Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of Monte Carlo Simulation, Least Square Fitting and Calibration Factor Methods for the Evaluation of Measurement Uncertainty Using Direct Pressure Indicating Devices

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
MAPAN Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

At present, several measuring instruments are commercially available in the market for accurate and precise pressure measurements. In case of electromechanical type pressure sensors, the evaluation of measurement uncertainty is always a tedious task for researchers due to lack of availability of the suitable and well-defined mathematical model. In order to harmonize the method of evaluation of measurement uncertainty associated with measuring instruments, “The Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in measurement,” published by International Standard Organization, is a major directional guide which is equally important in pressure metrology. The present paper describes the various uncertainty propagation models developed for the evaluation of measurement uncertainty associated with direct pressure indicating devices (DPIDs). A detailed comparative study is presented while using Monte Carlo simulation, least square fitting and calibration factor methods for the evaluation of measurement uncertainty using a DPID. In order to judge the feasibility and practical applicability of these contemporary methods, it is demonstrated through an example of a case study on the results thus obtained on a DPID that results using three different approaches are in excellent agreement and quite comparable.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. General requirements for the competence of testing and Calibration Laboratories (First Revision), ISO/IEC Document-17025:2005.

  2. R. Kumar, S. Rab, B.D. Pant, S. Maji and R.S. Mishra, FEA-based design studies for development of diaphragm force transducers. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-018-0292-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. S. Yadav, A.K. Bandyopadhyay and A.C. Gupta, Evaluation of associated uncertainties using linear squares best-fit lines for electromechanical transducers, J. Inst. Eng. (ID), 86 (2005) 49–53.

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Yadav, V.K. Gupta, O. Prakash and A.K. Bandyopadhyay, Evaluation of associated uncertainties in calibration of direct pressure indicating electromechanical devices, Meas. Sci. Rev. 5 (2005) 104–114.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Kumar, S. Rab, B.D. Pant and S. Maji, Design, development and characterization of MEMS silicon diaphragm force sensor. Vacuum 153 (2018) 211–216.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. BIPM, IEC, ISO IFCC, IUPAP, IUPAC, OIML, Evaluation of measurement data guide for the expression of uncertainty in measurement. JCGM 100 (2008).

  7. I. BIPM, I. IFCC, I. ISO, IUPAP and OIML, Evaluation of measurement data—supplement 1 to the “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement”—propagation of distributions using a Monte Carlo method. Joint committee for guides in metrology. JCGM 101 (2008). International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.

  8. M.G. Cox, B.R.L. Siebert, The use of a Monte Carlo method for evaluating uncertainty and expanded uncertainty, Metrologia 43 (2006) S178.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. S. Yadav and A.K. Bandyopadhyay, A proposal for evaluation of associated uncertainties in calibration of direct pressure indicating electromechanical devices, Callab. Int. J. Metrol. 13, (2006) 32–37.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Yadav, Characterization of dead weight testers and computation of associated uncertainties: a case study of contemporary techniques, Metrol. Meas. Syst. 14 (2007) 453–469.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Indicating and Recording Pressure Gauges, Vacuum gauges and pressure-vacuum gauges with elastic sensing elements (Ordinary Instruments), OIML International Recommendation (OIML R 101) (1991).

  12. W. Sabuga, D.A. Olson, J.C. Torres, S. Yadav, Y. Jin, T. Kobata and P. Otal, Final report on key comparison CCM.P-K13 in the range 50 MPa to 500 MPa of hydraulic gauge pressure, Metrologia 49, Tech. Suppl., (2012) 07006.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. R.G. Driver, D.A. Olson, S. Yadav, A.K. Bandyopadhyay, Final report on APMP.SIM. MP-K7: bilateral comparison between NIST (USA) and CSIR-NPLI (India) in the hydraulic pressure region 40 MPa to 200 MPa. Metrologia 43 (2006) 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. S. Yadav, A.K. Bandyopadhyay, N. Dilawar and A.C. Gupta, Intercomparison of national hydraulic pressure standards up to 500 MPa. Meas Control 35 (2002) 47–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Dr. D. K. Aswal, Director, National Physical Laboratory, New Delhi for his continuous support and encouragement.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIR-National Physical Laboratory (CSIR-NPL), New Delhi, India

    Shanay Rab, Sanjay Yadav, Afaqul Zafer, P. K. Dubey, Jasveer Singh, Rahul Kumar, Raman Sharma & Lalit Kumar

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi, India

    Shanay Rab & Abid Haleem

  3. Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), CSIR-NPL Campus, New Delhi, 110012, India

    Sanjay Yadav, Afaqul Zafer, P. K. Dubey & Rahul Kumar

Authors
  1. Shanay Rab
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sanjay Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Afaqul Zafer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Abid Haleem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. K. Dubey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jasveer Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rahul Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Raman Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Lalit Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shanay Rab.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rab, S., Yadav, S., Zafer, A. et al. Comparison of Monte Carlo Simulation, Least Square Fitting and Calibration Factor Methods for the Evaluation of Measurement Uncertainty Using Direct Pressure Indicating Devices. MAPAN 34, 305–315 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-019-00333-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-019-00333-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation