Measurement process is an important part of the routine work in a laboratory. Newanalytical methods, techniques, instrumentation and software packages for calculation ofresults and measurement uncertainties make this process to be in constant improvement.The scientists and technicians must receive training to adapt to the changes and todevelop a keen sense of awareness of data quality and the uncertainty estimates of thereported results. Correctly evaluating the uncertainties depends on several factorsincluding, but not limited to, experience in the analyses techniques. More important iseffectively and correctly communicating the results and the uncertainties in a manner thatare understood not only by the originator but also by all other users of those results.International efforts have been made in order to establish standard methods forcalculating and expressing measurement uncertainty so that scientists can talk the samelanguage when analysing data and reporting measurement results. Several publicationssuch as the “Guide to Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement” (GUM) [1] and the“Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurements” (EURACHEM / CITAC GuideCG 4) [2] are excellent source materials for training in the estimation of uncertainties inmeasurement results according to ISO guidelines. The evaluation of measurementuncertainty has also become a central element in the establishment of quality assuranceprograms within nuclear analytical laboratories. In this paper, we will discuss uncertaintyestimation as a means to evaluate some measurement processes typically used for nuclearmaterial control and accountability. Intra- and inter-laboratory comparisons ofmeasurement results must take into account the uncertainties associated with each result.Examples of such comparisons will be provided and discussed.
展开▼
