Science topic

# Metrology - Science topic

Science of measurement and its application.

Questions related to Metrology

If so, experimental results and related theory might also be helpful ...

I need to measure the tip point of the drill bit using a non-contact pyrometer device. However, the thickness of the undrilled part and cutting fluid affect the measuring device for getting the exact temperature of the drill bit. So, is there any method for measuring the internal temperature of a solid body?

**Thank you!**

I submitted my research paper in Measurement journal. Before build pdf stage, your journal asked money from me. I never paid a money. And proceed by clicking subscription. But I am not subscribed measurement journal. After that i approved my journal and submitted. If my research paper accepted, I need to pay how much amount?. Is any possibility to publish without money in measurement journal.

I am looking for a metrology tomograph for my lab. Ultimately, elements made of SLM-printed materials (steel and titanium alloys) will be X-rayed there. I mean a high-quality tomograph that would allow you to get high resolution images. Can someone recommend the manufacturer and model to me? Let me remind you - it is supposed to be a high-quality device for scientific purposes. Has anyone experience working with such equipment? I will be very grateful for any help.

I like to do linear laser measurements with environmental compensation and without environmental compensation. The parameters affecting linear laser reading are Pressure, Temperature, Humidity. For experimental purposes, I need to vary the Pressure, Temperature, and Humidity value. How I can select the Pressure, Temperature, and Humidity value? (randomly or any procedure available). Hint: The standard Pressure = 1013.25mbar, Temp=20C, Humidity=50%

And How much reading is required?

How to measure an optics thermal drift error in a laser measurement system(Renishaw XL80)?

Please tell me about optics thermal drift and what is the source for optics thermal drift. And How to find the value of optics thermal drift. And how to reduce it?

The reasoning behind this question is to align the ratios of the proton potential in energy per charge to the speed of light in distance per time. As these two dimensions appear to be related, having identical numerical values would simplify the maths when making calculations in physics.

approximately;

(938,272,310 Joules per Coulomb)/(299,792,458 meters per second)

Basically setting the units so 1 J/C = 1 m/s

For our friends in the U.S. this would be like bringing back the foot ;)

In my brief paper below I show why

*potential*and*speed*are one and the same thing.Working Paper A Case for Absolute Electrical Potential

Steven

Anyone holds information regarding the typical hourly distribution of rain events in Australian cities (i.e. rain intensities, hour by hour) is welcome to contact me for a shared research/publication.

Currently, the (insufficient) data that is available for me is daily rain and IDF (intensity–duration–frequency) curves.

Please no comments which refers me to the BOM website :) thanks.

Like for simulating oral cavity

Hello everybody,

Is there, by any chance, a statistical method that might help me determine whether two thermometers' data average differ significantly from one another? Since our laboratory does not have the right equipment at the moment to compare our data with we thought that maybe performing such an analysis would be of use, however, I'm lost.

I tried performing an ANOVA analysis, but that doesn't seem to solve my question since it'll only tell if the variances of each thermometer's registered data differ significantly, but what we're trying to verify is whether their averages are significantly differing, not their variances.

I've tried to solve this problem on my own, but don't seem to find a solution to it. Could anybody suggest any statistical analysis that might help here?

We usually register 5 to 10 data for each thermometer and we analyze at least 3 thermometers each time.

This is one of our data sets for contact thermometers A, B, C, and D (In °C)

A 36.6 36.8 36.7 36.6 36.7 36.7 36.7 36.7 36.9 36.7

B 37.2 37.1 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 36.9

C 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.3 37.3 37.3 37.2 37.3

D 37.3 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.3 37.2 37.3 37.3 37.3 37.3

We actually have a standard thermometer and for the thermometers, it works well with, we accept a maximum of +-1°C difference. However, we can't use any of them for a while.

Hello,I'd like to know how to submit papers in Metrology and Measurement Systems,thanks~

I have IMD grid data (0.25 by 0.25 resolution) in text format.

How to extract rainfall data of a river basin? any tutorials?

If it's not possible in ArcGIS any other software?

I am familiar with the Mann-Kendall Test and Sen's slop estimation etc, Can we use IMD gridded data for these analyses? any tutorials?

Can we convert IMD gridded data (0.25 by 0.25 resolution) to Taluk / District / Statewise for the analysis?

Hi, there!

I'm looking for information/standard/method about metrology for transient processes. I mean how to compare two or more charts with transient responses. I have no idea if this topic exist at all. All I have met is metrology for static measurements only.

Thank everyone. Every little help will be of great importance!

I'm working on a project that relates flooding to adequate Drainage system.

The project is area based (NSUKKA, Enugu Nigeria). Nusuka could be seen to have the geological features as stated above

I have a dynamic force +-4000N with frequency 1.5 Hz and I want to use a load cell to measure this force.

Some peoples told me that load cell S type can withstand such little frequency !

I'm not sure so if anyone know then please guide me.

Can I add it myself, or should these manipulations be performed only by the RG administration or the administrator who manages this institution profile?

All organs are not equally damaged by same amount of radiation dosage. But, on which basis equivalency is measured? (i..e 1 gray in this organ equals 10 sievert) Is it arbitrarily qualitative or quantitative as well? Then what is the quantity? ( concentration of reactive oxygen species, DNA mutation frequency, Radiative cellular apoptosis..., percent Coagulation of biomolecules). But all humans are not equally affected by same amount of radiation energy applied on same organ. Then, does the equivalency chart vary from person-to-person, species-to-species, or year to year ?(i.e. refining of values with increasing precision) I f so, thaen how the equivalency are standardized?

I'm The Technical Manager of Force, Torque & Pressure Laboratories of Metrology Division, Sri Lanka Standards Institution.

Dear Sirs,

1, 2, 3 laws of Newtons need closed system (net force is zero). How do we practically realize, create such closed system?

One example. Let us look at a body motion. One can say If the body velocity is constant, e.g. zero then no forces act to it. Is it true? I think no. According to the 1st Newton law the velocity constance is the CONSEQUENCE of F=0.

So are there precise ways to construct closed system? Or all physical theory is just a mean to generate a hypothesis which has more higher probability to be true then other random thought?

The coordinate measuring machine (CMM) is a mechanical system that moves a measuring probe to determine the coordinates of points on the surface of a work piece. The CMM comprises: the machine itself; the measuring probe; the control system, and the measuring software. CMM is a precious excellence control to manufacturing,

Is there any tool/technique that can help me in measuring thickness of double epoxy coating. Both are epoxy but with two different types of fillers. The resin could be same for both of them. The thickness scale could be from 20um - 500 um.

Hello all,

This is a slightly strange one.

I need to convince a community of practice (field biologists) that they need to validate their tools and methods before they use them to generate results that are used as the basis for important management decisions.

While QC and validation have penetrated to the benches in biochemistry and microbiology labs, they are completely foreign to field biologists, for reasons that I will not burden you with here.

What I need is a basic introduction to QC and validation that is not specific to the hard sciences (physics and chemistry), and that sets out the fundamental reasons why knowing that a tool and a method work properly are essential steps in doing good science and generating results that can be relied on.

I have googled all the combinations of validation, QC, fit for purpose, etc etc that I can think of, and everything I find is too specific to particular applications - I need something that sets out the basic need for validation in general. Peer reviewed or a standard textbook is preferred, but anything clearly written will be a help.

Thanks.

Peter

The Bermuda Triangle is one of the amazing landmarks in the world And there are strange, interesting and horrible events in that area. Events such as the crash of planes, the sinking of ships, the collapse of the compass, and etc. Scientists express different ideas for these events Like hexagonal clouds, deep earthquakes, atmospheric disturbances, methane gas and etc. And each of these reasons justifies part of the events in that area . What really happens in this area ? Could this be the cause of the extraterrestrials? Is there another area like the Bermuda Triangle?

All the research papers I found so far, are just showing measurement of the squeezing parameter or quantum Fisher Information (QFI). Of course authors mention that, due to large QFI or strong squeezing this setup can be used for metrological purposes beyond standard quantum limit (SQL). I could not find any papers, which actually perform estimation of the

**unknown**phase and show that the precision is beyond SQL. I am curious from the point of view of estimation in the presence of decoherence (which is always present). Theoretical papers indicate that entangled states are basically useless if frequency is estimated (e.q. Ramsey spectroscopy).hello,

i am using cygwin. i have imported the snaphu in cygwin and it is running. it is showing some parameter variation like number of nodes in network, pivots, tree size. i have assured the the status of program using task manager of windows explorer. i am not getting how long it will run. it has been taken 48hrs already.

my system configuration is HP Z620, 24GB RAM, Windows8.1

This, in particular, might help explain LIGO statements like

*„There are families of glitches that we frequently see but have not yet discovered the cause of.“*- See reference below, last paragraph on page 24.When measuring distances, isn't it an obvious idea to question our yardstick stability? We are talking about 10

^{-18}m transients at 4 km distance.From where to get a weekly or monthly rainfall data of any area in India?

please suggest...

I find your project really interesting. At the moment I am collaborating with a small company in the field of metrology, specifically in developing procedure to optimize the quality in laboratory.

We have developed a new approach to use metrology: it is a software platform able to organize the metrology in different application field, such as an analytical laboratory, etc. Specifically, it permits to organize the calibration of all laboratory instrumentations (e.g. scales, pipettes, thermometers, etc.) and the intermediate checks by the use of control charts, to elaborate data and estimate the uncertainty of measurement with the use of different approaches, to verify during the time the metrological characteristics of the test methods by means different tools that assure the quality. Moreover, the validation protocols of the methods for the measurements can be organized by the use of statistic tests to realize the same protocol, in accordance with the technical sectorial standard.

We are really interested to collaborate with you in this topic research area.

I'm using a HAKKE MARS II rheometer. Im currently linearly increasing the strain by setting a fixed value for shear (strain) rate. My problem is for rates lower than 1/s, the measured values are always off by a factor of about 100.

Do you have any suggestions to improve the measurement? Thanks.

I have a water container surrounded by the electrical heater with insulation. There is a temperature sensor and and opening for the compressed air supply below at the container .We were interested to measure the humidity at different temperature .We have measured the humidity with FTIR instrument which is supposed to be accurate. The reading shows by FTIR agreed to our calculated humidity for the temperature range till 90 degree but afterwards it got deviated largely from our calculated measurements. Meanwhile to be sure we have again measured the humidity with silica gel by gravimetric method. The reading obtained by silica gel also shows the same trend as shown by FITR like the silica gel readings were in agreement with our calculated measurement till 90 degree but not in agreement with higher temperature.

Has any one idea what might be the reason. I believed that my equation for humidity does not seems to be valid for higher temperature.Would like to hear feedback or suggestion for equation that will be valid for all temperature range.

I'm working on a metrology solution to work at cryogenic temperatures (80 K - 100 K). Ordinary photodiodes often have epoxy encapsulating the die wire bonds. At cryo temperatures, this epoxy shrinks, cracks, and breaks the wire. So I'm looking for a manufacturer that does not do wire bond encapsulation.

A second requirement is that the photodiode not have a window cover (or, at least, that it is easily removable).

Other specs - Si photodiodes, 10x10 mm active area, ceramic housing, NIR-sensitive (some have NIR-suppressed response, do not want that).

Any anyone suggest a supplier?

It does not matter whether the method is estimated empirically or not, all that matters is to be reliable enough and get us results without having to make further measurements beyond what authors used when they proved the validity of their work.

The location of interest for me is North America.

How can one measure particle charge using oscilloscope and op amp integrator circuit along with a capacitor and faraday cup. I am unable to figure out how to approach. I have the circuit ready but when I test the faraday cup by touching charged capacitor, the oscilloscope doesn't show any visible change in voltage. How can I use all these components to get a particle charge. My plan is to drop the particles in the faraday cup and get the output voltage change from oscilloscope. Then calculate the charge with the help of rated capacitor. Also, I don't have any electrometer.

Tell me please, can someone tell where to take data graphically for different years and months of (city) area (eg Europe)?

Example:

Does any laboratory arrange tests for intercomparison of extensiometers - or arrange cources with extensiometers?

I have googled and asked arround but not found many possibilities right now.

Kind regards,

Jan/Metrology/FORCE Technology, Denmark.

Good morning:

My name is Katherine Muñoz and I am a student of industrial engineering at the University of Colombia Coopertativa. Enter this site that made me curious because it is excellent. I am currently in a research project for accreditation of a laboratory based in the metrological assurance. I have no prior knowledge of the subject but want to learn and I saw this place I can find many people who want me contribute a bit to be able to carry out my research as a bibliographical source.

Thank you from my heart who can help me and I will be attentive to your comments ... I read, learn the subject .... Thank you.

HELP....

What mathematical model can be used in a metrological assurance in clinical laboratory?

Metrology infrastructure in developing countries?

The applications of the LSA for adjusting values are very wide. My interest is limited here to the field of quantitative measurements and for two peculiar fields of high-accuracy measurements, where it is used for computing adjusted values of the so-called “universal constants” (CODATA task) and of the atomic masses (often called atomic weights) (AME, AMDC task), for two purposes: to obtain an evaluation the consistency with each other of these (large) sets of values with a minimised associated uncertainty; to provide a set of recommended values. I report at the end some basic references about these two frames and their use of the LSA.

The LSA is used for minimising, according to a L2 norm, the standard deviation of a set, by computing new values (or deviations from the original values, called “adjustments”) of each member of the set of quantities, and the new uncertainty associated to each member of the set—generally lower, thanks to the minimisation.

However, the system cannot provide ‘absolute’ adjusted values when any of the values can be assumed to be ‘exact’. In fact, at least one of the original values must be kept constant, so, in actuality, all the adjustments are relative to this member, taken as ‘reference’ (please note, this does not generally mean ‘exact’). Should another member be chosen as the fixed one, all adjustments would be different, with a peculiar characteristics: the differences between two members of the set still remain the same, irrespective to the choice of the reference. Sometimes more than one member is kept fixed: I skip here this case for simplicity.

This ambiguity stands unless an additional assumption is made, concerning the ‘best’ reference, ‘best’ according to a chosen criterium. This limitation arises directly from the fact that, in measurement, the ‘true’ value cannot be known; consequently, no objective way exist to state which member carries the correct numerical value, implying that its value should not be adjusted. In the case of the use of fundamental constants for the definition of the measurement units, the additional assumption might consist of an independent way to estimate the minimisation of the discontinuity between the units, before and after the change in definition, which should strictly be avoided.

In my opinion, the LSA is a sound method to evaluate the consistency of the set of values with the lowest associated uncertainty level, by taking advantage of the statistical properties of a larger overall set. On the contrary, as to obtain and recommend ‘best’ values for standard tables of nuclides or of fundamental constants, the fact that the LSA evaluation is biased by the arbitrary choice of the reference member(s) should be carefully taken in consideration: in my opinion this bias makes the method inappropriate for that purpose, with respect to statistical means to obtain the ‘best value’ for each member of the set. In addition, with the LSA a relationship is construed between all members of the set, which could conflict with the fact that they originally are, at least in part, independent with each other.

Some basic and latest references:

CODATA: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants/index.html, http://www.bipm.org/extra/codata/. Last adjustment: P.J. Mohr, B.N. Taylor and D.B. Newell, CODATA Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2010, Rev. Modern Phys. 84 (2012) 1–94. LSA application: Cohen E R, Crowe K M and DuMond J W M 1957 The Fundamental Constants of Physics (Tamworth, UK: G. & J. Chesters); C. Eisenhart Spec.Publ. 300 NBS paper 4.5 (1961); F. Pavese, Metrologia 51 (2014) L1–L4.

AME, AMDC: http://www-csnsm.in2p3.fr/amdc/. Adjustments using LSA: A.H. Wapstra, G. Audi and C. Thibault, Nucl. Phys. A 729 (2003) 129, M. Wang, G. Audi, A.H. Wapstra, F.G. Kondev, M. MacCormick, X. Xu and B. Pfeiffer, Chinese Phys C 36 (2012) 1603.

For measurement of surface or thickness with high accuracy upto 1 micron which is best metrology device.

kinetic for capacitive sensitivity of capacitive accelerometer is:

S=(delta)C/(delta)g

or S=(C2-C1)/(g2-g1)

for example 10fF/g.

Now how can I turned it to resolution?

that means for example one 2g accelerometer with 10fF/g sensitivity what is its resolutions? or conversely?

In order to analyze the displacement, an equipment that control the amount of displacement has to be used in the setup. Example, xyz translational stage. But this one limited to milli metre varition. I want to analyze the displacement in micrometer range. What is another equipment that can be used?

I believe, there may be something essential and special about the Ramanujan's numbers, let me first label the numbers (in honor of the genius Ramanujan) as:

R

_{i}= 1, 3, 5, 11, 181. andr

_{i}= 3, 4, 5, 7, 15.to be the only solutions of the Ramanujan-Nagell equation:

2

^{r}= R^{2}+ 7It may be possible to express some of the famous mathematical constants in terms of the Ramanujan's Numbers, consider for instant the square root of 2:

sqrt(2) = 1.414 213 567...

the frequently used (and accepted) approximation of root 2 is:

99/70 = 1.414 285 714 ...

which differs from the correct value by about 7.215x10

^{-5}.Now, let's discover what the Ramanujan's numbers say, consider:

(R

_{5})^{(1/r}_{5}^{)}= (181)^{(1/15)}= 1.414 203 409 ...,Differs by only 1.007x10

^{-5}.a very good approximation for root 2 than (99/70).

I believe, one can find more mathematical constants that can be expressed in terms of the Ramanujan's numbers if one selects the right combination of them. Are there any additional notes about the Ramanujan's numbers from the readers?

Is there a simple expression for the effective sky temperature in terms of only the ambient air temperature and the solar irradiance?

I had taken the 3D roughness value of precision milled Ti6Al4V workpiece surface in Alicona microscope. The parameter I considered is Sa (Average height of selected area) in microns. In Alicona Infinite microscope I got the reading as 11.0355µm, 3.9683µm, 1.4111µm, 1.0857µm, 0.9991524µm, and 0.8205437µm at 2.5X, 5X, 10X, 20X, 50X and 100X magnifications. Which magnification is usually considered and why? Why so much variation in values? kindly help.

PS: Attached other 3D roughness parameter values and image of the sample

What is the relation between true reading and the reading given by an instrument having some least count?

Hello,

I`m wondering that is there any measurement technique to detect the height and shape of free surface of water in 3 dimensions.

I only know just taking picture from the side.

Thank you.

I need precision parts made of various materials (steel, ceramics, aluminium) with machining processes (polishing, milling, EDM) into various levels of surface finish.

For example, it could be a few steel blocks, each made with EDM, milling, polishing respectively. And the milled blocks are milled into a few roughness levels.

Are there samples like these that are readily available for purchase, like surface comparison blocks. And what are the prices for these samples?

I want to use to TOC data to study how meteorological parameters affect the concentration of tropospheric ozone in Bihar.

I want the last 10 years of meteorological data of a remote place. There isn't any field observatory, so can you provide me any reliable links which can provide these data based on some model? Any suggestions?

What is a common measurement standard for mouse ES cell/embryo (life and medical sciences) research?

DeSimone and the National Research Council committee state the following in “Convergence: Facilitating Transdisciplinary Integration of Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Engineering, and Beyond”:

“Many believe that life and medical sciences have not focused as extensively as physics and engineering on developing common measurement standards and common guidelines for collecting data from biological samples. In order to move beyond information encoded in individual genomes to translational application, further attention to this challenge of standardization and reproducibility is required. Strategies adapted from the physics and engineering communities can contribute, although the complexity and individual variability of living organisms make measurement challenges in life and medical sciences unique.”

So, is this a legitimate problem that concerns life scientists explicitly or are engineers and physicists simply asking for too much because they can't appreciate the difficulty of measuring what we all should want to know?

Is a common measurement standard for ES cell research, etc., the best someone has already done or is it defined as the best we can achieve for some stated purpose? What is that purpose and the best we can achieve? Can there be one colligated, stated purpose and measurement standard for something like, "in vitro generation of hemangioblasts for rejuvenation and health"?

Would a "stem cell scientist", a "developmental biologist", a "cell biologist", a "materials engineer", a "network physicist", a "computer scientist", a "physiologist", a "tissue engineer", a "geneticist", a "reasonably informed citizen" and a "potential patient" (

*i.e*., all who investigate) agree this is what we want to know? Why bother? That is, what can we know in that future that we can't know now with current standards?If we achieve this standard, would we even know what we're looking at? For example, if we saw regular flashing behavior associated with a construct that's not supposed to flash, how can we use that information? Who is responsible for assigning meaning if the behavior is novel to everyone investigating?

If we can't achieve that standard, whose problem would that be? Why should it be the biologists' problem? Isn't 21st century biology different in that it encompasses and synthesizes all disciplines?

Speculations are also welcome, so please... :)

In the ‘International vocabulary of metrology-basic concepts and associated

terms’ (VIM) JCGM200:2008 and IUPAC technical report, a reference measurement procedure is described as a measurement procedure accepted as measurement results fit for their intended use in assessing measurement trueness of measured quantity values obtained from other ‘measurement procedures’ for quantities of the same kind, in calibration, or in characterizing reference materials.

I have a thin-walled machined tube which I want to measure for it's thickness deviation in different positions but I don't know how. The specs: L=500mm , Ri=58mm , Ro=60mm

All measurements are uncertain, so in experimental science one should always specify the uncertainty, u, attached to the measured value, y. There are at least two mainstream ways to do it:

(1) y +- u(random) +- u(systematic) (sorry the post does not allow correct format for formulas); this way is often used in physics, leaving separate the random and systematic components.

(2) y +- u; in this way, in u, the two components are combined in quadrature, after "corrections" are performed on the result, uncorrected for systematic effects; this way is normal in metrology.

The size of u also depends on the chosen confidence level of a confidence interval (under Bayes approach the naming is different).

There are other ways when non-probabilistic methods are used to estimate the uncertainty.

In all instances, the result of a measurement is represented by (at least) a couple of parameters (y,u).

The question is: would it be possible to formalise a definition and notation which does not depend on the choice of the method (e.g. probabilistic or not) for the category 'uncertain number', and build an arithmetic out of that?

I was prompted by the existence of other categories of numbers, e.g., complex numbers.

Mathematicians should have the best tools to succeed (like, e.g., it happened for the mathematics of intervals)

I have placed some problems arising when using 'uncertain numbers', as opposed to 'mathematical' numbers, in some of my publications. I attach here one of them.

I'm pulsing an UV laser in a hot air jet, and imaging the Rayleigh scattering. But some particles in the flow seem to induce Mie scattering, confusing our measurements. Without filtering the flow, is it possible to separate the 2 scatterings contributions, by any mean (images post-treatment, polarization, etc..) ?