This eBook, available on Amazon, contains guidance on factors that ensure repeatable results through the entire measurement chain. For force-measuring devices, there are various mechanical and electrical interfaces that matter. At the time of calibration, these consist of:
Having problems figuring out all of the requirements to calculate a CMC for force or torque? This excel sheet provides a template to calculate CMC's with explanations of everything required to pass an ISO/IEC 17025 audit.
Decision Rules can be difficult to understand, and this worksheet will help simplify things by focusing on measurement risk. It will help cure those measurement headaches allowing anyone to calculate TUR properly, and Measurement Risk Correctly. Use this tool to input parameters such as accuracy requirement, resolution, measurement uncertainty, and repeatability with other error sources. The tool will calculate how good the reference standard uncertainty needs to be to maintain test uncertainty (TUR) ratios and will allow the end-user to input their own risk tolerances.
Having problems with results not agreeing because the same units are not being used. This spreadsheet tool was created to help convert force to mass and mass to force.
Need to know what 0.005 %, 0.01 % of full scale means when calibrating to a specified standard such as ASTM E74, this spreadsheet breaks these numbers down into a % of reading at various force points throughout the calibration range.
Several organizations and publications reference or insist on maintaining a 4:1 Test Uncertainty Ratio (TUR) without understanding the level of risk that they may be subjecting themselves to. The general thought is if the lab performing the calibrations has standards at least four times better then what they are calibrating that everything is good. This paper discusses TUR, PFA Risk, and why the location of the measurement matters. We will discuss two managed risk guard banding methods (5 & 6) found in the ANSI/NCSL Z540.3 Handbook. We will show that a 4:1 TUR is not enough and can result in a 50 % risk.
Morehouse has been performing both ASTM E74 and ISO 376 calibrations for more than fifteen years. We have been calibrating in accordance with the ASTM E74 standard since its introduction in 1974, and performing ISO 376 calibrations since sometime in early 2000. Until recently, we assumed that the rest of the world and force community knew that the standards were completely different and that either standard could not be substituted for another. This paper explains those differences in more detail.
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 2014.
What you need to know about molecule excitement decline and dual range calibrations. Article from Test Magazine May 2016 issue.
If you are new to force calibration or metrology, the information can be overwhelming. Since force calibration is mechanical in nature, there are many factors to consider. This guidance document provides a basic understanding of force calibration, the methods and instruments used, industry standards, and best practices.
This force calibration guidance for Technicians and Quality Managers covers more advanced force calibration topics including loading conditions, adapters, verification of the adjustments, indicators, measurement uncertainty, selecting the right calibration method.
There is a common misconception about equipment “being compliant” with ISO 376. Many struggle with how to use an ISO 376 calibration and put together an uncertainty budget. This document provides guidance for the evaluation of measurement uncertainty in the calibration of force-measuring instruments to support CMC in the scope of accreditation and calibration and/or measurement certificates/reports.
Article in test magazine from Oct-Nov 2015 issue.
Morehouse technicians have seen many different load cell issues and have lots of experience identifying and fixing the problems. With this experience, we developed a 7 Step Process for Troubleshooting a Load Cell, which will reduce the hours wasted troubleshooting a nonworking load cell to diagnose the problem.
Force-measuring instruments are susceptible to errors from improper adapters, misalignment, and not exercising the instrument to full capacity. This document provides guidance for replicating how the force-measuring instrument is used, keeping the line of force free from eccentric error, and overcoming safety concerns with old adapters.
This document provides guidelines for identifying all significant contributions to measurement uncertainty in the calibration of force-measuring instruments. It serves as a means for laboratories to be compliant with A2LA R205 – Specific Requirements: Calibration Laboratory Accreditation Program.
This document identifies all significant contributions to measurement uncertainty when using a Morehouse calibrating machine. It describes what is needed to achieve a measurement uncertainty of better than 0.02 % of the applied force.
Guide for locating the correct adapter for your application.
This is a one sheet verification proving the software converts the mV/V values properly. The end user must verify they have entered the coefficients correctly
V1.0.4: 2022 version Morehouse software, which uses the coefficients from the calibration report, typically ASTM E74 or ISO 376 report to ensure the mV/V values can be converted to engineering units. Keeping the calibration in mV/V is important as any adjustments are made at the time of calibration by issuing new coefficients. This keeps the cost down and allows the end-user the ability to easily compare the stability from one calibration to another. It also allows adjustments to other engineering units such as N, kN, kgf, & lbf. In addition, the software allows for multiple load cells to be summed together for weighing or other applications where each individual load cell can be monitored as a percentage of the overall applied load. This feature may be useful for calibrating pipe testers, large force machines where several load cells are required or checking the center of gravity. In addition, the software can convert force to mass values such as lb, kg, grams, and ounces which is useful for the calibration of scales.
V1.3.5: Force calibration software for use with Morehouse 4215, HADI, or DSC-USB Indicators. The software uses coefficients from ASTM E74 calibration and displays engineering units as well as capturing data with a remote control device and pausing readings etc.., Reporting section helps with ASTM E4 field calibrations. Must have Morehouse 4215, HADI, or DSC-USB indicator to use this software.
V1.2: This is the universal version for torque calibration which allows for lbf ft and N m coefficients to be entered. PEAK HOLD and new windows 8/10 drivers on this version. Inverse B0 coefficients.
Want to know how we calculate the expanded uncertainty on force and torque certificates? This spreadsheet has all of the formulas that comply with ILAC-P14:09/2020 ILAC Policy for
Measurement Uncertainty in Calibration at the time of calibration.
The coefficient calculator contains macros because it uses visual basic coding to generate the coefficients.
Presented at A2LA tech forum and NCSLI, this easy-to-use tool allows one to determine the effect of the resolution of an instrument on the overall measurement uncertainty and risk. One can use this tool to analyze the effects on TUR and measurement risk as well.
Decision Rules can be difficult to understand, but this worksheet will help. Use this tool to input parameters such as accuracy requirement, resolution, measurement uncertainty, and repeatability with other error sources. It will help make decisions on equipment, such as: Should I buy a device with better resolution? Do I need my calibration provider to have better measurement uncertainty than what I am getting? It also provides different Methods, using different decision rules (Method 5 and 6). The PFA calculator contains macros.
Use this calculator to easily interpolate the ending zero throughout your dataset.
Spreadsheet to print load tables for Proving Rings. This is used for ASTM E74 calibrations where the end-user does not want to use a computer and wants to print tables to interpolate force points.
Spreadsheet to print load tables for Load Cells
Calibration load points for Proving Rings used as standards in a Morehouse UCM
Load table generator for Morehouse A and B Coefficients Sheet for Load Cells
Convert LBF to KGF and N for Calibration load points in compression and tension.
Installation instructions for Morehouse software. This software uses the B coefficients from the calibration report and converts the mV/V readings into engineering units. Every time a new certificate is issued, the coefficient files must be changed. This software helps automate the calibration process and is used with the Morehouse 4215, HADI, and DSC indicators.
V1.4.2: This is the universal version which allows for LBF, KGF, N, kN coefficients to be entered. PEAK HOLD and new windows 8/10 drivers on this version. Inverse B0 coefficients.
