Skip to main content
Log in

The impact of measurement uncertainty on the producer’s and user’s risks, on classification and conformity assessment: an example based on tests on some construction products

  • Practitioner's Report
  • Published:
Accreditation and Quality Assurance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The reliability of test results and subsequent classification statements or product certification depend on the variability of the product’s properties and on the validity of the test procedures used. With an emphasis on measurement uncertainty, producer’s and user’s risks as well as probabilities of conformance, conformity and classification are calculated exemplarily for two requirements for mineral aggregates used in construction. An important methodological basis is an international draft document on measurement uncertainty in conformity assessment. The mathematical instruments given are applied and further developed to a risk scenario for product classification. The results from a classification point of view show that the reliability of test results for acid-soluble sulphates is mostly acceptable and both the producer’s and user’s risks are quite small. In contrast, the magnesium sulphate index test produces results which are hardly usable for classification and certification purposes or for risk management in production. Product certification bodies should generally have an appropriate approach when dealing with results where precision data are poor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. ISO/IEC Guide 65 (1996) General requirements for bodies operating product certification system

  2. Williams RH, Hawkins CF (1993) The economics of guardband placement. In: Proceedings of the 24th IEEE international test conference, Baltimore

  3. Rossi GB, Crenna F (2006) A probabilistic approach to measurement-based decisions. Measurement 39:101–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fearn T, Fisher SA, Thompson M, Ellison SLR (2002) A decision theory approach to fitness for purpose in analytical measurement. Analyst 127:818–824

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Pendrill LR, Källgren H (2008) Optimized measurement uncertainty and decision-making in the metering of energy, fuel, and exhaust gases. Meas Tech 51(4):370–377

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. EUROLAB (2007) Measurement uncertainty revisited: alternative approaches to uncertainty evaluation. Technical Report No. 1

  7. Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM) Geneva (1995) JCGM 100:2008 at http://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/gum

  8. ISO/IEC 17025(2005) General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories

  9. JCGM 106 (2009) Evaluation of measurement data—the role of measurement uncertainty in conformity assessment. Draft, 12 May 2009

  10. ASME B89.7.4.1-2005 Measurement uncertainty and conformance testing: risk analysis

  11. ISO 5725-2 (2002) Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results—part 2: basic method for the determination of repeatability and reproducibility of a standard measurement method

  12. EN 12620 (2002) Aggregates for concrete

  13. EN 13139 (2002) Aggregates for mortar

  14. EN 13242 (2002) Aggregates for unbound and hydraulically bound materials for use in civil engineering work and road construction

  15. EN 1744-1 (1998) Tests for chemical properties of aggregates—Part 1: chemical analysis

  16. EN 1367-2 (1998) Tests for thermal and weathering properties of aggregates—Part 2: magnesium sulphate test

  17. ISO/IEC CD Guide 73:2007-06 Risk management—Vocabulary

  18. Hinrichs W (2003) Information on measurement uncertainty in product and test standards. Accred Qual Assur 8:569–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wilfried Hinrichs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hinrichs, W. The impact of measurement uncertainty on the producer’s and user’s risks, on classification and conformity assessment: an example based on tests on some construction products. Accred Qual Assur 15, 289–296 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-009-0619-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-009-0619-3

Keywords

Navigation