Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T00:30:51.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Traceable dynamic measurement of mechanical quantities: objectives and first results of this european project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2013

C. Bartoli ,
M. F. Beug ,
T. Bruns ,
C. Elster ,
T. Esward ,
L. Klaus ,
A. Knott ,
M. Kobusch ,
S. Saxholm  and
C. Schlegel
C. Bartoli*
Affiliation:
LNE, 1 rue Gaston Boissier, 75015 Paris, France
M. F. Beug
Affiliation:
PTB, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
T. Bruns
Affiliation:
PTB, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
C. Elster
Affiliation:
PTB, Abbestraße 2-12, 10587 Berlin-Charlottenburg, Germany
T. Esward
Affiliation:
NPL, Hampton Road, TW11 0 LW Teddington, UK
L. Klaus
Affiliation:
PTB, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
A. Knott
Affiliation:
NPL, Hampton Road, TW11 0 LW Teddington, UK
M. Kobusch
Affiliation:
PTB, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
S. Saxholm
Affiliation:
MIKES, Tekniikantie 1, 02150 Espoo, Finland
C. Schlegel
Affiliation:
PTB, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
*
⋆ Correspondence: claire.bartoli@lne.fr
Get access

Abstract

Nine european national metrology institutes (NMIs) are collaborating in a new project funded by the european metrology research programme (EMRP) to establish traceable dynamic measurement of the mechanical quantities force, pressure, and torque. The aim of this joint research project (JRP) is to develop appropriate calibration methods, mathematical models, and uncertainty evaluation. The duration of the project is 3 years for a global amount of €3.6 million. It began in September 2011.

Keywords

Dynamic forcedynamic torquedynamic pressuretraceabilitymeasurement uncertainty
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , 2012 , pp. 127 - 135
Copyright
© EDP Sciences 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

EMRP outline 2008 document
C. Schlegel, G. Kiekenap, B. Glöckner, R. Kumme, Dynamic calibration of force sensors using sinusoidal excitations, Sensordevices 2011, Nice, France
Schlegel, C., Kiekenap, G., Glöckner, B., Buß, A., Kumme, R., Traceable periodic force calibration, Metrologia 49, 224–235 (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, The new impact force machine at PTB, in Proc. of XVII IMEKO World Congress, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2003, pp. 263–267
M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, Uncertainty contributions of the impact force machine at PTB, in Proc. of XVIII IMEKO World Congress, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (CD publication, 2006)
M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, L. Klaus, M. Müller, The 250 kN primary shock force calibration device at PTB, in Measurement, Special Issue: IMEKO 2010, Pattaya, Thailand (Elsevier), in press
M. Kobusch, L. Klaus, T. Bruns, Model-based analysis of the dynamic behaviour of a 250 kN shock force calibration device, in XX IMEKO World Congress, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2012, to be published
M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, E. Franke, Challenges in practical dynamic calibration, in Advanced Mathematical and Computational Tools in Metrology and Testing (World Scientific, 2009), pp. 204–212
T. Bruns, Sinusoidal torque calibration: A design for traceability in dynamic torque calibrations, in XVII IMEKO World Congress, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2003, pp. 282–285
Bruns, T., Kobusch, M., Traceability of dynamic force and torque calibrations by means of laser-Doppler-interferometry, Proc. SPIE 5503, 602–607 (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
L. Klaus, T. Bruns, M. Kobusch, Determination of model parameters for a dynamic torque calibration device, in XX IMEKO World Congress, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2012, to be published
Williams, J.M., Smith, D.R., Georgakopoulos, D., Patel, P.D., Pickering, J.R., Design and metrological applications of a low noise, high electrical isolation measurement unit, IET Sci. Meas. Technol. 3, 165–174 (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M.F. Beug, H. Moser, G. Ramm, Dynamic bridge standard for strain gauge bridge amplifier calibration, Conference on Precision Electromagnetic Measurements (CPEM), 2009
Ramm, G., Moser, H., Braun, A., A new scheme for generating and measuring active, reactive, and apparent power at power frequencies with uncertainties of 2.5 × 10-6, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 48, 422–426 (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, and OIML, Evaluation of measurement data – Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, JCGM 100:2008
S. Eichstädt, Analysis of dynamic measurements – Evaluation of dynamic measurement uncertainty, Ph.D. thesis, PTB report IT-16 (2012)
Eichstädt, S., Link, A., Elster, C., Dynamic uncertainty for compensated second-order systems, Sensors 10, 7621–7631 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Link, A., Elster, C., Uncertainty evaluation for IIR (infinite impulse response) filtering using a state-space approach, Meas. Sci. Technol. 20, 055104 (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, C., Link, A., Uncertainty evaluation for dynamic measurements modelled by a linear time-invariant system, Metrologia 45, 464–473 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichstädt, S., Link, A., Bruns, T., Elster, C., On-line dynamic error compensation of accelerometers by uncertainty-optimal filtering, Measurement 43, 708–713 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
G. Wübbeler, A. Link, T. Bruns, C. Elster, Impact of correlation in the measured frequency response on the results of a dynamic calibration, in Advanced mathematical & computational tools in metrology VIII, Series on Advances in Mathematics for Applied Sciences, edited by F. Pavese, M. Bär, J.M. Limares, C. Perruchet, N.F. Zhang (World Scientific, New Jersey, 2009), Vol. 78, pp. 369–374
Elster, C., Link, A., Bruns, T., Analysis of dynamic measurements and determination of time-dependent measurement uncertainty using a second-order model, Meas. Sci. Technol. 18, 3682–3687 (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Link, A., Täubner, A., Wabinski, W., Bruns, T., Elster, C., Modelling accelerometers for transient signals using calibration measurements upon sinusoidal excitation, Measurement 40, 928–935 (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Link, A., Täubner, A., Wabinski, W., Bruns, T., Elster, C., Calibration of accelerometers: determination of amplitude and phase response upon shock excitation, Meas. Sci. Technol. 17, 1888–1894 (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M. Kobusch, A. Link, A. Buss, T. Bruns, Comparison of shock and sine force calibration methods, in Proc. of IMEKO TC3 & TC 16 & TC22 International Conference, Merida, Mexico, 2007
T. Esward, C. Matthews, S. Downes, A. Knott, S. Eichstädt, C. Elster, Uncertainty evaluation for traceable dynamic measurement of mechanical quantities: a case study in dynamic pressure calibration, in Advanced mathematical & computational tools in metrology IX, Göteborg, Sweden, 2011, in press
Eichstädt, S., Elster, C., Esward, T.J., Hessling, J.P., Deconvolution filters for the analysis of dynamic measurement processes: a tutorial, Metrologia 47, 522–533 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichstädt, S., Link, A., Harris, P., Elster, C., Efficient implementation of a Monte Carlo method for uncertainty evaluation in dynamic measurements, Metrologia 49, 401–410 (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar