Metrologia ( IF 2.4 ) Pub Date : 2021-02-23 , DOI: 10.1088/0026-1394/58/1a/08003 Toshiaki Asakai 1 , Igor Maksimov 1 , Sachiko Onuma 1 , Frank Bastkowski 2 , Beatrice Sander 2 , Jos Luis Ortiz Aparicio 3 , Judith Velina Lara Manzano 3 , Samuel M F Lo 4 , Desmond K F Poon 4 , Mabel Delgado 5 , Paola Avendao 5 , Ronald Cristancho Amaya 6 , Henry Torres Quezada 6 , Fabiano Barbieri Gonzaga 7 , Leonardo da Silva Pardellas 7 , S D I Dias 8 , D Gunawardana 8 , Xiu Hongyu 9 , Wu Bing 9 , Nongluck Tangpaisarnkul 10 , Patumporn Rodruangthum 10 , Vladimir V Gavrilkin 11 , Anton V Petrenko 11 , Sergey Prokunin 12 , Darya Vengina 12 , Vladimir Dobrovolskiy 12
This key comparison is being performed to evaluate the degree of equivalence of measurement procedures to support the participants' claims of Calibration and Measurement Capabilities (CMCs) and to evaluate the capabilities of participants for the determination of the pH of carbonate buffer solutions.
This is the fourth APMP key comparison on pH measurement following APMP.QM-K9/P16 (phosphate), APMP.QM-K19/P25 (borate) and APMP.QM-K91/P29 (phthalate).
The results have the linkage to CCQM-K18.2016 (carbonate buffer) and were evaluated by comparing the results of the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) and the National Metrology Institute of Japan (NMIJ) performing Harned cell method. The results of PTB and NMIJ were used for the definition of the Key Comparison Reference Value (KCRV). The ensuing pH value was calculated based on the Bates-Guggenheim convention to compare the results of primary and secondary methods.
In this comparison measurements of pH were performed only at the temperature of 25 C.
The results demonstrated by most participants are in better agreement than those in CCQM-K18.2016.
To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.
The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).
中文翻译：
关于APMP.QM-K18.2016碳酸盐缓冲液pH测量关键比较的最终报告
进行此关键比较是为了评估测量程序的等效程度，以支持参与者对标定和测量能力（CMC）的要求，并评估参与者确定碳酸盐缓冲溶液pH值的能力。
这是继APMP.QM-K9 / P16（磷酸盐），APMP.QM-K19 / P25（硼酸盐）和APMP.QM-K91 / P29（邻苯二甲酸盐）之后，在pH测量中进行的第四次APMP关键比较。
结果与CCQM-K18.2016（碳酸盐缓冲液）相关联，并通过比较物理技术技术大学（PTB）和日本国立计量学会（NMIJ）进行Harned cell方法的结果进行了评估。PTB和NMIJ的结果用于键比较参考值（KCRV）的定义。根据Bates-Guggenheim惯例计算得出的pH值，以比较主要方法和次要方法的结果。
在该比较中，仅在25°C的温度下进行pH值的测量。
大多数参与者展示的结果比CCQM-K18.2016中的结果更好。
要获得本文的正文，请单击“最终报告”。请注意，此文本显示在BIPM密钥比较数据库kcdb.bipm.org/的附录B中。
根据CIPM相互认可安排（CIPM MRA）的规定，最终报告已由CCQM进行同行评审并批准发布。
京公网安备 11010802027423号