The key comparison EURAMET.L-K1.2011 on gauge blocks was carried out in the framework of a EURAMET project starting in 2012 and ending in 2015. It involved the participation of 24 National Metrology Institutes from Europe and Egypt, respectively. 38 gauge blocks of steel and ceramic with nominal central lengths between 0.5 mm and 500 mm were circulated. The comparison was conducted in two loops with two sets of artifacts. A statistical technique for linking the reference values was applied. As a consequence the reference value of one loop is influenced by the measurements of the other loop although they did not even see the artifacts of the others. This influence comes solely from three "linking laboratories" which measure both sets of artifacts. In total there were 44 results were not fully consistent with the reference values. This represents 10% of the full set of 420 results which is a considerable high number. At least 12 of them are clearly outliers where the participants have been informed by the pilot as soon as possible. The comparison results help to support the calibration and measurement capabilities (CMCs) of the laboratories involved in the CIPM MRA. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCL, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

In dynamic pressure measurement phenomena, dynamic pressure calibration of the measurement chain including a pressure sensor, signal conditioning amplifier and data acquisition part is required. A drop mass dynamic calibration machine which is used for the dynamic calibration in hydraulic media was designed and developed. This study presents a research study and measurement results on the dynamic calibration of pressure transducers by using the newly developed machine.

The results of the inter-RMO key comparison EURAMET.L-K5.2016 on the calibration of a step gauge are reported. Twenty-two National Metrology Institutes from four different metrological regions all over the world participated in this comparison which lasted three years, from December 2015 to December 2018. Two artefacts were circulated so that the varying ranges of participants equipment could be accommodated. A 1020 mm ceramic monolithic step gauge remained stable throughout the comparison. A 610 mm steel step gauge changed length, possibly due to an impact while travelling between participants. The comparison of this artefact was divided into two groups, those before the damage and those after, with the reference value for each group derived from a linking participant who had demonstrated equivalence in the 1020 mm artefact circulation. For the 1020 mm comparison the inverse-variance weighted mean was taken as reference value. Of the twenty two participants, eleven successfully demonstrated the validity of the claimed measurement capability. Of the remaining 11, 3 submitted revised uncertainties after the initial circulation of results which were shown to be valid when compared to the reference value. A set of recommendations and actions were agreed with the remaining participants. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCL, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

The results of the comparison of parallel thread gauges between ten European countries are presented. Three thread plugs and three thread rings were calibrated in one loop. Croatian National Laboratory for Length (HMI/FSB-LPMD) acted as the coordinator and pilot laboratory of the comparison. Thread angle, thread pitch, simple pitch diameter and pitch diameter were measured. Pitch diameters were calibrated within 1a, 2a, 1b and 2b calibration categories in accordance with the EURAMET cg-10 calibration guide. A good agreement between the measurement results and differences due to different calibration categories are analysed in this paper. This comparison was a first EURAMET comparison of parallel thread gauges based on the EURAMET ctg-10 calibration guide, and has made a step towards the harmonization of future comparisons with the registration of CMC values for thread gauges. Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCL, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

No abstract