KR101950584B1 - Comparison test method of measurement devices - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a measuring instrument comparison inspection method, and more particularly, to a measuring instrument comparison inspection method for verifying the reliability of a measuring instrument for measuring information output from a facility, comprising the steps of: (S10) A step (S30) of collecting measurement data measured by a plurality of measuring devices with respect to a measurement target facility; A step (S40) of selecting a reference group according to the standard deviation of the measurement data; Calculating an average of measurement data included in the reference group and selecting a reference value (S50); A step (S60) of calculating a tolerance range for each model by using a reference value and a tolerance ratio defined for each individual measuring instrument model; And a step S80 of selecting a measuring device for outputting measurement data within an allowable error range from among the collected measurement data. Therefore, the reliability of the measuring device can be effectively verified without using a conventional calibration standard .

Description

{COMPARISON TEST METHOD OF MEASUREMENT DEVICES}

In order to verify the reliability of a measuring instrument for measuring information outputted from various facilities, the present invention relates to a measuring instrument for comparing measurement data within a prescribed tolerance range without using a conventional calibration standard The method comprising the steps of:

In general, various facilities operated by industry are periodically checked by a measuring device to determine whether or not the function is normally operating.

The measuring device is a device that displays the results by calculating the functions performed by the measuring target facility as numerical data. For example, the main measuring instruments used in the whole operation of an urban railway are optical power meter, infrared camera, infrared thermometer, oscilloscope, multimeter, insulation resistance meter, hook meter, coil meter, beacon meter, track circuit bond meter, track circuit And a current measuring instrument.

Since the results measured by the various measuring instruments described above have a significant influence on the overall operation of the facility, it is necessary to secure the reliability of the measuring apparatus prior to the facility inspection. Most of the facility management industry has enacted regulations on the management of measuring instruments.

There are two methods of securing the reliability of the measuring instrument: asking the calibration company to calibrate the measuring instrument or calibrating it in-house. In the case of the former, the calibration data is calibrated and verified using the calibration standard.

The calibration standard is a measurement device that already has high accuracy of the measurement result. As a result, the reliability of the measuring device is verified by comparing the measurement value of the measuring device with the measurement value of the standard device.

As an example, Korean Patent No. 10-1207995 discloses a method for calibrating a low frequency AC magnetic field measuring device that calculates a calibration value of a magnetic field measuring device based on a standard device that meets the international standard for magnetic field measurement in order to secure the reliability of the magnetic field measuring device A standard device has been disclosed.

Korean Patent No. 10- 1332059 discloses a method of calibrating various optical measuring instruments such as a light intensity and a light distribution measuring instrument using a standard light source that is verified and compares an energy value of a standard light source with a value measured by a calibrating optical measuring device, A calibration device configured to calibrate the calibration device.

In addition, a pressure measuring instrument test system of Korean Patent No. 10-1933165 is known, and a schematic configuration thereof will be described below.

A pressure measuring system testing system for testing and calibrating the performance of a pressure measuring instrument by connecting a low pressure measuring unit and a high pressure measuring unit to a computer, the system comprising: a history management module for managing a database of history of testing the pressure measuring instrument; A meter management module that manages information about the meter; and a meter test module that tests the pressure meter using pneumatic pressure in the low pressure pressure measurement unit or hydraulic pressure in the high pressure pressure measurement unit, And the pressure meter is calibrated when the difference between the pressure value measured through the pressure meter and the pressure value measured through the standard meter, which is a standard measure of the pressure measurement, is outside the predetermined error tolerance range.

Korean Patent No. 10-1207995 (2012.04.04) Korean Registered Patent No. 10 - 1332059 (Nov. 21, 2013) Korean Patent No. 10 - 1093165 (December 13, 2011) Korean Registered Patent No. 10 - 0585293 (2006.06.02)

As a method for securing the reliability of the measuring device in the prior art, there is a method of requesting a calibration company to calibrate the measuring instrument to the authorized calibration company or calibrating it in-house. In addition, there is a method of confirming the self-operation test of the equipment. In the case of the former, the calibration data is calibrated and calibrated using the calibration standard.

In addition, the calibration standard to which the conventional technique as described above is applied corresponds to an apparatus configured to receive the output value of the measurement object facility and to calculate the measurement result with high accuracy, and the input value measured through the meter and the input value The pressure measuring unit is configured to be calibrated.

However, if the output from a particular measurement facility is an output of a unit that is self-regulated and used by industry, as it is not possible to represent it as a base unit of measurement (eg length, weight, voltage, etc.) specified by ISO, It is very difficult to secure and select a calibration standard for these self-measuring instruments.

Therefore, it is urgent to develop a method for effectively verifying the reliability of the measuring instrument even in an environment where it is difficult to select a reliable standard for calibration as described above.

Accordingly, the present invention has been made to solve the above-mentioned problems of the prior art,

A meter comparison inspection method for verifying the reliability of a meter for measuring information output from a facility,

Selecting a facility to be measured (S10);

A step (S30) of collecting measurement data measured by a plurality of measuring devices with respect to the measurement target facility;

A step (S40) of selecting a reference group according to the standard deviation of the measurement data;

Calculating an average of measurement data included in the reference group and selecting a reference value (S50);

A step (S60) of calculating a tolerance range for each model by using the reference value and a tolerance rate defined for each individual measuring instrument model;

And a step S80 of selecting a measuring device for outputting measurement data within an allowable error range from among the collected measurement data.

In addition, in the measuring instrument comparison inspection method, the step of selecting the reference value (S50) includes verifying the validity of the selected reference value,

(S20) of calculating a history average value collected in a past normal operation state of the measurement target facility,

And a reference value validity checking step (S70) of comparing the history average value with a reference value and determining whether the reference value is within the normal range or not, according to the present invention. Therefore, Verifiable objectives can be achieved.

The present invention has an effect of providing a method of precisely selecting a measuring instrument that outputs measurement data within a prescribed tolerance range without using a standard instrument for calibration of a conventional instrument.

Therefore, there is an advantage that it is possible to more quickly and effectively verify the reliability of a measuring device which is difficult to select a standard device for calibration, such as a self-manufactured measuring device used for each industry.

Therefore, it ultimately has various advantages such as not only deriving stable maintenance effect of the facility, but also saving the time and cost of requesting comparison inspection of the measuring instrument through the manufacture and calibration company of the measuring instrument.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a system for carrying out a comparator test method according to the present invention; FIG.
2 is a block diagram schematically illustrating a meter comparison and inspection method according to the present invention.
FIG. 3 is a flow chart showing an implementation process of a meter comparison and inspection method according to the present invention.
FIG. 4 to FIG. 6 are views showing an embodiment of a measuring instrument comparison inspection method according to the present invention; FIG.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, a configuration and an operation of a comparative testing method according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram schematically showing a method of comparing and checking a measuring instrument according to the present invention. FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a measuring instrument comparison inspection method according to the present invention. FIGS. 4 to 6 are explanatory diagrams illustrating an embodiment of a measuring instrument comparison inspection method according to the present invention.

The measuring instrument comparison inspection method to which the technology of the present invention is applied is constituted as a method for verifying the reliability of a measuring instrument for measuring information output from various equipments. In the case of a self-manufactured measuring instrument, The present invention relates to a method of selecting a measuring instrument that outputs measurement data within a prescribed tolerance range without using a measuring instrument.

The measuring instrument comparison inspection method of the present invention for this purpose is performed by a measuring instrument comparison inspection system as schematically shown in FIG.

The meter comparison and inspection system is constituted by a computer equipped with the meter comparison inspection program software as exemplarily shown in FIG. Therefore, data is inputted from the measuring instrument by the connection setting between the computer and the measuring device, or the measuring value displayed on the measuring device by the inspector is manually inputted, and then the calculation and processing are performed by software.

Each of the measurement comparator and inspection program includes a measurement data collection unit, a reference group selection unit, a reference value selection unit, a measurement data comparison unit, and a measurement data abnormality determination unit, Perform a step-by-step process.

The measuring instrument comparison inspection method according to the present invention is a comparator inspection method for verifying the reliability of a measuring instrument for measuring information output from a facility, which is constituted by a comparative inspection configuration as shown in FIG. 2, As shown in Fig. 3.

First, a comparator inspection program is executed to start a comparison inspection process, and a step of selecting a facility to be measured (S10) is performed.

When the measurement object facility is selected as described above, the output value is measured from the facility using a plurality of meters, and the measurement data collection unit of the meter comparison inspection system collects the measurement data measured by the plurality of meters (S30).

The measuring instrument may vary depending on the type of equipment to be measured. For example, the main measuring instrument used in the entire operation of an urban railway is an optical power meter, an infrared camera, an infrared thermometer, an oscilloscope, a multimeter, Coil measuring instrument, beacon measuring instrument, orbital circuit bond measuring instrument, and track circuit current measuring instrument.

In addition, since the measuring device may be equipped with equipment for measuring according to a different measuring method for each measuring device corresponding to the same measuring object facility, the measuring data collector collects measurement data from the measuring device.

The measurement data collected as described above is subjected to a step S40 of selecting a reference group according to the standard deviation of the measurement data by the reference group selection unit of the measuring instrument comparison and inspection system.

The reference group is generated by combining the groups consisting of the number of measuring instruments corresponding to 2/3 of the total number of measuring instruments. The standard deviation of each group is calculated based on the measuring data of each measuring instrument, A group with the lowest standard deviation is selected as the reference group.

<그림 (1)>

<Figure (1)>

The formula for calculating the standard deviation is given by the following equation (1).

<식 (1)>

&Lt; Formula (1) >

The selected reference group performs step S50 of calculating the average of the measurement data included in the reference group by the reference value selection unit of the comparator system and selecting a reference value.

The formula for calculating the reference value is shown in the following formula (2).

<식 (2)>

&Lt; Formula (2) >

The selected reference value is calculated by a measurement data comparing unit of the measuring instrument comparison and inspection system (S60) by calculating a tolerance range for each model using the reference value and the tolerance rate defined for each individual measuring instrument model.

The permissible error rate applies to the Instrument Accuracy Limits specified by the accredited organizations such as the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) or to the values specified by the industry that operates each facility.

The tolerance range derives the normal range according to the minimum value and the maximum value calculated by the following equation (3).

<식 (3)>

&Lt; Formula (3) >

In addition, the measurement data abnormality determination unit of the measuring instrument comparison and inspection system outputs the measurement data within the tolerance range among the measurement data collected through the step of collecting the measurement data using the tolerance range derived as described above (S30) A step of selecting a measuring instrument (S80) is performed. Therefore, as shown in Fig. 2 (2), the measurement data belonging to the outside of the tolerance range are selected, and the measuring device determined to be abnormal beyond the tolerance range is inspected by the manufacturer.

<그림 (2)>

<Figure (2)>

Meanwhile, in the measuring instrument comparison inspection method according to the present invention, the step of selecting the reference value (S50) includes verifying the validity of the selected reference value.

First, when the measurement target facility is selected through the step of selecting the measurement target facility as described above, the measurement target comparison facility is calculated (S20) of calculating a historical average value collected in the past normal operation state of the measurement target facility Conduct.

That is, since the measurement target facility is periodically checked by an individual measuring device in order to determine whether or not the corresponding function is in a normal operating state, the measuring device comparison test program is configured to determine, based on the historical data measured by the past measuring device, The average value of the hysteresis data collected from the memory is calculated.

The calculation formula of the history average value is expressed by the following equation (4).

<식(4)>

&Lt; Expression (4) >

Also, prior to the step of selecting the measuring instrument (S80), comparing the selected reference value through the step (S50) of selecting the historical average value and the reference value calculated through the step S20 of calculating the historical average value as described above And a reference value validity checking step (S70) for determining whether or not the reference value is within the normal range.

Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to the following embodiments, and various modifications may be made without departing from the scope of the present invention.

<Examples>

As shown in FIG. 1, the measuring and comparing inspection system according to the present invention includes a measurement data collection unit, a reference group selection unit, a reference value selection unit, a measurement data comparison unit, and a measurement data abnormality determination unit And a computer equipped with a meter comparison and inspection program.

As shown in FIG. 4, the measuring instrument comparison and inspection program can automatically calculate and calculate a reference range and a reference value in a series of steps as shown in FIG. 3 by using measurement data of a plurality of measuring instruments for a specific facility, Perform the screening process.

First, measurement data in a normal operating state is collected from the selected measurement target facility through a step (S10) of selecting a measurement target facility.

In the present embodiment, the measurement target apparatuses that have operated stably without structural change for the past two years are selected, and measurement data histories are collected and a history average value is calculated (S20).

And collects the measurement data measured by the plurality of measuring devices with respect to the measurement target facility through the step of collecting the measurement data (S30). In step S40, the reference group is selected according to the standard deviation of the measurement data. (The following table 1 shows the measured values of the current value (mA) measured by the current measuring device using the current measuring instrument.) However, the current value (mA) measured by the measuring device is not the current specified by ISO The value measured by the measuring machine is arbitrarily given a unit.

number Measuring instrument Measurement data (mA) Criteria group 0 3-010504-00241-0001 532.0 O One 3-010504-00241-0002 534.0 O 2 3-010504-00241-0003 534.0 O 3 3-010504-00241-0004 542.0 4 3-010504-00241-0005 538.0 O 5 3-010504-00241-0006 534.0 O 6 3-010504-00241-0007 520.0 7 3-010504-00241-0008 528.0 O 8 3-010504-00241-0009 500.0

An average of the measurement data included in the reference group is calculated through the step of selecting the reference value (S50), and the reference value is selected. The reference value of the reference group in Table 1 is calculated as 533.33 mA.

In the step of calculating the tolerance range (S60), the tolerance range is calculated using the reference value and the tolerance rate defined for each individual measuring instrument type. The tolerance of the current meter is specified as ± 3.5%, so it is calculated as 514.67mA minimum and 552.00mA maximum.

In order to verify the validity of the selected reference value in the step of selecting the reference value (S50), a comparison is made between the average value and the reference value and whether or not the reference value is within the normal range And a reference value validity verification step (S70) is performed to determine whether or not to pass.

If it is determined that the failure has occurred in the reference value validity step, it is determined that there has been a past variation in the initially selected measurement target facility, and the other facility of the same type is selected in the measurement target facility selection step (S10) And performs a verification of the re-selected facility in the step of verifying the reference value validity (S70). For example, if it is determined in step S70 that the reference value validity verification step (S70) is performed despite the fact that the process has been performed three times, the inspection of the entire facility and the measuring apparatus is performed.

Finally, in the step of selecting the measuring instrument (S80), a measuring instrument for outputting measurement data within a tolerance range among the measuring data collected from a plurality of measuring instruments is selected to judge whether or not to pass or fail.

number Measuring instrument Measurement data (mA) Judgment 0 3-010504-00241-0001 532.0 pass One 3-010504-00241-0002 534.0 pass 2 3-010504-00241-0003 534.0 pass 3 3-010504-00241-0004 542.0 pass 4 3-010504-00241-0005 538.0 pass 5 3-010504-00241-0006 534.0 pass 6 3-010504-00241-0007 520.0 pass 7 3-010504-00241-0008 528.0 pass 8 3-010504-00241-0009 500.0 fail

As shown in FIG. 5, the measuring instrument comparison / inspection program outputs the final result through numerical values and graphs, and performs a function of automatically generating a comparison inspection report as shown in FIG. 6, It provides a function to express clearly.

Accordingly, the measuring instrument comparison inspection method according to the present invention as described above can select the measuring instrument more scientifically and quickly and more precisely through a series of steps performed by the measuring instrument comparison inspection program without using the conventional measuring instrument calibration standard And thus it is possible to effectively verify the reliability of a measuring instrument which is difficult to select a calibration standard device such as a self-manufactured measuring device.

Not applicable.

Claims (2)

A meter comparison inspection method for verifying the reliability of a meter for measuring information output from a facility,
Selecting a facility to be measured (S10);
A step (S30) of collecting measurement data measured by a plurality of measuring devices with respect to the measurement target facility;
A step (S40) of selecting a reference group according to the standard deviation of the measurement data;
Calculating an average of measurement data included in the reference group and selecting a reference value (S50);
Calculating a tolerance range for each model using the reference value and the tolerance rate defined for each individual measuring instrument model (S60); And
(S80) selecting a measuring instrument for outputting measurement data within an allowable error range from the collected measurement data,
And verifying the validity of the selected reference value in the step (S50) of selecting the reference value,
(S20) of calculating a history average value collected in a past normal operation state of the measurement target facility,
And a reference value validity checking step (S70) of comparing the history average value with a reference value and determining whether the reference value is within a normal range or not according to whether the reference value is within the normal range. delete

Images