### Abstract

Original language | English |
---|---|

Place of Publication | Espoo |

Publisher | VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland |

Number of pages | 34 |

ISBN (Electronic) | 951-38-5418-3 |

ISBN (Print) | 951-38-5417-5 |

Publication status | Published - 1999 |

MoE publication type | Not Eligible |

### Publication series

Series | VTT Tiedotteita - Meddelanden - Research Notes |
---|---|

Number | 1951 |

ISSN | 1235-0605 |

### Fingerprint

### Keywords

- measuring methods
- automatic measuring systems
- uncertainty
- industrial plants
- emissions
- gaseous pollutants
- flow rate

### Cite this

*Determination of uncertainty of automated emission measuring systems under field conditions using a second method as a reference*. Espoo: VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. VTT Tiedotteita - Meddelanden - Research Notes, No. 1951

}

*Determination of uncertainty of automated emission measuring systems under field conditions using a second method as a reference*. VTT Tiedotteita - Meddelanden - Research Notes, no. 1951, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Espoo.

**Determination of uncertainty of automated emission measuring systems under field conditions using a second method as a reference.** / Puustinen, Harri; Aunela-Tapola, Leena; Tolvanen, Merja; Vahlman, Tuula; Kovanen, Keijo.

Research output: Book/Report › Report

TY - BOOK

T1 - Determination of uncertainty of automated emission measuring systems under field conditions using a second method as a reference

AU - Puustinen, Harri

AU - Aunela-Tapola, Leena

AU - Tolvanen, Merja

AU - Vahlman, Tuula

AU - Kovanen, Keijo

N1 - Project code: K7SU00375

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - This report presents a procedure to determine the uncertainty of an automated emission measuring system (AMS) by comparing the results with a second method (REF). The procedure determines the uncertainty of AMS by comparing the final concentration and emission results of AMS and REF. In this way, the data processing of the plant is included in the result evaluation. This procedure assumes that the uncertainty of REF is known and determined in due form. The uncertainty determination has been divided into two cases; varying and nearly constant concentration. The suggested procedure calculates the uncertainty of AMS at the 95 % confidence level by a tabulated t-value. A minimum of three data pairs is required. However, a higher amount of data pairs is desirable, since a low amount of data pairs results in a higher uncertainty of AMS. The uncertainty of AMS is valid only within the range of concentrations at which the tests were carried out. Statistical data processing shows that the uncertainty of the reference method has a significant effect on the uncertainty of AMS, which always becomes larger than the uncertainty of REF. This should be taken into account when testing whether AMS fulfils the given uncertainty limits. Practical details, concerning parallel measurements at the plant, and the costs of the measurement campaign, have been taken into account when suggesting alternative ways for implementing the comparative measurements.

AB - This report presents a procedure to determine the uncertainty of an automated emission measuring system (AMS) by comparing the results with a second method (REF). The procedure determines the uncertainty of AMS by comparing the final concentration and emission results of AMS and REF. In this way, the data processing of the plant is included in the result evaluation. This procedure assumes that the uncertainty of REF is known and determined in due form. The uncertainty determination has been divided into two cases; varying and nearly constant concentration. The suggested procedure calculates the uncertainty of AMS at the 95 % confidence level by a tabulated t-value. A minimum of three data pairs is required. However, a higher amount of data pairs is desirable, since a low amount of data pairs results in a higher uncertainty of AMS. The uncertainty of AMS is valid only within the range of concentrations at which the tests were carried out. Statistical data processing shows that the uncertainty of the reference method has a significant effect on the uncertainty of AMS, which always becomes larger than the uncertainty of REF. This should be taken into account when testing whether AMS fulfils the given uncertainty limits. Practical details, concerning parallel measurements at the plant, and the costs of the measurement campaign, have been taken into account when suggesting alternative ways for implementing the comparative measurements.

KW - measuring methods

KW - automatic measuring systems

KW - uncertainty

KW - industrial plants

KW - emissions

KW - gaseous pollutants

KW - flow rate

M3 - Report

SN - 951-38-5417-5

T3 - VTT Tiedotteita - Meddelanden - Research Notes

BT - Determination of uncertainty of automated emission measuring systems under field conditions using a second method as a reference

PB - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland

CY - Espoo

ER -