2019 spring and fall meetings and technical conferences€¦ · nist update john barton, nist........
TRANSCRIPT
2019 Spring and Fall Meetings and Technical Conferences
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
The Goals of theNational Industrial Scale Association
Promote a better understanding of the importance and scope of the scale industry by the public, thus furthering the welfare of those engaged in weights and measures activities
E ncourage proper observance of requirements and regulations pertaining to the operation, business and practices of industrial weighing.
Work for cooperation and understanding between the scale industry and the regulatory community.
Provide a forum for the exchange of information on the technology and application of industrial scales.
Coordinate and implement lawful collective action for the improvement of industrial weighing to the mutual benefit of industry, users, the regulatory community, manufacturers of weighing equipment and the general public.
Copyright 2019National Industrial Scale Association, 9 Rockbridge Lane, Pueblo, CO 81001
All rights reserved. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means including electronic, photocopying, mechanical, graphical, recording, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems without written permission from the National Industrial Scale Association.
National Industrial Scale Association is not responsible for statements or opinions in this publication.
NISA membership is $85.00 per year; foreign membership $100.00 US. Technical publications and newsletters included in membership fee. Non-member − back issues of technical publications $25.00 each.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
Table of ContentsThe Goals of the National Industrial Scale Association ................................................ Inside front cover
Officers.................................................................................................................................................................2
Directors ..............................................................................................................................................................3
NISA 2019 Spring Meeting and Technical Conference, Galveston, Texas ...............................................4
Batch Weigh Loading Systems Larry Wigal, Kanawha Scales ................................................................................................. 5
Fire Rail Logistics Joe Warren, Qualer ....................................................................................................................................... 12
Nicol Scales’ Metrology Lab Jim Budke, Nicol Scales ............................................................................................................. 17
NIST John Barton, NIST ............................................................................................................................................................... 19
Rail Weighing Solutions Tuomas Laine, Tamtron Group ....................................................................................................... 28
NCWM Don Onwiler, NCWM ...................................................................................................................................................... 31
Grain Probes Ryan Fox, Central Illinois Scale ........................................................................................................................... 36
NISA 2019 Fall Meeting and Technical Conference, Hyannis, Massachussetts ....................................40
Technical Presentations
Masschussetts Division of Standards James Cassidy, Director of Standards ..................................................................... 41
Hydrostatic Load Cell Technology Rudi Baisch, Emery Winslow.......................................................................................... 42
Obituary, Rudi Baisch ................................................................................................................................................................. 45
TTCI Updates Chris Pinney, TTI/AAR ......................................................................................................................................... 46
NIST Update John Barton, NIST ................................................................................................................................................. 51
Weight Verification Tool Robert Gray, Group Four Transducers ........................................................................................... 53
Handbook 44 and the 0.1% Belt Scale Peter Sirrico, Thayer Scale ...................................................................................... 55
Attendees, Spring 2019 ..................................................................................................................................................57
Attendees, Fall 2019 ........................................................................................................................................................58
NISA Sponsors ..................................................................................................................................................................59
Call for Papers ..................................................................................................................................................................61
NISA 2019 Officers ...........................................................................................................................................................62
NISA 2019 Directors ........................................................................................................................................................62
Past Presidents of the National Industrial Scale Association ..................................................................63
About the front cover, from top to bottom: The layout of the TTCI facility (C. Pinney); an AEI reader scanning a railcar tag (J. Warren); the Weight Verification Tool used in a tank system (R. Gray); drawings of a Merrick E-310 belt scale, from its patent application, April 12 1910 (P. Sirrico)
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
2
Officers
Rafael JimenezSecretary/TreasurerRafael retired from the railroad industry, where he began a 43-year career with the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad (D&RGW) and concluded at the Transportation Technology Center, Inc. (TTCI), the test and research
subsidiary of the Association of American Railroads (AAR) in Pueblo, Colorado.
Rafael was involved with research and in-track performance testing of newly-developed railway track components and systems, including wheel impact measurement and in-motion weighing.
Rafael represented the AAR at the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association (AREMA) Committee 34 “Scales” and the National Industrial Scale Association (NISA) for 17 years until his retirement. He continues as an active member of both organizations.
Robin ShepherdsonPast PresidentRobin Shepherdson is President of Scale-Tron, a company specialized in concrete batching, moisture measurement and silo inventory management.
Tim BroemmerPresidentWith more than 12 years of experience in the weighing industry, Tim joined Cardinal Scale as their Director of Business Development in 2018. Tim has an industry emphasis and deep technical knowledge in railroad weighing systems, along with an extensive background in truck scale weighing solutions.
Tim and his wife, Amy have 3 very active children that are all involved in sports and school activities. The whole family enjoys both watching and playing hockey, basketball, track and softball. Amy is a paramedic and teaches EMT classes locally as well.
Tim is an active member in AREMA,NISA, REMSA and NCWM communities, and enjoys meeting peers in the industry as well customers to discuss their individual weighing needs and applications.
Robert MonroeProgram ChairmanRelatively new to the Scale Industry, Robert joined Fairbanks Scales in 2016 as the Heavy Capacity Product Manager based in Kansas City. Prior to that, Robert spent over 8 years in various roles in an industrial manufacturing environment with ITW and
graduated with an MBA from University of Missouri-Kansas City in 2015. He and his wife of 12 years Jodie live in KC and have a daughter Kaitlynn who lives in Topeka.
Ryan GarnhartVice PresidentWith more than 18 years in the weighing industry, Ryan Garnhart started his career with Cream City Scale in 2000, and is Vice President of the Company today. Ryan is knowledgeable in heavy capacity and automated weighing systems as well as
programming. He graduated as a National Scholar from the Northern Illinois University in Dekalb, IL in 2006, majoring in Business Management. He is married to his wife Vanessa of 9 years with three young boys Landon (5), Jack (2), Brady (1) and one on the way. As a family, the Garnhart’s enjoy hiking in Colorado and snowmobiling in Wisconsin.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
3
Directors
Joe PriceJoe Price has been in the weighing industry for 38 years. After graduating from Mississippi State University with a degree in Civil/Structural Engineering, he began his career with Fairbanks Scales in 1979 as a Product Design Engineer. Joe was promoted to
his current position as manager of Fairbanks Scale’s Heavy Capacity Product Engineering group in 1989. He works at Fairbanks’ Heavy Capacity manufacturing facility in Meridian , Ms.
Joe and his wife Christy have four adult sons, Matthew, Nicholas, Patrick and John, and are proud grandparents of a grandson, Asher.
Joe GrellJoe Grell began his career at Rice Lake Weighing Systems in 1983. Prior to that, Joe studied music and marketing in the University of Wisconsin system. Having been an electronics hobbyist since grade school, he operated
an audio engineering service up to the time he joined Rice Lake Bearing. Over the years, Joe led the development of the Rice Lake digital weight indicator product line, including the 920i and IQ810, in addition to many integrated solutions-based products. He helped establish the Rice Lake service school program and continues as an instructor in that mission today. Joe has served customers in technical, marketing and sales positions. In 1985, Joe becaue Director of Sales, and in 1987 became Vice President of Product Development. Today, he services as Vice Presiden of Heavy Capacity Products.
Joe is active in local theater and agri-business development and isthe guitarist with a 17-piece big band called “The Dean’s List.” This band is a volunteer organization, owned by the University of Wisconsin, which funds a scholarship program. Joe lives in Rice Lake, WI with Nancy, his wife of 33 years. They have an adult daughter and an extremely energetic standard poodle.Dave Gogolin
Dave graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in Electronic Engineering Technology Science from DeVry Institute of Technology. In 1985 he ventured into the scale industry as a Scales Technician for Brechbuhler Scales, Inc. Three years later, and still finding scales quite interesting, he became a Scale Inspector with
Norfolk Southern Corporation. In 2007, Dave was promoted to Superintendent of Scales, overseeing the scale maintenance and testing programs. He currently is a member of the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association (AREMA) Committee 34 – Scales and of the National Conference of Weights and Measures (NCWM). Dave has been a NISA member since 1992.
Jay ViscoJay entered the weighing and measurement industry in 1973 as a Test Technician for BLH Electronics which he claims was the most fun of all. He then became a Supervisor of Calibration and Test of load
cells for HBM. In 1988 Jay was # 3 employee under mentor Harry Lockery for what became Flintec and during this time did a stint as Manager of Operations for in Sri Lanka. In 1999 Jay ventured into the sales arena as an OEM Sales Manager for HBM. By 2006 Vishay Transducers brought Jay on leading to Sr. Sales Manager of the Americas. Jay then joined Coti Global Sensors for 1yr before landing at his current position as VP of Sales and Business Development at Transcell Technology. Jay has an Associate’s degree electronic engineering, along with an array of credited educational awards. Jay was President of NISA 2009-2010. He is a past board member of the SMA and has current memberships with NCWM and ISWM. Jay lives just outside the Boston area with his wife Denise and their son Matt and enjoys golf, motorcycles and Cape Cod summers with family and friends..
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
4
Technical Presentations
National Industrial Scale Association2019 Spring Meeting and Technical ConferenceGalveston, Texas
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
5
Batch Weigh Loading Systems
Larry WigalKanawha Scales
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
6
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
7
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
8
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
9
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
10
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
11
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
12
Fire Rail Logistics
Joe WarrenQualer
I have been involved in the scale industry since 1990 when I joined Systems Associates as a scale technician. I went to a couple of these NISA meetings in those early years when they were in Chicago. About halfway through my 22 years at SAI, I shifted into Sales. I know many people in this room.
In 2012, I got the opportunity to head up the sales for the rail market for Transcore and late last year, I decided to pre-tire and try to do my own thing by preaching the virtues of AEI for shippers and receiv-ers. So much for my resume…
AEI stands for Automatic Equipment Identification. It was developed for the rail industry and, for the most part, I’m going to be talking about identification in the rail industry. But I’ll also have some truck scale information, because it’s equally important for trucks.
The AEI Tag is a beam powered passive RFID Tag. In the RFID world, there are several types of tags:
Battery Powered – battery-powered tags typically are higher powered and can be read at longer distances. The negative is that batteries will eventually need to
be replaced.
Beam Powered – A beam powered tag is powered by the RF received from the reader antenna. The tag circuitry isn’t powered up until that RF turns it on.
Passive – A passive tag doesn’t transmit its data until the RF from the antenna asks for it.
Active – An active tag transmits continually whether an antenna RF is present or not. Therefore, an active tag must also be a battery tag. But, a battery tag can be passive in that they don’t transmit unless spoken to.
Here you see a visual representation of the transaction. The RF from the reader antenna powers up the passive tag which then sends its data back to the antenna.
The steel backing that is the railcar effectively acts as a part of the tag’s antenna, so if you’re testing for read range, make sure that you use a metal backing on your test tag.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
13
Before there was AEI, there was ACI (Automatic Car Identification). ACI began in the late 1960’s. It was essentially a barcode system that worked pretty well. But as anyone here can attest to, railcars get pretty banged up, dirty, graffiti covered etc. Also, any optical system relied on lenses staying clean as well. As such, the ACI system just wasn’t nearly as accurate as it needed to be.
So, in 1988 the AAR defined an RFID AEI (Automatic Equipment Identification) system as a possible re-placement for ACI. In 1989, an industry competition was implemented to test out different companies’ efforts at this type of technology. Out of this competi-tion, we wound up with the system we have today (Amtech/Transcore).
In 1994, the AAR mandated tagging requirements for every interchange railcar in North America. This was obviously a tremendous undertaking and it took several years to get up to a usable percentage. Some fleets (coal, chemical tank cars, etc.) were well tagged early while some lagged.
In the early 2000’s, tagging blitzes continued. Also, a new Gen II tag was introduced that was much better sealed. This better sealing lead to fewer water leak-age problems and this led to improved tag reliability. Today, readable and reliable tag health percentage is in the very high 90’s.
So, the AAR mandate also included what data is to be programmed into the tag. Below is the railcar data that is in the tag:
• Owner (i.e. BNSF, CSXT, etc.)
• Number (six numeric characters)
• Side Indicator (Left or Right Tag)
• Railcar Length
• Number of axles
• Bearing Type
• Platform (for multiple platform railcars)
As I have been both in the scale world and the AEI world, I have often been asked about why the tare weight isn’t in there. My answer concerning their mo-tives is only an educated guess. But, my opinion is the data that they mandated was primarily for the benefit of the railroads in the interest of train movement and weight data wasn’t a primary interest. Also, in the early 90’s, data capacity and transfer speed wasn’t nearly what it is today. A car traveling at 60 mph has a limited amount of time for that transaction of data. So, the amount of data was intentionally kept small to ensure that good transactions could occur at any speeds.
Just as what’s in the AEI Tag is mandated, the physical location of the tag is also mandated. There is a left and a right designator in the tag, but otherwise, they are identical. They’re oriented in such a way if the car is turned around, the orientation is the same with the left and the right being the only differentiator.
For static railroad scales, there are a couple of different methods that I would recommend. The most bulletproof method would be to ensure that traffic enters the scale from one direction. With this method, both tags are guaranteed to pass by the readers. Both the right and the left tag would be buffered and when the weight is acquired, the car ID from both tags would be used.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
14
The second method would be used if the cars move onto the scale from either direction. The goal here is that, for all the cars weighed, the tag winds up either in front of the reader or it will have to pass a reader prior to weighment. The problem is that there may be a car length / tag placement that might not get in front of the reader. This method works best when cars that are to be weighed are of a fairly uniform length.
This is a picture of a static scale with a single reader. This configuration would work well for a single direction scale coming from the left. But coming from the right, a longer car might not have its tag reach the antenna. So, while there are several configurations that will work for the vast majority of cars, there will be cars that can get through without being identified.
In either the single direction or the bidirectional methods, you can opt to go with one reader instead of two. The ability to read both the left and right tags lessens the opportunity for a missed tag. Whether that miss is attributed to tag / reader placement or due to a faulty or missing tag, misses do happen.
A third option for static weighing is to put the reader in an operator’s hands. In our time of handheld computing, more and more operators have a
handheld computer of some sort to help them do their job. There are handheld computers that have AEI readers integrated into them. If weight data from the digital weight indicator is broadcasted wirelessly, the operator can scan the tag and then acquire the weight. This keeps the operator at the scale, pulling pins and spotting cars where he’s most productive.
One word of warning here though. Almost all indus-trial and warehouse style RFID readers are ISO 18000-6C protocol (commonly shortened to 6C tags). The rail AEI tag protocol is effectively its own protocol. I spent a good deal of time at Transcore telling custom-ers that the reader that they’d bought at RFIDs_R_US.com wouldn’t work. If someone is telling you a reader will read the AEI Tags, get a guarantee or test it out with a loaner unit before you buy. This warn-ing goes for stationary readers and handheld readers alike. But since handheld computers are a lot more common, I saw the problem most here.
In-Motion Weighing is actually much easier. The movement of the car guarantees that both tags will pass by both readers. So, where you place the readers is a function of when you want to receive the tag data. This slide shows the two antennas offset from each other.
And this slide shows the readers centerline and directly across from each other.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
15
Here is a photo of an in-motion scale with two staggered reader antennas. Again, where you place the readers would be a function of when you want your logic to receive them.
RFID is obviously not just for trains, It can be used for trucks and intermodal as well. But there are some caveats to understand:
The most obvious issue is tagging. In the 90’s the AAR was very forward thinking and helped bring about the mandate to develop an identification system that the entire rail industry would utilize. The trucking industry has no such mandate and no tagging stan-dard. Therefore most trucks aren’t tagged. A couple of ways to get around this:
• Captive fleet – If a fleet of trucks resides on-plant, they can be tagged.
• Tags issued on plant entry – As the truck enters the plant, the driver is issued a hang tag that hangs from the rear view mirror. As the truck loads/unloads and then weighs, the truck is iden-tified. The ID that was issued follows that truck through all of the movements in the plant.
• Toll Tags – Increasingly, most states have toll roads. These tags are pretty standardized. The unique Tag ID is recorded at the gate and follows the truck through the plant.
As I conclude, I’d like to posit that the number one function of a scale is to produce an accurate weight, but an accurate weight alone is an incomplete record. If you looked at your grocery store receipt and saw a weight and a unit cost, but not an item, you’d be left to wonder if you spent $30 for steak or for potatoes. In today’s data driven world, there should be no weighment that is not properly identified.
I realize this is not a perfect analogy. Having the car number doesn’t inherently tell you what the product is. But having the car number at least allows for some-one to take a deeper dive into the data and through that, much more data is available.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
16
Nicol Scales’ Metrology Lab
Jim BudkeNicol Scale
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
17
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
18
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
19
NIST
John BartonNIST
Thank you, NISA, for inviting me to address your membership. I believe the last opportunity I had to address this group was October 2016, so it is a great pleasure to see you all again.
I would first like to talk with you today about changes that have occurred in the NIST Office of Weights and Measures since I last attended a NISA meeting. After that, I will share with you changes that were made to NIST Handbook 44 in 2019 as well as proposed changes currently being considered. I will also speak briefly on how the process to make those changes to NIST Handbook 44 (HB 44) takes place.
Since it has been some time since our staff has been able to attend a meeting of this group, I will begin with a few details about the nature of the NIST Office of Weights and Measures (OWM) and some recent changes in our staffing.
NIST is non-regulatory agency of the U.S. Depart-ment of Commerce; thus, we have no enforcement powers. The enforcement of weights and measure laws is largely the responsibility of state and local officials.
We work with a variety of entities, including various standards development organizations; trade associations; industry; consumers; and other groups to develop and encourage uniform implementation of legal metrology requirements. One of these organizations is the National Conference on Weights and Measures (NCWM), a private organization comprised of a variety of members including: state and local regulatory officials, industry representatives, various subject matter experts, federal agencies, and other stakeholders.
We collaborate closely with NCWM on the devel-opment of requirements and procedures used by weights and measures officials. One of our primary objectives is the promotion of uniform interpretation and application of standards and procedures found in NIST OWM publications including Handbook 44 and other NIST publications.
Achievement of that uniformity is accomplished by providing training to weights and measures field of-ficials and their administrators. We are accessible to provide technical support to field officials, industry personnel, standards committees, laboratories, and other federal agencies.
OWM publishes multiple NIST Handbooks related to
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
20
legal metrology, including: Handbook 130 – Uniform Laws and Regulations; Handbook 133 – Checking the Net Contents of Packaged Goods; and Handbook 44 – Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices; and the NIST 105 Series (a series of handbooks which outline requirements for standards used in the inspection and testing of commercial weighing and measuring equipment). OWM also develops and publishes recommended test procedures for examin-ing commercial weighing and measuring devices and multiple other guidance documents.
NIST also provides traceability for working standards to the primary U.S. standards. NIST OWM staff mem-bers also serve as the United States representatives to international organizations including the Internation-al Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) and the Asian Pacific Legal Metrology Forum (APLMF) and other groups.
Following the retirement of Carroll Hockert, we were fortunate to have Dr. Doug Olson join us as OWM Chief in January 2017. Doug has had a long career at NIST, formerly serving as the head of the Thermodynamic Metrology Group (high pressure standards) and more recently completing a several-year assignment at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Paris, France.
NIST OWM includes the following programs: Laboratory Metrology; Laws and Regulations; Metric Program; International Legal Metrology; and the Legal Metrology Devices Program (which is the program I work under).
Over the past few years NIST OWM has lost several staff through attrition. We are pleased to announce we recently filled two vacancies – one in the Laboratory Metrology Program and another who will oversee our publications process.
Many of you are familiar with NIST HB 44; this docu-ment has been adopted in some form by all 50 states to specify requirements for commercial weighing and measuring devices in those states. This next portion of my presentation is a brief explanation about how standards are developed and adopted for use by weights and measures officials and industry.
NIST HB 44 is revised on an annual basis. This revision is necessary largely due to the changes in technology introduced in weighing and measuring devices, ad-vances in testing procedures for weighing and mea-suring devices; and changes in marketing practices.
Typically, a proposed change will be submitted and reviewed first, by at least one of the four regional Weights and Measures Associations before it is for-warded to the National Conference on Weights and Measures. Those regional associations will consider each item on their agenda and determine whether the item has merit and has been sufficiently devel-oped.
Changes that are recommended related to require-ments for commercial weighing and measuring devices will be forwarded to NCWM with a request as amendments to NIST HB 44. These changes to HB 44 are submitted to and considered by the Specifications & Tolerances (S&T) Committee.
At the beginning of each calendar year, the NCWM holds their “Interim” meeting where the S&T Committee reviews an agenda consisting of new items forwarded from the regional weights and measures associations and work groups along with items carried over from their previous year’s agenda. At this meeting, the S&T Committee determines a status for each item based on comments received
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
21
prior to the meeting and comments made during an “open hearing” session. This status will determine whether the item will be proposed for adoption (Voting) at the NCWM’s Annual Meeting held in July of each year. Items not yet ready for “voting” include those that require more input (Information) or work by a task group (Assigned); these items will be, carried-over for additional development (Developing), or are withdrawn (Withdrawn).
Moving on to some specific changes that have oc-curred in HB 44 and now appear in the 2019 edition of that publication, we can begin with an amendment to the HB 44 Scales Code, paragraph S.1.2.2.3.
To provide some background information on another change that has taken place in the Scales Code I will call your attention to a requirement that was added in 2017 that addressed high-precision scales (Class I & II) being used in direct sale applications (when both seller and buyer are present during weight determi-nation).
Some designs of scales categorized as Class I or Class II will actively display both “d” and “e” increments representing the resolution used in the scale’s display and the scale’s internal resolution. When both “d” and “e” are displayed, there is a potential that buyers and sellers in direct sale transactions can become con-fused by a representation of weight value using two levels of resolution. To eliminate this potential confu-sion, the requirement adopted in 2017 required that “e” and “d” be equal for scales used in direct sales.
In 2018, a related change was adopted to add a new paragraph, S.1.2.2.3. “Deactivation of a “d” Resolution.” This paragraph was added to address a possible problem involving the rounding of scale increments. This problem may appear when using Class I & II scales where “e” is not equal to “d,” and where “d” will provide a greater resolution of the scale’s weighing range.
Rounding up to the next nearest increment normally occurs when the load applied surpasses the half-way point between two adjacent scale increments.
When the scale senses that type of change in the load applied, the scale display should advance to the next increment. However, some scale designs were reported to operate such that if the “d” resolution is simply deactivated or turned off, then the remaining “e” increment may not advance until the load applied reaches the full value of the next “e” increment in the series.
This newly adopted paragraph in the Automatic Bulk Weighing Systems (ABWS) Code (A.2. “Exceptions”) explicitly excludes batching systems from the application of this code. There were reports of instances where field officials were confused about the correct application of the ABWS Code. This was reported when field officials were tasked with the
inspection and testing of sophisticated batching operations.
Some systems have been found where, during processing a product in bulk form, the product is weighed in a series of drafts (rather than in a single draft) and a high degree of automation is used in the system. One example of this use is found in agricultural applications where crop seeds are treated and coated with chemicals to boost their performance or to protect them from certain environmental conditions.
OWM expressed concerns over technical points in this proposal since it is our belief that ABWS are defined by very specific characteristics that were not present in the systems described in the proposal. Not only did it seem unreasonable to exclude ABWS from being used in operations such as those described above, but systems with the functionality of an ABWS would, in some instances be favored for such applications.
A number of additional proposals related to batching scales/systems have been submitted for consider-ation by the S&T Committee on its current agenda.
Related to proposed changes pertaining to batching systems is a definition for “batching system” that was adopted and added in the 2019 HB 44 Appendix D.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
22
While OWM did not disagree with the language used in this definition, we did not believe it was necessary to add this definition to HB 44.
Our analysis of this item included the notion that there was not a critical need to distinguish scales that are typically used in batching operations from any other scale. These types of scales are typically hopper-type scales and can be used in many various processes and applications.
The remainder of changes to HB 44 addressed in this presentation are proposed changes that have not been adopted yet, but they have been submitted for consideration. Some of these items are proposed to be voted on in July 2019 while others are still under-going development.
As mentioned previously, during the NCWM Interim Meeting held in January each year, the S&T
Committee designates a status for each item on its agenda. The status of an item will be designated as: voting; information; developing; withdrawn; or assigned.
The “assigned” status has only been in use during the last 2 or 3 years. This status is intended for proposals that would have a significant impact on the community, are complex in nature, and are items that the S&T Committee believes should be further developed by a sub-committee or task group.
There are three “assigned” items included on the cur-rent NCWM S&T Committee agenda.
An administrative approach to facilitate the handling of items proposing the same or related changes
across multiple H44 codes is to group the items into a single block. In those instances, the items will be grouped together to be acted upon as a single item during the voting process.
A current proposal designated with an “assigned” status consists of a block of items including changes to a variety of requirements concerning the use of “transfer standards.” This term has been used to describe alternative types of test equipment or materials that are used as a substitute for calibrated physical standards during tests. This item appeared on the 2019 agenda for NCWM’s Interim Meeting as “Block 1 – Terminology for Testing Standards.”
The type of test standard referred to in this proposal is more commonplace in testing metering systems however, it is also relevant to tests conducted on
some automated weighing systems such as in-motion railway scales and automatic bulk weighing systems where test procedures may include the use of “reference scales.”
The primary objectives in this block of proposed changes are related to the terminology used to describe the type of standards used in field examinations and the establishment of acceptable test procedures and appropriate tolerances when these tests are conducted.
This block of items also includes proposed changes to several specific device codes in HB 44 and changes to two HB 44 appendices: Appendix A - “Fundamental Considerations” and Appendix D - “Definitions.”
Another “assigned” item on the S&T Committee’s agenda typically concerns smaller capacity weigh-ing devices rather than “industrial-type” devices which would be of most interest to NISA members. I thought that it may still be of interest to the NISA membership since the goal of ensuring clear and transparent information is the same for any weighing application. These smaller capacity scales are used extensively in food markets and other retail settings,
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
23
and since we are all consumers, we may all benefit by being aware of what is proposed in this item.
A proposal has been submitted that will require the identification of weight values on the customer’s display/receipt (i.e., gross, net, tare). This new pro-posal would apply to point-of-sale systems (POS) that are comprised of cash registers integrated with scales and other ancillary components.
This item is intended to assist consumers better understand the weighing process and would require that the tare value and/or gross and net values be
included as part of the information provided on a consumer’s receipt. Industry is largely opposed to this item stating that this change will be too costly to implement.
Next in this presentation is one additional assigned item that began as an effort to amend the tentative HB 44 Weigh-In-Motion (WIM) Code for Vehicle Enforcement Screening. Though originally proposed as a change to the WIM Code, over time, a decision was made to amend the HB 44 Scales Code instead; the thinking behind this decision was this would be better location to address scales used in commercial applications.
This proposal is based on claims from a WIM manu-facturer that their system is capable of meeting the existing tolerance for static weighing Class III L scales.
The submitter is now in the process of producing data to support those claims. The task group working on the development of this item is conflicted in what will be appropriate test procedures for these systems.
Another proposal involving smaller capacity scales
(Electronic Cash Registers and POS) has been given a voting status for NCWM’s July 2019 meeting. This proposed change to paragraphs S.1.1.1. and UR.2.10. would require customer displays of weight on electronic cash registers and point-of-sale systems to be represented by alpha-numeric symbols no smaller
than 9.5 mm in height.
This change would align U.S. standards with OIML standards under OIML R76.
This next proposed change has been given a “developing” status and is another change pertaining to scale divisions “d” and “e.” This proposal is related to the previously mentioned requirement S.1.2.2.2. that was adopted in 2017 to require “d” and “e” on Class II scales used in direct sales be of equal value.
For some high precision scales that are used in other than direct sales, d and e may differ. If d and e are different in Class II scales, e will be the larger division and will therefore provide a value with less resolution than if d had been used.
OWM expressed some concerns over this item in-cluding the existence of a Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS) requirement that specifies the value of d (rather than e) must be used in grain measure-ment transactions when determining “dockage” – a weighment that normally involves very small sample amounts.
If adopted this change would require that these devices would not utilize the scale’s resolution to the finest extent.
This next proposed change is one that I’m sure will draw your interest due to its effect on coupled-in-motion (CIM) railway track scales. The item is a voting
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
24
item and seeks to change several requirements in the HB 44 Scales Code to facilitate the use of that code for evaluation of the submitter’s system. Given the topic,
and the potential impact to many of you, I’ve devoted a bit more detail in this presentation regarding this proposal.
The changes recommended under this item include: a change to tolerances applied to tests performed on CIM weighing of unit trains; an exemption from the creep test for “point-based” weighing systems; a requirement for the owner/user of these systems to provide an acceptable reference scale for tests; and the addition of a definition for “point-based railway weighing systems.”
The new user’s requirement included in this proposal specifies that the owner/operator is responsible for providing an acceptable reference scale. The proposal also indicates that the weights and measures official
with statutory authority will make the determination if the reference scale is suitable for the intended purpose.
This proposal also includes the statement that railway cars weighed on the approved reference scale can be used for testing a CIM railway track scale.
This final slide related to this particular item includes a proposed definition for “point-based railroad weighing systems.” It is interesting to note that the “weighing zone” centered over the load sensor is
typically no longer than 2 inches. The definition also explains that the totalized weight of the train is based on the accumulated weight of each set of wheels.
Moving on to the next item, another proposal that has been given a voting status will amend several different requirements in the HB 44 Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems Code. These changes are intended to clarify the application of tolerances for material test runs that are performed under the same conditions (primarily the same flowrate of material) and those test runs that are conducted under varying conditions.
For test runs conducted using the same flowrate (i.e., repeatability tests), the tolerance would be applied as an absolute value when comparing test run results. Conversely, for results of test runs conducted under different flowrates, tolerances would be applied as a range or “plus or minus” value when comparing the results of individual test runs.
Further changes to the HB 44 Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems Code include the introduction of different accuracy classes for systems included in this code. A new accuracy class identified as “Class 0.1” would be added and a designation of systems meeting the
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
25
existing tolerances would be identified as “Class 0.25.” These two accuracy classes represent different levels of performance and appropriate tolerances would be applied to a system according to its Class.
The next proposed change has been given a developing status and proposes to amend multiple requirements throughout the ABWS Code.
The submitter of this proposal suggests that the changes included would modernize the ABWS Code so that systems using more advanced technology in their design would be recognized in the ABWS Code.
OWM interprets this proposal as an effort to redefine ABWS to encompass additional types of automated systems not appropriately classified as ABWS. The specific features and characteristics that make ABWS unique would be relocated from the Applications section of the current ABWS Code to the Specifications section. Those features include: automatic operation to weigh a single commodity
in successive drafts of predetermined amounts; the automatic recording of a “no-load” reference value and gross weight of each draft; and recording the accumulated net weights for each draft.
The next proposed change has been given a voting status and would apply to the Automatic Weighing Systems (AWS) Code. The AWS Code and the Scales Code requires compliance with the formula shown in the slide that establishes a limit on the value of vmin
Paragraph S.5.4. in the HB 44 Scales Code (shown be-low) provides an exemption from this requirement for load receiving elements and complete scales meeting the following three criteria:
• The device has met requirements for proper operation in the temperature range specified by manufacturer;
• The device has received an NTEP Certificate of Conformance; and
• The device is equipped with an Automatic Zero Tracking (AZT) feature that cannot be made inoperable in normal weighing mode.
It was noted by the submitter (the NTEP Weighing Sector) that there are no corresponding exemptions to the same requirement found in the AWS Code. The recommended change is to add the same three exemptions from the Scales Code requirement to the corresponding requirement in the AWS Code.
This next proposed change has been given a developing status. The changes recommended in this
item would amend all paragraphs in the tentative WIM Systems Code listed in the slide, so they could be applied to non-commercial WIM vehicle scale applications.
The proposal would also include additional accuracy classes associated with increased tolerances in the tentative WIM Code. It is OWM’s understanding that
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
26
the submitter’s motivation is an attempt to develop regulatory standards for in-motion scales that could satisfy recently implemented “Safety of Life at Sea” (SOLAS) requirements.
Another proposed change has been given a “voting”
status by the S&T Committee. The item is another of the “block” items where multiple changes are included in one item due to the same general change being proposed for multiple device codes.
It has been recognized that some devices use digital data storage media such as SD cards or USB “memory sticks” to hold calibration and/or configuration parameters for the device. The use of this type of removable data storage presented a challenge in terms of the relative ease provided in making metrological changes by replacing the digital data storage media with another storage device. The concerns involved how this data can be secured when this type of storage media is easily removed and replaced.
Rather than proposing changes to the current requirements for security on devices that are adjusted by means other than removable media, this requirement would only apply to devices that use this type of data storage where the removable data storage must remain in the weighing or measuring device for normal operation to occur. The proposal would require that an event logger be required for devices that can be adjusted using this type of removable data storage; the proposed change intends to help protect against the unwarranted
removal/replacement of the digital data media.
This item involves the creation of a new paragraph in the HB 44 General Code to apply to all types of
devices where there is no specific requirement included in those codes for sealing this type of removable data.
This slide provides an example of the additional changes being proposed under this item regarding removable digital storage devices.
Paragraph S.1.11.1. in this example refers back to the General Code requirement. New specification requirements would be added in 18 specific HB 44 device codes for instances where those devices are already covered by specific “sealing” requirements.
The final proposed change I would like to address is related to changes proposed for the ABWS Code. In a previous slide (#7), we looked at an adopted change to HB 44 where a definition for “batching systems” has been added to Appendix D.
This proposal is a “voting” item and is related to a previous item we have discussed addressing proposed changes to the ABWS Code. This item proposes the addition of a definition for “batch” or “batching.”
In conclusion, I would like to speak briefly on some OIML projects that could be of interest to this group.
A project is underway to develop an OIML Recommendation addressing a type of device that could be described as a “flow-meter” for solids. This type of device is represented as having an accuracy on par with Class III or Class III L weighing devices in
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
27
the U.S.
The device uses a measurement of centripetal force exerted by a product flowing through an “arched-chute.” The new Recommendation will be based largely on the existing OIML R50 for Beltweighers.
A revision of R76 for Non-Automatic Weighing De-vices has been approved although, progress on this project has run into some unanticipated delays. This revision is expected to update the current edition and a 1st Working Draft is expected soon.
Another revision for an OIML Recommendation that has been approved is for R134 Automatic Instruments for Weighing Road Vehicles in Motion. It is expected that the revision would be updated to include sys-tems used for pre-selecting vehicles of possibly over-loaded vehicles. A project group is now being formed for this work.
Thank you for your attention. For more information or questions regarding any of the topics discussed dur-ing this presentation please contact me:
John Barton
NIST Office of Weights and Measures
(301) 975-4002
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
28
Rail Weighing Solutions
Tuomas LaineTamtron Group
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
29
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
30
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
31
NCWM
Don OnwilerNCWM
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
32
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
33
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
34
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
35
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
36
Grain ProbesRyan FoxCentral Illinois Scale
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
37
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
38
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
39
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
40
Technical Presentations
National Industrial Scale Association2019 Fall Meeting and Technical ConferenceHyannis, Massachussetts
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
41
Massachussetts Division of Standards
James CassidyDirector of Standards
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
42
Hydrostatic Load Cell Technology
Rudi BaischEmery Winslow
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
43
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
44
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
45
Rudi Baisch, July 31, 1957 - December 3, 2019
NISA notes with sadness the death in early December of Rudi Baisch, NISA member and conference contribu-tor. We reproduce here his obituary from https://www.carpinofuneralhome.com/notices/RudolfRudi-Baisch.
Rudolf (Rudi) Baisch - beloved husband, father, brother, and friend, suddenly and peacefully passed into Heaven at his home in Southbury, CT on December 3rd, 2019 at the age of 62.
Born July 31st, 1957, Rudi grew up in Valhalla, NY with older sister Heidi and younger brother Peter. He was loved and raised by his late parents Rudolf and Caro-line Baisch. He is survived by the love of his life, Kathy, and their adoring children, Jason and wife Kristi Baisch, Thomas and wife Brittany Baisch, Lauren Baisch and fiancé Graham Musson.
Rudi and Kathy shared 41 beautiful years of marriage filled with stolen kisses in the kitchen, laughter, and the record for the loudest family game of Pictionary ever played. They raised their ever-growing family in Southbury, CT where they’ve re-sided for the past 25 years. He will be missed by his five gorgeous grandsons, Jaxon, Maddox, Lincoln, Benjamin, and Grant, who all brought him immeasurable joy.
Blessed with a spiritual family, he spent 47 years faithfully serving God’s children like his own. Of these, thirty-five years were spent as the Rector of the New Mil-
ford branch of the New Apostolic Church. He guided, comforted, and uplifted members with exponential kindness, patience and love.
Since 1979, Rudi worked at the Emery Winslow Scale Company where he started as a junior clerk. Over the course of more than 40 years, he rose through the company to become the Executive Vice President and sit on the Board of Directors. He was the voice and face of the company with humor and expert understanding.
Rudi was stable and unwavering. Clearly, he did not commit to anything unless he was going to spend the next 40 plus years doing it. This included, but was not limited to, perfecting the voices used to read Dr. Seuss books to his children and then their children. Making the best pot of boxed Macaroni and Cheese ever stirred, fluffy scrambled eggs, and wrapping you in the safest bear hugs known to man. He welcomed everyone into his life and gave all of the love he had to give.
He will continue to be loved and missed by all who knew him.
The family asks that in lieu of flowers, donations may be made to the Ronald McDonald House Charity Global Chap-ter in memory of ‘Rudi Baisch’ at: support.rmhc.org/donate. To leave a message of remembrance, please visit www.CarpinoCares.com.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
46
TTCI Updates
Chris PinneyTTI/AAR
Thank you, everyone for having me here today. I’m ex-cited to talk to you about TTCI, and how we support the rail industry’s desire to be safer, more reliable and more efficient.
TTCI is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Association of American Railroads, and considered one of the world’s foremost rail-related research, testing, and training organizations. Headquartered in Pueblo, Col-orado, TTCI operates a secure 52-square mile facility with 48 miles of test track, state-of-the-art laboratory and training facilities, and a highly talented engineer-ing and support staff. TTCI provides its customers — which include freight and passenger railroads, freight and passenger rail suppliers, and government agen-cies from throughout North America and the world — with railway research, consulting, testing, inspec-tions, training, and technical support.
TTCI is home to SERTC (CERT-see), the Security and Emergency Response Training Center.
Transportation Technology Center has been around for more than 40 years. It started out life as a Federal Facility called the High Speed Ground Test Center back in 1971. The purpose of the site was to test innovative new designs, like the two that you see here. In 1974 the Linear Induction Motor Research Vehicle, which is on display at the Pueblo Railway Museum, set a world speed record for steel-wheel-on-rail vehicles traveling 255 mph. Today’s record is held by the French at 357 mph (575 kph), set in 2007.
In December 1974, the government shifted its em-phasis toward enhancing the safety and efficiency of conventional railroading and changed the name of the site to the Transportation Test Center.
1982 Reagan era cuts threatened TTC existence, but AAR, recognizing the benefits, stepped up with con-tract that allows us to manage the site for the Federal Railway Administration in exchange to being able to perform commercial testing.
The facility itself, the Transportation Technology Center, is still owned by the Federal Railroad Administration. TTCI operates the facility on behalf of the FRA.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
47
TTCI receives no direct government funding to oper-ate the facility. Instead, TTCI maintains and improves the site in exchange for use of the facility. This ensures that the site continues to provide the North American freight, passenger, transit and commuter railroads with a state-of-the-art facility at which to conduct research, testing or training.
The member roads continue to support TTCI. They donate rails, ties, ballast, bridge sections. Our 110 car train that we run for research on site is on loan from Union Pacific. Many of the locomotives we have on site are also on loan from our Class I’s. And, moves to the site are all donated.
In fact, since 1982, we estimate that the Class I’s have donated over $300 million in goods and services that provides a direct benefit to the site. That is the main reason that TTCI is a great example of a working public-private partnership.
TTCI has over 300 full and part-time employees. Individuals within TTCI provide all the maintenance and repair services experienced by a revenue-service railroad. TTCI employees operations personnel all well-qualified to operate trains on the test tracks. TTCI employs a number of individuals to train railroad employees and emergency responders, as well as per-sonnel to inspect and audit on behalf of the industry. Finally, TTCI has over 100 researchers, all with degrees up to and including doctorates.
TTCI’s management team is guided by a Board of Directors that include the Chief Operating Officers of the Class I railroads, as well as representatives from the passenger, commuter and supplier organizations. The Chairman of the Board is Ian Jeffieries, President of the Association of American Railroads.
TTCI performs research, testing, development and training for customers in North American and around the globe.
We are known for our testing capability. We have 48 miles of active track at our site that can test all kinds of equipment. We can test at speeds up to 165 mph. We have overhead catenary and third rail power available, so we can test passenger, transit and freight rolling stock.
Our engineers also offer consulting services for com-panies in North American and around the world.
We offer hands on training on everything from basic “Railroading 101” to very advanced hazard-ous materials response training at our Security and
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
48
Emergency Response Training Center. Since 1985, we have trained over 70,000 of our nation’s emergency responders.
In addition to research, TTCI employees also man-age many other activities for the North American rail industry. This includes the AAR Technical Committees that are primarily responsible for creating and modi-fying wagon design and repair standards. In addi-tion, we inspect and certify manufacturing systems to produce parts for the North American market. We also inspect the quality of rolling stock maintenance, transport of hazardous materials, and securement of lading.
But, the heart and soul of what we do is research. We have two main programs – one sponsored by the member organizations of the AAR, and the other through Task Orders from the Federal Railroad Administration.
The best way to see TTC is by actually touring the site. The VTU is a computer controlled, full-scale labora-tory test device used to evaluate suspension charac-teristics of railway vehicles, components and vehicle natural frequencies, ride quality studies, and lading responses
• It is used to characterize rigid body roll behavior; pitch, bounce, yaw, and flexible modes of vibrations for railway vehicles
• It can be used to shake a railway vehicle vertically and laterally through the wheels simulating the vehicle operating over varied track geometry conditions
• The SMU is a computer controlled, electro-hydraulic structural test device used for applying dynamic forces directly to full-scale railcar bodies, highway vehicles and other heavy structures
• It can be used for full-scale multi-axial fatigue and durability testing of railcars, locomotives, transit buses, and truss sections
• The Impact wall provides an opportunity to understand how a railcar reacts to a large impact load. It is primarily used to gather data to validate computer simulations.
• The Rolling Contact Fatigue Simulator is used for research into the Wheel/rail interface. It is the only test machine of its kind in the world.
• The Squeeze Fixture can determine the ultímate strength of a carbody in compression
• The dynomometer is primarily used to understand the performance of wheels and brake systems.
TTCI has very unique tracks that are designed to test the durability of track and track structures as well as the response of rolling stock, both freight and passenger.
The five tracks are:
• The Railroad Test Track – a 13.5 mile loop that can test traffic at speeds of up to 165 mph. This track has overhead catenary for the entire loop. The RTT also has 500 ft section that can have different perturba-tions added to test the response of passenger or freight cars at high speeds
• The Transit Test Track – a 9 mile loop with DC third rail that can test at speeds of up to 80 mph
• The Precision Test Track – this track is used to under-stand the response of wagons – both passenger and freight, to conditions that can be found in track such as pitch, bounce, yaw and sway
• The Wheel/Rail Mechanism Track – this track tests the dynamic curving performance of passenger and freight cars, with curves as tight as 12 degrees
• The High Tonnage Loop – this 2.7 mile loop is primarily used to test the reliability and durability of track and track structures as well as components or systems for heavy-haul freight cars.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
49
TTC is just like a real, revenue service railroad. You would not see any difference between our track or railcars and those used in revenue service – with one small exception. We can test not only cars and rails in perfect working order – we can test cars and rails that we know are NOT perfect
Our various test facilities offer both the revenue service conditions, but also a controlled, consistent environment.
We can place known defects into our test beds to see if test equipment will reliably find the defects. We can also see how the system reacts when faced with less than pristine conditions.
Both FRA and AAR sponsor significant research pro-grams at TTCI on an annual basis. The focus of both programs is similar – to improve safety and efficiency
Where possible, both entities sponsor research jointly. This allows the industry to gain the best use of pre-cious research dollars.
Some of our research focused in understanding the root causes of fundamental issues such as wheel and rail defects. In other cases, we use the site to evaluate new products from vendors to ensure we understand how they will perform under the high tonnage freight usage common in the North American market.
Both FRA and AAR sponsor significant research pro-grams at TTCI on an annual basis. The focus of both programs is similar – to improve safety and efficiency
Where possible, both entities sponsor research jointly. This allows the industry to gain the best use of pre-cious research dollars.
Some of our research focused in understanding the root causes of fundamental issues such as wheel and rail defects. In other cases, we use the site to evaluate new products from vendors to ensure we understand how they will perform under the high tonnage freight usage common in the North American market.
In addition to research, TTCI employees also man-age many other activities for the North American rail industry. This includes the AAR Technical Commit-tees that are primarily responsible for creating and modifying wagon design and repair standards. We also inspect the quality of rolling stock maintenance, transport of hazardous materials, and securement of lading.
Many times, I have been asked how a supplier can be certified to sell products in North America. It is the TTCI quality auditors responsibility to evaluate a product and the manufacturing process using the AAR Quality Assurance M-1003 process. The audit results and the auditors’ recommendations are then provided to several AAR Technical Committees who make the final decision on certification.
TTCI also performs research, testing, development and training for commercial customers around the globe.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
50
Both the industry-sponsored research and the com-mercial consulting benefit from each other. The research enables TTCI to offer clients the latest in technology breakthroughs to help solve problems, and the consulting provides insights as to needed areas of research.
TTCI offers consulting in many areas, including vehicle design analysis, consultation for track and track structure design and modification, as well as testing of products.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
51
Handbook 44 Update
John BartonNIST
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
52
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
53
Weight Verification Tool
Robert GrayGroup Four Transducers
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
54
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
55
Handbook 44 and the 0.1% Belt Scale
Peter SirricoThayer Scale
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
56
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
57
Attendees, Spring 2019Meeting and Technical Conference
Bill BarberaSAI
John BartonNIST OWM
Paul BatsonTSW Automation
Matt BauerAmerican Scale
Trent BeasleyCOTI Global
Tim BroemmerCardinal Scale
Chris BuchhornA-1 Scale
Jeff BudicMettler-Toledo
Jim Budke Nicol Scales and Measurement
Dennis Fox Central Illinois Scale
Ryan Fox Central Illinois Scale
Brad Fryburger Southern Illinois Scale
Ryan Garnhart Cream City Scale
David Gogolin Norfolk Southern Railroad
Shawn GoodRail Scale, Inc.
Joe Grell RLWS
John Holleman SAI
Lloyd HollemanIndy Scale
Craig Howard RMH Systems
Chris Huntman American Scale
Rafael Jimenez TTCI/AAR (Retired)
John Kowalczyk Norfolk Southern Railroad
Tuomas Laine Tamtron
Ed LuthySchenck Process
Joshua MarschkeCSX
Dave Mathieu WAM Publishing
Robert Monroe Fairbanks Scales
Mark Morris Vishay
Jacob MuellerSchenk Process
Stuart Mueller Thermo Fisher Scientific
Jim Norvid Rice Lake Weighing
Don Onwiler NCWM
Joe Price Fairbanks Scales
Bill RameyCOTI Global
Thomas Schuller Cardinal Scale
Martin Stillger Schenck Process
Carmen Trevico TTCI
Jay Visco Transcell, Inc.
Aaron Voreis Weight and Test Solutions
Joe Warren Fire Logistics
Larry Wigal Kanawha Scales Systems
Justin Wilson Salient Systems
Brad Young Kanawha Scales Systems
Brad Young Kanawha Scales Systems
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
58
Attendees, Fall 2019Meeting and Technical Conference
Rudi BaischEmery Winslow
William BarberaSystems Associates, Inc.
John BartonNIST
Steve BeitzellSystems Associates, Inc.
Mark Bird Scales Sales and Service
Tim BroemmerCardinal Scale
Jimmy CassidyState of Massachussetts
Darren FlockenNCWM
Dennis FoxCentral Illinois Scale
Brad FryburgerSouthern Illinois Scale
Ryan GarnhartCream City Stateline Scale
David GogolinNorfolk Southern Railroad
Shawn GoodRaile Scale, Inc.
Joe GrellRice Lake Weighing Systems
Gary GuiAnyload, LLC
Matt HartGroup Four Transducers
John HollemanSystems Associates, Inc.
Rafael JimenezSecretary/Treasurer, NISA
John KowalcheckNorfolk Southern
Tom LukeFairbanks Scales
Ed LuthySchenck Process
Mike ManheimNCWM
Jonathan MeisnerJ.A. King
Robert MonroeFairbanks Scales
Mark MorrisVPG Transducer
Stuart MuellerThermoFisher Scientific
Jacob MuellerSchenck Process
Al PageMontana W & M (Retired)
Gary PelletierFairbanks Scales
Chris PinneyAAR/TTCI
Joe PriceFairbanks Scales
Robin ShepherdsonScale-Tron, Inc.
Peter SirricoThayer Scale
Martin StillgerSchenck Process
Jay ViscoAnyload, LLC
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
59
NISA SponsorsThanks for your helpAfter our technical presentations, NISA publishes a Technical Journal containing the subject matter presented at the sessions. NISA is dedicated to providing this Technical Journal as a reference for each of our members. As you can imagine, the cost of producing, printing and distributing these publications is quite high, and with-out outside support, woul result in increased dues for our members.
We asked sponsors to help offset the costs of this NISA publication and the hospitality suites at our Confer-ences. We thank those listed on the following pages for their support.
We will continue to print extra Technical Journals so they will be available to new members to purchase as the years go on. We hope that you have enjoyed this publication. If you would like to acquire previous editions, please contact us.
We would like to thank those who supported the Technical Publication and hospitality suites, and would ask any of you who wish to support future Technical Conferences and Publications to contact Rafael Jimenez, Sec-retary/Treasurer, NISA, 9 Rockbridge Ln., Pueblo, CO 81001.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
60
Scale Sales & Service
Systems Associates, Inc.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
61
Call for Papers
The National Industrial Scale Association (NISA), which provides a mechanism for exchange of technical information and applica-
tions of industrial weighing, invites you to present a paper for our 2020 Spring and Fall Technical Conferences.
Topics can include truck scales, railroad track scales, tank and hopper scales, belt scales and other peripheral equipment involved in the pro-cess of industrial weighing.
NISA offers you an opportunity to present your information to movers and shakers in utilities, railroads and mining, as well as other end-users who are interested in heavy capacity scales. Your presentation will also be included in our 2020 Technical Publication.
If you would like the participate in these conferences, contact our Pro-gram Chairman, Mark Morris, VPG Transducers, [email protected].
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
62
NISA 2019 Officers
NISA 2019 Directors
Jay ViscoTranscell Technology, Inc.
Dave GogolinNorfolk Southern Railway
Norm BruckerPrecision Measurement
Standards, Inc.
PresidentTim Broemmer
Cardinal Scale
Secretary/TreasurerRafael Jimenez
Retired
Program ChairmanRobert Munro
Fairbanks Scale
Vice PresidentRyan Garnhart
Cream City Scale
Past PresidentRobin Shepherdson
Scale-Tron
Joe PriceFairbanks Scales, Inc.
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
WW
W.
NI
SA
.O
RG
63
Past Presidents of the National Industrial Scale Association
1986 - 1988E. Joe Lloyd, Jr.
CXS Transportation Company
1988 - 1990W.G. GeMeiner
Chicago and Northwestern Railroad
1990 - 1991Steven J. Beitzel
Systems Assocates, Inc.
1991 - 1992John J. Robinson
Association of American Railroads
1992 - 1993Peggy L. Cunningham
Virginia Electric Power Company
1993 - 1994Max Casanova
Ramsey Technologies, Inc.
1994 - 1995Bob Brumbaugh
Systems Associates, Inc.
1995 - 1996Shawne Hawkins
ABC Scale
1996 -1997Bill McHale
Kanawha Scales and Systems
1997 - 1998Dave Quinn
Fairbanks Scales
1999 - 2000Dennis Davis
Norfolk Southern Co.
2000 - 2001Joe Geisser
Rice Lake Weighing Systems
2001 - 2002Mike Smith
Cardinal Scale and Mfg. Company
2002 - 2003Ed Luthy
Breckbuhler Scales
2003 - 2004John Holleman
Systems Associates, Inc.
2004 - 2005Dennis Fox
Central Illinois Scale Company
2005 - 2006Bubba BuchhornA-1 Scale Company
2006 - 2007Steve SheltonScale Systems, Inc.
2007 - 2008Eric Boggs
Mettler-Toledo, LLC
2008 - 2009Bill Murphy
Rice Lake Weighing Systems
2009 - 2010Jay Visco
VPG Transducers
2010 - 2011John Fowler
Retired
2011 - 2012Mike Powers
Central Illinois Scale Company2012 - 2013
Kevin McFaddenMettler-Toledo, LLC
2013 - 2014Gary Young
OV Scale & Instruments
2014 - 2015Bill Ripka
Thermo Scientific
2015 - 2017Joe Grell
Rice Lake Weighing Systems
2017 - 2018Robin Shepherdson
Scale-Tron
2018 - 2019Tim Broemmer
Cardinal Scale
9 Rockbridge Lane, Pueblo, CO 81001