This may be the last version of our Newsletter in this format. This newsletter discusses our Portable Calibrator, LAC and has an article on measurement risk.
Features: New Calibration Certificates and QR Codes; Top 3 ASTM E74 Calibration Mistakes; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates
Features: Designing Force Adapters for Calibration; Quick Change Tension Adapters for Calibrating Machines; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates; Meet Our Staff - James Wagner, Chief Engineer
Features: 2-Bar Versus 3-Bar Universal Calibrating Machines; ASTM E74 Calibration – Simplified step-by-step instructions; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates
Features: Tips from the Cal Lab - SPC – Statistical Process Control in the lab; Good Measurement Practice – Keep your system in control with a 5 in 1 solution; Calibration Intervals – by Phil Smith; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates
Features: Load Cell Troubleshooting – Morehouse 7 Step Load Cell Troubleshooting Guide; Potential Measurement Error – Tension Links; Meet the Morehouse Staff – Barry Cook (Lab); Training Workshop – Announcements and Dates
Features: Lean Tips – Setup Reduction; Potential Measurement Error – Unbolting Load Cells May Not Product Repeatable Results; Meet the Morehouse Staff – William Lane (Design Engineer); “Specifying Accredited Services” – Column by Phil Smith
Features: Lean Tips - 5S or 6S; Potential Measurement Error - 4 wire versus 6 wire; Meet the Morehouse Staff - Brian Ruppert (Machine Shop Supervisor); "Single Measurement Bliss" - Column by Dilip Shah discussing the problems with a single measurement
Features: Tips from the calibration lab - Point of Use to Save Time; Potential Measurement Error - Loading Through Bottom Threads in Compression; History of Morehouse - A detailed history from the 1920's through 2015; Oops! I severed my Cable Again - An article about switching cables
Measurement decision risk as probability that an incorrect decision will result from a measurement. Are you telling your customers instrument passes without considering measurement uncertainty? If taken to court, are your measurement defensible? This paper examines the proper way to make statements of compliance.
Having troubles understanding measurement uncertainty and how to put together a budget? This paper examines all of the components required to put together a full calibration and measurement capability (CMC) reviewed by Accreditation Bodies for your scope. This is a guide to calculating force measurement uncertainties and was published in Cal Lab magazine.
Article written by Henry Zumbrun for Cal lab Magazine.
What you need to know about dual range calibrations. Article from Test Magazine May 2016 issue.
Article in test magazine from Oct-Nov 2015 issue.
There is not a difference in repeatability and reproducibility between a 2 bar and a 3 bar Universal Calibrating Machine
Written and published in Cal Lab magazine April 2016
Article published in Quality Digest written by Henry Zumbrun (Morehouse Instrument Company).
Recommended steps for calibrating instruments in accordance with ASTM E74-13a. Published in Quality Digest Online in July 2016
This paper will describe our calibration process, including the calculations of our Calibration and Measurement Capability(CMC), as it appears on our scope of accreditation.
This paper describes NPL’s 2 kN·m torque machine — Now at Morehouse Instrument Company — a lever deadweight machine with a vertical torque axis and an uncertainty of ±0.002 %. Despite the greater difficulty in applying torques to a vertically mounted transducer, this design was selected as it enables a symmetric “pure” torque to be applied. In addition, this design provides adaptability, enabling comparisons with the application of asymmetric torque and “on-thefly” torque calibrations to be studied.
Guidance on Uncertainty Budgets for Force Measuring Devices Part 4. Calculating Uncertainty for Force Proving Instruments Calibrated to ISO 376
Morehouse CMC sheet will allow CMC calculation in accordance with ISO 376. The purpose of this blog is to provide guidance for determining the proper contributors of parameters for force measuring devices that should be taken into consideration when developing uncertainty calculations that support Calibration and Measurement Capability (CMC) uncertainty claim made on a scope of accreditation.
ISO 376:2011 Metallic materials — Calibration of force-proving instruments used for the verification of uniaxial testing machines standard explained. The ISO 376 standard is used worldwide, and it is a requirement for anyone calibrating in accordance with ISO 7500. If ISO 7500 is the requirement, then calibration needs to be performed in accordance with ISO 376 on the force-proving instruments used to certify the tensile machine. It is also the generally accepted force standard for most of the countries outside of North America for calibration of force-proving instruments such as load cells, proving rings, dynamometers, and other instruments used to calibrate similar types of instruments.
The article discusses the differences between ISO 376 and ASTM E74 in hopes to prevent intermixing of the standard as we had heard of companies using an ASTM E74 calibration to certify a tensile machine to ISO 7500.
Morehouse has been performing ISO 376 calibrations for over the last fifteen years. In this time frame, we have changed our ISO 376 certificate format three times. The latest change offers additional information such as calibration graph per run and is laid out in a way that is much more cohesive making it easier to read and understand
This blog details the calibration multi-axis load cells in a Morehouse Universal Calibrating Machine. Similar adapters and the same method could be used to calibrate multi-axis load cells in a Morehouse Deadweight frame. Please contact us for more information.
Tensile Calibration Adapter Breakthrough! Morehouse Force Calibration Adapters for Calibration of Lifting Devices such as Crane Scales, Tension Links, and Dynamometers.
Finally, a way to reduce excessive clutter and simplify tensile calibrations for Load Cells, Crane Scales, Tension Links, and Dynamometers.
If you get everything else correct and choose the wrong indicator, the overall system performance can suffer. This blog is going to better detail three specific indicator types. These are: 1- An A/D indicator that requires a computer to read the display 2- A battery powered portable indicator with minimal span points 3- A versatile indicator that can be used with several span points or accurately display mV/V through calibration.
Guidance on Uncertainty Budgets for Force Measuring Devices Part 3a. Calculating Uncertainty for Force Measuring Devices for Measurement or Verification of Force Using Non-Linearity
What is acceptable for a force calibration uncertainty budget when the device is not calibrated to a known standard and just to a couple manufacturer's specifications. This document aims at helping laboratories calculate force measurement uncertainties for Force Measuring Devices for Measurement or Verification of Force.
Guidance on Uncertainty Budgets for Force Measuring Devices Part 2. Calculating Uncertainty in Accordance with the ASTM E74 Standard
The ASTM E74 uncertainty appendix does not align with ILAC Policy for Uncertainty in Calibration ILAC P-14 which can be a problem for any accredited calibration laboratory. The purpose of this post is to combine the ASTM E74 calibration method, ILAC P-14, and JCGM 100:2008 together to help labs calculate measurement uncertainty per point throughout the loading range with the appropriate coverage factor k to meet their accreditation requirements.
Guidance on Uncertainty Budgets for Force Measuring Devices Part 1. Why Do We Need a Guidance Document?
This is part 1 of 4 total blog posts. This post deals with why Force Calibration needs a guidance document. The hope is to expand each of these posts and let them stand on there own to a specific force application.