It would not be possible to confidently qualify weapon systems performance or validate computer codes without knowing the uncertainty of the experimental data used. This report provides uncertainty estimates associated with thermocouple data for temperature measurements from two of Sandia's large-scale thermal facilities. These two facilities (the Radiant Heat Facility (RHF) and the Lurance Canyon Burn Site (LCBS)) routinely gather data from normal and abnormal thermal environment experiments. They are managed by Fire Science & Technology Department 09132. Uncertainty analyses were performed for several thermocouple (TC) data acquisition systems (DASs) used at the RHF and LCBS. These analyses apply to Type K, chromel-alumel thermocouples of various types: fiberglass sheathed TC wire, mineral-insulated, metal-sheathed (MIMS) TC assemblies, and are easily extended to other TC materials (e.g., copper-constantan). Several DASs were analyzed: (1) A Hewlett-Packard (HP) 3852A system, and (2) several National Instrument (NI) systems. The uncertainty analyses were performed on the entire system from the TC to the DAS output file. Uncertainty sources include TC mounting errors, ANSI standard calibration uncertainty for Type K TC wire, potential errors due to temperature gradients inside connectors, extension wire uncertainty, DAS hardware uncertainties including noise, common mode rejection ratio, digital voltmeter accuracy, mV to temperature conversion, analog to digital conversion, and other possible sources. Typical results for 'normal' environments (e.g., maximum of 300-400 K) showed the total uncertainty to be about {+-}1% of the reading in absolute temperature. In high temperature or high heat flux ('abnormal') thermal environments, total uncertainties range up to {+-}2-3% of the reading (maximum of 1300 K). The higher uncertainties in abnormal thermal environments are caused by increased errors due to the effects of imperfect TC attachment to the test item. 'Best practices' are provided in Section 9 to help the user to obtain the best measurements possible.
[1]
Barry N. Taylor,et al.
Guidelines for Evaluating and Expressing the Uncertainty of Nist Measurement Results
,
2017
.
[2]
P Burnett,et al.
INSULATION DEGRADATION ERRORS IN LONG, METAL SHEATHED THERMOCOUPLES: CALCULATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS
,
1984
.
[3]
W. G. Steele,et al.
Engineering application of experimental uncertainty analysis
,
1995
.
[4]
Asme.
Test Uncertainty, Instruments and Apparatus
,
1998
.
[5]
Ronald H. Dieck,et al.
Measurement uncertainty models
,
1997
.
[6]
James T. Nakos,et al.
Final Report - Summary of Thermal Testing of the Furnace Characterization Unit (FCU) for the Coast Guard
,
2000
.
[7]
J T Nakos,et al.
Error analysis of thermocouple measurements in the Radiant Heat Facility
,
1980
.
[8]
G WERNER,et al.
The measurement of uncertainty
,
1961,
Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.
[9]
S. Standard.
GUIDE TO THE EXPRESSION OF UNCERTAINTY IN MEASUREMENT
,
2006
.
[10]
Hugh W. Coleman,et al.
Experimentation and Uncertainty Analysis for Engineers
,
1989
.
[11]
Charles P. Wright.
Applied Measurement Engineering: How to Design Effective Mechanical Measurement Systems
,
1994
.