OIML R60 Parts 1&2 1 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

OIML R60-1 Metrological Regulation of Load Cells

R60 Parts 1&2 4CD Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State Page # Document Clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Australia 25 6.2.1

We understand that maximum capacity (Emax) is currently a 

required/mandatory marking under 6.2.2 but for small load 

cells it may be provided in accompanying documentation, 

rather than marked on the load cell. We believe that the 

maximum capacity is important to identify the load cell and 

that it should be included as a minimum on the load cell itself, 

along with ‘load cell type designation’ and ‘serial number’, in 

the case where markings are limited by the size of the load cell.

Paragraph has been 

amended to reflect what 

is specified in the 2000 

edition of R60. 

Manufacturer's name or 

trade mark and maximum 

capacity added to 

mandatory markings on 

the load cell.

Australia 37 8.7.3

This clause still does not specify actual values for the 

conditions referred to in clause 9.7.4. We are not satisfied that 

the removal of the term ‘reference’ necessarily addresses this 

issue.

This paragraph was 

inserted as part of the 

effort to conform to the 

OIML template for 

Recommendations. Its 

value was questionable, 

thus it has been deleted.
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 2 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Australia 48 8.10.6.11

We do not think that our previous comment regarding altering 

the damp heat tests was adequately addressed. The test 

proposed in this draft of R 60 varies from the test used in the 

current 2000 version of OIML R 60 and we do not believe this 

to be appropriate without further consideration. 

We are still of the opinion that it is not appropriate to alter the 

damp heat tests to align with other manufacturer defined upper 

temperature limits by just changing the temperature. If the level 

is going to be adjusted then consideration needs to be given to 

appropriate humidity levels considering absorption, diffusion 

effect on the load cell and water content of the air.

We propose that the damp heat test should be conducted at 

40°C 85%. 

Test procedure in the 

latest draft aligns with 

that procedure found in 

the 2000 version of R60.

High temperature limit is 

found in 5.6.1 (– 10 °C to 

+ 40 °C, unless otherwise 

specified as in 5.6.1.2)

Australia 55 8.10.7.8

We believe that the issue identified in our previous comment 

has not been adequately resolved. There is nothing in the note 

to say that this test cannot be conducted on a load cell in a 

weighing instrument. The note that is there appears to indicate 

that the test could be performed while the load cell is installed 

as a component in a weighing instrument.

Note deleted in all tables 

under test procedures. 

See also Netherlands 

comment.
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 3 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Austria 3 2.3

The last sentence may be a contraction to the described scope 

of R60 in the previous sentence. On the one hand the scope is 

limited to digital “raw count” while on the other hand, the 

picture may allow further processing (scaling). 

Within this data processing we understand only “scaling” as 

possible data processing covered by OIML R60. Further data 

processing is not under the scope of R60. 

Therefore we suggest changing the sentence

“While digital load cells may be covered under this 

Recommendation, a load cell that produces an output consisting 

of more than digital “raw counts” will not be covered under 

R60.”

to 

“While digital load cells may be covered under this 

Recommendation, a load cell that produces an output consisting 

of more than digital “raw counts” will only be covered under 

R60 when the further data processing only consists of scaling.”

Wording has been 

amended. See also 

comments from France, 

CECIP, Netherlands, and 

Germany.

Austria 10 3.6 For clarification we suggest changing “related to E” to “related 

to Annex E. The same should be done for (related to D). Language amended

Austria 27 6.2 f

We can not find a definition for the type approval mark within 

the document; whereas we assume that it is meant as 

identification and reference to the appropriate certificate. 

Definition for type 

approval mark added to 

terminology - see 3.7.21.

Austria 41 8.10.1.14

In the definitions of errors (3.7) the “hysteresis error” is only 

mentioned once in the whole document. We suggest 

referencing to the hysteresis error as well, because the meaning 

itself seems to be the same. 

Hysteresis error was 

included under "Variation 

of results under reference 

conditions" in the 2CD 

(9.12.1) however, the 

project group did not 

support its inclusion. 

The clause was deleted 

from the 3CD.

Austria 56 8.10.7.9 In the notes there is a wrong reference. (9.10.7.10 should be 

8.10.7.10) Amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 4 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Austria 60 8.12.1

Please include the possibility for Annex C. Please amend 

“Annex C provides as an example of supplemental information 

that may be included in the OIML Certificate format and is 

intended to compliment Annex B..

Amended as proposed

CECIP 3 2.3

Editorial Correction: 

The scope of R60 would not extend beyond module 3. Module 

4 is not correct

Wording has been 

amended. See also 

comments from France, 

Austria, Netherlands, and 

Germany.

CECIP 4 3.1.2 Unknown abbreviation:

Replace “EUT” by “Equipment under Test (EUT)”. 

Definition has been 

deleted, also see 

abbreviations 3.9

CECIP 5 3.1.5.2

An electronic load cell is a special kind of digital load cell 

which utilizes active electronics and consequently has 

metrologically relevant software for additional functionalities 

but not beyond module 3 of figure 1. 

Recommendation: 

Replace to first sentence of 3.1.5.2 by “Digital load cell which 

is capable of performing the functions as described under “nonelectronic load cell (3.1.5.1) and which utilizes active 

electronics and consequently has metrologically relevant 

software.

Clause has been amended

CECIP 5 3.1.5.2

Add following note for clarification:

Note: The further data processing of an electronic load cell do

not cover functionalities of module 4 of figure 1 (e.g. scaling 

on weighing value in mass units). 

See edits and responses 

to comments regarding 

2.3

CECIP 5 3.1.5.2

Add following second note for clarification: 

Note: Subsequent this recommendation refers to digital load 

cells (see. 3.1.5.3)

Justification:

3.1.5.2 and 3.1.5.3 Only difference is the missing 

Firm/Software but there are usually electronic components in 

both load cells used. So it’s clearer to use general in this 

recommendation the digital load cell as description.

Definition has been 

amended to indicate that 

these are digital load 

cells. Additional note 

could add unnecessary 

information and was not 

considered to contribute 

to clarity
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 5 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 7 3.4.2 c.)

Replace 3.4.2 c.) by

when used, the same type attachment of the strain gauge (e.g. 

the same adhesive) to the load cell.

Or delete 3.4.2 c it’s similar under 3.4.2.b

3.4.2.c) amended to 

specify the use of 

"similar" adhesive 

CECIP 9 3.5.2

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.2 by “Range of values of the measured quantity”

Justification: 

The load cell measuring range Dmax – Dmin is specified by 

testing possibilities of the issuing authority and should be as 

close as possible cover the maximum measuring range, defined 

by the manufacturer. The load cell measuring range is 

independent of test results and the MPE.

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

CECIP 8 3.5.5

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.5 by “largest value of a quantity expressed in units 

of mass, which may be applied to a load cell”. 

Justification: 

The maximum capacity Emax is defined by the manufacturer. 

The Emax is independent of test results and the MPE.

Amended as proposed

CECIP 9 3.5.6

Replace “during test or use” by “under test”

Justification: 

Dmax is a test specification given by testing possibilities of the 

issuing authority and should be as close as possible by Emax. It 

is not a specification for a load cell used in a weighing 

instrument. 

Amended as proposed

CECIP 9 3.5.7

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.7 by “range of values of the quantity expressed in 

units of mass that may be applied to a load cell”. 

Justification: 

The maximum measuring range is defined by the manufacturer 

and independent of test results and the MPE.

Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 6 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 9 3.5.8

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.8 by “maximum number of load cell verification 

intervals into which the load cell measuring range may be 

divided. 

Justification: 

The maximum number of load cell verification intervals is 

defined by the manufacturer and independent of test results and 

the MPE.

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

CECIP 9 3.5.9

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.9 by “smallest value of a quantity (expressed in 

mass units) that may be applied to a load cell. 

Justification: 

The minimum dead load is defined by the manufacturer and 

independent of test results and the MPE.

Amended as proposed

CECIP

9 3.5.11

Change “smallest load cell verification interval” to “smallest 

load cell verification interval”

Editorial clarification

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

CECIP 9 3.5.11

Change “load cell measuring range DR (Dmax – Dmin) to 

“maximum load cell measuring range Emax – Emin)” 

Justification: 

Vmin is defined by the manufacturer and independent of test 

results and the MPE.

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

CECIP 9 3.5.12

Replace “during test or use” by “under test”

Justification: 

Dmin is a test specification given by testing possibilities of the 

issuing authority and should be as close as possible by Emin. It 

is not a specification for a load cell used in a weighing 

instrument.

Amended as proposed

CECIP 9 3.5.13

Replace “load cell measuring range” by “maximum measuring 

range Emax – Emin”

Justification: 

The number of load cell verification intervals is defined by the 

manufacturer and independent of test results.

Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 7 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 9 3.5.14

Replace “load cell measuring range” by “maximum measuring 

range Emax – Emin”

Justification: 

The number of load cell verification intervals is defined by the 

manufacturer and independent of test results.

Amended

CECIP 10 3.5.14 Delete “or”

Editorial change Amended as proposed

CECIP 10 3.5.15 Delete “or”

Editorial change Amended as proposed

CECIP 10 3.6

Replace to last part of the first paragraph by

“..., dependent on the conditions of the test of a load cell”. 

Justification: 

The variable parameters D depend only on the test conditions 

and not the conditions of use. 

Amended as proposed

CECIP 10 3.6

Replace “related to E” by “related to parameters Emin and 

Emax”

Justification: 

Unclear and undefined meaning of “E” 

Amended as proposed

CECIP 10 3.6

Replace “related to D” by “related to parameters Dmin and 

Dmax”

Justification: 

Unclear and undefined meaning of “D”

Amended as proposed

CECIP 10 3.6 Figure 3: delete DR Amended as proposed

CECIP 10 3.6

Description of Figure 3: 

Delete “Range of D” and “Range of E”

Justification: 

Unclear and undefined meaning of “D” and “E”

Amended as proposed

CECIP 11 3.7.9 Delete (see 3.7.9)

Editorial change Amended as proposed

CECIP 13 3.7.20

Replace “load cell ́s measuring range (DR)” by “”load cell 

measuring range (see 3.5.2)”

Editorial change. Delete “DR”

"DR" deleted in 

definition as proposed

CECIP 13 3.7.21

Replace “Change in minimum dead load output ...” by “change 

of the signal output under minimum dead load Dmin ...”

Justification: 

Editorial change, minimum dead load output is not defined”

Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 8 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 14 3.9

Further abbreviations:

DR: minimum dead load output return (see 3.5.10)

CH: cyclic humidity

NH: no humidity

SH: steady-state humidity

Abbreviations added as 

proposed

CECIP 14 4

Replace 1st sentence in the 2nd paragraph “...to provide an 

output to an input stimulus based on electrical current” by 

“...to provide an electrical output relative to a mechanical 

input”. 

Justification: 

Replace “load cell maximum measuring range” by “maximum 

measuring range Emax – Emin (see 3Wording not general 

enough 

Amended as proposed

CECIP 15 5.1.2 .5.8)”

Editorial change

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

CECIP 16 5.1.5 c.) Delete “7”, see 5.1.4

Editorial change Amended as proposed

CECIP 16 5.1.5

Figure 4:

Delete (shear and bending)

Unnecessary information, editorial change

Amended as proposed

CECIP 17 5.2.1

Delete “or use”

Justification: 

Dmin is only a test specification

Amended as proposed

CECIP 17 5.2.2

Delete “or use”

Justification: 

Dmax is only a test specification

Amended as proposed

CECIP 18 5.3.2 “1” as footnote

Editorial change Amended

CECIP 19 5.5.1 Delete “*”

Editorial change

Asterisk has been 

retained, refers to note 

that follows the clause.

CECIP 19 5.5.1

Put the first formula from the first example directly under 

paragraph 5.5.1

Editorial change

Clause amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 9 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 19 5.5.1

Chance the first formula in a general way to “0.7 × pLC × MPE 

of the applied load”

Editorial change

Clause amended

CECIP 19 5.5.1

Change the first example in the following way: 

Example: Load cell class: C3: (declared by the 

manufacturer)

Apportionment factor: pLC = 0.7 (declared by the 

manufacturer)

applied load: Dmax = Emax (test specification)

Maximum difference between the reading = 0.7 × 0.7 × 1.5 = 

0.735

Justification: 

The example is incorrect

Replaced example as 

proposed

CECIP 19 5.5.1

Put the second formula from the second example directly under 

paragraph 5.5.1

Editorial change

Clause amended

CECIP 19 5.5.1

Chance the second formula in a general way to “0.15 × pLC × 

MPE of the applied load”

Editorial change

Clause amended

CECIP 19 5.5.1

Change the second example in the following way: 

Example: Load cell class: C3: (declared by the 

manufacturer)

Apportionment factor: pLC = 0.7 (declared by the 

manufacturer)

applied load: Dmax = Emax (test specification)

Maximum difference between the initial reading = 0.15 × 0.7 × 

1.5 = 0.1575

Justification: 

The example is incorrect with pLC = 0,75

Replaced example as 

proposed

CECIP 19 5.5.2

Change head line from “Minimum dead load output return” to 

“Minimum dead load output return (DR)”

Editorial change for 

Amended as proposed

CECIP 19 5.5.2

Add a reference to the definition of DR: “(see definition of DR 

in 3.5.10) 

Editorial change shown for clarification

Amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 10 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 19 5.5.2

Note:

Add a reference to the definition of DR: “(see definition of DR 

in 3.5.10) 

Editorial change shown for clarification

Since reference is now 

included in title of clause, 

this change would seem

superfluous

CECIP 21 5.7.1

Replace „pLC, equal to 1.0 (pLC = 1.0) by the wording „pLC, 

0,7 ≤ pLC ≤ 0.9 (typically: pLC = 0.8)”

Justification: 

An apportionment factor of PLC = 1.0 is not possible for a 

digital load cell (incorrect example, 1.0 it’s possible only for a 

module according OIML R76)

Amended as proposed

CECIP 21 5.7.1.1 Change “load cell equipped with electronics” by “digital load 

cell” Amended

CECIP 22 5.7.1.1

A fault is a value that is equal or smaller than the minimum 

load cell verification interval vmin and not the load cell 

verification interval v. 

Change in the note: “load cell verification interval v” in 

“minimum load cell verification interval vmin. “

Justification: 

This is a significant error in this issue and also covers the issue 

of OIML R60-3 

See also comments from 

Germany. The 

significant change being 

proposed would cause 

substantial changes in 

tests and interpretation of 

results. This type of 

change is more 

appropriate for 

consideration during 

early stages of a revision 

and should not be 

implemented without the 

support of a majority of 

PG members.

CECIP 22 5.7.1.4 Change “load cell equipped with electronics” by “digital load 

cell” Amended

CECIP 22 5.7.1.1

Change note: „load cell verification interval v“ in „minimum 

load cell verification intercal vmin“ 

Justification: 

Situation of a complete weighing instrument not a subject to 

transfer to digital load cells. “v” as a generally criteria for a 

significant fault is much too high. 

See response above
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 11 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 22 5.7.2

Justification: This is a describtion for a weighing Module 

according OIML R76

Add note: 

Alternatively a manufacturer has the possibility to specify a 

warm-up time in the data sheet, if there is no possibility to 

prevent the transmission of measuring results in the warm-up 

period of the digital load cell. 

This clause does not 

currently require that 

transmission of 

measuring results be 

prevented, it simply 

states that during the 

warm-up time there shall 

be no transmission of 

measurement results. If 

the manufacturer 

specifies a period of time, 

then that warm-up time 

has been established 

through the 

manufacturer's 

declaration.

CECIP 23 5.7.2.5 Editorial change in Table 5 Section 8.10 Amended

CECIP 24 5.7.2.6 Change “load cell equipped with electronics” by “digital load 

cell”

Amended - replaced load 

cell equipped with 

electronics with "digital

load cell"

CECIP 24 5.7.2.6 Change “test load applied” in “applied test load Dmax”

Editorial change shown for clarification Amended as proposed

CECIP 24 5.7.2.6

Delete the last half sentence “whichever is the greatest”

Justification: 

The explanation is misleading

Sentence has been 

amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 12 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP 24 6.1

Change wording “Any weighing instrument function ...” by 

“Any weighing instrument function is covered by this 

recommendation and ...” 

Editorial change shown for clarification

There is no need for 

clarification. The 

sentence states that "Any 

weighing instrument 

function shall be 

evaluated under other 

appropriate 

Recommendations..." 

This clearly states that 

the function of weighing 

instruments are outside 

the scope of this 

Recommendation.

CECIP 26 6.2.2 j. Add “or relative minimum dead load verification interval Y = “

Editorial change shown a common practice Amended as proposed

CECIP 27 6.2.4.2

Table 6:

Delete (shear and bending)

Unnecessary information, editorial change

Amended

CECIP 37 8.8.2 Incorrect reference: 

Change “5.3.1.1” to “5.3.2” Amended

CECIP 40 8.10.1.8 Incorrect reference: 

Change “5.3.1.1” to “5.3.2” Amended

CECIP 47 8.10.6.8 Incorrect reference: 

Change “5.3.1.1” to “5.3.2” Amended

CECIP 52 8.10.7.6 Under “test procedure in brief” the old IEC standard 61000-4-4 

of 1995 has been quoted although the “Bibliography” lists the 

document of 2012.

Reference in "test 

procedure in brief" under 

8.10.7.6 amended to 

reflect current standard

CECIP 59 8.11 Incorrect reference: 

Change “Figure 35” to “Figure 5” Amended

CECIP A-4 A.1.2 Delete (For note, please refer to OIML D 11)

Does not exist in A.1.2. 

however, this has been 

deleted also in A.1.1

CECIP A-4 A.1.3 Delete (For note, please refer to OIML D 11) Amended

CECIP A-4 A.1.4 Delete (For note, please refer to OIML D 11) Amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 13 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

CECIP A-8 A.2 Add under the head line “For note, please refer to OIML R 76)

Editorial change

Not necessary, no note to 

refer to for the single 

definition referenced in 

R76

CECIP A-8 A.2.1 Change “[T.2.2.7]” to “(OIML R76, T.2.2.7)”

Editorial change

Since section A.2 is titled 

"Definitions from OIML 

R76," this is not seen as 

necessary

CECIP B-3 Annex B A list of the EUT and test pattern, identified by type, 

metrological characteristic and serial number is missing. 

Annex B provides the 

format for OIML 

Certificate and has not 

been modified from the 

2000 edition of R60-1. 

There appears to be 

ample locations for 

including this type of 

additional information on 

the EUT in the current 

Certificate format
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 14 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

France

2 

bottom

3 top

FR-1

2.3

The sentence: “While digital load cells may be covered under 

this Recommendation, a load cell that produces an output 

consisting of more than digital “raw counts” will not be 

covered under R60. In the illustration from OIML R76 below, 

the scope of R60 would not extend beyond module #4” seems 

not consistent in itself and also with the Note in paragraph 

3.1.5.3. 

It is not clear if #4 is included as the limit of “raw counts” is in 

theory before #4

Proposal :

If the intention is to cover at least part of #4 : the reference to 

“more than raw counts” should be deleted. A possible sentence 

could then be : “Digital load cells may be covered under this 

Recommendation if their output is in raw counts or with only 

limited further data processing (e.g., scaling). In the 

illustration from OIML R76 below, the scope of R60 applies to 

part 2 or part 2+3 or part 2+3+4”

(If the intention was to limit it to “raw counts” then “beyond 

#4” should be replaced by “before #4” and the Note in 3.1.5.3 

should be deleted.)

Wording has been 

amended. See also 

comments from Austria, 

CECIP, Netherlands, and 

Germany.

France 3

FR-2

Figure 1

The title of the figure 1, "weighing modules" shall be changed 

to "typical parts of a weighing instrument" because a “weighing 

module” is a special typical module within a weighing 

instrument defined in R76-T.2.2.7; Figure 1 is more general.

Language amended

France 3

FR-3

3.1.3 “Sampling” is only used 2 times in this draft: in 3.1.3 and in 

3.1.17 and nowhere else. Are 3.1.3 and 3.1.17 necessary? 

These definitions have 

been deleted

France 4

FR-4

3.1.5

3.1.5.1

Agree in principle with this approach; however, in 3.1.5.1, in 

the wording “· passive electronics (i.e., strain gauges)”, “i.e.” 

should be replaced by “e.g.” because other solutions may use 

passive electronics

Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 15 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

France 6

FR-5

3.3

3.3.1

Again, we face with the almost unique experienced type of load 

cells based on strain gauge technology. As 3.3 title is 

“construction of load cells”, this lonely 3.3.1 seems very 

restrictive compared to the title of 3.3. In fact, introducing other 

definitions for other technologies would take a lot of time with 

rare examples of evaluation (e.g. pressure sensors or optic 

fibber sensors, ...) –

Suggestion to add a note to refer to 3rd paragraph of chapter IIntroduction and stating that other technologies, although 

possibly in the scope of R60 have not yet been experienced. 

Therefore, as knowledge has not been gained to make sure that 

specifications given in existing R60 would match other 

technologies, it has been decided to restrict paragraph 3.3 to 

strain gauges technology.

Note added to refer to 

sections 1 and 2.1

France 10 Figure 3 Delete “DR” to keep only “load cell measuring range” Amended as proposed

France 10 Figure 3

in the text added in Fig 3 b)

E min ≤ Dmin ≤ (0.1 E max ), and (0.9 E max ) ≤ Dmax ≤ E 

max

Requirements applies for test purpose only at certification 

stage, not for the use of the load cell

{ E min ≤ Dmin, and Dmax ≤ E max }.

This type of requirements should not be repeated in the chapter 

Definitions (especially if the repetition is misleading)

Text has been amended

France 13

FR-7

3.7.20 Delete “ (DR) ” "DR" deleted in 

definition as proposed

France NL-8

P 17 5.3.2 Editorial : Delete "1." and read (0.3 ≤ p LC ≤ 0.8) Amended

France 20

FR-8

5.5.1 In the examples, PLC seems to be 0,7 Amended

France 32

FR-9

8.4

In the sentence “Examples of load cells with identical outer 

dimensions but different geometries are shown below”, add 

“strain gauges” to read “Examples of strain gauges load 

cells...”

Amended

France 8.10.7.1 Read "to 8.10.7.11" instead of "8.1.7.10" Amended

France 50 table Editorial : delete the "*" that references to nothing now * Deleted
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 16 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

France FR-10 general for EMC

We wonder why there is no homogeneity to electromagnetic 

environmental classes defined in OIML D11.

For example, 

- in 8.10.7.6 (page 52), test levels for bursts are 1 kV for power 

supply lines and 0.5 kV for I/O signal, data, and control lines. 

This is class E1 according to OIML D11 

- in 8.10.7.10 (page 57), test levels for conducted currents 

generated by RF EM fields is a field strength of 10 V (emf). 

This is class E2 according to OIML D11 

Paragraph 8.10.7.6 has 

been amended per 

comment. RF field 

strength changed from 

10V to 3V to reflect level 

2 severity index

France 57

FR-11 8.10.7.10

It is stated that test level is “Level 2 (in accordance with the 

referred standard)”, but this is not in line with OIML D11 that 

states that field strength shall be 3 V for level 2, not 10V 

10V changed to 3V to 

comply with test 

procedures for level 2 

France FR-12 Bibliography item [5] Reference to OIML D11 should be edition of 2013, not 2004. Amended

Germany 3 2.3

Editorial Correction: 

The scope of R60 would not extend beyond module 3. Module 

4 is not correct. 

Wording has been 

amended. See also 

comments from 

Netherlands, France, 

CECIP, and Austria.

Germany 3 3.1.2 Unknown abbreviation: 

Replace “EUT” by “Equipment under Test (EUT)”. 

Definition has been 

deleted, also see 

abbreviations 3.9

Germany 4 3.1.5.2

An electronic load cell is a special kind of digital load cell 

which utilizes active electronics and consequently has 

metrologically relevant software for additional functionalities 

but not beyond module 3 of figure 1. 

Recommendation: 

Replace to first sentence of 3.1.5.2 by “Digital load cell which 

is capable of performing the functions as described under “nonelectronic load cell (3.1.5.1) and which utilizes active 

electronics and consequently has metrologically relevant 

software.

Clause amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 17 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 4 3.1.5.2

Add following note for clarification:

Note: The further data processing of an electronic load cell do 

not cover functionalities of module 4 of figure 1 (e.g. scaling 

on weighing value in mass units). 

See edits and responses 

to comments regarding 

2.3

Germany 4 3.1.5.2

Add following second note for clarification: 

Note: Subsequent this recommendation refers to digital load 

cells (see. 3.1.5.3)

Additional note could 

add unnecessary 

information and was not 

considered to add clarity. 

See also CECIP’s 

comment.

Germany 8 3.4.2 c.)

Replace 3.4.2 c.) by

when used, the same type attachment of the strain gauge (e.g. 

the same glue) to the load cell

3.4.2.c) amended to 

specify the use of 

"similar" adhesive 

Germany 8 3.5.2

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.2 by “Range of values of the measured quantity”

Justification: 

The load cell measuring range Dmax – Dmin is specified by 

testing possibilities of the issuing authority and should be as 

close as possible cover the maximum measuring range, defined 

by the manufacturer. The load cell measuring range is 

independent of test results and the MPE.

Amended paragraph

(See also Japan’s 

comments)

Germany 8 3.5.5

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.5 by “largest value of a quantity expressed in units 

of mass, which may be applied to a load cell”. 

Justification: 

The maximum capacity Emax is defined by the manufacturer. 

The Emax is independent of test results and the MPE.

Amended as proposed

Germany 9 3.5.6

Replace “during test or use” by “under test”

Justification: 

Dmax is a test specification given by testing possibilities of the 

issuing authority and should be as close as possible by Emax. It 

is not a specification for a load cell used in a weighing 

instrument. 

Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 18 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 9 3.5.7

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.7 by “range of values of the quantity expressed in 

units of mass that may be applied to a load cell”. 

Justification: 

The maximum measuring range is defined by the manufacturer 

and independent of test results and the MPE.

Amended as proposed

Germany 9 3.5.8

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.8 by “maximum number of load cell verification 

intervals into which the load cell measuring range may be 

divided. 

Justification: 

The maximum number of load cell verification intervals is 

defined by the manufacturer and independent of test results and 

the MPE.

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

Germany 9 3.5.9

Delete the second part of paragraph: 

Replace 3.5.9 by “smallest value of a quantity (expressed in 

mass units) that may be applied to a load cell. 

Justification: 

The minimum dead load is defined by the manufacturer and 

independent of test results and the MPE.

Amended as proposed

Germany 9 3.5.11

Change “smallest load cell verification interval” to “smallest 

load cell verification interval in units of mass”

Editorial clarification

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

Germany 9 3.5.11

Change “load cell measuring range DR (Dmax – Dmin) to 

“maximum load cell measuring range Emax – Emin)” 

Justification: 

Vmin is defined by the manufacturer and independent of test 

results and the MPE.

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 19 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 9 3.5.12

Replace “during test or use” by “under test”

Justification: 

Dmin is a test specification given by testing possibilities of the 

issuing authority and should be as close as possible by Emin. It 

is not a specification for a load cell used in a weighing 

instrument.

Amended as proposed

Germany 9 3.5.13

Replace “load cell measuring range” by “maximum measuring 

range Emax – Emin”

Justification: 

The number of load cell verification intervals is defined by the 

manufacturer and independent of test results.

Amended as proposed

Germany 10 3.5.14

Replace “load cell measuring range” by “maximum measuring 

range Emax – Emin”

Justification: 

The number of load cell verification intervals is defined by the 

manufacturer and independent of test results.

Amended as proposed

Germany 10 3.5.14 Delete “or”

Editorial change Amended as proposed

Germany 10 3.5.15 Delete “or”

Editorial change Amended as proposed

Germany 10 3.6

Replace to last part of the first paragraph by

“..., dependent on the conditions of the test of a load cell”. 

Justification: 

The variable parameters D depend only on the test conditions 

and not the conditions of use. 

Amended as proposed

Germany 10 3.6

Replace “related to E” by “related to parameters Emin and Emax”

Justification: 

Unclear and undefined meaning of “E” 

Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 20 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 10 3.6

Replace “related to D” by “related to parameters Dmin and Dmax”

Justification: 

Unclear and undefined meaning of “D”

Amended as proposed

Germany 11 3.6 Figure 3: delete DR Amended as proposed

Germany 11 3.6

Description of Figure 3: 

Delete “Range of D” and “Range of E”

Justification: 

Unclear and undefined meaning of “D” and “E”

Amended as proposed

Germany 12 3.7.9 Delete (see 3.7.9)

Editorial change Amended as proposed

Germany 13 3.7.20

Replace “load cell ́s measuring range (DR)” by “”load cell 

measuring range (see 3.5.2)”

Editorial change

"DR" deleted in 

definition as proposed

Germany 13 3.7.21

Replace “Change in minimum dead load output ...” by “change 

of the signal output under minimum dead load Dmin ...”

Justification: 

Editorial change, minimum dead load output is not defined”

Amended as proposed

Germany 14 3.9

Further abbreviations:

DR: minimum dead load output return (see 3.5.10)

CH: cyclic humidity

NH: no humidity

SH: steady-state humidity

Abbreviations added as 

proposed

Germany 14 / 15 4

Replace 1st sentence in the 2nd paragraph “...to provide an 

output to an input stimulus based on electrical current” by 

“...to provide an electrical output relative to a mechanical 

input”. 

Justification: 

Wording not general enough 

Amended as proposed

Germany 15 5.1.2

Replace “load cell maximum measuring range” by “maximum 

measuring range Emax – Emin (see 3.5.8)”

Editorial change

Paragraph amended (see 

also Japan's comments)

Germany 16 5.1.5 c.) Delete “7”, see 5.1.4

Editorial change Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 21 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 17 5.1.5

Figure 4:

Delete (shear and bending)

Unnecessary information, editorial change

Amended as proposed

Germany 18 5.2.1

Delete “or use”

Justification: 

Dmin is only a test specification

Amended as proposed

Germany 18 5.2.2

Delete “or use”

Justification: 

Dmax is only a test specification

Amended as proposed

Germany 19 5.3.2 “1” as footnote

Editorial change Amended

Germany 19 5.5.1 Delete “*”

Editorial change

Asterisk refers to note 

that follows the clause.

Germany 20 5.5.1

Put the first formula from the first example directly under 

paragraph 5.5.1

Editorial change

Clause amended

Germany 20 5.5.1

Chance the first formula in a general way to “0.7 × pLC × MPE 

of the applied load”

Editorial change

Clause amended

Germany 20 5.5.1

Change the first example in the following way: 

Example: Load cell class: C3: 

(declared by the manufacturer)

Apportionment factor: pLC = 0.7 

(declared by the manufacturer)

applied load: Dmax = Emax (test 

specification)

Maximum difference between the reading = 

0.7 × 0.7 × 1.5 = 0.735

Justification: 

The example is incorrect

Replaced example as 

proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 22 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 20 5.5.1

Put the second formula from the second example directly under 

paragraph 5.5.1

Editorial change

Clause amended

Germany 20 5.5.1

Chance the second formula in a general way to “0.15 × pLC × 

MPE of the applied load”

Editorial change

Clause amended

Germany 20 5.5.1

Change the second example in the following way: 

Example: Load cell class: C3: 

(declared by the manufacturer)

Apportionment factor: pLC = 0.7 

(declared by the manufacturer)

applied load: Dmax = Emax (test 

specification)

Maximum difference between the initial 

reading = 0.15 × 0.7 × 1.5 = 0.1575

Justification: 

The example is incorrect

Replaced example as 

proposed

Germany 20 5.5.2

Change head line from “Minimum dead load output return” to 

“Minimum dead load output return (DR)”

Editorial change for 

Amended as proposed

Germany 20 5.5.2

Add a reference to the definition of DR: “(see definition of DR 

in 3.5.10) 

Editorial change shown for clarification

Amended

Germany 20 5.5.2

Note:

Add a reference to the definition of DR: “(see definition of DR 

in 3.5.10) 

Editorial change shown for clarification

Since reference is now 

included in title of clause, 

this appears superfluous

Germany 22 5.7.1

Replace „pLC, equal to 1.0 (pLC = 1.0) by the wording „pLC, 0,7 

≤ pLC ≤ 0.9 (typically: pLC = 0.8)”

Justification: 

An apportionment factor of PLC = 1.0 is not possible for a 

digital load cell (incorrect example)

Clause amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 23 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 22 5.7.1.1 Change “load cell equipped with electronics” by “digital load 

cell” Amended

Germany 22 5.7.1.1

A fault is a value that is equal or smaller than the minimum 

load cell verification interval vmin and not the load cell 

verification interval v. 

Change in the note: “load cell verification interval v” in 

“minimum load cell verification interval vmin. “

Justification: 

This is a significant error in this issue and also covers the issue 

of OIML R60-3 

See also comments from 

CECIP. The significant 

change being proposed 

would cause substantial 

changes in tests and 

interpretation of results. 

This type of change is 

more appropriate for 

consideration during 

early stages of a revision 

and should not be 

implemented without the 

support of a majority of 

PG members.

Germany 23 5.7.1.4 Change “load cell equipped with electronics” by “digital load 

cell” Amended

Germany 23 5.7.1

Change „load cell verification interval v“ in „minimum load 

cell verification intercal vmin“ 

Justification: 

Situation of a complete weighing instrument not a subject to 

transfer to digital load cells. “v” as a generally criteria for a 

significant fault is much too high. 

Erroneous reference –

this language not found 

in 5.7.1.
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 24 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 23 5.7.2

Add note: 

Alternatively a manufacturer has the possibility to specify a 

warm-up time in the data sheet, if there is no possibility to 

prevent the transmission of measuring results in the warm-up 

period of the digital load cell. 

This clause does not 

currently require that 

transmission of 

measuring results be 

prevented, it simply 

states that during the 

warm-up time there shall 

be no tranmission of 

measurement results. If 

the manufacturer 

specifies a period of time, 

then that warm-up time 

has been established 

through the 

manufacturer's 

declaration.

Germany 25 5.7.2.6 Change “load cell equipped with electronics” by “digital load 

cell”

Amended - replaced load 

cell equipped with 

electronics with "digital

load cell"

Germany 25 5.7.2.6 Change “test load applied” in “applied test load Dmax”

Editorial change shown for clarification Amended as proposed

Germany 25 5.7.2.6

Delete the last half sentence “whichever is the greatest”

Justification: 

The explanation is misleading

Sentence has been 

amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 25 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany 26 6.1

Change wording “Any weighing instrument function ...” by 

“Any weighing instrument function is covered by this 

recommendation and ...” 

Editorial change shown for clarification

There is no need for 

clarification. The 

sentence states that "Any 

weighing instrument 

function shall be 

evaluated under other 

appropriate 

Recommendations..." 

This clearly states that 

the function of weighing 

instruments is outside the 

scope of this 

Recommendation.

Germany 27 6.2.2 j. Add “or relative minimum dead load verification interval Y = “

Editorial change shown a common practice Amended as proposed

Germany 28 6.2.4.2

Table 6:

Delete (shear and bending)

Unnecessary information, editorial change

Amended

Germany 37 8.8.2 Incorrect reference: 

Change “5.3.1.1” to “5.3.2” Amended

Germany 40 8.10.1.8 Incorrect reference: 

Change “5.3.1.1” to “5.3.2” Amended

Germany 47 8.10.6.8 Incorrect reference: 

Change “5.3.1.1” to “5.3.2” Amended

Germany 52 8.10.7.6

Under “test procedure in brief” the old IEC standard 61000-4-4 

of 1995 has been quoted although the “Bibliography” lists the 

document of 2012.

Reference in "test 

procedure in brief" under 

8.10.7.6 amended to 

reflect current standard

Germany 59 8.11 Incorrect reference: 

Change “Figure 35” to “Figure 5” Amended

Germany A-4 A.1.2 Delete (For note, please refer to OIML D 11)

Does not exist in A.1.2. 

however, this has been 

deleted also in A.1.1

Germany A-4 A.1.3 Delete (For note, please refer to OIML D 11) Amended

Germany A-4 A.1.4 Delete (For note, please refer to OIML D 11) Amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 26 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Germany A-8 A.2 Add under the head line “For note, please refer to OIML R 76)

Editorial change

Not necessary, no note to 

refer to for the single 

definition referenced in 

R76

Germany A-8 A.2.1 Change “[T.2.2.7]” to “(OIML R76, T.2.2.7)”

Editorial change

Since section A.2 is titled 

"Definitions from OIML 

R76," this is not seen as 

necessary

Germany B-3 Annex B A list of the EUT and test pattern, identified by type, 

metrological characteristic and serial number is missing. 

Annex B provides the 

format for OIML 

Certificate and has not 

been modified from the 

2000 edition of R60-1. 

There appears to be 

ample locations for 

including this type of 

additional information on 

the EUT in the current 

Certificate format

Japan General

We had to submit a negative vote on 4CD due to the following 

reasons. Practical suggestions are mentioned in respective 

calluses.

1. It seems that our earlier important comments on 3.5 and 

8.10.7.11were not fully accepted.

2. We consider that contents of the present draft are still 

premature to be published as it was described in our 

editorial/technical comments.

Additional edits have 

been made.
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 27 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 4

2.3

Figure 1

1. Copy the table under Figure 1 of R76-1 (2006) and add it 

under Figure 1 of this draft. As Australia suggested, we also 

propose to add this table to facilitate understanding. 

2. Definitions of load cells were added in 3.1.5.1-3.1.5.3. 

Therefore, it is better to explain three types of load cell with a 

relationship to their components in the table requested in 1. The 

similar explanation is already provided in the table under 

Figure 1 of R 76-1. 

3. Output data from the data processing unit (#4) is not always 

expressed in the unit of mass. Therefore, the label “(in mass 

units)” in Figure 1 is not necessary.

Table from R76 added as 

proposed

Japan 4 3. Terminology

To facilitate users’ understanding of this recommendation, we 

propose to arrange the terms in the order of either one of the 

two shown below.

1. R76-1 (2006) 

T1. General definitions

T2. Construction of instrument

T3. Metrological characteristics of an instrument

...

2. VIML

0. Basic terms

1. Metrology and its legal aspects

2. Legal metrology activities

...

While the proposed 

change to 

format/sequence may 

have some benefit, the 

format prescribed under 

the OIML 

Recommendation 

templates has been 

adhered to as much as 

possible
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 28 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 4 3. Terminology

Several terms are added to the terminology. Among them, 

unused terms in this draft should be deleted as shown below. 

3.1.2. durability test [VIML 5.22]

3.1.3. inspection by sampling [VIML 2.18]

3.1.10. preliminary examination [VIML 2.10]

3.1.13. sensitivity of a measuring system [VIM 4.12]

3.1.14. test program [VIML 5.20]

3.1.17. verification by sampling [VIML 2.11]

3.1.18. verification of a measuring instrument [VIML 2.09]

3.7.13. measurement repeatability [VIM 2.21]

3.7.17. resolution of a displaying device [VIM 4.15]

These definitions of 

terms were determined 

not to assist the user of 

this document and have 

been deleted

Japan 5 3.1.5 Load cell

1. Analog load cells are commonly used complementary to 

digital load cells. Therefore, the present two categories for 

analog type (3.1.5.1 and 3.1.5.2) should be merged into one 

category and should be renamed as “analog load cell”. We 

consider that a categorization scheme with “analog/digital” fits 

current situation of load cells more practically than another 

scheme with “electronic/non-electronic”. Proposed revision is 

shown below for understanding. 

Present:

3.1.5.1. non-electronic load cell 

3.1.5.2. electronic load cell 

3.1.5.3. digital load cell 

Proposed:

3.1.5.1. analog load cell 

3.1.5.1.1. non-electronic load cell, 

3.1.5.1.2. electronic load cell

3.1.5.2. digital load cell 

2. The term “load cell equipped with electronics” was defined 

in terminology in 3CD but it was deleted in 4CD. However, 

this term is still used in the current draft. Instead, a new term 

“electric load cell” is defined in 3.1.5.2. Use either one of these 

terms in the same document.

The use of the 

terminology "analog load 

cell" as a means to 

categorize is a 

determination that should 

have been made by 

TC9/p1 in an early draft 

(1st or 2nd CD). At this 

late stage in the revision, 

it is not considered 

appropriate to change the 

structure of 

categorization of load 

cells in this fashion.

Use of term "load cell 

equipped with electronics 

has been discontinued 

and has been replaced 

with "digital load cell." 

Also see revised 

definition for electronic 

load cell 
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 29 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 8

3.5

Range, capacity and 

output terms

This is partly a repetition of our comment on 3CD because these 

comments were not completely reflected in 4CD. The terms and 

symbols used to specify range, capacity and output terms have 

been revised inconsistently during the revision procedures from 

2CD to 3CD, and these expressions were maintained in 4CD. 

As a result of these revisions, there exists a significant lack of 

consistency among such terms and symbols, and it makes 

difficult to understand the present draft correctly. 

The use of symbols E (Emin, Emax, ER) and D (Dmin, Dmax, DR) for 

range/capacity seems to be confusing. We believe that E should 

primarily be specified by the manufacturer based on the

performance of load cell and then, D is determined based on E

for practical tests and uses. The range of D shall be equal or 

narrower than that of E based on the principle [Emin ≤ Dmin ≤ 0.1 

Emax and 0.9 Emax ≤ Dmax ≤ Emax] in 8.7.3.4 (Measuring range 

limits). It is because the range of D is limited by the capability 

of a testing laboratory as well as the condition in practical use. 

Test for type approval should ideally be performed for the entire 

range of E. Some testing laboratory however may not have a 

sufficient testing capability to cover the entire range. The above 

principle was prepared for such a case to provide an alternative 

test method in a narrower range. 

Metrological requirements for type approval/verification 

including the important parameters (MPE, v and n) shall be 

defined based on ‘E’ which is specified by the manufacturer and 

not on ‘D’ which is affected by testing capability. If this policy 

could not be maintained, the specifications of load cell including 

the important parameters, in particular v which is proportionally 

related to MPE, may be affected by the testing capability. We 

believe that the specifications defined by the manufacturer shall 

not be affected (even indirectly) by the capability of a testing 

laboratory.

A review of the complete 

document has been 

performed.

Amendments made 

where inconsistencies 

were found. Use of 

symbols E and D, 

Emax/Emin and Dmax/Dmin

has been amended where 

needed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 30 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 8

3.5.2

load cell measuring 

range

Change the expression by deleting the first half as shown 

below.

3.5.2 load cell measuring range 

range of values of the measured quantity for which the result of 

measurement is not affected by an error exceeding the 

maximum permissible error (MPE) (see 3.7.10).

Note:

Load cell measuring range is the range between the maximum 

load of the measuring range Dmax and minimum load of the 

measuring range Dmin

Load cell measuring range = (Dmax – Dmin)

Reason: “load cell measuring range” is the range used for 

practical test or use. It should not be related to MPE. Therefore, 

the first half of the definition is unnecessary. See also our 

comment on 3.5.

Amended (See also 

Germany’s comments)

Japan 9

3.5.8

maximum number 

of load cell 

verification 

intervals (nLC)

The definition of nLC should be consistent with that of 

“maximum measuring range” (3.5.7). Change the expression as 

shown below.

3.5.8. maximum number of load cell verification intervals 

(nLC)

maximum number of load cell verification intervals into which 

the load cell maximum measuring range may be divided for 

which the result of measurement will not be affected by an 

error exceeding the MPE (see 3.7.10).

Amended (See also 

Germany’s comments)
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 31 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 9

3.5.10

minimum dead load 

output return(DR)

Change the expression as shown below.

3.5.10. minimum dead load output return (DR)

observed difference of load cell output, expressed in units of 

mass at the minimum dead load (Emin)of the measuring range 

(Dmin), measured before and after application of a load of 

Dmax Emax.

Reason: DR should be defined based on Emin/Emax. See also 

our comment on 3.5.

Amended as proposed 

(also see Germany's and 

CECIP's comments)

Japan 9

3.5.11

minimum load cell 

verification interval 

(vmin)

Change the expression as shown below.

Smallest load cell verification interval into which the load cell 

measuring maximum measuring range DR (Dmax –Dmin) 

(Emax-Emin)can be divided.

Reason: vmin should be defined based on Emin/Emax. See also 

our comment on 3.5.

Paragraph amended (See 

also Germany’s and 

CECIP's comments)

Japan 10

3.5.14

relative minimum 

dead load output 

return or Z

Change the expression of the definition as shown below.

3.5.14. relative minimum dead load output return or Z

Ratio of the load cell maximum measuring range, to two times 

of the minimum dead load output return, DR.

Reason: Definition should be consistent with those of 3.5.7 and 

3.5.10.

Amended

Japan 10

Figure 3 Illustration 

of certain 

definitions

Since “Figure 2” is deleted in 4CD, “Figure 3” should be 

corrected to “Figure 2” in the figure title (p. 12) as well as in 

the main text of 3.6.

Amended

Japan 10, 18

3.6 Illustration of 

certain definitions

Figure 3

“DR” is not used in this draft. Therefore, delete “DR” under the 

label “Load Cell Measuring Range” 

“DR” symbol deleted as 

proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 32 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 11 3.7.2 apportioning 

factor

The name of PLC in terminology was changed from 

“apportionment factor” to “apportioning factor”. However, only 

the former is used in the rest of this draft. Use either 

“apportionment factor” or “apportioning factor”.

Consistency was 

maintained throughout 

document by use of only 

"apportioning factor" in 

document

Japan 12 3.7.11

Measurement error

The note in 5.3 cited below should be moved to 3.7.11.

Note: The term “measurement error” in this Recommendation 

refers to load cell measurement errors.

Amended as proposed.

Note in 5.3 relocated to 

3.7.11

Japan 12

3.7.12. measured 

quantity value (and 

other places)

The term “measured quantity value” is not used in this draft, 

whereas “measured quantity” is used twice (3.5.2 and 3.7.11). 

Use the same expression in the terminology.

Entry of "measured 

quantity value" modified 

following the directive 

found in OIML B6-2:

A.2.5.1 Parentheses ( ) 

enclosing a part of a term 

indicate that that part of 

the term may be omitted, 

provided that no 

confusion can arise in the 

context in which the term 

is used.

Japan 13 3.8.5. reference 

operating condition

“Reference operating condition” is not used in this draft, 

whereas “reference condition” is used frequently. Use the same 

expression.

Entry of "reference 

operating condition" 

modified following the 

directive found in OIML 

B6-2:

A.2.5.1 Parentheses ( ) 

enclosing a part of a term 

indicate that that part of 

the term may be omitted, 

provided that no 

confusion can arise in the 

context in which the term 

is employed.

Japan 14 3.9 Abbreviations Like Clause T.9 in R76-1 (2006), this clause could include 

more abbreviations.

CH, SH, NH, and DR 

abbreviations added
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 33 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 14 3.10

Like Clause “T.8 Index of terms defined” in R76-1 (2006), 

index of all terms used in this recommendation should be added 

for convenience. 

Revision of this 

Recommendation was 

based on OIML template 

which did not include 

index of all terms

Japan 15

5.1.2

Maximum number 

of ...

Change the expression as shown below by deleting “load cell”.

The maximum number of load cell verification intervals, nLC, 

into which the load cell maximum measuring range can be 

divided in a measuring system shall be within the limits 

presented in Table 1.

Reason: The definition of nLC should be consistent with that of 

maximum measuring range (3.5.7).

Paragraph amended (see 

also Germany's and 

CECIP's comments)

Japan 16

5.1.5. Complete 

load cell 

classification

f), Figure 4,

5.1.7

Multiple 

classifications

Correct “Figure 4” to “Figure 3” both in the main text and the 

figure title because “Figure 3” should be corrected to “Figure 

2”.

Amended as proposed

Japan 19 5.5.1

Creep

In order to match the formula below, make a correction as 

shown below. There are two places to be corrected in this 

clause.

Example: (pLC declared by manufacturer = 0.75 0.7)

Amended

Japan 32 8.4 Selection of load 

cells within a family

Figure number and title are missing. Add “Figure 4 Examples 

of Load Cell Design Shapes” under the figures. Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 34 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Japan 57 8.10.7.11

Span stability

We consider both span stability test and humidity test are 

important. Even so, conducting humidity test during span 

stability test is not appropriate due to the following reasons. 

Humidity test should be conducted after completing span 

stability test. 

Tests for the high-capacity load cell are usually conducted 

using a large-capacity tester for general use. Result of span 

stability test can be affected even by a small difference in the 

force application point. Therefore, uninstalling/installing of the 

load cell from the tester can lead an ambiguity in the force 

application point and results in a significant error.

Please be noted that the present R60 (2000) reminds that 

instauration of load cells should be done carefully as cited 

below.

A.3.2.13 Span stability: the installation of the load cell in the 

force-generating system shall be done with particular care, 

since the aim of this test is not to measure the influence on the 

metrological performances of mounting/dismounting the load 

cell on/from the force-generating system.

With the reasons above, we would like to propose following 

changes in the first paragraph.

Test procedure in brief:

The test consists in observing the variations of the output of the 

load cell under reasonably constant (±2 °C °) conditions (e.g., 

in a normal laboratory environment) at various intervals 

before, during and after the load cell has been subjected to 

performance tests. The performance tests shall include (as a 

minimum) the temperature test and, if applicable, the damp 

heat test. A performance test shall include temperature test (at 

minimum). Damp heat test may be conducted after a series of 

span stability tests, if applicable.

Amended paragraph by 

changing language in 

bold-font as follows:

Test procedure in brief: 

The test consists in 

observing the variations 

of the output of the load 

cell under reasonably 

constant (±2 °C) 

conditions (e.g., in a 

normal laboratory 

environment) at various 

intervals before, during 

and after the load cell has 

been subjected to 

performance tests. and, if 

applicable, the damp 

heat test The 

performance tests shall 

include (as a minimum) 

the temperature test. 

The damp heat test may 

be performed (when 

applicable) after a 

series of span stability 

tests if the conduct of 

that test during a span 

stability test imposes a 

greater risk that the 

principles expressed 

under 8.7.3.3. would be 

compromised. This 

may be a greater 

vulnerability when 

conducting tests on 
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 35 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

higher capacity load 

cells.

Japan 59 8.11

Test sequence Correct “Figure 35” to “Figure 5” in the text. Amended

Netherlands NL-1General

We observed that the actual draft is improved a lot and is 

considered almost ready for the next stage. The main point is 

that the implications of the subdivision of load cells as 

presented in the terminology has not yet been fully 

implemented in the draft.

The amendments made in 

the 5CD are expected to 

resolve these concerns

Netherlands NL-2

PG convener 

response on

NL-61 on 3 CD

The following was reported as part of the email sent on 30 

September 2015 by the subgroup to the PG convener:

“It is expected that directly powered load cells are rare or even 

do not exist.

If there would exist (become available on the market) a directly 

powered load cell it is considered outside the scope of this 

edition of R 60”

This was expected to be the definitive conclusion of the 

subgroup that direct mains powered load cells are not in the 

scope of R 60. 

References to load cells 

supplied directly from 

mains have been deleted

Netherlands NL-3 several

The term “load cells equipped with electronics” should no 

longer be applied instead the terms of 3.1.5.2 and 3.1.5.3 

should be applied. 

See comments from 

Germany & CECIP and 

amendments made to 

definitions based on work 

of sub-group. “Load 

cells equipped with 

electronics" has been 

deleted and replaced with 

the term "digital load 

cells"
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 36 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Netherlands

NL-4

Several 

pages

PG convener 

response on

NL-58 on 3 CD

As a consequence of the previous comment (NL-3) and as 

stated in NL-58 on the 3 CD pLC = 1.0 should only be applied 

for digital load cells (3.1.5.3). For electronic load cells (3.1.5.3) 

only quipped with analogue electronics (for example to 

compensate for temperature effect) pLC should be 0.7. 

For NL this is a mayor issue which is considered not in 

contradiction with the yet applied practise based on the R 60

Refer to revised 

definitions of load cells 

(non-electronic, 

electronic, and digital) in 

3.1.3.1, 3.1.3.2, and 

3.1.3.3.

Clause amended – see 

Germany’s/CECIP’s 

comments

Netherlands NL-5

P 3

2.3

NL-10 on 3 CD

At least adapt the clause to the applicable figure 1 text: digital 

“raw values” (counts) 

Wording has been 

amended. See also 

comments from Austria,

France, CECIP, and 

Germany.

Netherlands NL-6

P 7

3.2.1.1; 3.2.1.2

NL-14 and NL-15 

on 3 CD

Although the secretariat response so indicates we have not 

detected any changes made Amended as proposed

Netherlands NL-7

P 14 3.9 Suggest to add NH, SH, CH and DR Abbreviations added as proposed

Netherlands 5.1.7 Suggest to remove “shear” and “bending” from the descriptions 

in the table. Amended as proposed

Netherlands NL-9

P 20

5.6

NL-54 on 3 CD

It is the companies or manufacturers (so called economic 

operators) that will apply for type evaluation. ‘The person 

responsible for submitting the load cell for evaluation’ is rather 

undefined and may even be interpreted the person from the 

transport company. Therefore please use the word “applicant”

Wording amended
OIML R60 Parts 1&2 37 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Netherlands NL-10

several

8.10.7.9

Australian comment 

on page 58 of 3CD

8.10.7.5 -8.10.7.10

This Australian comment is supported by NL

However, although the secretariat response on the Australian 

indicates that the note is deleted, we have not detected this 

change, moreover the note shows been added to several other 

tables. Please reverse the insertions: “If test is conducted while 

load cell is installed as a component in a weighing instrument, 

then...” while a load cell to be tested for R60 should never be 

installed in a weighing instrument during the testing. Normally 

it will be connected to an indicator which will not be exposed 

to the test and maybe some support will be needed to introduce 

a force on the load cell.

Note deleted in all tables 

under test procedures

Netherlands NL-11 several Many references to OIML D 11 (2013) definitions are not correct. Amended

SCAIME General Few comments for this draft close to the final one. Good job!

SCAIME 8 3.4.2. c)

We are not in favour of this adding that will create unnecessary 

constraints when manufacturing the load cell.

Like the type/model/manufacturer of the strain gage, and also 

the type/model/manufacturer of the glue, some adjustments are

needed and we are dependent of suppliers' sources and products 

that are subject to change due to environmental requirements

like ROHS and Reach Directives in Europe. All that can 

modify the manufacturing process. We propose to suppress this

adding.

3.4.2.c) amended to 

specify the use of 

"similar" adhesive 

SCAIME 11 Fig 3

in the text added in Fig 3 b)

Emin ≤ Dmin ≤ (0.1 Emax), and (0.9 Emax) ≤ Dmax ≤ Emax

Requirements applies for test purpose only at certification 

stage, not for the use of the load cell

{ Emin ≤ Dmin, and Dmax ≤ Emax}.

Text has been amended

SCAIME 19 5.3.2 Supress "1." and read (0.3 ≤ pLC ≤ 0.8) Amended

SCAIME 48 8.10.7.1 Read "to 8.10.7.11" instead of "8.1.7.10" Amended

SCAIME 50 table Supress the "*" that references to nothing. * Deleted
OIML R60 Part 3 1 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

OIML R60-1 Metrological Regulation of Load Cells

R60 Parts 3 1WD Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Austria

Despite the missing parts in 2.2.5 and 2.2.8 and 

the format issue, we may send our comments to 1 

WD R60-2 at the moment as follows:

Austria 36 4.10.5

Chapter 4.10.5 should be deleted, because it is 

twice (see 4.10.3) Amended as proposed

Austria 41 5.1

The term “OIML certificate number should be 

renamed to “type evaluations mark according to 

R60-1.

Amended as proposed

CECIP 2 1.1

Replace “R60 (20XX)” by “OIML R60”

Editorial change

Remark: I recommend referring to OIML R60 

without year specification. 

Amended

CECIP 7 2.2

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell” in general

Editorial change

Replaced "load cells equipped with 

electronics" with "digital load cells"

CECIP 2

1.2

2

Replace “R60-1 (20XX)” by “OIML R60-1”

Editorial change Amended
OIML R60 Part 3 2 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

CECIP 7 2.2.1.2

Supplement: 

Calculate the span in count:

span (counts) = counts at Dmax - counts at Dmin

Calculate the span in units of vmin: 

span (vmin) = span(counts) x (Dmax - Dmin) / f 

x n x vmin

Calculate the change of the span in units of vmin 

with regard to the initial span. 

The change of span must not exceed vmin. 

See also comments from Germany. Refer 

to comments and response for R60 Part 1, 

paragraph 5.7.1.1. The significant change 

being proposed would cause substantial 

changes in tests and interpretation of 

results. This type of change is more 

appropriate for consideration during early 

stages of a revision and should not be 

implemented without the support of a 

majority of PG members.

CECIP 7/8 2.2.3.2 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin, according 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 8 2.2.4.2 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin, according 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 8 2.2.5.2 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin, according 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 8 2.2.6.2 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin, according 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 8 2.2.7.2 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin, according 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 9 2.2.8.2 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin, according 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 9 2.2.9.2 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin, according 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 13 4.3.2

2nd table: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1
OIML R60 Part 3 3 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

CECIP 22 4.9.1

Row 5: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

CECIP 23 4.9.3

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

CECIP 31 4.10

Table, row 7: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

CECIP 38 4.10.8

Chapter 4.10.7 is missing. Leads to changes in 

the numbering of the following chapters

Editorial change

Amended

CECIP 38 4.10.8

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

CECIP 40 4.10.12

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

CECIP 45 6.1.1

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

CECIP 48 6.2.1

Table, row 7: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

CECIP 71 Form 6.11

Table 6.11:

Change the “span” in the second line in “span in 

units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.
OIML R60 Part 3 4 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

CECIP 71 Form 6.11

Table 6.11:

Change the “change” in the third line in “change 

of span in units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 71 Form 6.11

Table 6.11:

Delete “mpc v” in the last column

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 71 Form 6.11

Add the following remark: 

The change of span must not exceed vmin.

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2..

CECIP 72 Form 6.12

Table 6.12:

Change the “span” in the second line in “span in 

units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 72 Form 6.12

Table 6.12:

Change the “change” in the third line in “change 

of span in units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 72 Form 6.12

Table 6.12:

Delete “mpe v” in the last column

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 72 Form 6.12

Add the following remark: 

The change of span must not exceed vmin.

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 73 Form 6.12

The Table on page 73 is not named and has no 

head line (table 6.13 or table 6.12 b ?).

Editorial change 

Table has been titled 6.12 (b)
OIML R60 Part 3 5 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

CECIP 73 Form 6.12

Table ???:

Change the “span” in the second line in “span in 

units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 73 Form 6.12

Table ???:

Change the “change” in the third line in “change 

of span in units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 73 Form 6.12

Table ???:

Delete “mpe v” in the last column

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 73 Form 6.12

Add the following remark: 

The change of span must not exceed vmin.

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 73 Form 6.13 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 74 / 75 Form 6.14 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 74 / 75 Form 6.14 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 76 / 77 Form 6.15 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 78 - 80 Form 6.16 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 80 - 81 Form 6.17 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 82 - 83 Form 6.18 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

CECIP 84 - 92 Form 6.18 Miscalculation, must refer to vmin according 6.11 

new.

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.
OIML R60 Part 3 6 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Germany 2 1.1

Replace “R60 (20XX)” by “OIML R60”

Editorial change

Remark: I recommend referring to OIML R60 

without year specification. 

Amended as proposed

Germany 2 1.2 Replace “R60-1 (20XX)” by “OIML R60-1”

Editorial change Amended as proposed

Germany 2 2

1st paragraph: Replace “R60-1 20XX” by 

“OIML R60-1”

Editorial change

Amended as proposed

Germany 2 2

2nd paragraph: Replace “R60 parts 1 20XX” by 

“OIML R60-1”

Editorial change

Amended as proposed

Germany 7 2.2

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

Replaced "load cells equipped with 

electronics" with "digital load cells"

Germany 7 2.2.1.2

Supplement: 

Calculate the span in count:

span (counts) = counts at Dmax - counts at Dmin

Calculate the span in units of vmin: 

span (vmin) = span(counts) x (Dmax - Dmin) / f 

x n x vmin

Calculate the change of the span in units of vmin 

with regard to the initial span. 

The change of span must not exceed vmin. 

See also comments from CECIP. Refer to 

comments and response for R60 Part 1, 

paragraph 5.7.1.1. The significant change 

being proposed would cause substantial 

changes in tests and interpretation of 

results. This type of change is more 

appropriate for consideration during early 

stages of a revision and should not be 

implemented without the support of a 

majority of PG members.

Germany 7/8 2.2.3.2 Erroneous calculation; refers to v instead to vmin; 

calculation should be done in analogy to 2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.
OIML R60 Part 3 7 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Germany 8 2.2.4.2 Erroneous calculation; refers to v instead to vmin; 

calculation should be done in analogy to 2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 8 2.2.5.2 Missing calculations; they shall refer to vmin, see 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 8 2.2.6.2 Erroneous calculation; refers to v instead to vmin; 

calculation should be done in analogy to 2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 8 2.2.7.2 Erroneous calculation; refers to v instead to vmin; 

calculation should be done in analogy to 2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 9 2.2.8.2 Missing calculations; they shall refer to vmin, see 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 9 2.2.9.2 Missing calculations; they shall refer to vmin, see 

2.2.1.2

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 13 4.3.2

2nd table: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

Germany 22 4.9.1

Row 5: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

Germany 23 4.9.3

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

Germany 31 4.10

Table, row 7: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

Germany 38 4.10.8

Chapter 4.10.7 is missing. Leads to changes in 

the numbering of the following chapters

Editorial change

Amended

Germany 38 4.10.8

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1
OIML R60 Part 3 8 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Germany 40 4.10.12

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

Germany 45 6.1.1

Head line: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

Germany 48 6.2.1

Table, row 7: Change “load cells equipped with 

electronics” by “digital load cell”

Editorial change

"load cells equipped with electronics" has 

been replaced with "digital load cells" for 

consistency with R60-1

Germany 71 Form 6.11

Table 6.11:

Change the “span” in the first line in “span in 

counts”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 71 Form 6.11

Table 6.11:

Change the “span” in the second line in “span in 

units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2..

Germany 71 Form 6.11

Table 6.11:

Change the “change” in the third line in “change 

of span in units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 71 Form 6.11

Table 6.11:

Delete “mpe v” in the last column

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 71 Form 6.11

Add the following remark: 

The change of span must not exceed vmin.

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.
OIML R60 Part 3 9 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Germany 72 Form 6.12

Table 6.12:

Change the “span” in the first line in “span in 

counts”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 72 Form 6.12

Table 6.12:

Change the “span” in the second line in “span in 

units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 72 Form 6.12

Table 6.12:

Change the “change” in the third line in “change 

of span in units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 72 Form 6.12

Table 6.12:

Delete “mpe v” in the last column

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 72 Form 6.12

Add the following remark: 

The change of span must not exceed vmin.

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 73 Form 6.12

The Table on page 73 is not named and has no 

head line (table 6.13 or table 6.12 b ?).

Editorial change 

Table has been titled 6.12 (b)

Germany 73 Form 6.12

Table ???:

Change the “span” in the first line in “span in 

counts”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 73 Form 6.12

Table ???:

Change the “span” in the second line in “span in 

units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.
OIML R60 Part 3 10 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Germany 73 Form 6.12

Table ???:

Change the “change” in the third line in “change 

of span in units of vmin”

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 73 Form 6.12

Table ???:

Delete “mpe v” in the last column

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 73 Form 6.12

Add the following remark: 

The change of span must not exceed vmin.

Substantial correction

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 73 Form 6.13 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 74 / 75 Form 6.14 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 74 / 75 Form 6.14 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 76 / 77 Form 6.15 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 78 - 80 Form 6.16 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 80 - 81 Form 6.17 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 82 - 83 Form 6.18 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Germany 84 - 92 Form 6.18 Erroneous calculations and designations (vmin

instead of v); should be done as on in Form 6.11

Existing language retained. See response 

to comment on clause 2.2.1.2.

Japan (not 

specified)

(not 

specified)

In the present R60 (2000), there are many 

recording examples in Annex E. We propose to 

add such examples also in this draft.

These examples appear in R60-1, Annex 

B
OIML R60 Part 3 11 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Japan

2 

Applicability 

of this 

Report 

Format

We consider that the contents of Clause 2 may 

not appropriate for Part 3 (test report format). 

Such contents are usually placed under Part 1 or 

2 in many OIML Recommendations. We cite the 

present titles under Clause 2 for your reference.

2. Applicability of this Report Format

2.1. Calculation procedures

2.2. Additional tests for load cells equipped with 

electronics

2.3. General notes

2.4. Formula signs and list of symbols

Considering that the conclusions of the 

calculations of test results will be

recorded in the report formats provided in 

Part 3, this portion of OIML R60 seems 

an appropriate location for these clauses

Japan 6 2.1.5.8.

Delete “Emin” as it is unnecessary. Correct the 

equation as shown below.

DR = (Emax - Emin × CDR) / nmax

Amended as proposed

Japan 10

2.4 and 

throughout 

the 

document

In Part 1and 2, “nmax” was changed to “nLC”. 

Therefore, “nmax” should be replaced with “nLC” 

in Part 3. 

Amended as proposed

Japan After 56

After 6.8 

Creep (Cc) 

and DR 

(CDR)

It is not clear where to record data of Dmin and 

Dmax in some datasheets. Add a comment to 

clarify where to record the data.

Reports and data tables seem to have 

locations for these values when it is 

necessary to record them. Please identify 

those missing locations

Japan 50 Table 6.3

There are several “0”s in the column of “Test 

load (units)”. The lowest “0” is written in the 

wrong row. It should be written in a-row-above 

(the same row in which asterisk is written).

Amended as proposed
OIML R60 Part 3 12 October 2016

Comments and Secretariat’s Responses

Member 

State

Page 

number

Document 

clause Comment Secretariat’s Response

Japan 50 and 52

Table 6.3 

and Table 

6.4

Preload is required only once. Therefore, cells 

which are not necessary for recording in the 

datasheet should be shadowed with a grey 

background like Table D.1 in the present R60 

(2000).

Amended as proposed

Japan

10, 53, 

54, 57, 

69 and 72

For the expression of “MPE”, both upper and 

lower cases are used. Correct “mpe” to “MPE” 

(p.10, 53, 54, 57, 69 and 72) for consistency. 

Amended as proposed