Hi Everyone,
Just wanted to get some of your thoughts on this. I have thread plug gauges that have come due for calibration. The wax seal from the last calibration is still intact. Is it acceptable to re-date them or do they need to be re-calibrated. I appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks
Matt:bigwave:

Hi Reflex,

I am assuming you have calibration certificates with the gauges i.e. from an accredited external test house. If this is the case and you are audited e.g for ISO 13485 etc, I think the auditor (from my experience) would want to see up to date certificates. This would have the obvious implication.

Hi Steve,
I do have the certs from the previous calibrations, but you bring up a good point about them being updated.
Thanks

Hi Everyone,
Just wanted to get some of your thoughts on this. I have thread plug gauges that have come due for calibration. The wax seal from the last calibration is still intact. Is it acceptable to re-date them or do they need to be re-calibrated. I appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks
Matt:bigwave:

Matt,
Generally what we have been doing in this instance is sending the gauge out for calibration and changing the frequency from 1 year to 2 years. If after two years the wax seal has not been removed, we will discard the gauge and remove it from our database.
Our business has changed quite a bit and it does not make sense to hold on to some of the gauges, we have found this method to work the best for us.

Phil

Hi Everyone,
Just wanted to get some of your thoughts on this. I have thread plug gauges that have come due for calibration. The wax seal from the last calibration is still intact. Is it acceptable to re-date them or do they need to be re-calibrated. I appreciate your thoughts.


We need some additional info - what are these gages used for? How is the calibration date determined an who does it? You may want to have you procedure indicate "12 months from time of initial use", or something like that. It puts the onus on you to indicate when that gage is checked out to start the clock running.

Does the calibration certificate from an outside lab have a "Calibration due" on it? If so, why? How do they know the wear characteristics of your usage? I think if you only used these gages for layouts three or four times a year, the calibration period could be two years or longer. (You may find another thread discussing this issue already.)

If they are not on a current control plan, or are spares for active gages that you are willing to take the time to send out (not needed immediately if other gages are found out of calibration), you may wish to mark them as "out of service - recalibrate before use" Why spend the money to have them sit? If they are out of service, you auditor should have no problem with that. :cool:

Matt,
If after two years the wax seal has not been removed, we will discard the gauge and remove it from our database.
Our business has changed quite a bit and it does not make sense to hold on to some of the gauges, we have found this method to work the best for us.


IMHO: Boy, I hate to throw out thread gages - especially if they have little usage on them. But, that may just be from my experiences working with very limited budgets.

I know - quote gages in with the part pricing. But these days, you may teak a better quote if you already had the gages handy. Especially thread gages and their masters. :cool:

I would suggest that you must have a section in your calibration program for "not in use". Place the new and unused gauges in this section and that way they are not calibrated on a regular cycle basis.

Prior to releasing the gauge for use, it should be calibrated (really confirming the calibration) and then the calibration cycle begins. In your case, you should have a certificate of compliance but then, probably on a yearly basis from its time of activity, it should have its calibration confirmed.

It just doesn't make any sense that one would confirm, on a cycle basis, the calibration on a gauge that has not been used.

What Dave said. :agree1:

Only part of calibration requirements are externally defined. Most are internally defined. That is, we decide what our requirements are based on our needs and our customers' needs. If you can include an option for as-needed calibration or suspending when the item is still sealed from the last calibration, then I support the idea.

Many times we make things harder than they need to be.

Now, I am not a 17025 expert, and if this was just an ISO 9001, or a TS requirement, I would be confident in my answer, but with 17025, I might be going out on a limb. But here goes....

In 17025, subsection 5.5.2, it reads: "It shall be checked and/or calibrated
before use."

How do you know you can trust the gage? Because it was sealed at the last calibration. It is not the calibration record that allows you to trust the gage, it is the seal. I would think that you could ammend your rules to allow for sealed gages.

Here is what I would do. Change the calibration rules to it must be calibrated within on year of having the seal broken. It might be a bit harder to track, but I don't think it would happen that often to be burdensome.

Now, this is just thinking off the cuff, and I might be way off. If so, I am sure others will jump on my response, like a duck on a Junebug!

Hi Everyone,
Just wanted to get some of your thoughts on this. I have thread plug gauges that have come due for calibration. The wax seal from the last calibration is still intact. Is it acceptable to re-date them or do they need to be re-calibrated. I appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks
Matt:bigwave:

I am using a large number of 'Thread plug gages' of different sizes, out of which a few odd sizes are not readily available in the market, and the lead time on order varies anywhere between 2 to 4 months! So I am forced to keep enough stock of such gages, and some of them remain unused (seal intact) for a few months. Our cycle for calibration is 3 months, and the D-Day of actual use, in some cases, may lie beyond the cycle time. There fore I have kept the cycle date starting from the date of first issue, irrespective of the date of purchase.

The auditor wanted to raise NC on this, which was countered because we were able to prove the actual date of purchase of the gage, and the actual date of first issue from our records.

So moral of the story is, you can keep a new gauge out of the calibration cycle, with the rider, that you can show records of actual date of purchase and actual date of issue.

:caution: A word of caution. This will not hold true for all instruments. TPGs' and many other instruments' efficiency remains unaffected by environmental temprature/moisture etcetra. But, there are plenty of instruments which get affected by environment, and in those cases, even a brand new instrument has to be subjected to calibration, since we are unaware of the time lapse between the manufacturing date and the date of purchase.(Exceded shelf life at the dealer can do the damage)

Hope this helps

Umang :D

Well,
I can't thank you all enough for the responses I have so far. On a different note, I now remember why I joined this site. The support and advice are excellent. :applause::applause::applause::thanks:

We are going to begin using the sealing wax in-house next month for thread gauges. The gauges will be sealed and returned to service locations and will then be checked for seal damage when the next interval comes around. If the seal is damaged the calibration will be done on the gauge. If the seal integrity remains we will extend the calibration based on last calibration in our system and return the gauge to service. If the gauge comes up for calibration in two cycles and the seal still remains intact we will remove the gauge from service. We currently have 3,4,6 and 12 month intervals on these gauges due to use and wear based on locations.

Our ISO auditor only scratches the surface during an audit when doing the calibration section. With the case stated above set for implementation next month, is it necessary to revise our calibration interval section in our ISO 9001.