As you all know the reliability and accuracy of an instrument can only be verified after it is calibrated against a known standard. This is also the case with toxic gas monitors as well as other types of gas detectors.
In case of gas monitors, there are two ways to check the functioning, one is a full fledged calibration where the sensor is exposed to different concentrations of a known air-gas mixture (to calibrate it at various points from minimum to maximum) and the other is to subject it to a "bump" test. A bump test exposes the sensor to just one known concentration of the gas, to verify if it responds.
Now which amongst these two methods should you use?
There are two issues here. First, are you interested in the accuracy of measurement, or merely the functional testing? Accuracy of measurement is important in many applications, where, for example, an oxygen meter is used for confined space entry. A reading that shows 20% when the actual value is say 17% can be disastrous. Here, we require that the instrument always function at it's best accuracy and has to be thoroughly calibrated always. Also a "bump" test is simple, just check the reading in the outside air-it should Oxygen of about 21% (more or less depending on the area and the pollution levels).
However in other cases, the instrument may be used more for detecting the presence of a toxic gas rather than its exact concentration. Suppose a Chlorine gas monitor is installed on the outlet of a vent line, that carries away vent gas away from a confined Chlorine storage area-here the presence of Chlorine must be detected, rather than the exact ppm level. It does not matter whether it shows 2 ppm when the level was 1 ppm. It has to detect the presence (according to its minimum resolution). Here, instead of subjecting the Chlorine gas monitor to a full calibration, it may be simpler to bump test it once a while. As long as it responds to a bump test of the lowest concentration of Chlorine, it's fine, you need not carry out a full fledged 3 or 4 point calibration.
What are the advantages of bump testing?
1. It is simpler than a full fledged calibration
2. Less lecetrolyte is consumed in case of electrochemical sensors-this increases the life of the sensor substantially
3. Cheaper and easier-just one gas bottle per type of gas is needed.
Any other advantages? Please use the comments section below to post.
In case of gas monitors, there are two ways to check the functioning, one is a full fledged calibration where the sensor is exposed to different concentrations of a known air-gas mixture (to calibrate it at various points from minimum to maximum) and the other is to subject it to a "bump" test. A bump test exposes the sensor to just one known concentration of the gas, to verify if it responds.
Now which amongst these two methods should you use?
There are two issues here. First, are you interested in the accuracy of measurement, or merely the functional testing? Accuracy of measurement is important in many applications, where, for example, an oxygen meter is used for confined space entry. A reading that shows 20% when the actual value is say 17% can be disastrous. Here, we require that the instrument always function at it's best accuracy and has to be thoroughly calibrated always. Also a "bump" test is simple, just check the reading in the outside air-it should Oxygen of about 21% (more or less depending on the area and the pollution levels).
However in other cases, the instrument may be used more for detecting the presence of a toxic gas rather than its exact concentration. Suppose a Chlorine gas monitor is installed on the outlet of a vent line, that carries away vent gas away from a confined Chlorine storage area-here the presence of Chlorine must be detected, rather than the exact ppm level. It does not matter whether it shows 2 ppm when the level was 1 ppm. It has to detect the presence (according to its minimum resolution). Here, instead of subjecting the Chlorine gas monitor to a full calibration, it may be simpler to bump test it once a while. As long as it responds to a bump test of the lowest concentration of Chlorine, it's fine, you need not carry out a full fledged 3 or 4 point calibration.
What are the advantages of bump testing?
1. It is simpler than a full fledged calibration
2. Less lecetrolyte is consumed in case of electrochemical sensors-this increases the life of the sensor substantially
3. Cheaper and easier-just one gas bottle per type of gas is needed.
Any other advantages? Please use the comments section below to post.
