Measurement Uncertainty frustration - Had to change MU 3 times because of assessors!

[nomisd]

Originally Posted by JerryStem

BTW, any reason these replies didn't show up when I click on the "view replies since last visit"?

This is also a problem that I have had in the last few days......

[Hershal]

Originally Posted by JerryStem

Thanx for the suggestions thus far. I think it will be easy. Easier than the measurement uncertainty that changes EVERY time we get an assessment, even by the SAME auditor 3 different times!

I thought no one loved me.........

Jerry

This will sound harsh.....welcome to MU. Believe it or not, it's not easier from the assessor side.

Hershal

[JerryStem]

Easier than the measurement uncertainty that changes EVERY time we get an assessment, even by the SAME auditor 3 different times!

Originally Posted by Hershal

This will sound harsh.....welcome to MU. Believe it or not, it's not easier from the assessor side.

Hershal

I think ridiculous is a better term. So when he shows up on the 3rd visit, sees what I've been doing since his LAST (2nd) visit and says "No, that's not right either. I think you should do it THIS way", I should just redo everything?

Remember, on the 2nd visit, he said "Well, what I told you the FIRST time isn't right, so do it THIS way". Now he's changed it AGAIN.

Why should I do anything, when next time he'll have "learned something new" and I'll have to change it again??

I may not understand MU completely but I have an idea of what it tries to describe. All the mathematical formulae, "rectangular distributions", etc... get my head spinning though. I thought I had it the first three times we were assessed...

After 3 changes by the same assessor, and still unresolved, I've kind of lost respect for both the assessor and A2LA, and even the concept altogether. This last assessment when he started changing his previous method I just put my head in my hands and went "Ok..." (In Naval Nuclear Power School we had an imaginary button called the "I believe" button. Worked for anti-matter theory and other concepts like this.)

Jerry
PS- Sorry, this probably should be on its own thread by now!

[Hershal]

Jerry,

I hope this is a more appropriate title for your efforts with MU (measurement uncertainty).

Remember, MU is only one thing: It is the mathematical description of errors (systemic and random) associated with any measurement. That's all it is.

Another point: All the existing MU models (save one) come from the Metrology world, so if you are a test lab, there is a REALLY good chance that the MU model does not fit what you do. The one exception I am aware of is a model developed for what I call extreme testing (fire, wood, ultra-large structure), and soon to be handed off for validation.

Given that, it is no surprise to be exceptionally frustrated (I'm being PC here, the true term is likely different).

For those reading who have never dealt with MU, one of the bad indicators is that the "experts" don't even agree.......so expecting total consistency is a bit of a challenge.

Any accreditation assessor for a lab should try to be practical. With MU that is not always possible, but the attempt should be made.

Feel free to vent regarding MU. I'll join you.

Hershal

[JerryStem]

Originally Posted by Hershal

Feel free to vent regarding MU. I'll join you.

My only complaint (ok, maybe I have more) is the fact that the same assessor changes his plans every time & I have to do the tap dance to figure out what HE wants. Doesn't exactly make me feel like he knows what he's doing, but we have to appease him to keep our little A2LA logo.......

Especially when our Mom&Pop customers have never even heard of MU.....

Jerry
PS- Any way to shift this to a MU-disgust thread for others to join in?

[Hershal]

I second the motion....

Hershal

[Hershal]

Hopefully done now....

[Marc]

This looks like this was split off of a different thread. Let me know if you need it moved, merged with the original thread and that thread moved or whatever.