Performance Verification of Analytical Balances according to ISO/IEC 17025
Accurate analytical measurements are fundamental to the functioning
of modern society. Inaccurate results can have an enormous social and economic
impact1 (Prichard et al. “Quality Assurance in Analytical
Measurement”, 2007) such as:
- “In trade, it could lead to the supply of sub-standard goods and the high cost of replacement with subsequent loss of customers”
- “In environmental monitoring, mistakes could lead to hazards being undetected or to the identification of unreal hazards”
- “In supply of drinking water, it could lead to harmful contaminants being undetected”
- “In healthcare, the incorrect medication or the incorrect content of an active ingredient in a tablet can be catastrophic for the patient”.
Calibration and verification are the
most important actions to ensure the correct indication of measuring
instruments2 (K. Sommer et al. “Calibration and Verification: Two
Procedures
Having
Comparable Objectives and Results”; OIML BULLETIN; vol. XLII, number 1, 2001)
They are considered major requirements for the competence of testing
and calibration laboratories according to the International Standard ISO/IEC 17025:
“Equipment used for testing, calibration and sampling shall comply
with specifictions…” (5.5.1) and
“Before being placed into service,
equipment (including that used for sampling) shall be calibrated or checked to
establish that it meets the laboratory’s specification requirements and
complies with relevant standard specifications. It shall be checked and/or
calibrated before use”. (5.5.2)
ISO/IEC Guide 2 defines verification
as: “Confirmation by examination and provision of evi-dence that specified requirements
have been met”.
Verification is the confirmation,
based on evidence (test results) that a certain number of specified
requirements have been fulfilled. For example, the verification of an
analytical balance will prove that the
performance of the balance is still in agreement with the calibration
certificate.
The acceptance / rejection criteria
used for the verification of analytical balances are:
·
Trueness (% relative error),
comparing to the weights of certified standard weights. The average weight xaverage
of ten consecutive measurements of a certified standard weight is measured using
the analytical balance. The absolute error is calculated and then the %
relative error according to:
Absolute error = xaverage
– xt
% relative error = [
(xaverage – xt )/ xt] x 100
Where xt the true value of the certified weight and xaverage the average weight of the certified
weight determined experimentally ( ten consecutive measurements of the
certified weight using the analytical balance of interest).
Absolute and % relative error are a
measure of the accuracy (trueness) of the analytical balance.
The definition of trueness according to
VIM 2010 (International Vocabulary of Terms in Legal Metrology) is: closeness of agreement between the average
of an infinite number of replicate measured quantity values and a reference
quantity value.
· Repeatability (% coefficient of variance, %RSD), comparing
to the weighs of certified standard weights.
The
standard deviation from the mean value of ten consecutive measurements of a
certified weight is determined. Then the % relative standard deviation (%RSD)
is calculated.
Standard deviation = s = [Σ(xi-xaverage)2 / (n – 1)]1/2
Where xaverage the
average value of the ten consecutive measurements and x each individual
measurement and n the number of measurements
% relative standard deviation (%RSD) = s / xaverage * 100
Repeatability (%RSD) is a measure of the precision of the
analytical balance.
The definition of precision
according to VIM 2010 (International Vocabulary of Terms in Legal
Metrology) is: closeness of agreement between indications
or measured quantity values obtained by replicate measurements on the same or
similar objects under specified conditions.
·
Drift
The acceptance /
rejection criteria (tolerance) for analytical balances are given in the table
below:
Acceptance / Rejection
Criteria for Analytical Balances
|
|
Trueness,
% Relative Error
|
0.01
|
Repeatability,
% RSD
|
0.0001
|
Drift,
g
|
0.001
|
The above
procedure was followed for the performance verification of a KERN 770-13 precision balance.
The results are given in the table below:
Table 1: Balance Verification Table – Trueness and Repeatability
Assays
Balance I.D.
|
Standard Weight I.D.
|
||
Brand
|
KERN
|
Nominal Value
|
99,9996
|
Model
|
770-13
|
||
Measurement #
|
Value (g)
|
Drift (g)
|
1
|
99.9998
|
t = 0 1.0000
|
2
|
99.9997
|
t = 5 1.0001
|
3
|
99.9996
|
t = 10 1.0001
|
4
|
99.9997
|
|
5
|
99.9998
|
|
6
|
99.9998
|
|
7
|
99.9997
|
|
8
|
99.9997
|
|
9
|
99.9997
|
|
10
|
99.9997
|
|
Average (g)
|
99.9997
|
|
Absolute Error (g)
|
0.0001
|
|
Relative Error (%)
|
0.0001
|
|
Accepted /not Accepted
Trueness
|
Accepted
|
|
Std. Deviation (g)
|
0.000063
|
|
%RSD
|
0.000063
|
|
Accepted /not Accepted
Repeatability
|
Accepted
|
|
Drift (g)
|
0.0001
|
|
Accepted /not Accepted
Drift
|
Accepted
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment