Results

Experiment 1: Draft UUT Calibration of EJA430A Pressure Transmitter

In the experiment 1, the objective for this experiment is to draft UUT

calibration of EJA430A Pressure Transmitter by deciding the MSU value of the
pressure on the Pneumatic Standard MC100. There are 2 methods that have
been used in this experiment to observe the results affected by using
method 1 or method 2.

Figure 1 shows the Graph of UUT vs MSU (METHOD 1)

UUT Vs MSU (Method 1)

250
200
150

UUT (mA)

100
50
0

50

100

150

MSU (kPa)

200

250

For the calibration of method 1, the objective is to draft UUT calibration

in kPa of the EJA430A Pressure Transmitter. From the results obtained, all of
the value of the MSU reading from the UUT reading has a deviation that is
only 0.03 kPa. According to Gassman (2014), there is deviation between the
actual characteristic and the ideal characteristic of the UUT equipment. The
results also shows that as the pressure increases, the deviation of the MSU
and UUT reading becomes constant as all of shows 0.03 kPa reading.

MSU Vs UUT (Method 2)

25
20
15

MSU (kPa)

10
5
0

50

100

150

UUT (mA)

Figure 2 shows the Graph of MSU vs UUT (METHOD 2)

200

250

For the calibration of method 2, the objective is to draft UUT calibration

in mA of the EJA430A Pressure Transmitter. There is deviation when the value
of MSU (kPa) is converted to UUT (mA) in the range of 0.03 to 0.05 mA. The
result also shows as the pressure increases, the deviation of UUT reading
between MSU become increases. Based on the readings that we have
obtained, the small value of the deviation is acceptable and the equipment is
reliable to be used in the conversion of pneumatic signal into electrical signal
as the deviation is within tolerated range.

Based on the both method 1 and method 2, it can be seen the

accuracy of the reading is the best by using the method 1. MSU equipment
has higher resolution as it have 2 decimal points to read the data easily
compared to UUT equipment 1 which got only 1 decimal place.

Experiment 2: Determination of Hysteresis of the Pressure Measurement

Devices

MSU (kPa) Vs UUT (mA)

250
200
150

Increase

MSU

Decrease

100
50
0

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

UUT

Figure 3 shows the Graph of MSU vs UUT for both increasing and decreasing MSU
applied value.

The maximum deviation between the increased and decreased

characteristic curve is known as the hysteresis. This occurs mainly at a
specific value, which means the output of the variable when it increases is
not similar to the output of the variable when it decreases. According to
Gassman (2014), the extent of the hysteresis rely on the sensor materials
inherent properties and also the sensing elements design principle

Based on the results that we obtained, it can be clearly seen that the value
of UUT in increasing value of MSU is similar with the decreasing value of the
MSU. Since there are no deviations between the 2 set of the UUT values, it
can be concluded that the equipment is very accurate and the experimental
data that are obtained are valid. It is also better to avoid hysteresis because
it is difficult to differentiate and isolate from other errors.

Experiment 3: Five Point Calibration of Pressure Transmitters

Output Error (%) vs MSU (kPa)

0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50

Output Error (%)

0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

MSU (kPa)
Output Error vs MSU applied

200.00

250.00

Figure 4 shows the Graph of Output Error (%) vs MSU for five-point calibration.

In this experiment, the range of the pressure transmitter is divided into 5

equal parts which ranges from 0 to 200 kPa. The values that are varied is 0,
50, 100, 150 and 200kPa. The actual output reading from the pressure
transmitter is then compared with the output reading that is desired. Then,
the output errors for each readings were calculated.
Based on the results obtained, it can be seen that as the MSU value
increases, the percentage of the output error decreases as shown in Figure 4.
This is because of the non-linearity of the UUT equipment where the actual
characteristic of the UUT is a curved-line and the ideal characteristic a linear
line. Besides that, it can be observed that the output error ranges from 0.250.75%. The reason for this is due to the deviation between the actual and
ideal characteristic of the UUT equipment (Gassman, 2014). However, since
the percentage of the ouput error is relatively small which is less than 1%,
thus the experimental data are considered valid.