Does a successful round-robin result validate every future measurement?
No. It supports performance for the specified exercise. Your material and routine procedure still need an appropriate application assessment.
The Microtrac participation example concerned a specified ceramic-powder exercise. Its outcome should not be generalized to every material or configuration. Review preparation, dispersion and the reported distribution before interpreting agreement or differences between laboratories. A comparison study is evidence within its tested scope, not a substitute for developing your method.
Planning particle analysis quality
Define what is being compared before collecting repeated measurements. Sampling, preparation, instrument performance and result evaluation contribute different sources of variation. Keep the measurement definition and comparison conditions with the result so that a change in the material can be distinguished from a change in the procedure.
What to bring to an application discussion
| Consideration | Information to provide |
|---|---|
| Comparison material | Identity and preparation |
| Method alignment | Dispersion and evaluation settings |
| Assessment basis | Assigned values and study scope |
Questions before selecting a configuration
How can Glen Mills help with this application?
Share comparison material, method alignment, assessment basis when you contact Glen Mills for further information or a quote. This helps focus the discussion on the preparation and evaluation described here.
How should a measurement result be assessed?
Use the size definition, distribution basis and acceptance criteria required by your measurement method. Discuss particle measurement with Glen Mills when a representative trial is needed to evaluate the configuration.
Explore particle characterization equipment
Review the equipment details and discuss the supported configuration for your sample.