Good Weighing Practice in Pharmaceutical Industry
Good Weighing Practice in Pharmaceutical Industry
-1-
Content Introduction........................................................................................................................................3 2. Measurement errors ......................................................................................................................4 2.1. Gross error.................................................................................................................................4 2.2. Systematic error ........................................................................................................................4 2.3. Random error ............................................................................................................................5 2.4. Balance accuracy and precision ................................................................................................5 3. Mass measurement in pharmaceutical industry .........................................................................7 3.1. Balances used for pharmacy .....................................................................................................7 3.2. Requirements according to quality, control and balance examination .....................................8 3.3. Verify or calibrate? .................................................................................................................10 3.4. Balance estimation criteria......................................................................................................11 4. Quality Risk Managing in reference to mass measurements...................................................15 5. Balances Risk Analysis practical matters ...............................................................................18 5.1. Resolution and precision.........................................................................................................18 5.2. Electronic balances sensitivity change....................................................................................19
5.2.1. Standard procedure for sensitivity changes testing....................................................................... 20
6. Measurement uncertainty ...........................................................................................................34 6.1. Mass measurement uncertainty...............................................................................................35 7. Low masses measurement ...........................................................................................................39 7.1. Low mass rule .....................................................................................................................41 7.1.1. Calculation of minimal mass - instance..........................................................................42 7.1.2. Permissible repeatability of a balance in minimal mass.................................................42 8. Balance routine examination.......................................................................................................44 8.1. Measuring instrument life cycle..............................................................................................45 8.2. Balances and weighing systems validation.............................................................................46 9. External factors in weighing process..........................................................................................49 9.1. Oscillations - vibrations ..........................................................................................................49 9.2. Breeze of air ............................................................................................................................50 9.3. Temperature during analysis ...................................................................................................50
9.3.1. Balance temperature errors .......................................................................................................... 51
9.4. Electrostatics in weighing process ..........................................................................................55 9.5. Sample structure, hygroscopicity............................................................................................54 9.6. Magnetism as weighing process interfering factor .................................................................55 -2-
Introduction
Functional abilities and automatics of contemporary electronic balances create a wrong
impression that they offer guaranteed measurement precision. Such attitude does not take into account incorrect measurement risk, if interfering factors occur during weighing process. The volume of unintentional changes can be noticed only in case of analytical and semi-microbalances, microbalances and ultra- microbalance. A practical hint results from it: even if such changes take place, they are not registered by precision balances too low sensitivity of an instrument. It means that operating conditions of such balances do not have to be as strict as, for example, in case of microbalances. It can be stated that there are no two homogenous weighing processes, there are various models of balances in use, dynamics of ambient conditions changes is different, and different samples are weighed. As for balances, they have different levels of stability of their parameters. Therefore, balance parameters should be controlled in order to assure high quality and at the same time low risk level of the analysis.
-3-
2. Measurement errors
In practice, there are no ideal measurements, each measurement is afflicted by an error. Irrespective of chosen method, measured volume real value can never be defined absolutely precisely- because of instruments and methods imperfection. The difference between a measurement result and measured volume real value is commonly called a measurement error. Errors are divided into: gross (mistakes), systematic, random
-4-
With reference to balances, a correction can have a form of constant movement of zero, for instance, if a balance does not display exact zero after removing a load from its weighing pan, but it ALWAYS stops on e.g. 0,0012g. In such case, measuring result should be corrected according to below instance: reference mass:100g reference mass error: + 0,2mg measuring result: 99,9996g actual value: 99,9996g 0,2mg = 99,9994g actual value corrected by systematic error: 99,9994g 0,0012g = 99,9982g In practice, balances that are not characterized by ideal return to zero, can be used successfully. However, such balance should have stable and repeatable characteristics with regard to corrective parameter
Definition: accuracy closeness of agreement between a measured quantity value and a true quantity value of a measurand. VIM * difference between measurements average value and the real value according to USP** -5-
Definition: precision closeness of agreement between indications or measured quantity values obtained by replicate measurements on the same or similar objects under specified conditions. VIM
Definition: trueness closeness of agreement between the average of an infinite number of replicate measured quantity values and a reference quantity value according to VIM 2010
precise, inaccurately (good balance repeatability) Fig 4 Balance accuracy and precision
(*) VIM International Vocabulary of Terms in Legal Metrology (**) USP United States Pharmacopeia
-6-
During most processes intended for formula elaborating, mass measurement should be performed. The weighing quality significantly influences the quality of final result. Therefore acceptance criteria are defined by pharmaceutical companies and recommendations for weighing process are presented by American Pharmacopoeia*. Such recommendations are not contained in European Pharmacopoeia and that is why the companies that are not subordinate to American requirements, use their own balance estimation criteria.
(*) Pharmacopoeia, pharmacy code the official list of medicines in a given country or in the market, and fortified by the same regulations inventory of substances for the manual preparation of some of the drugs in the pharmacy (prescription drugs). In Poland, official pharmacopoeia is Polish Pharmacopoeia, issued by Drugs, Medical Products and Bio-killers Register Office. At present, Polish Pharmacopoeia VIII is valid, edited in 2008,which is European Pharmacopoeia 6.0 translated to Polish.
-7-
Section 1, Chapter 3: Weighing rooms and instruments Point. 3.41. Instruments designed for measuring, weighing, weighing records and control should be calibrated and checked with application of specific methods in specific time intervals. Specific documents on these activities should be stored.
Section 2, Chapter 5: Process instruments Point. 5.3 5.30 Calibration Instruments designed for calibration, weighing, monitoring, testing , that are critical for semi-finished products and pharmaceutical active substances, should be calibrated according to written procedures and set schedules.
5.31
Calibration of instruments should be performed with application of standard masses that have reference to certified standard masses, if such exist.
5.32
5.33
Current calibration status of critical equipment should be determined and accessible for checking.
-8-
5.34
Instrument which are not compatible with valid calibration criteria should not be utilized.
5.35
Any deviation from approved calibration standards, which refers to critical instruments should be evaluated for their influence on semi-finished products and pharmaceutical active substances that have been manufactured with use of these instruments since their last correct calibration process.
Above recommendations make obligations for control over the instruments, but they do not specify any acceptance criteria or cautionary limits. It can be assumed, that a pharmaceutical company should manufacture products according to regulation specified in attachment Detailed Requirements on Good Manufacturing Practice, which states that:
,, Manufacturer of medical products is required to ensure that medical products manufactured by it are suitable for their intended purpose, meet the requirements of authorization to market and do not expose patients to risks from inadequate application of safety, poor quality or too low efficiency.
In order to reliably achieve the objective of quality, there has to be carefully designed and properly implemented Quality Management System for Good Manufacturing Practice, Quality Control and Quality Risk Management.
Apart from definitions mentioned in the above regulation, there is also regulation EN ISO/IEC 17025 which defines criteria for control of weighing instruments: General requirements on testing and calibration laboratories point. 5.6.:
All equipment used for measuring research . . . . . . which has significant effect on accuracy . . . . should be CALIBRATED before putting it into use. The laboratory should have specific PROGRAM and PROCEDURE for calibration of its equipment.
Similar record can be found in EN ISO 9001:2008 ,,Quality management System point 7.6.:
-9-
,,... Where it is necessary to ensure reliable results, measuring equipment should be: a) calibrated or checked at specified intervals or prior to use in relation to standard units which are linked to international or national standard units...
In case of companies which operate according to US Pharmacopeia standards, than applicable documentation is specified in 21 CFR 211 US GMP Guide Drugs 211.68:
,, Automatic, mechanical and electronic equipment . . Should be routinely calibrated, monitored and reviewed in accordance with stored program to ensure the required action.
Calibration of equipment . . . according to valid and established program that contains detailed instructions, schedules, limits for accuracy and precision. . . Equipment, apparatus and recording equipment with no particular specification may not be used.
According to above documents it is clearly stated that there is a need to monitor and check the measuring devices measuring instruments in a clearly described and repeatable way which ensures adequate quality. Due to open characteristics of the documentation, it is an open issue on which criteria should be accepted for checking procedures.
6. Determination of price based on weight for the purposes of direct sales to the public and the prepackaging; b) All other uses not mentioned in point a Weighing instruments described in point a) are subject to legal metrological control. For them, process of conformity evaluation with basic requirements of 90/384/EEC directive is carried out. The effect of positive outcome of this process is sticking a green M label to weighing instrument.
All above requirements oblige all users of weighing instruments in pharmaceutical industry to use weighing instruments with declaration of conformity, i.e. those which were positively assessed for requirements of Directive 90/384/EEC. This is a requirement deriving from legal area, which is a national supervision over instruments used for determination of mass. From the other point of view, Quality Management Systems and GLP, GMP, FDA guidelines require performance of calibration procedures for determination of actual error of a weighing instrument, see point 3.2.
(*) FDA, Food and Drug Administration Agency dealing with Food and Drugs, American governmental agency established in 1906 . It is a part of health and social service department and it is responsible for food control (for people and animals), diet supplements, drugs (for people and veterinary), cosmetics, medical devices and those emitting radiation (including non-medical ones),biological materials and products.
Summary: Pharmaceutical industry should use weighing instruments that are accepted by national supervision, i.e. legal area, despite of possible errors of such weighing instruments (errors in use may be two times bigger than errors determined in conformity declaration process). In practice, however, it is known that pharmacy requires precise weighing processes, which require weighing instrument with errors much smaller than those resulting from norm PN-EN 45501. This problem is particularly visible in case of semi-microbalances, microbalances and ultra-microbalances.
process, substance control and consideration of precision with which sample mass is to be determined. It is the first approach that requires good knowledge of production, control process and quality. Another approach can be focusing on regulations specified in norm PN-EN 45501, Metrological matters in non-automatic weighing instruments. The standard defines volume of maximal permissible errors (MPE) that may occur in a balance. It should be mentioned that operating errors are double as big as those specified in the standard. The errors division is presented in the table below.
Chart 2.Maximal permissible errors while conformity evaluation process performed according to basic requirements of directive 90/384/EEC and norm PN-EN 45501 In practice, it is not practical to base only on the standards in balance evaluation balance can indicate too significant error and it is still treated as well-functioning. It is possible to accept more strict criteria for balance operation in ones own evaluation system. Such assumption is obligatory during balance control procedure in RADWAG Control Department it has been assumed that a balance is working correctly if its errors during control are lower than of maximal permissible error defined in PN-EN 45501.
1 ITEST Mpe 3
- 12 -
Instances of balance estimation process according to standard requirements are presented in tables below. The first one contains MPE for balance PS 510/C/2.
Basic balance characteristics: Load m [verifying unit] 0e m 5 000e 5 000 e < m 20 000e 20 000e < m 51 000e Precision class Max Min d e II 510 g 20mg 1 mg 10 mg MPE [verifying unit] 0,5 e 1e 1,5 e MPE [ reading unit] 5 mg 10 mg 15 mg Real error indication
[reading unit] 10 mg 20 mg 30 mg
Chart 3. MPE according to norm PN-EN 45501 for balance model PS 510/C/2
The second table contains balance-sheet for microbalance MYA 5. Basic balance characteristics: precision class Max Min d e I 5g 1mg 1 g 1 mg
Real error
indication
[reading unit] 3 g
If ones criteria are based on acceptance criteria according to standard PN-EN 45501 it should be taken into account that M are twice increased in balance operation. In case of microbalances and ultra-microbalances, so-called verification is quite problematic because of drastic difference between permissible errors accepted by the standard and real errors of balances.
- 13 -
instructions that can be commonly used or corrected up to individual needs. The third attitude for evaluation of balances is connected with requirements of American Pharmacopoeia. This approach defines what precision a balance should have in order to be put into operation: If it is not specified . . ., a substance is correctly weighed (taking random and systematic error into account), if device measurement uncertainty does not exceed 0,1% of readout. USP, General Chapter 41 ,,Weights and Balances Measurement uncertainty is satisfactory if 3-times standard deviation from series of at least10 repetitions divided by series average value does not exceed 0,001. USP, General Chapter 41 ,,Weights and Balances Such approach is used by American market product manufacturers, that are a part of global concerns which are subordinated to periodical controls by FDA. The fourth approach is directed to Risk Analysis in accordance to document EMEA* ICH Q9** Quality Risk Management. The document is of general nature and shows how to manage risk. Obviously, it is necessary to adapt the assumptions to balances. How should risk be defined?, How to reduce it? How to manage it? It requires defining. Risk area will depend on the weighing procedures that are performed. *EMEA European Drugs Agency, EU agency for medical products estimation and supervision coordination. **ICH Q9 Guide elaborated by a group of experts for pharmaceutical industry Irrespective of adapted balance estimation criteria, following 4 parameters should be subject to examination: repeatability linearity error centricity sensitivity change
- 14 -
At pharmacy, risk is connected with medicine manufacturing and the medical product use. In case of balances, it is the risk of incorrect weighing performing , which significantly influences the quality of manufactured medicine. In order to avoid it, knowledge of used weighing devices measurement possibilities should be obtained, controlled and used in practice.
Basic mistake made by most users is the belief that they can buy a balance with elementary unit 0,1mg for process that should be performed with precision 0,1mg. Balance elementary unit [d] is something completely different from balance precision*. (*) measuring instrument precision measuring instrument ability to give indications close to true value. International Dictionary of Basic and General Metrological Terms point 5.18 In order to estimate balance precision, its repeatability ,eccentricity, non-linearity and sensitivity change should be estimated. After taking these factors into account, measured value is close to the real value. Using the attitude connected with risk analysis aims to: obtaining a high quality product money saving and expenses cut obtaining conformity with legal requirements that are currently valid. Main problem that some users face is the problem of transmitting risk analysis and manage matters to their own balance analysis. In such case, three questions connected with risk analysis are helpful:
- 15 -
ICH Q9 1. What can go wrong? 2. What is probability of failure? 3. What can be the consequences?
Balance 1. Which balance parameters is decisive? 2. Is the parameter constantly stable or it shows drifters? 3. What does it mean for my balance analysis?
Typical process of Quality Risk Management Using the above operating scheme for a balance, requires performing of RISK ESTIMATION as the first step. The process consists of: Risk Identification Define your own balance analysis o What are you weighing? o What is the expected analysis precision? - 16 -
o How big is the sample? o What weighing containers do you use? o What are the external conditions of analysis realization? Risk Analysis o Should catalogue data be estimated? o Should measurement data be estimated? Risk Estimation o Estimate mass measurement error influence on product quality Then the most important stage of risk management should be performed, which helps in decrease it. Balances risk reduction is finding an answer to the question: how to reduce measurement error: Risk Reduction how to reduce weighing errors? o suitable balance choice o using balance self-adjustment o weighing techniques internal training o using standard operational procedures ,,SOP? o using authorized service service reviews Risk Acceptance is balance precision sufficient? o Estimate weighing errors influence on the whole process risk Next stage of risk management process is performed process data monitoring. At this stage balance precision is estimated with regard to requirements and effectiveness of carried out operations. Risk Management Process Review is a system procedure. It aims at receiving new ideas and using them in order to reduce risk.
When using risk management in reference to balances, it should be remembered that legal requirements have to be observed. Risk management is designed as a process that supports making decisions based on scientific knowledge and practice.
- 17 -
Obviously it is only a theoretical solution, because there are no ideal measurements or devices.
- 18 -
The scheme estimation shows that sensitivity changes test is justified only for heavy loads and the error is proportional to sample mass. A practical aspect results from it:
,,sensitivity changes do not influence small samples weighing
a) m = 200;
b) m = 200;
RIND = 205;
RIND = 200;
Example a) shows sensitivity change, example b) is an ideal weight. The easiest method to introduce the test is Standard Operational Procedure, which describes what should be done and how to do it. As each procedure, it should be short and unequivocal. Such procedure example:
Calculation:
1. Indication correction by zero change: that is A = m IND - m ZL 2. Sensitivity change calculation: substract nominal mass value, that is SE = A - m NOM from obtained result 3. Check if obtained value is contained in your acceptance field.
Procedure note: 1. Procedure should contain all information needed by personnel , for its proper application 2. Warning limits for registered sensitivity changes should be fixed, that is, it should be defined what is permissible and what is not 3. Decision track should be defined clearly if limits are exceeded.
- 20 -
Balance non-linearity characteristics Equation of ideal balance characteristics straight line equation
RL = RI RZ (m mZ ) + RZ mI mZ RL balance ideal characteristics equation RI Max loading indication
where:
- 21 -
RZ zero indication mI Max nominal loading mZ zero loading m indirect nominal loading
(m mZ ) ( RI RZ ) + RZ RPOINT = R RL = R mI mZ
where: RPOINT examined point non-linearity deviation
Calculation example Balance non-linearity for loading 70g is tested, when Max loading is equal to 220g Input data: nominal load mZ = 0 Max nominal loading mI = 220,0002g Indirect nominal loading m = 70,0005g Zero indication RZ = 0,0000g Max loading indication RI = 220,0012g Indirect loading indication R = 70,0008g
- 22 -
Non-linearity of point 70g is equal to 0,00002g. Practically, mass result in point 70 can be contained in range 70,0006 70,0010
Advantage of this testing method is possibility to define non-linearity at any point. Disadvantage of this method is necessity to have several standards and complicated mathematical calculations.
Each measurement deviation from expected value, that is standard nominal mass, (if standard mass is equal to 50,0002 g, the same result should be indicated at the whole test range)
Whether each following measurement is similar if standard mass is not known. In this case, it cannot be defined, how precise* the balance is. Then a stable, indefinite error occurs, which is a standard error. Such case is presented with red measuring points.
Fig.5 Non-linearity test in whole weighing range of a balance (*) measuring instrument precision measuring instrument feature of giving response close to the real value. International Dictionary of Basic and General Metrological Terms point 5.18
- 23 -
While the test, an interval should be fixed with which the balance will be tested. It is recommended to use compact control mass in form of single mass standard. Obviously, the method can be used for testing the whole balance measurement range or just its sector. In such case, ballast of suitable mass should be used, e.g. 100g. After indication has been tarred, it is possible to test balance linearity with interval, e.g. 20g. The test will then contain the range from 100g to 200g with the assumption that balance is used just at this range. Such solution is presented in drawing number 13
This way of characteristics examination is used by Quality Control Department in reference to microbalances and ultra-microbalances.
11. Calculate balance indication [Wi] corrected by zero drifter for following measurements Ii Bi 12. Substract standard mass nominal value from obtained indication [Wi]. The obtained result is a linearity deviation for each measurement point
NL = Wi - m NOM 13. Maximal difference is maximal error of balance linearity. An instance of checking non+linearitz of a balance model ASY 220/C/2 with set interval every 50g m NOM = 50g -0,002mg = 49,999996g T= 0g T= 50g T= 100g T= 150g B1 = 0,0000g B2 = 0,0000g B3 = 0,0000g B3 = 0,0000g I1=50,0001 I2=50,0001 I3=50,0000 I4=50,0001 W1 = 50,0001 - 49,999996 = 0,000104 W2 = 50,0001 - 49,999996 = 0,000104 W3 = 50,0000 - 49,999996 = 0,000004 W4 = 50,0001 - 49,999996 = 0,000104
5.3.4. Summary
Evaluation of non-linearity of a balance can be done by means of two methods. As practice shows, method with application of tare is commonly used. Its advantages are speed, direct reading and simplicity. Additionally, it requires only a single mass standard in a specified class for determination of accuracy. Mass for tares do not have to be precise.
- 25 -
weighing pan and indication when the same mass standard is located at another place on the weighing pan. The location for mass standard on the weighing pan is defined by norm PN-EN 450501 in point 3.6.2 and A.4.7. ,,Eccentric loading tests. Measurement place is presented in drawing below.
Balance eccentricity test is motivated only in case of heavy loads. For low mass, the parameter is non-measurable (repeatability influence is dominant). Example of centricity error differential calculation: Formula: E = R (i) R (1); with: E centricity differential error R (i) following point indication R (1) central location indication R (1) = 70,0003 R (2) = 70,0002 R (3) = 70,0006 R (4) = 70,0007 R (5) = 70,0002
E (2) = 70,0002 70,0003 = - 0,0001 E (3) = 70,0006 70,0003 = 0,0003 E (4) = 70,0007 70,0003 = 0,0004 E (5) = 70,0002 70,0003 = - 0,0001
- 26 -
Intended use: measuring bulbs with ball-shaped bottom 50ml, 100ml and 250 ml
- 27 -
Repeatability can be expressed as maximal deviation between measurements or in terms of quantity as standard deviation from a series. Testing the parameter as maximal deviation between series measurements is compatible with PN-EN 45501 that is: P = I MAX I MIN Mpe where: I MAX maximal indication I MIN minimal indication Mpe maximal permissible error
- 28 -
Repeatability for a series of measurement is presented in drawing 16, according to following dependence, is equal to:
P = 10,0009 10,0001 = 0,0008
Repeatability for the same series of measurements can be presented in terms of quantity as standard deviation. It is defined in accordance with following dependence: Measurement series 1. 10,0001 2. 10,0003 3. 10,0009 4. 10,0005 5. 10,0002 6. 10,0009 7. 10,0004 8. 10,0005 9. 10,0002 10. 10,0001
s=
( x x)
i =1 i
n 1
with:
Average value determines the middle of data. For this measurement series x = 10,0004 Standard deviation informs about individual data average distance to average value, s = 0,00029 0,0003
Subtracting and adding standard deviation to average value, a range is obtained in which measurement value can be contained with some probability.
- 29 -
When an x volume is measured (random variable) repeatedly and measurement result indicate statistic dispersion, the dispersion is best described by Gauss function. If there is no statistic dispersion in measurement series, that is x= x1 = x2= x3 . . . then, balance reading unit is the main uncertainty source and following dependence is used: u= Repeatability in practice Individual measurement deviation from average value does not exceed standard deviation, that is ~ 0,0003g with probability 68,5%. d 2 3
Individual measurement deviation does not exceed three standard deviations, that is ~ 0,0009g with probability higher than 99,7%, so very close to certainty.
1. Balance should be thermally stabilized 2. Remove load from weighing pan and zero the indication 3. Note down measurement result of empty pan R (Z-1) 4. Place standard and note down measurement result R (1) 5. Remove standard and note down empty pan result R (Z-2) 6. Place standard and note down measurement result R (2) 7. Repeat points 5 6 till the series is finished Calculation:
8. Substract values R (Z-1) . . R (Z-5) from following results R (1) . . R (5) 9. On the basis of obtained results, define maximal difference Max Min or define standard deviation.
- 30 -
Calculation example: Analytical balance XAY 220; Max 220g; d = 0,1mg No. Tare value R ( Z-i ) 0,0000 0,0001 0,0001 0,0000 -0,0002 Measurement result R (i) 200,0001 200,0001 200,0003 200,0001 199,9999 Max Min Difference R(i) R(z-i) 200,0001 200,0000 200,0002 200,0001 200,0001 0,0002 0,00007
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. s=
Taking the above into account, repeatability should be defined at its operating location of a balance, with use of a sample and other objects connected with weighing process.
- 31 -
precision. Assuming that external conditions are stable, following balance parameters control periods can be fixed: calibration annually
For low mass measurement, other balance errors influence deriving from linearity, sensitivity change or eccentricity, is negligible.
- 32 -
Sensitivity drift can occur even though most balances are equipped with self-adjustment system. It can be caused by device drift as a result of ambient conditions change. If it occurs, than situation from above drawing takes place. According to Good Laboratory Practice, before taking a measurement, an operator is to perform an adjusting procedure. Then all errors connected with sensitivity changes are leveled. After the operation, error-free value should not be expected, because adjustment process relates to mass weighing, and has been already said, there are not ideal measurements. In most organizations, sensitivity changes are not tested. Organizations perform tests on adjustment effectiveness, and balance accuracy is controlled after adjustment with mass standard with precisely specified weight.
- 33 -
6. Measurement uncertainty
Definition: it is a parameter connected with measurement result, characterizing dispersion value, that can be assigned to measured value in justified way. International Dictionary of Basic and General Metrological Terms 3.9. Uncertainty: determins, that measurement is actually not ideal determins, how precisely a value is measured: how close values are in relation to expected value
A parameter expressed by uncertainty cab be for instance standard deviation or its multiple. Standard deviation from a series of measurements is also uncertainty. There are two basic types of uncertainty which differ in parameters origin: type A and type B. Type A uncertainty Method A describes the calculation of standard uncertainty by analyzing the statistic series of observations. In such case the standard uncertainty is actually the standard deviation. This method requires large amount of measurements and their repetitions, and it is successfully implemented in case of random errors. Method A is applied if it is possible to perform a series of equal
measurements in equal measuring conditions. Such is the case for checking the repeatability of an electronic balance, For the uncertainty type A the standard distribution is employed, which is graphically expressed as Gaussian curve. Type B uncertainty Uncertainty type B is determined by a scientific analysis based on all accessible information on input volume variability. Those data can be: based on previously performed measurements, operators experience, characteristic features of measured materials and measuring devices, data from manufacturers product specification, uncertainty reference data, handbook and manual content, all accessible publications and other.
- 34 -
Complex uncertainty Complex uncertainty in simple words is a connection of uncertainty type A and type B. the most common is the complex uncertainty, there are, however, some cases, where complete uncertainty analysis is based on the type B.
Extended uncertainty Extended uncertainty is a value describing the range of values surrounding the measuring result, which, as expected, can cover a large part of values distribution, which are commonly assigned to measured value. According to Guide to Expression of Uncertainty in Measurements, letter u has been assigned to match uncertainty, and expression of extended uncertainty is realized by capital letter U. An extension ratio k is a numerically expressed ratio, used as a multiplier of standard complex uncertainty, determined to set extended uncertainty. The extended uncertainty is expressed by a below relationship:
with:
R balance readout m loading mass m1 uncertainty participation connected with readout precision m2 uncertainty participation connected with balance repeatability m3 uncertainty participation connected with balance non-linearity m4 uncertainty participation connected with balance eccentricity
Symbol m1 m2 m3 m4 cSE
Uncertainty type A
u(m2 ) =
sd n
u(m3 ) =
u(m 4 ) = u se = c SE 3
Basic uncertainty components related to weighing procedure include: type B uncertainty component connected with readout precision, that is counted with following equation:
u(m1 ) = d 2 3
where: CAUTION
Uncertainty component related to readout precision is often taken into account in standard deviation and it is not taken into account in calculations. Type A uncertainty component connected with repeatability ,which is measured by standard deviation:
u(m2 ) = sd n
where:
sd standard deviation
Type B uncertainty component connected with linearity errors, which is calculated with the equation:
- 36 -
u(m3 ) =
where: NL non-linearity factor
2 (NL ) 2 3
Type B uncertainty component connected with eccentricity errors, which is calculated with the equation: u(m 4 ) = with: I ecc
max
2 Lecc 3
B type uncertainty component connected with sensitivity that is calculated with the equation:
u(c SE ) = c SE 3
with: cse sensitivity factor Complex uncertainty is defined with following equation:
u = u 2 (m1 ) + u 2 (m2 ) + u 2 (m3 ) + u 2 (m 4 ) + u 2 (c SE )
where: k extension factor: k= 2 for probability ~ 95,5% k=3 for probability ~ 99,7%
- 37 -
Example of balances technical data for uncertainty calculation UYA 2 Max capacity Reading unit [d] 2g 0,0001mg MYA 5 5g 0,001mg x XA 60/220Y 60/220g 0,01mg 0,1mg XA 160Y 160g 0,1mg x PS 600/Y 600g 1mg x
Reading unit [d2] x Repeatability Max Repeatability 5%Max Linearity Eccentricity Sensitivity [ppm/oC] ~ ~
2g: 0,0004mg 5g: 0,003mg 200g: 0,1mg x 0,001mg 1g 5E-07g 0,000002 x 0,005mg 2g 5E-07g 0,000002 10g
100g: 0,1mg 500g: 1,5mg x 3mg 50g 0,2mg 200g 5mg 0,000002
0,025mg x
0,000002
0,000002
Typical values for measurement uncertainty calculation UYA 2 Repeatability Repeatability 5%Max Linearity Eccentricity Sensitivity MYA 5 XA 60/220Y XA 160Y PS 600/Y
2g: 0,00018mg 5g: 0,0013mg 200g: 0,04mg 100g: 0,04mg 500g: 0,67mg x 6,7E-13g 1,0E-07g 1,0E-06g x 1,7E-11g 7,0E-07g 1,0E-06g 4,0mg 0,3mg 10g 0,011mg x 2,7E-08g 1,0E-06g 1,0E-06g 124mg 9mg x 6,0E-06g 7,0E-06g 1,0E-06g 2012mg 134mg
Minimal sample 0,54mg U=0,1%; k=3 Minimal sample 0,04mg U=1%; k=2
- 38 -
If it is not specified . . . a substance is weighed correctly (taking random and systematic errors into account),if device measurement uncertainty does not go beyond 0,1% of readout.
Measurement uncertainty is satisfactory if 3-times standard deviation of at least 10 repetitions series, divided by series average value does not exceed 0,001.
Forum
introduction of change of the definition consisting in introducing requirement of 2-times standard deviation k=3 k=2 If production is based on European Pharmacopoeia requirements, the tolerance level can be different (individual criteria).
- 39 -
mmin =
where:
k s AREQ
k extension factor (k=3; k=2) AREQ required weighing precision (0,1% lub 1%) s repeatability,standard deviation of at least10 repetitions
In practice, minimal mass depends on: sensitivity, non-linearity eccentricity In practice, if the requirements below are taken into account: measurement uncertainty . . cannot exceed 0,001 [A] three standard deviations . . [k] then, a rule according to which definition of minimal mass can be simplified to the form: k 3 mmin = s = s = 3000 s AREQ 0,1% For factor k=3 or
mmin =
For factor k=2 That is:
Multiply standard deviation value by constant factor = 2000 for k=2, or 3000 for k=3 The above statement shows clearly, which balance parameter is the most important while minimal mass defining. The parameter is: REPEATABILITY
- 40 -
Instance: Calculation of minimal mass in case of balance series XA 60/220? analysis required precision 0,1%, standard deviation is taken from balance catalogue card.
mmin =
Minimal weighing for the balance is 50mg, if analysis is supposed to be performed with precision 0,1%.
What should be balance repeatability if 40mg is weighed, and process precision is maintained 0,1%? . Basic equation should be transformed to the following form: s= Calculation:
s= 0,1% 40mg = 0,02mg 2
AREQ k
mmin
Answer: a balance should be used, which repeatability is lower than 0,02mg. It can be microbalance MYA 5.
- 41 -
MYA 2 Max capacity Readability Repeatability Linearity Pancsize Display Interface 2g 1 g 0,8 g 2 g 16 mm
MYA 5 5g 1 g
MYA 11 11 g 1 g
MYA 21 21 g 1 g
MYA 31 31 g 1 g
2,1 g 5 g 6 g 7 g 26 mm 5,7'' touch panel 2USB, RS 232, Ethernet, 2in / 2out (digital) 7 g
Summary Two basic criteria for selection of a balance can be considered: 1. Maximal load capacity has to be higher than the maximal gross mass, that is, total of tare load and net load (sample mass).
2. Uncertainty while the smallest sample weighing has to be lower or equal to required analysis precision [A]
Readout does not determine balance precision. It is determined by its repeatability and minimal mass volume that depends on repeatability.
- 42 -
The other one is a critical limit, which exceeding causes balance recognition as defected if utilized in this specific range. In case of sensitivity control, it is necessary to consider actual balance error for loads below max capacity, like 50% Max. in such case balance error can occur as acceptable. And so, exceeding of limit no. 2 does not always result is separating a balance and recognizing it as out of order.
Then a question emerges, on the criteria according to which a balance should be checked. Generally, it can be assumed that:
The other approach is testing a balance before each measurement process. It is possible practically only if a balance is not on heavy duty (relatively low quantity of measurements, and a couple of operators). In such case it is necessary to create a specific procedure, according to which a balance will be tested. Test results should be noted down with date , time and operator code. However, application of such procedure may be a problem, as it requires very high exploitation of mass standard, and supervision over this mass standard. Thus, is it possible to decrease test frequency? It is recommended to decrease quantity of tests. A balance is a working device, and too frequent tests may disturb its working cycle. It is recommended to observe stability of balance parameters and with regard to their results increase or decrease quantity of tests. Analysis accuracy is the main factor here, and test frequency should be adjusted according to it. Generally, the rule is: high risk = frequent tests
- 44 -
Calibration of a balance is a inseparable part of life cycle of a measuring instrument. It determines the actual balance errors. Calibration should be connected with determination of minimal mass, if such data is necessary. Routine activities are all the work that is performed by an operator that aims at decreasing level of risk which occurs in weighing process. Risk decreasing activities also include calibration and adjustment processes.
Provides objective evaluation, that measuring errors do not exceed set criteria. Based on such criteria, a balance is qualified as meeting the requirements. The next step is comparison of requirements with actual measuring possibilities of a balance. On the other hand, qualification
- 45 -
process can give an answer to question whether a balance provides specified functionality, ergonomics, weighing speed and other if valid.
Qualification process is specified in details by Qualification Policy, Documentation and Qualification Process. Basic requirements relating to it are described in Health Ministry Regulation of 1st October 2008 On requirements of Good Manufacturing Practice Dz. U. from 17.10.2008.
One of activities which relates to qualification process is Qualification, which is performed according to below presented schema. Qualifications are usually performed as single or complex and they include: Design Qualification (DQ): documented testing and approving that design of rooms, devices, installation is
In case of balances, it comes to a statement, that a balance in use meets requirements on functionality and measuring reliability.
Installation Qualification (IQ): documented testing and approving that installed or modified devices or installation are compatible requirements. with approved design, manufacturer recommendations or user
This stage of qualification process is more like formality the controller is to check whether type of balance that is qualified is the same as stated in documents. Controller is to check documentation, descriptions, parameters, etc.
Operational Qualification (OQ): documented testing and approving that installed or modified devices or installation operate correctly at the whole range of assumed operational conditions.
At this stage, controlling personnel should check whether balance functional parameters and balance accuracy are within limits specified in DQ
documented testing and approving that devices and supporting installation, joined into one functional set, can operate effectively and repeatedly, in accordance to approved process performance method and specifications.
This stage is realized for balances that are in cooperation with other devices, and they exchange, collect or process data. The aim of qualification process is to make sure that obtained product is safe in use, and risk of level in production or control process will not increase.
Common practice in qualification process is to prepare corresponding forms, tests and reports which are confirmed by Quality Control Department. In most cases, such documents are in a company for several years, they were prepared according to Quality Management System and their shape does not change. Such universality may lead to routine tests performance, which results in omitting important aspects of balance control, like processes related to mass control and balance parameters. High importance refers to formal side of the process. Such approach is relatively strict and it does not allow to modify the procedures. Thus, there appears new approach, like FDA document Guidance on General Principles of Process Validation, which provides another approach to qualification process, namely:
It is a process to obtain the quality of a medicine, which should be produced in a way to correspond to a scheduled activity.
This quality is guaranteed by continuous activity in three following cycles: process planning, its qualification and verification based on results, analysis and observations. According to FDA, qualification process is:
Activity taken to demonstrate that systems and equipment are suitable for the intended use and operate properly.
Thus, it is proposed not to perform routine tests, and notes resulting from strict internal procedures, but perform qualification in a form of confirmative activities, according to which a balance (device) is proper for its intended use. FDA does not specify qualification procedure, but it requires summary of obtained results. FDA refers to risk management as described in ICH Q9.
- 47 -
Such approach gives relative freedom in performance of qualification process, but is also orders combining of practical knowledge on production process and control with possibilities of balances. This way, personnel knowledge and responsibility should increase.
- 48 -
It is not possible to define all of them, but the main factors include:
Oscillations, vibrations Breeze of air Temperature drifts Electrostatics Evaporation and absorption phenomena (hygroscopicity) Magnetism
It should be remembered, that the factors influence both balance and the weighed object. When estimating weighing process as a whole, factors should be distinguished and diagnosed, which of them is of decisive significance for analysis correction. The operator should focus on connection:
measurement time and higher indication dispersion. Vibrations are transmitted to balance mechanical system, so the most successful method of preventing them, is to remove them from weighing process.
Another commonly used way to prevent vibrations is application of anti-vibration table. It is a construction based on a double rubber console, which task is to suppress vibrations. In RADWAG offer, such tables are manufactured in mild steel or stainless construction. Operating desktop is a stone plate. - 49 -
balances with d=0,01mg. It is accepted that temperature is treated as stable if its changes are not higher than 0,5oC/hour.
For balances equipped with automatic adjustment system, balance precision restoring process is carried out automatically, with consideration of temperature and time changes. Such solution is commonly used in RADWAG balances.
In some cases, even if ambient conditions are fine, a balance does not stabilize, and operator can observe drift of indications. It can be caused by lack of temperature stability of a balance that has been plugged to mains just before the measurement procedure. When assessing influence of temperature on a sample or a weighing vessel, it needs to be stressed, that if a temperature of the sample or weighing vessel is significantly different than ambient temperature, than it may cause air drifts.
acclimatize the samples before analyzing their mass operator should not put their hands into weighing chamber (causes change of weighing chamber temperature) pick up the samples with use of tweezers or other holders (if touched with hands, samples change their temperature)
- 51 -
The problem of dynamic temperature error is particularly dangerous for balances equipped with system of external calibration. Such balances are not equipped with system notifying on temperature change.
In case of slow temperature changes, a balance will warm together with a weighing room. Such process is not source of errors due to its slow dynamics, and static errors compensating factors.
Considering temperature influence on weighing process, balance and ambient area warming up process caused by operator influence should be taken into account. It is assumed, that a man is a source of about 70W power. Bearing in mind this factor, quantity of operators working in the weighing room at the same time cannot be large. Practically, it depends on the room size and air- 52 -
conditioning system. Process of balance warming by an operator and temperature distribution in balance area is presented in the picture below
Visible effect of electrostatics presence is: slow drift of weighing result, large dispersion of weighing results in a series of measurements, and no return to zero if a load is taken off the weighing pan.
- 53 -
As it is not possible to remove the source of electrostatics, it is common to use factors that eliminate or compensate the influence of undesired electrostatic charges.
One of the methods that partially eliminates the problem is providing proper air humidity in a weighing room. It is recommended to set relative humidity of a weighing room in between 40 % and 60 %. There are, however, cases where setting such humidity is not desired or impossible. If such is the case, than operator should install an ionizer ionizing frame.
Ionizing frame is a device that generates ions, so called aero-ions, which charge is opposite to charges that operator wants to eliminate. The means of operation of a ionizing frame is eliminating - 54 -
charges that are on operators hand and inside weighing chamber on its opening. If balance conditions, ionizing rate is equal to recombination rate, which maintains constant ionization rate. Additionally, an operator can apply specially designed mats, antistatic foils and selected uniforms.
A factor reverse to evaporation is absorption of moisture from ambient air by a sample. it is very important in case of hygroscopic samples. The effect of moisture absorption is differences in mass determination, each measurement will have higher mass readout than the previous one. For the purpose of proper weighing of such substances, weighing vessel should be clean and dry. The easiest way to eliminate moisture absorption factor is application of hermetic vessels.
- 55 -
there is a risk, that electromagnetic field of a balance is disturbed or weighed sample is influenced by magnet installed in a balance. The effect is incorrect mass reading of a weighed sample.
A solution for this problem is removal of a weighed sample from electromagnetic field of a balance, i.e. increasing a distance between a sample and balance mechanism. It is possible through so called under-hook weighing with application of special racks or hooks made of aluminum.
- 56 -
RADWAG ELECTRONIC BALANCES Poland, 26-600 RADOM, 28 Bracka Street tel.+48 48 38 48 800; tel./fax. +48 48 385 00 10 http://www.radwag.com
- 57 -