W Sabuga 1, M Bergoglio 2, T Rabault 3, B Waller 4, J C Torres 5, D A Olson 6, A Agarwal 7, T Kobata 8 and A K Bandyopadhyay 9
1
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Germany (PTB)
2
Istituto di Metrologia 'G Colonnetti', Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Italy (IMGC-CNR)
3
Bureau National de Métrologie, Laboratoire National d'Essais, France (BNM-LNE)
4
National Physical Laboratory, UK (NPL)
5
Centro Nacional de Metrología, Mexico (CENAM)
6
National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA (NIST)
7
Institute for National Measurement Standards, National Research Council, Canada (INMS/NRC)
8
National Metrology Institute of Japan (NMIJ/AIST)
9
National Physical Laboratory, India (NPLI)
W Sabuga et al 2005 Metrologia 42 07005
This report describes a CCM key comparison of hydraulic pressure standards of nine national metrology institutes that was carried out in the period from November 2002 to June 2004 in order to determine their degrees of equivalence in the range 10 MPa to 100 MPa of the gauge pressure. The pilot laboratory was PTB. The primary pressure standards were pressure balances of different design equipped with piston-cylinder assemblies operated in free-deformation, controlled-clearance or re-entrant operation mode. The transfer standard was a pressure balance equipped with a piston-cylinder assembly and a mass set. The pressure-dependent effective areas of the transfer standard at specified pressures were reported by the participants and led to the reference values calculated as medians. All participants' results agree with the reference values and with each other within the expanded uncertainties calculated with a coverage factor 2, most of them even within their standard uncertainties. In addition, the results were analysed in terms of the zero-pressure effective area and the pressure distortion coefficient. Also for them agreement within expanded uncertainties (k = 2) is observed. The results of the comparison demonstrate equivalence of the laboratory standards and support their measurement capability statements.
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 Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).
Issue 1A ( 1 January 2005)
W Sabuga et al 2005 Metrologia 42 07005
Kenichi Fujii et al 2006 Metrologia 43 07007
Jong S Paik et al 2007 Metrologia 44 07005
A Gosset and T Madec 2005 Metrologia 42 07003
H-J von Martens et al 2003 Metrologia 40 09001
R Thalmann 2002 Metrologia 39 165
Richard Barham 2003 Metrologia 40 09002
L O Becerra et al 2003 Metrologia 40 07004
Nile Oldham et al 2003 Metrologia 40 01003
J Terrien 1972 Metrologia 8 99