Metrology

INTRODUCTION TO
METROLOGY
DEFINITIONS
 Metrology is the study of measurements
 Measurements are quantitative observations;

numerical descriptions
lseidman@matcmadison.edu
OVERVIEW
 This longer lecture explores general principles of

metrology
 Next 3 shorter lectures apply principles to specific

measurements: weight, volume, pH
 Later will talk about measuring light transmittance

(spectrophotometry)
WE WANT TO MAKE “GOOD”
MEASUREMENTS
 Making measurements is woven throughout
daily life in a lab.
 Often take measurements for granted, but

measurements must be “good”.
 What is a “good” measurement?
EXAMPLE
 A man weighs himself in the morning on his

bathroom scale, 172 pounds.
 Later, he weighs himself at the gym,173
pounds.
QUESTIONS
 How much does he really weigh?
 Do you trust one or other scale? Which one?
Could both be wrong? Do you think he
actually gained a pound?
 Are these “good measurements”?
NOT SURE
 We are not exactly certain of the man’s true

weight because:
 Maybe his weight really did change – always
sample issues
 Maybe one or both scales are wrong – always
instrument issues
DO WE REALLY CARE?
 Do you care if he really gained a pound?
 How many think “give or take” a pound is

OK?
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
 Suppose a premature baby is weighed. The

weight is recorded as 5 pounds 3 ounces and
the baby is sent home.
 Do we care if the scale is off by a pound?
“GOOD” MEASUREMENTS
 A “good” measurement is one that can be

trusted when making decisions.
 We just made judgments about scales.
 We make this type of judgment routinely.
IN THE LAB
 Anyone who works in a lab makes judgments about

whether measurements are “good enough” –
 but often the judgments are made subconsciously
 differently by different people
 Want to make decisions

 Conscious
 Consistent
QUALITY SYSTEMS
 All laboratory quality systems are concerned

with measurements
 All want “good” measurements
 Some language is quoted in your lab manual
NEED
 Awareness of issues so can make “good”

measurements.
 Language to discuss measurements.
 Tools to evaluate measurements.
METROLOGY VOCABULARY
 Very precise science with imprecise

vocabulary
 (word “precise” has several precise meanings that
are, without uncertainty, different)
 Words have multiple meanings, but specific

meanings
VOCABULARY
 Units of measurement
 Standards
 Calibration
 Traceability
 Tolerance
 Accuracy
 Precision
 Errors
 Uncertainty
UNITS OF MEASUREMENT
 Units define measurements

 Example, gram is the unit for mass
 What is the mass of a gram? How do we
know?
DEFINITIONS MADE BY
AGREEMENT
 Definitions of units are made by international
agreements, SI system
 Example, kilogram prototype in France
 K10 and K20 at NIST
EXTERNAL AUTHORITY
 Measurements are always made in

accordance with external authority
 Early authority was Pharaoh’s arm length
 A standard is an external authority
 Also, standard is a physical embodiment
of a unit
STANDARDS ARE:
 Physical objects, the properties of which are

known with sufficient accuracy to be used to
evaluate other items.
STANDARDS ARE AFFECTED BY
THE ENVIRONMENT
 Units are unaffected by the environment, but
standards are
 Example, Pharaoh’s arm length might change
 Example, a ruler is a physical embodiment of
centimeters
 Can change with temperature
 But cm doesn’t change
STANDARDS ALSO ARE:
 In chemical and biological assays,

substances or solutions used to establish the
response of an instrument or assay method
to an analyte
 See these in spectrophotometry labs
STANDARDS ALSO ARE:
 Documents established by consensus and

approved by a recognized body that establish
rules to make a process consistent
 Example ISO 9000
 ASTM standard method calibrating micropipettor
CALIBRATION IS:
 Bringing a measuring system into accordance

with external authority, using standards
 For example, calibrating a balance
 Use standards that have known masses
 Relate response of balance to units of kg
 Do this in lab
PERFORMANCE
VERIFICATION IS:
 Check of the performance of an instrument or
method without adjusting it.
TOLERANCE IS:
 Amount of error that is allowed in the

calibration of a particular item. National and
international standards specify tolerances.
EXAMPLE
 Standards for balance calibration can have

slight variation from “true” value
 Highest quality 100 g standards have a tolerance
of + 2.5 mg
 99.99975-100.00025 g
 Leads to uncertainty in all weight measurements
TRACEABILITY IS:
 The chain of calibrations, genealogy, that

establishes the value of a standard or
measurement
 In the U.S. traceability for most physical and

some chemical standards goes back to NIST
TRACEABILITY
 Note in this catalog example, “traceable to

NIST”
VOCABULARY
 Standards
 Calibration
 Traceability
 Tolerance
 Play with these ideas in labs
ACCURACY AND PRECISION
ARE:
 Accuracy is how close an individual value is
to the true or accepted value
 Precision is the consistency of a series of
measurements
EXPRESS ACCURACY
% error = True value – measured value X 100%

True value
Will calculate this in volume lab
EXPRESS PRECISION
 Standard deviation
 Expression of variability
 Take the mean (average)
 Calculate how much each measurement deviates
from mean
 Take an average of the deviation, so it is the
average deviation from the mean
 Try this in the volume lab
ERROR IS:
 Error is responsible for the difference

between a measured value and the “true”
value
CATEGORIES OF ERRORS
 Three types of error:

 Gross
 Random
 Systematic
GROSS ERROR
 Blunders
RANDOM ERROR
 In U.S., weigh particular 10 g standard every

day. They see:
 9.999590 g, 9.999601 g, 9.999592 g ….
 What do you think about this?
RANDOM ERROR
 Variability
 No one knows why
 They correct for humidity, barometric
pressure, temperature
 Error that cannot be eliminated. Called
“random error”
RANDOM ERROR
 Do you think that repeating the measurement

over and over would allow us to be more
certain of the “true” weight of this standard?
RANDOM ERROR
 Yes, because in the presence of only random error,

the mean is more likely to be correct if repeat the
measurement many times
 Standard is probably really a bit light
 Average of all the values is a good estimate of its

true weight
RANDOM ERROR AND
ACCURACY
 In presence of only random error, average
value will tend to be correct
 With only one or a few measurements, may

or may not be accurate
Mean
Median
Mode
THERE IS ALWAYS RANDOM
ERROR
 If can’t see it, system isn’t sensitive enough
Less sensitive balance: 10.00 g,

10.00 g, 10.00 g
Versus 9.999600 g…
SO…
 Can we ever be positive of true weight of that

standard?
 No
 There is uncertainty in every weight
measurement
RELATIONSHIP RANDOM
ERROR AND PRECISION
 Random error –
 Leads to a loss of precision
SYSTEMATIC ERROR
 Defined as measurements that are

consistently too high or too low, bias
 Many causes, contaminated solutions,

malfunctioning instruments, temperature
fluctuations, etc., etc.
SYSTEMATIC ERROR
 Technician controls sources of systematic

error and should try to eliminate them, if
possible
 Temperature effects
 Humidity effects
 Calibration of instruments
 Etc.
 In the presence of systematic error, does it
help to repeat measurements?
SYSTEMATIC ERROR
 Systematic error –
 Does impact accuracy
 Repeating measurements with systematic

error does not improve the accuracy of the
measurements
ANOTHER DEFINTION OF
ERROR IS:
 Error = is the difference between the measured
value and the “true” value due to any cause
Absolute error = “True” value - measured value
 Percent error is:

“True” value - measured value (100 %)
“True” value
ERRORS AND UNCERTAINTY
 Errors lead to uncertainty in measurements

 Can never know the exact, “true” value for
any measurement.
 Idea of a “true” value is abstract – never
knowable.
 In practice, get close enough
UNCERTAINTY IS:
 Estimate of the inaccuracy of a measurement

that includes both the random and systematic
components.
UNCERTAINTY ALSO IS:
 An estimate of the range within which the true

value for a measurement lies, with a given
probability level.
UNCERTAINTY
 Not surprisingly, it is difficult to state, with

certainty, how much uncertainty there is in a
measurement value.
 But that doesn’t keep metrologists from trying

…
METROLOGISTS
 Metrologists try to figure out all the possible sources

of uncertainty and estimate their magnitude
 One or another factor may be more significant. For
example, when measuring very short lengths with
micrometers, care a lot about repeatability. But, with
measurements of longer lengths, temperature
effects are far more important
REPORT VALUES
 Metrologists come up with a value for

uncertainty
 You may see this in catalogues or
specifications
 Example:
measured value + an estimate of uncertainty
UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATES
 Details are not important to us now
 But principle is: any measurement, need to

know where the important sources of error
might be
SIGNIFICANT FIGURES
 One cause of uncertainty in all measurements is that

the value for the measurement can only read to a
certain number of places
 This type of uncertainty. It is called “resolution

error”. (It is often evaluated using Type B methods.)
SIIGNIFICANT FIGURE
CONVENTIONS
 Significant figure conventions are used to
record the values from measurements
 Expression of uncertainty
 Also apply to very large counted values
 Do not apply to “exact” values
 Counts where are certain of value
 Conversion factors
ROUNDING CONVENTIONS
 Combine numbers in calculations

 Confusing
 Look up rules when they need them
RECORDING MEASURED
VALUES
 Record measured values (or large counts) with
correct number of significant figures
 Don’t add extra zeros; don’t drop ones that are
significant
 With digital reading, record exactly what it says;
assume the last value is estimated
 With analog values, record all measured values plus
one that is estimated
 Discussed in Laboratory Exercise 1
ROUNDING
 A Biotechnology company specifies that the

level of RNA impurities in a certain product
must be less than or equal to 0.02%. If the
level of RNA in a particular lot is 0.024%,
does that lot meet the specifications?
 The specification is set at the hundredth
decimal place. Therefore, the result is
rounded to that place when it is reported. The
result rounded is therefore 0.02%, and it
meets the specification.
 Look at all the problems for chapter 13.
GOOD WEB SITE FOR
SIGNIFICANT FIGURES
 http://antoine.frostburg.edu/cgi-
bin/senese/tutorials/sigfig/index.cgi
Match these descriptions with the 4 distributions in
the figure:
Good precision, poor accuracy
Good accuracy, poor precision
Good accuracy, good precision
Poor accuracy, poor precision
THERMOMETERS
 Look at the values for the thermometers on

the board.
 Significant figure conventions can guide us in
how to record the value that we read off any
measuring instrument.
 With these thermometers, correct number of
sig figs is _______.
THERMOMETERS
 Were they accurate?

 How could we figure out the “true” value for
the temperature?
REPEATING MEASUREMENTS
 Would repeating measurements with these

thermometers, assuming we did not calibrate
them, improve our ability to trust them?
 Is their error an example of random or
systematic error?
CALIBRATION
 Calibration of the thermometers could lead to

increased accuracy
 This is a type of systematic error
 In the presence of systematic error, repeating
the measurement will not improve its
accuracy
TOLERANCE
 Here is a catalog description of mercury

thermometers.
 Are these thermometers out of the range for
which their tolerance is specified?
PRECISION
 Were they precise? How could precision be

measured?
 Would calibration help to make them more
precise?
CALIBRATION
 Calibration would probably not improve their

precision
RETURN TO OUR ORIGINAL TYPE
OF QUESTION
 Are our temperature measurements “good”
measurements?
 How do you make that judgment?
 Can we trust them?
THERMOMETERS – GOOD
ENOUGH?
 Are times that we need to be very close in
temperature measurements. For example
PCR is fairly picky.
 Other times we can be pretty far off and
process will still work.
EXPLORE SOME OF THESE
IDEAS
 In lab:
 Calibrate instruments
 Use standards
 Check performance of micropipettes
 Record measurement values
 Calculate per cent errors
 Calculate repeatability

Metrology

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Metrology

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

INTRODUCTION TO

 Metrology is the study of measurements

 Measurements are quantitative observations;

 This longer lecture explores general principles of

 Next 3 shorter lectures apply principles to specific

 Later will talk about measuring light transmittance

 Often take measurements for granted, but

 What is a “good” measurement?

 A man weighs himself in the morning on his

 How much does he really weigh?

 We are not exactly certain of the man’s true

 Do you care if he really gained a pound?

 How many think “give or take” a pound is

 Suppose a premature baby is weighed. The

 Do we care if the scale is off by a pound?

 A “good” measurement is one that can be

 We just made judgments about scales.

 We make this type of judgment routinely.

 Anyone who works in a lab makes judgments about

 differently by different people

 Want to make decisions

 All laboratory quality systems are concerned

 All want “good” measurements

 Some language is quoted in your lab manual

 Awareness of issues so can make “good”

 Language to discuss measurements.

 Tools to evaluate measurements.

 Very precise science with imprecise

 Words have multiple meanings, but specific

 Units define measurements

 Measurements are always made in

 Physical objects, the properties of which are

 In chemical and biological assays,

 See these in spectrophotometry labs

 Documents established by consensus and

 Bringing a measuring system into accordance

 Amount of error that is allowed in the

 Standards for balance calibration can have

 The chain of calibrations, genealogy, that

 In the U.S. traceability for most physical and

 Note in this catalog example, “traceable to

% error = True value – measured value X 100%

Will calculate this in volume lab

 Error is responsible for the difference

 Three types of error:

 In U.S., weigh particular 10 g standard every

 What do you think about this?

 Do you think that repeating the measurement

 Yes, because in the presence of only random error,

 Standard is probably really a bit light

 Average of all the values is a good estimate of its

 With only one or a few measurements, may

Less sensitive balance: 10.00 g,

 Can we ever be positive of true weight of that

 Defined as measurements that are

 Many causes, contaminated solutions,

 Technician controls sources of systematic

 Repeating measurements with systematic

Absolute error = “True” value - measured value

 Percent error is:

 Errors lead to uncertainty in measurements

 Estimate of the inaccuracy of a measurement

 An estimate of the range within which the true

 Not surprisingly, it is difficult to state, with