The effects of correlated bias uncertainties are considered for both single and comparative tests, and the implications of these effects on experimental results and their uncertainties are investigated. In single tests, correlated bias uncertainties can cause a significant increase or a significant decrease in uncertainty in the result as compared to the uncertainty when there are no correlation effects. In comparative tests, the experimental result is the difference of two test results or the ratio of two test results. If the same test apparatus and instrumentation are used to obtain the two test results, the systematic uncertainty in the difference or the ratio can be significantly less than the systematic uncertainly in the individual test results. However, the effects of systematic uncertainties do not cancel out in comparative tests in which the result is the difference in the results of two tests, contrary to assertions made in some engineering standards.

Issue Section:
Research Papers
Topics:
Uncertainty, Engineering standards, Instrumentation
1.
AGARD, 1994, Quality Assessment for Wind Tunnel Testing, AGARD-AR-304. (This document, with minor editorial revisions, has also been issued as AIAA Standard S-071-1995, Assessment of Wind Tunnel Data Uncertainty, 1995.)
2.
ANSI/ASME, 1986, Measurement Uncertainty, ANSI/ASME PTC 19.1–1985.
3.
ANSI/ASME, 1984, Measurement Uncertainty for Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits, ANSI/ASME MFC-2M-1983.
4.
ASHRAE, 1989, Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
5.
ISO, 1993, Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, International Organization for Standardization.
6.
Brown, K. K., Coleman, H. W., Steele, W. G., and Taylor, R. P., 1994, “Evaluation of Correlated Bias Approximations in Experimental Uncertainty Analysis,” AIAA Paper 94-0772 presented at the 32nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting.
7.
Chakroun, W., Taylor, R. P., Steele, W. G., and Coleman, H. W., 1993, “Bias Error Reduction in Experimental Results by Presentation as a Ratio to a Baseline Experiment—A Heat Transfer Case Study,” J. Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, Vol. 7, No. 4.
8.
Coleman, H. W., and Steele, W. G., 1989, Experimentation and Uncertainty Analysis for Engineers, Wiley, New York, NY.
9.
Hudson, S. T., 1994, personal communication, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center.
This content is only available via PDF.
Copyright © 1995
 by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
You do not currently have access to this content.