report on ccauv.v k3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 conclusion the first...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Report on CCAUV.V-K3
low frequency vibration comparison
2017-09-20
SUN Qiao
National Insititute of Metrology, China
CCAUV/17-10
![Page 2: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Contents
Metrological background of low frequency vibration
RMO low frequency vibration comparisons
CCAUV low frequency vibration comparison
Conclusion
![Page 3: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Metrological Background
Source: APMP TCAUV DEC Workshop 2014
by Mr. Suwandi. A, KIM-LIPI
![Page 4: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Metrological Background
Source: APMP TCAUV DEC Workshop 2014
by Mr. Shinji SATO, Railway Technical Research Institute, Japan
![Page 5: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Metrological Background
Source: APMP TCAUV DEC Workshop 2014
On-site visit, Thailand
![Page 6: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Metrological Background
Source: APMP TCAUV DEC Workshop 2014
by Mr. Suwandi. A, KIM-LIPI
![Page 7: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Contents
Metrological background of low frequency vibration
RMO low frequency vibration comparisons
CCAUV low frequency vibration comparison
Conclusion
![Page 8: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
RMO comparisons
Supplementary comparison in 3 RMOs (18 Participants)
AFRIMETS.AUV.V-S2
EURAMET.AUV.V-S1
2 participants (0.4 to 50) Hz
APMP.AUV.V-S1 7 participants (0.5 to 20) Hz
10 participants (1 to 80) Hz
2010 to 2011
2011 to 2012
2012 to 2013
![Page 9: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
RMO comparisons
![Page 10: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
RMO comparisons
Monitoring measurements performed 2010-2011
![Page 11: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
RMO comparisons
Comparison transfer standards (Gw10kg)
Comparison measurements carried out 2011-2012
![Page 12: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
RMO comparisons
Planned
in 2011 KRISS
July
NMIJ June
NIMT
Aug
CMS
Sept
NMIA
Oct NMISA
Nov
1
2
3
![Page 13: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
RMO comparisons
Source: Report of NMIJ to the 11th APMP TCAUV 2011
by Dr. T. KIKUCHI
![Page 14: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
RMO comparisons
KRISS
Mar
NMIJ
Dec
NIMT
Aug
CMS
Sept
NMIA
Oct NMISA
Nov
1
2
rearranged
![Page 15: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
RMO comparisons
NIM Horizontal Vertical
Horizontal
Vertical
Self-developed systems
NMIJ
(0.1 - 20) Hz (0.1 - 20) Hz
(0.5 - 2) Hz
(>2 - 20) Hz
![Page 16: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
RMO comparisons
CMS
NIMT
Horizontal
Vertical
Commercial systems
KRISS Horizontal
NMISA Horizontal (0.5 - 20) Hz
(0.5 - 20) Hz (0.5 - 20) Hz
(0.5 - 20) Hz
![Page 17: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
RMO comparisons
Installation direction
Note: Horizontal motion is the main
cause of building destruction.
![Page 18: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
RMO comparisons
Installation direction
Note: Sensors are tri-axis,
but horizontal X and Y
axis are very important
directions.
![Page 19: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Contents
Metrological background of low frequency vibration
RMO low frequency vibration comparisons
CCAUV low frequency vibration comparison
Conclusion
![Page 20: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
CCAUV comparison
No. NMIs low limit Direction
1 NMISA 0.4 Horizontal
2 KRISS 0.1 Horizontal
3 NIM 0.1 Horizontal
4 NMIJ 0.1 Horizontal
5 BKSV-DPLA 0.1 Horizontal
6 NMIA 0.1 Horizontal
7 LNE 0.4 Horizontal
8 METAS 0.4 Horizontal
9 PTB 0.4 Horizontal
10 INMETRO 0.4 Horizontal
11 CENAM 0.1 Horizontal
12 A*STAR 0.1 Horizontal
13 VNIIM 0.1 Horizontal
14 GUM 0.4 Horizontal
Participants List
![Page 21: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
CCAUV comparison
![Page 22: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
CCAUV comparison
• CCAUV.V-K3 2013-2015 time of measurement
BKSV-DPLA , CENAM, GUM, INMETRO, KRISS, LNE, METAS, NIM, NMC, NMIA, NMIJ, NMISA, PTB and VNIIM (14).
Approved for equivalence, Results available
Metrologia, 2017, 54, Tech. Suppl., 09001
![Page 23: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
CCAUV comparison
![Page 24: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
CCAUV comparison
136.1
136.2
136.3
136.4
136.5
136.6
136.7
136.8
136.9
137.0
03/2014 04/2014 05/2014 06/2014 07/2014 08/2014 01/2015 03/2016
mag
nit
ud
e in
mV
/(m
/s²)
1.6 Hz
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
03/2014 04/2014 05/2014 06/2014 07/2014 08/2014 01/2015 03/2016
ph
ase i
n °
1.6 Hz
![Page 25: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
CCAUV comparison
Comparison results
![Page 26: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
CCAUV comparison
Comparison results
![Page 27: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Contents
Metrological background of low frequency vibration
RMO low frequency vibration comparisons
CCAUV low frequency vibration comparison
Conclusion
![Page 28: Report on CCAUV.V K3 low frequency vibration comparison · 2017. 9. 28. · 28 Conclusion The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in vibration revealed the current](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071017/5fd05a9ff002617b09660ce1/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Conclusion
The first low-frequency CIPM key comparison CCAUV.V-K3 in
vibration revealed the current calibration capabilities of the 14
participants of 5 RMOs. 13 participating laboratories provided their
calibration results, which were mostly consistent within their
declared expanded uncertainties.
For magnitude results, only 2 participants failed to contribute to
the KCRV values calculated for 5 frequencies out of a total of 27
comparison frequencies.
For phase shift, 3 participants could not contribute to the
calculation of the KCRV values in a total of 16 frequencies. Better
understanding of their calibration devices and more reasonable
evaluation of their calibration uncertainties will provide more
accurate and reliable measurement results in the future.