Open Access
Issue
Int. J. Metrol. Qual. Eng.
Volume 3, Number 3, 2012
Page(s) 127 - 135
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ijmqe/2012020
Published online 13 May 2013
  1. EMRP outline 2008 document [Google Scholar]
  2. C. Schlegel, G. Kiekenap, B. Glöckner, R. Kumme, Dynamic calibration of force sensors using sinusoidal excitations, Sensordevices 2011, Nice, France [Google Scholar]
  3. C. Schlegel, G. Kiekenap, B. Glöckner, A. Buß, R. Kumme, Traceable periodic force calibration, Metrologia 49, 224–235 (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, The new impact force machine at PTB, in Proc. of XVII IMEKO World Congress, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2003, pp. 263–267 [Google Scholar]
  5. M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, Uncertainty contributions of the impact force machine at PTB, in Proc. of XVIII IMEKO World Congress, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (CD publication, 2006) [Google Scholar]
  6. M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, L. Klaus, M. Müller, The 250 kN primary shock force calibration device at PTB, in Measurement, Special Issue: IMEKO 2010, Pattaya, Thailand (Elsevier), in press [Google Scholar]
  7. M. Kobusch, L. Klaus, T. Bruns, Model-based analysis of the dynamic behaviour of a 250 kN shock force calibration device, in XX IMEKO World Congress, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2012, to be published [Google Scholar]
  8. M. Kobusch, T. Bruns, E. Franke, Challenges in practical dynamic calibration, in Advanced Mathematical and Computational Tools in Metrology and Testing (World Scientific, 2009), pp. 204–212 [Google Scholar]
  9. T. Bruns, Sinusoidal torque calibration: A design for traceability in dynamic torque calibrations, in XVII IMEKO World Congress, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2003, pp. 282–285 [Google Scholar]
  10. T. Bruns, M. Kobusch, Traceability of dynamic force and torque calibrations by means of laser-Doppler-interferometry, Proc. SPIE 5503, 602–607 (2004) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. L. Klaus, T. Bruns, M. Kobusch, Determination of model parameters for a dynamic torque calibration device, in XX IMEKO World Congress, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2012, to be published [Google Scholar]
  12. J.M. Williams, D.R. Smith, D. Georgakopoulos, P.D. Patel, J.R. Pickering, Design and metrological applications of a low noise, high electrical isolation measurement unit, IET Sci. Meas. Technol. 3, 165–174 (2009) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. M.F. Beug, H. Moser, G. Ramm, Dynamic bridge standard for strain gauge bridge amplifier calibration, Conference on Precision Electromagnetic Measurements (CPEM), 2009 [Google Scholar]
  14. G. Ramm, H. Moser, A. Braun, A new scheme for generating and measuring active, reactive, and apparent power at power frequencies with uncertainties of 2.5 × 10-6, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 48, 422–426 (1999) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, and OIML, Evaluation of measurement data – Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, JCGM 100:2008 [Google Scholar]
  16. S. Eichstädt, Analysis of dynamic measurements – Evaluation of dynamic measurement uncertainty, Ph.D. thesis, PTB report IT-16 (2012) [Google Scholar]
  17. S. Eichstädt, A. Link, C. Elster, Dynamic uncertainty for compensated second-order systems, Sensors 10, 7621–7631 (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. A. Link, C. Elster, Uncertainty evaluation for IIR (infinite impulse response) filtering using a state-space approach, Meas. Sci. Technol. 20, 055104 (2009) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. C. Elster, A. Link, Uncertainty evaluation for dynamic measurements modelled by a linear time-invariant system, Metrologia 45, 464–473 (2008) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. S. Eichstädt, A. Link, T. Bruns, C. Elster, On-line dynamic error compensation of accelerometers by uncertainty-optimal filtering, Measurement 43, 708–713 (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. G. Wübbeler, A. Link, T. Bruns, C. Elster, Impact of correlation in the measured frequency response on the results of a dynamic calibration, in Advanced mathematical & computational tools in metrology VIII, Series on Advances in Mathematics for Applied Sciences, edited by F. Pavese, M. Bär, J.M. Limares, C. Perruchet, N.F. Zhang (World Scientific, New Jersey, 2009), Vol. 78, pp. 369–374 [Google Scholar]
  22. C. Elster, A. Link, T. Bruns, Analysis of dynamic measurements and determination of time-dependent measurement uncertainty using a second-order model, Meas. Sci. Technol. 18, 3682–3687 (2007) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. A. Link, A. Täubner, W. Wabinski, T. Bruns, C. Elster, Modelling accelerometers for transient signals using calibration measurements upon sinusoidal excitation, Measurement 40, 928–935 (2007) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. A. Link, A. Täubner, W. Wabinski, T. Bruns, C. Elster, Calibration of accelerometers: determination of amplitude and phase response upon shock excitation, Meas. Sci. Technol. 17, 1888–1894 (2006) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. M. Kobusch, A. Link, A. Buss, T. Bruns, Comparison of shock and sine force calibration methods, in Proc. of IMEKO TC3 & TC 16 & TC22 International Conference, Merida, Mexico, 2007 [Google Scholar]
  26. T. Esward, C. Matthews, S. Downes, A. Knott, S. Eichstädt, C. Elster, Uncertainty evaluation for traceable dynamic measurement of mechanical quantities: a case study in dynamic pressure calibration, in Advanced mathematical & computational tools in metrology IX, Göteborg, Sweden, 2011, in press [Google Scholar]
  27. S. Eichstädt, C. Elster, T.J. Esward, J.P. Hessling, Deconvolution filters for the analysis of dynamic measurement processes: a tutorial, Metrologia 47, 522–533 (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. S. Eichstädt, A. Link, P. Harris, C. Elster, Efficient implementation of a Monte Carlo method for uncertainty evaluation in dynamic measurements, Metrologia 49, 401–410 (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.