• Mar 26, 2024 News!Vol.16, No. 1 has been published with online version.   [Click]
  • Jan 02, 2024 News!All papers in IJET will be publihsed article by article staring from 2024.
  • Nov 03, 2023 News!News | Vol.15, No. 4 has been published with online version.   [Click]
General Information
    • ISSN: 1793-8236 (Online)
    • Abbreviated Title Int. J. Eng. Technol.
    • Frequency:  Quarterly 
    • DOI: 10.7763/IJET
    • Managing Editor: Ms. Jennifer Zeng
    • Abstracting/ Indexing: Inspec (IET), CNKI Google Scholar, EBSCO, ProQuest, Crossref, etc.
    • E-mail: ijet_Editor@126.com
Editor-in-chief
IJET 2022 Vol.14(3): 38-42 ISSN: 1793-8236
DOI: 10.7763/IJET.2022.V14.1199

Comparison of GUM and Monte Carlo Methods for the Measurement Uncertainty Circular Runout Error of Shafts

Pornpawit Ounjutturaporn, Ramil Kesvarakul, Pipitanon Poonsawat, and Khompee Limpadapun

Abstract—Measurement uncertainty is one of the most important concepts. The ISO IEC 17025:2005 standard: describes harmonized policies and procedures for testing and calibration laboratories. Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM) is a direct uncertainty analysis method, which calculates the combined standard uncertainty and expanded uncertainty by law of propagation of uncertainty. Monte Carlo Method (MCM) as presented by the (GUM S1) involves the propagation of the distributions of the input sources of uncertainty by using a model to provide the distribution of the output. By random sampling, the probability density function of the input quantities. In this paper, present measurement uncertainty to circular runout error. By use shaft standard with a diameter of 32 mm., length 100 mm. From the experiment results, Comparison of GUM and MCM showed no differences. The cases the estimated uncertainty using the GUM approach slightly overestimated the results obtained with the MCM. However, the use of numerical methods such MCM as a valuable alternative to the GUM approach. The practical use of MCM it has proven to be a fundamental tool, being able to address more complex measurement problems that were limited by the GUM approximations.

Index Terms—Circular runout error, Guide to the expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM), Monte Carlo Method (MCM), measurement uncertainty.

Pornpawit Ounjutturaporn, Ramil Kesvarakul, Pipitanon Poonsawat are with the Department of Production Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok, Thailand (email: Pornpawit.boom@gmail.com, Ramil.k@eng.kmutnb.ac.th, Pipitanon.p@eng.kmutnb.ac.th).

Khompee Limpadapun is with the School of Engineering, Eastern Asia University, Thailand (e-mail: Khompee.lim@gmail.com).

[PDF]

Cite: Pornpawit Ounjutturaporn, Ramil Kesvarakul, Pipitanon Poonsawat, and Khompee Limpadapun, "Comparison of GUM and Monte Carlo Methods for the Measurement Uncertainty Circular Runout Error of Shafts," International Journal of Engineering and Technology vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 38-42, 2022.

Copyright © 2008-2024. International Journal of Engineering and Technology. All rights reserved. 
E-mail: ijet_Editor@126.com