1. bookVolume 19 (2019): Issue 4 (August 2019)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1335-8871
First Published
07 Mar 2008
Publication timeframe
6 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Effectiveness of Automatic Correction of Systematic Effects in Measuring Chains

Published Online: 24 Aug 2019
Volume & Issue: Volume 19 (2019) - Issue 4 (August 2019)
Page range: 132 - 143
Received: 20 Mar 2019
Accepted: 31 Jul 2019
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1335-8871
First Published
07 Mar 2008
Publication timeframe
6 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

The uncertainty of measurements associated with the following correction methods: advanced correction of additive linear drift, correction of additive and multiplicative effects, as well as joint correction of a linear drift and systematic additive and multiplicative effects is analyzed in the present article. For each correction method sensitivity coefficients and amplitude responses according to which noise and internal and external interferences influence the corrected measurement result have been determined. Besides uncertainty of reference quantities, the main factors which limit the efficiency of correction are: non-linearity of measurement function including non-linearity of ADC, no idealities of the switching systems and external and internal noises and periodic interferences. The efficiency of correction of systematic additive and multiplicative effects was studied for the multifunction 16 bit PCI DAQ of family NI 6250.

Keywords

[1] Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology. (2008). Evaluation of measurement data — Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, 1st edition. JCGM 100:2008.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Pavese, F. (2012). On the difference of meaning of ’zero correction’: zero value versus no correction, and of the associated uncertainties. In Advanced Mathematical and Computational Tools in Metrology IX. World Scientific, 297-309.10.1142/9789814397957_0037Search in Google Scholar

[3] Pavese, F. (2013). Why should correction values be better known than the measurand true value? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 459, 012036.10.1088/1742-6596/459/1/012036Search in Google Scholar

[4] Pavese, F. (2012). Corrections and input quantities in measurement models. International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering, 3, 155-159.10.1051/ijmqe/2012024Search in Google Scholar

[5] Danilov, A.A., Kurchenko, Yu. (2015). Calibration method of measuring instruments in operating conditions. In Advanced Mathematical and Computational Tools in Metrology X. World Scientific, 149-155.10.1142/9789814678629_0017Search in Google Scholar

[6] Krilov, A., Marinko, S, Boyko, L. (2015). Considerations on the influence of test equipment instability and calibration methods on measurement uncertainty of the test laboratory. In Advanced Mathematical and Computational Tools in Metrology X. World Scientific, 219-228.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Pavese, F. (2018). On the classification into random and systematic effects. In Advanced Mathematical and Computational Tools in Metrology and Testing XI. World Scientific, 58-69.10.1142/9789813274303_0006Search in Google Scholar

[8] Keithley Instruments. Low Level Measurements Handbook - 7th Edition : Precision DC Current, Voltage and Resistance Measurements.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Meijer, G.C.M. (ed.) (2008). Smart Sensor Systems. John Wiley and Sons.10.1002/9780470866931Search in Google Scholar

[10] Tuz, Ju.M. (1976). Structural Methods to Improve the Accuracy of Measuring Devices. Kyiv: Vyshcha shkola. (in Rusian)Search in Google Scholar

[11] Bromberg, E.M. (1978). Test Methods for Improving the Accuracy of Measurements. Moscow: Energia. (in Russian)Search in Google Scholar

[12] Wang, G., Meijer, G.C. (2000). Accurate DEM SC amplification of small differential-voltage with CM level from ground to VDD. In Smart Structures and Materials 2000: Smart Electronics and MEMS. SPIE, Vol. 3990. DOI: 10.1117/12.388913.10.1117/12.388913Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[13] Keithley Instruments. (2008). Switching Handbook: A Guide to Signal Switching in Automated Test Systems, 6th Edition.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Dorozhovets, M. (2015). Uncertainty of correction of the systematic effects and drifts. Przegląd Elektrotechniczny, 11, 300-304. (in Polish)Search in Google Scholar

[15] Bayley, G.V., Hammersley, G.M. (1946). The “effective” number of independent observations in an autocorrelated time-series. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 8 (2), 184-197.10.2307/2983560Search in Google Scholar

[16] Zhang, N.F. (2006). Calculation of the uncertainty of the mean of autocorrelated measurements. Metrologia 43 (4), 276-281.10.1088/0026-1394/43/4/S15Search in Google Scholar

[17] Warsza, Z., Dorozhovets, M. (2008). Uncertainty type A evaluation of autocorrelated measurement observations. Biuletyn WAT, LVII (2), 143-152.Search in Google Scholar

[18] National Instruments Corporation. NI 6250/6251/6254/6259 Multifunction 16 bit Data Acquisition. Datasheet. http://www.ni.com.Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo