论文部分内容阅读
[目的]通过工频电场测量仪器的实验室间比对,了解广东省职业卫生技术服务机构工频电场测量仪器的配置、校准情况及性能。[方法]以广东省40家职业卫生技术服务机构(以下简称“参比机构”)的40台工频电场测量仪器(以下简称“参比仪器”)为研究对象,查验其校准证书。以某变压器为标准源,组织方用同一台仪器在距离其1.0 m处进行不同时间段的检测,采用单因素方差分析法检验其稳定性。在稳定性检验后,由参比机构测量人员持参比仪器在距离标准源1.5 m和2.0 m的测量点进行比对检测,采用基于四分位数稳健统计技术的z比分数对测量结果进行分析。[结果]标准源稳定性检验中,第1天下午、第2天上午、第2天下午共3个时间段电场强度比较,差异无统计学意义[(209.52±0.38)、(209.96±0.51)和(209.74±0.60)V/m,P>0.05],表明标准源可满足实验室间比对的稳定性要求。40台参比仪器中有1台参比仪器未送检,2台参比仪器校准证书已过期,1台参比仪器校准结果超出允差范围。40台参比仪器实验室间z比分数(zB)为-1.16~13.41,实验室内z比分数(zW)为-1.29~25.26;其中2台参比仪器|zB|及|zW|均>3.00,1台参比仪器|zB|>3.00,为离群结果 ;4台参比仪器|zB|或|zW|>2.00,为有问题结果。根据比对结果,判定3台参比仪器不合格。[结论]以变压器为标准源进行工频电场测量仪器的实验室间比对具有可行性,目前广东省职业卫生技术服务机构配置的工频电场测量仪器在使用上仍存在一定的问题。
[Objective] To understand the configuration, calibration and performance of power frequency electric field measuring instruments of occupational health service agencies in Guangdong Province through laboratory comparison of power frequency electric field measuring instruments. [Method] With 40 industrial frequency electric field measuring instruments (hereinafter referred to as “reference instruments”) of 40 occupational health service agencies in Guangdong (hereinafter referred to as “reference institutions”) as the research object, certificate. With a transformer as the standard source, the organizer used the same instrument to measure the distance from 1.0 m at different time intervals, and its stability was tested by one-way ANOVA. After the stability test, the reference institution’s surveyors carry out comparison tests with the reference instruments at measuring points of 1.5 m and 2.0 m from the standard sources, and analyze the measurement results by the z-score based on quartile robust statistical techniques . [Results] There was no significant difference in electric field intensity between the three sources in the afternoon of the first day, the morning of the second day and the afternoon of the second day in the standard source stability test [(209.52 ± 0.38) and (209.96 ± 0.51) And (209.74 ± 0.60) V / m, respectively, P> 0.05], indicating that the standard source can meet the stability requirements of inter-laboratory comparison. One reference instrument out of 40 reference instruments was not submitted for inspection. Two reference instrument calibration certificates have expired. One reference instrument calibration result is out of tolerance. The z-score (zB) was -1.16 ~ 13.41 in laboratory and the z-score in laboratory was -1.29 ~ 25.26. Two reference instruments | zB | and | zW | 3.00, 1 reference instrument | zB |> 3.00 for outlier results; 4 reference instruments | zB | or | zW |> 2.00 for problematic results. According to the comparison results, determine the three reference instrument failed. [Conclusion] It is feasible to use inter-laboratory comparison of power frequency electric field measuring instruments with transformer as the standard source. At present, there are still some problems in the use of power frequency electric field measuring instruments configured by occupational health service agencies in Guangdong Province.