No abstract

Bilateral mass comparison of mass standards of 100 mg, 2 g, 20 g, 500 g and 10 kg was carried out in 2011 to 2012 between UME and NPL. UME was the pilot laboratory. For all mass standards, the results show adequate agreement between the laboratories. 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 CCM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

In order to demonstrate the equivalence in calibration of mass standards among National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) of EURAMET this key comparison (KC) on 1 kg stainless steel mass standards has been carried out under the auspices of EURAMET. The comparison was undertaken with reference to the International Prototype Kilogram (IPK) as the definition of the unit of mass. The overall result shows good consistency among the 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 CCM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

In order to show metrological equivalence in mass standards calibration among National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) of member countries of the "Gulf Association for Metrology" (GULFMET), the first organized supplementary comparison (SC) of mass standards have been carried out under the auspices of the GULFMET. This supplementary comparison of 10 kg, 500 g, 20 g, 2 g and 100 mg stainless steel mass standards was based on the decision of the GULFMET meeting held in 2013. TÜBİTAK-UME (Turkey) acted as pilot laboratory. In this region only two NMIs have the CIPM-MRA signature. These NMIs are SASO-NMCC (Saudi Arabia) and EMI (Abu Dhabi). Therefore, the reference values were calculated with the weighted mean method using these two participating laboratories. Concerning the weight of 100 mg, the weight has not been evaluated in this comparison because the travelling standard was mixed-up at some point during the artefact circulation. The results of EMI and SASO-NMCC are consistent with the reference values within their expanded uncertainties with the coverage factor, k = 2. KEY WORDS FOR SEARCH reference value, travelling standard, weighted mean method and metrological equivalence 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 CCM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).