Test accuracy ratio and test uncertainty ratio, calculated separately because they are different quantities. Companion to the three-wire and pre-plate pitch diameter calculators.
Calculation aid. Not a compliance determination.
This page performs arithmetic on values you supply. It does not determine whether any decision rule,
uncertainty budget, or acceptance decision satisfies ANSI/NCSL Z540.3, ISO/IEC 17025, or any other
standard, and it does not constitute a statement of conformity. Selecting a guardband method here is
not the same as having a documented decision rule. Walden Gage Distribution & Calibration Services
is not an accredited calibration laboratory; calibration is managed through ISO/IEC 17025 accredited
partner laboratories. Uncertainty budgets, decision rules, and acceptance decisions remain the
responsibility of the user and their accredited laboratory. No warranty of any kind is made as to
accuracy, completeness, or fitness for a particular purpose, and no liability is accepted for any loss
or damage arising from use of this page.
Version 1.0 · All values computed from user input · Last reviewed August 2026
Measurement and tolerance
TAR — test accuracy ratio
What TAR leaves out
TAR accounts for exactly one contributor: the published accuracy specification of the reference standard.
It ignores repeatability, resolution, thermal effects, operator reproducibility, fixturing, and every other
contributor to the uncertainty of the measurement. Two labs using the same standard on the same part can
produce very different measurement uncertainties and identical TAR figures. TAR is calculated here because
it is still widely used and still requested, not because it is interchangeable with TUR.
TUR — test uncertainty ratio
Per the definition in ANSI/NCSL Z540.3: the span of the tolerance divided
by twice the 95% expanded uncertainty of the measurement process.
Guardbanding
Formulas and standards framing
Formulas
Tolerance span
span = UL − LL
Half-span
T = span / 2
TAR
spanUUT / spanstandard
Standard uncertainty of a contributor
ui = valuei / divisori
Divisors
normal k=2 → 2 normal k=1 → 1 rectangular → √3 triangular → √6
Combined standard uncertainty
uc = √( Σ ui² )
Expanded uncertainty
U = k · uc, k = 2, approximately 95%
TUR
spanUUT / (2 U)
Percentage contribution
ui² / uc² variances sum, so variance shares total 100%
Guardband, root-difference-of-squares
√( U² − (T/4)² )
Guardband, subtract expanded uncertainty
U
The root-difference-of-squares guardband is defined only where U > T/4, which is
the same thing as TUR below 4:1. At or above 4:1 the radicand is zero or negative and the method yields no
guardband. That is a property of the method, not a fault in the calculation.
Standards framing
ANSI/NCSL Z540.3. The requirement at clause 5.3(b) is stated in terms of risk: the probability of false
accept arising from calibration tests must not exceed 2%, and must be documented. A test uncertainty ratio of at
least 4:1 is specified for the case where estimating that probability is not practical. The 4:1 ratio is the
fallback provision, not the primary requirement. It is common to see this stated the other way round.
ISO/IEC 17025:2017. No fixed ratio is mandated anywhere in the standard. Where a statement of conformity
is given, a decision rule must be documented and agreed with the customer, and measurement uncertainty must be
taken into account. A 4:1 TUR is one possible basis for a decision rule, not a requirement of 17025.
This tool does not tell you what your decision rule should be. It computes ratios and guardbands from
values you supply. Whether a given ratio, method, or guardband is appropriate is a determination for you and
your accredited laboratory, documented in your quality system.
Deliberately not computed
False accept risk. Estimating the probability of false accept requires an assumed a priori distribution
for the population of units under test and an end-of-period reliability estimate. Both materially change the
answer and neither can be known by this page. A PFA figure resting on assumptions invented by a web tool would
look more authoritative than it is, in precisely the setting where that does the most harm. If your decision
rule relies on the 2% risk provision, that calculation belongs with your accredited laboratory.
Also not computed: degrees of freedom and effective degrees of freedom, coverage factors other than k = 2,
correlation between contributors, and any determination of whether a decision rule satisfies a standard.
Need the gage, not just the math?
Standard, custom, and built-to-print gaging — plus calibration management through ISO/IEC 17025-accredited partner labs. Same-day quotes.