The present study was realized for measuring viscosities of reference liquids using capillary viscometers and Stabinger viscometer SVM 3001 with viscosity interval between 1 mm2/s and 5000 mm2/s with temperatures from 20 °C to 80 °C. Based on our measurement with various liquids, we determine the viscosity values and compare both of the results. The aim of this study to evaluate the results of the primary level viscosity measurement system and stabinger viscometer and to compare the measurement results due to the providing traceability of Stabinger viscometer by TUBITAK UME. An increasing number of national metrology institutes and accredited laboratories provide viscometer calibration with reference liquids in a wide viscosity range. It is a common practice to use the viscosity of water as the metrological basic of viscometry. The national standard of viscosity provided by TUBITAK UME consists of a set of ubbelohde viscometers covering the measuring range of kinematic viscosities from about 0.5 mm2/s to 100 000 mm2/s. At the low viscosity, long − capillary viscometers are used as primary standards which are directly calibrated water.

The main objective of the EUROMET project 702 was to compare the extent of comparability among eleven participating European national metrology institutes (INRIM (IT), OMH (HU), PTB (DE), BEV (AT), IPQ (PT), LNE (FR), MIKES (FI), GUM (PL), SMU (SK), UME (TR) and VNIIM (RU)) in performing calibrations of high-resolution hydrometers for liquid density determination in the range between 600 kg m-3 and 1300 kg m-3. By means of two groups of four similar transfer standards of excellent metrological characteristics, the participating laboratories were initially divided into two groups (petals) linked by the three density laboratories of INRIM, OMH and PTB.The results of the participating laboratories have been analyzed in this report and a good agreement was found between the results provided by most of the participants. These results allowed also determination of the degrees of equivalence of each NMI participating with the EUROMET_key comparison reference values (EU_KCRV); they will provide a basis for the review of the Calibration Measurement Capabilities (CMC) entries on hydrometer calibration, and they allowed the degree of equivalence between pairs of NMIs to be established.The Istitituto Nazionale di Ricerca Metrologica (INRIM), Italy, formerly IMGC-CNR, coordinated the project.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 (MRA).

Hydrostatic density determination for liquids is mainly performed by laboratories to provide means for calibrating liquid density measuring instruments such as oscillation-type density meters. From 2002 to 2005 the CIPM key comparison CCM.D-K2 ‘comparison of liquid density standards’ was carried out piloted by the PTB. The aim was to compare the results of the density determination by the participating laboratories to support entries to the CMC tables in this sub-field. To provide further laboratories the possibility to support their entries to the CMC tables at the meeting of the EUROMET Working Group on Density in 2007 this comparison was agreed on. BEV (Austria) organized the comparison supported by the PTB (Germany). For the comparison samples of pentadecane, water, tetrachloroethylene and of an oil of high viscosity were measured in the temperature range from 5 °C to 60 °C at atmospheric pressure by hydrostatic weighing. The measurements were completed in 2008. The reference values of the first reports based on the draft of the CCM.D-K2. After the official publication of the CCM.D-K2 the reference values were recalculated and the report was finalised in 2015. 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).

This report describes the result of a key comparison of volume standards at twelve European national metrology institutes. This comparison was carried out during the period January 1996 to January 1999 within the framework of the European Collaboration in Measurement Standards (EUROMET) in order to determine the degree of equivalence between the participants for the determination of the volume of solids in the range 87 cm3 to 315 cm3. The pilot institute was the Federal Office of Metrology METAS (former OFMET) of Switzerland. This comparison was initiated and realized before the CCM.D-K1 (Density measurements of a silicon sphere). For that reason no direct link was made between the CCM.D-K1 and the EUROMET.M.D-K1 comparison. The transfer standards consisted of three different spheres made of ceramic material (Si3N4/MgO). The three spheres were calibrated by the participants using hydrostatic weighing either with solid density standard or with water density tables as reference. Stability measurements show that the transfer standards were sufficiently stable during the comparison. The degrees of equivalence of the measurement standards were expressed quantitatively by two terms, deviations from the key comparison reference values and associated uncertainty of measurement for each of the three spheres. Considering all participants, the maximum relative difference between the volume measurements was 1.6 × 10-5 for the biggest sphere (1 kg and 315 cm3). Considering the five participants using a solid density standard as volume reference and having performed automatic mass determination, the maximum relative difference between the volume measurements was 2.2 × 10-6 for the same sphere. This comparison was approved for provisional equivalence of the CMC declared in the field.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 (MRA).

No abstract