There is requirement in 7.6 of the TS standard that says "Measuring equipment shall be calibrated to measurement standards traceable to national/ international standards where no standards exist the basis used for calibration shall be recorded "

Can someone give me some examples of cases where there are no standards (masters) that are traceable to national or international standards

There is requirement in 7.6 of the TS standard that says "Measuring equipment shall be calibrated to measurement standards traceable to national/ international standards where no standards exist the basis used for calibration shall be recorded "

Can someone give me some examples of cases where there are no standards (masters) that are traceable to national or international standards
The exception addresses such things as temperature, speed, and pressure meters and controllers on machinery such as injection molding presses, and similar types of dedicated devices.

A good example is the Brinnell and Rockwell hardness.....

Until recently they were only a consensus standard.....since you are in India, contact NABL (accrediting body for India).....they may be able to give you more help for your situation.

Hope this helps.

Hershal

When working for a vibration monitoring company, we used the earth's gravitational field to calibrate accelerometers. Since the gravitational constant is not in dispute, all we had to do was document the method used to achieve a measurement of the accelerometer dropping in that field.

Additional examples from when I was mechanical lab supervisor in a stainless steel mill - we were accredited by A2LA to ISO Guide 25 and our scope included tests for which there were no national or consensus standards. Among the tests without national standards were a "ridging test" a test developed internally within the company that dealt with formability of stainless sheet - it was a visual comparison test and our visual comparison standards were developed and controlled internally. Results also were reported externally to some customers. We also tested samples to determine a "modul-r" value that was reported to external customers (Modul-r was accepted by many customers in place of a strech-r value, which has an ASTM test method. Modul-r was actually more repeatable, quicker, and non-destuctive of test specimens than running a stretch-r, which involves preparing and pulling 3 tensile specimens ( 1 paralell to, 1 perpendicular to and 1 at 45 degrees to the rolling direction for flat sheet) and then making calculations to determine stretch-r) Again a formability test that was I believe originally developed by USX, By the time I took the lab over Tinius-Olsen had purchased the rights to manufacture the testers and associated punches, and ended up developing and certifying a set of standards, but as there were no national test methods based on this test method there were no national standards.

I also believe some standards for spectrometers, etc. have been developed by consensus testing between labs.