| Zugriffsnummer | 33684 |
| Dokumenttyp | Zeitschriftenartikel |
| Peer Review | unbekannt |
| Sprache | Englisch |
| Titel | Final report on the torque key comparison CCM.T-K1.2 measurand torque: 0 N·m, 500 N·m, 1000 N·m |
| Autor(in); Institution |
Röske, Dirk; 1.2, Festkörpermechanik, PTB-Braunschweig
|
| Quelle/Jahr | Metrologia: 52 (2015), Tech. Suppl., 23 S. |
| Artikelnummer | 07006 |
| Availability | [online only] |
| ISSN | 0026-1394 |
| DOI | |
| URL | |
| Verlag | Bristol: IOP |
| Freie Schlagworte | Torque ; Key comparison ; CCM.TK-K1.1 |
| Zusammenfassung | The purpose of the CIPM subsequent bilateral comparison CCM.T-K1.2 was to link another participant, namely the National Institute of Metrology (Thailand), in short NIMT, to the CCM.T-K1 torque key comparison. The measuring capabilities up to 1000 N·m of dead-weight torque standard machines with supported lever were investigated. The pilot laboratory was the same in both comparisons - it was the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB, Braunschweig, Germany). The same two very stable torque transducers with well-known properties were used as travelling standards. The measurements at the participating laboratory were carried out between November 2007 and February 2008. According to the technical protocol, torque steps of 500 N·m and 1000 N·m had to be measured both in clockwise and anticlockwise directions. Corrections had to be applied to the results reported by the participants taking into account the use of different amplifiers, the creep (due to different loading times of the machines) and the environmental conditions in the laboratories (temperature and relative humidity of the ambient air). The results of the pilot laboratory in this bilateral comparison are in very good agreement with the same results obtained in the CCM.T-K1 comparison. For each of the transducers, the two torque steps and both senses of direction of the torque vector, the key comparison reference value of the CCM.T-K1 was taken, and the results of participant NIMT were calculated with respect to these values. The agreement between the results is very good. The smallest expanded (k = 2) relative uncertainty of the machine stated by the participant is 1 × 10-4. The results of the comparison support this uncertainty statement. |
