TY - CONF A1 - Schneider, M. A1 - Schlingmann, T. A1 - Schmidt, J. A1 - Bettge, Dirk A1 - Hilgenberg, Kai A1 - Binder, M. A1 - Klöden, B. T1 - A Round Robin Test To Investigate The Printing Quality Of PBF LB/M Processed AlSi10Mg N2 - When it comes to higher accuracies, new technologies and real applications in additive manufacturing, there is one topic which cannot be avoided: The material response on the chosen processing parameters and its agreement and correspondence with literature data of the wrought material grade counterpart. In industrial Additive Manufacturing (AM) standards in terms of printing parameters, protection gas atmospheres or powder handling instructions are not obligatory. Therefore, the question must be answered whether the AM process is reproducible and reliable over different printing companies. This was the motivation to realize a round robin test between 8 European printing companies and academic partners. The consortium had printed and tested fatigue and tensile testing bars under plant-specific conditions. A commonly used cast aluminum alloy, AlSi10Mg, was chosen as test material for the PBF-LB/M process. Differences of the results between the partners and the scatter itself were discussed in detail. T2 - World PM2022 CY - Lyon, France DA - 09.10.2022 KW - Additive manufacturing KW - AlSi10Mg KW - Laser powder bed fusion KW - Round robin KW - Reproducibility PY - 2022 AN - OPUS4-56303 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - CONF A1 - Schneider, M. A1 - Schlingmann, T. A1 - Schmidt, J. A1 - Bettge, Dirk A1 - Hilgenberg, Kai A1 - Binder, M. A1 - Klöden, B. T1 - A Round Robin Test To Investigate The Printing Quality Of PBF-LB/M Processed AlSi10Mg T2 - World PM2022 N2 - When it comes to higher accuracies, new technologies and real applications in additive manufacturing, there is one topic which cannot be avoided: The material response on the chosen processing parameters and its agreement and correspondence with literature data of the wrought material grade counterpart. In industrial Additive Manufacturing (AM) standards in terms of printing parameters, protection gas atmospheres or powder handling instructions are not obligatory. Therefore, the question must be answered whether the AM process is reproducible and reliable over different printing companies. This was the motivation to realize a round robin test between 8 European printing companies and academic partners. The consortium had printed and tested fatigue and tensile testing bars under plant-specific conditions. A commonly used cast aluminum alloy, AlSi10Mg, was chosen as test material for the PBF-LB/M process. Differences of the results between the partners and the scatter itself were discussed in detail. T2 - World PM2022 CY - Lyon, France DA - 09.10.2022 KW - Additive manufacturing KW - Round robin KW - Reproducibility KW - Laser powder bed fusion KW - AlSi10Mg PY - 2022 SN - 978-1-899072-54-5 SP - 1 EP - 10 PB - European Powder Metallurgy Association (EPMA) AN - OPUS4-56304 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Antoni, S. A1 - Clemens, J. A1 - Kunath, K. A1 - Rabe, J. A1 - Simon, K. A1 - Uhlig, S. A1 - Wehrstedt, Klaus-Dieter T1 - Evaluation of the 3rd round robin on solid oxidizer test (UN O.1) with calcium peroxide, sodium nitrate, sodium perborate monohydrate N2 - The classification of solid oxidizers according to the regulations on the transport of dangerous goods (based on the UN Recommendations/Model Regulations and accepted by all international organisations for the transport of dangerous goods as ADR, IMO, IATA) and in future also according to the GHS (Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals) is performed on the basis of the results of the UN test O.1 (UN test O.1 ―Test for oxidizing solids‖ described in chapter 34.4.1 in the Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods – Manual of Tests and Criteria, see [1]). This test was introduced into the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria in 1995 as a replacement for a similar test from 1986. Even if the UN O.1 test as described in the current 5th revised edition of UN Manual of Tests and Criteria gives some improvements compared to the old test, which had had many deficiencies, there are still some problems left with this test in terms of e.g. repeatability or reproducibility of test results, how to handle compacted or multilayer formulations like tablets, toxicity and partly significantly varying particle size distribution within defined fractions of 150 μm to 300 μm of the reference oxidizer potassium bromate (KBrO3). For this reason the IGUS EOS working group installed an ad-hoc working group in 2002 assigned with the task to propose solutions for the existing problems. The appropriateness of such proposed solutions has to be proved by the method of interlaboratory (round robin) tests before they are presented for the adoption to the UN Committee of Experts on the TDG and on the GHS with a proposal of a completely revised test procedure. KW - Round robin KW - Solid oxidizer test KW - United Nations KW - IGUS KW - EOS KW - Calcium peroxide KW - Sodium nitrate KW - Sodium perborate monohydrate PY - 2011 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b43-232246 SN - 978-3-9813853-7-3 IS - Final Report, 2009 - 2011 SP - 1 EP - 192 PB - Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung (BAM) CY - Berlin AN - OPUS4-23224 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - GEN A1 - Pauw, Brian Richard A1 - Smales, Glen Jacob T1 - Small-angle Scattering Data Analysis Round Robin dataset: original for participants. N2 - These are four datasets that were made available to the participants of the Small-angle Scattering data analysis round robin. The intent was to find out how comparable results from different researchers are, who analyse exactly the same processed, corrected dataset. In this repository, there are: 1) a PDF document with more details for the study, 2) the datasets for people to try and fit 3) an Excel spreadsheet to document the results. Datasets 1 and 2 were modified from: Deumer, Jerome, & Gollwitzer, Christian. (2022). npSize_SAXS_data_PTB (Version 5) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5886834 Datasets 3 and 4 were collected in-house on the MOUSE instrument. KW - Round robin KW - SAXS KW - Small angle scattering KW - SANS KW - X-ray KW - Neutron KW - Human factor KW - Data analysis KW - Data fitting KW - Human influence PY - 2023 DO - https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7506365 PB - Zenodo CY - Geneva AN - OPUS4-56799 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - CONF A1 - Pauw, Brian Richard A1 - Smales, Glen Jacob T1 - The Human Factor: Results of a Data Analysis Round Robin N2 - How much do we, the small-angle scatterers, influence the results of an investigation? What uncertainty do we add by our human diversity in thoughts and approaches, and is this significant compared to the uncertainty from the instrumental measurement factors? After our previous Round Robin on data collection, we know that many laboratories can collect reasonably consistent small-angle scattering data on easy samples1. To investigate the next, human component, we compiled four existing datasets from globular (roughly spherical) scatterers, each exhibiting a common complication, and asked the participants to apply their usual methods and toolset to the quantification of the results https://lookingatnothing.com/index.php/archives/3274). Accompanying the datasets was a modicum of accompanying information to help with the interpretation of the data, similar to what we normally receive from our collaborators. More than 30 participants reported back with volume fractions, mean sizes and size distribution widths of the particle populations in the samples, as well as information on their self-assessed level of experience and years in the field. While the Round Robin is still underway (until the 25th of April, 2022), the initial results already show significant spread in the results. Some of these are due to the variety in interpretation of the meaning of the requested parameters, as well as simple human errors, both of which are easy to correct for. Nevertheless, even after correcting for these differences in understanding, a significant spread remains. This highlights an urgent challenge to our community: how can we better help ourselves and our colleagues obtain more reliable results, how could we take the human factor out of the equation, so to speak? In this talk, we will introduce the four datasets, their origins and challenges. Hot off the press, we will summarize the anonymized, quantified results of the Data Analysis Round Robin. (Incidentally, we will also see if a correlation exists between experience and proximity of the result to the median). Lastly, potential avenues for improving our field will be offered based on the findings, ranging from low-effort yet somehow controversial improvements, to high-effort foundational considerations. T2 - International Small-Angle Scattering Conference (SAS2022) CY - Campinas, Brazil DA - 11.09.2022 KW - Round robin KW - Data analysis KW - Small angle scattering KW - Nanomaterials KW - MOUSE KW - Interlaboratory comparison KW - Intercomparability KW - Reliability KW - Data analysis round robin KW - Large number of participants PY - 2022 AN - OPUS4-55762 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - VIDEO A1 - Pauw, Brian Richard T1 - The Human Factor: Results of a Data Analysis Round Robin N2 - This is a remote presentation I gave at the 2022 Small-angle Scattering conference in Campinas, Brazil. The video has been obtained from the conference organisers with their explicit permission for use on YouTube. I've tried to spruce up the audio from the remote recording the best I could. The conference abstract for this talk was: "How much do we, the small-angle scatterers, influence the results of an investigation? What uncertainty do we add by our human diversity in thoughts and approaches, and is this significant compared to the uncertainty from the instrumental measurement factors? After our previous Round Robin on data collection, we know that many laboratories can collect reasonably consistent small-angle scattering data on easy samples[1]. To investigate the next, human component, we compiled four existing datasets from globular (roughly spherical) scatterers, each exhibiting a common complication, and asked the participants to apply their usual methods and toolset to the quantification of the results (https://lookingatnothing.com/index.ph.... Accompanying the datasets was a modicum of accompanying information to help with the interpretation of the data, similar to what we normally receive from our collaborators. More than 30 participants reported back with volume fractions, mean sizes and size distribution widths of the particle populations in the samples, as well as information on their self-assessed level of experience and years in the field. While the Round Robin is still underway (until the 25th of April, 2022), the initial results already show significant spread in the results. Some of these are due to the variety in interpretation of the meaning of the requested parameters, as well as simple human errors, both of which are easy to correct for. Nevertheless, even after correcting for these differences in understanding, a significant spread remains. This highlights an urgent challenge to our community: how can we better help ourselves and our colleagues obtain more reliable results, how could we take the human factor out of the equation, so to speak? In this talk, we will introduce the four datasets, their origins and challenges. Hot off the press, we will summarize the anonymized, quantified results of the Data Analysis Round Robin. (Incidentally, we will also see if a correlation exists between experience and proximity of the result to the median). Lastly, potential avenues for improving our field will be offered based on the findings, ranging from low-effort yet somehow controversial improvements, to high-effort foundational considerations." KW - Round robin KW - Data analysis KW - X-ray scattering KW - Neutron scattering KW - Nanomaterials KW - Metrology KW - Interlaboratory comparison PY - 2023 UR - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1Rowo--Osg PB - YouTube, LLC CY - San Bruno, CA, USA AN - OPUS4-56897 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER -