An Interlaboratory Comparison of Relative Humidity and Temperature Probes Using Diverse Generation Techniques

Gee, Roger; Farley, Richard S.; Sax, P.; Benyon, R.; Stevens, M; Böse, N.

doi:10.1007/s10765-008-0505-y

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some comparisons in the scope of relative humidity were conducted in recent years [1,2]. TÜBİTAK UME also participated in an international comparison (EURAMET Project No.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Interlaboratory Comparison in Scope of Relative Humidity in the Range from 11 %rh to 95 %rh at 23 $${}^{\circ }\hbox {C}$$ ∘ C

Aytekin

Kalemci

2015

Int J Thermophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of interlaboratory comparisons is to verify the competence of accredited or non-accredited laboratories, including verification of the reported measurement uncertainties, whenever possible. An interlaboratory comparison consists of measurement results of a laboratory and a reference laboratory which is competent to run the comparison and provides traceability at the required uncertainty level. In Turkey, the demand for an interlaboratory comparison in the humidity field increased drastically in parallel to an increasing number of accredited laboratories in this field. Therefore, a national interlaboratory comparison in the scope of relative humidity in the range between 11 %rh and 95 %rh at 23 • C was initiated by TUBITAK UME in 2011. Two hygrometers were calibrated at TUBITAK UME in the above-mentioned range and characterized in terms of long-term stability, temperature dependence, and hysteresis. One of the hygrometers is used throughout this comparison. The second one was kept aside as a backup device in case of a malfunction of the first device. Organization and evaluation of the interlaboratory comparison in the scope of relative humidity were performed according to the EN ISO/IEC 17043:2010 "Conformity assessment-general requirements for proficiency testing" among thirteen national laboratories. Evaluation of comparison results are performed by normalized error analysis. It was found that among the 95 realized points of comparison, 85 (89 %) had E n ≤ 1 and only 10 (11 %) had E > 1.

show abstract

“…Some comparisons in the scope of relative humidity were conducted in recent years [1,2]. TÜBİTAK UME also participated in an international comparison (EURAMET Project No.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Interlaboratory Comparison in Scope of Relative Humidity in the Range from 11 %rh to 95 %rh at 23 $${}^{\circ }\hbox {C}$$ ∘ C

Aytekin

Kalemci

2015

Int J Thermophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To evidence these CMC claims, dew-point key comparisons are in progress (one completed [2]). However, comparisons in relative humidity (RH) have only been conducted informally between national laboratories (e.g., [3]), or between laboratories below the national level [4]. As well as the need internationally to substantiate CMC claims, many NMIs also hold accreditations to ISO/IEC 17025:2005 [5], and so need to carry out interlaboratory measurement comparisons to demonstrate proficiency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Trial Intercomparison of Humidity Generators at Extremes of Range Using Relative Humidity Transmitters

et al. 2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to effectively implement the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA) of the International Committee for Weights and Measures (CIPM), national metrology institutes (NMIs) are required to support their claims of calibration and measurement capability (CMC) with a quality system compliant with ISO/IEC 17025, and with suitable evidence of participation in key or supplementary comparisons. The CMC review process, both at regional and inter-regional levels, uses criteria that combine the provisions mentioned above, together with additional evidence demonstrating scientific and technical competence of the institutes. For dew-point temperatures, there are key comparisons in progress under the Consultative Committee for Thermometry (CCT) and under the European regional metrology organisation (EU-ROMET), together with information available on past regional supplementary comparisons. However, for relative humidity there are, to date, no such comparisons available to support CMC entries. This paper presents and discusses the results of a preliminary investigation of the use of relative humidity and temperature transmitters in order to determine their suitability for the intercomparison of standard humidity generators in support of CMC claims for the calibration of relative humidity instruments. The results of a recent bilateral comparison between 2 NMIs at the extremes of the range up to 98 %rh at 70 • C, and down to 1 %rh at −40 • C are reported. Specific precautions and recommendations on the use of the devices as transfer standards are presented.

show abstract

Practical Study of Psychrometer Calibrations

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An Interlaboratory Comparison of Relative Humidity and Temperature Probes Using Diverse Generation Techniques

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

National Interlaboratory Comparison in Scope of Relative Humidity in the Range from 11 %rh to 95 %rh at 23 $${}^{\circ }\hbox {C}$$ ∘ C

National Interlaboratory Comparison in Scope of Relative Humidity in the Range from 11 %rh to 95 %rh at 23 $${}^{\circ }\hbox {C}$$ ∘ C

A Trial Intercomparison of Humidity Generators at Extremes of Range Using Relative Humidity Transmitters

Practical Study of Psychrometer Calibrations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About