The Elsmar Cove Forum and Site Map The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page

Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > ISO (International Organization for Standardization) Standards > ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories


The Elsmar Cove Forum SideBar!
Monitor the Forum
Monitor New Forum Posts
New Threads Feeds
RSS FeedRSS Feed
Sponsor Link










$ Contributor Forum Access
Courtesy Quick Links

Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:


Howard's International Quality Services

Atul's Symphony Technologies

Dave Scott's Scott Quality Solutions

Praxiom Research Group


NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest Portal

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology

ASQ - American Society for Quality


All the Important Standards and Related Web Sites in the World
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11th February 1999, 08:23 PM
Mark W
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Default Calibration and Heirarchy of Standards

I work at a small automotive manufacturing company (approximately 100 employees at my division) and have been working in the quality department for a couple of years now. Our calibration program is pretty weak and we are attempting to rebuild and strengthen the system.
While working on this project I am strugling with the concept of "calibrating against certified equipment having a known valid relationship to nationally recognized standards". I am not sure if a gage has to be calibrated directly to our highest in-house standard, or if calibrating a gage to this standard and then using this gage to calibrate another measuring instrument is acceptable or not.
A typical example is as follows. I was informed by someone that our gage pin set(pins in increments of .001") has to be sent out to an outside lab for calibration and thereby recieve a certification that is traceable to NIST. The only gaging that we currently do this for is our highest in-house standard, a set of gage blocks. These blocks are used to maintain traceability to NIST with our in-house calibrations. The pin set is a shop floor working set that is used for a variety of tasks, i.e. measuring a depth over a radius broached feature with OD Mics., go/no-go diameters of holes and slots, etc. My question is this. Is it acceptable practice to calibrate a set of .0001" OD mics. against our highest level gage block set, and then calibrate the pin set with the micrometers? I understand that the measuring accuracy of what I am using the pins for will probably impact the justification for this so what if instead I carried out the same procedure but instead of using an OD micrometer, I used a laser micrometer with an accuracy of +/- .00002"?
I am trying to justify what are acceptable calibration methods to industry standards at a level that will ensure our gages will adequately provide quality product at the most economical cost. Please help.
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 12th February 1999, 10:02 AM
Kevin Mader's Avatar
Kevin Mader Kevin Mader is offline
One of THE Original Covers!

Registration Date: Nov 1998
Location: Wallingford, CT USA
Age: 43
 
Posts: 1,158
Thanks Given to Others: 22
Thanked 63 Times in 43 Posts
Karma Power: 94
Karma: 1335
Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.Kevin Mader is appreciated, and has over 1300 Karma points.
Send a message via AIM to Kevin Mader
Default

Mark,

I have used a similar approach with our inhouse calibration activities with success. The registrar who reviewed this area was concerned that the general calibration record keeping was current, complete, was done by a trained associate, and demonstrated the "10 factor". The Registrar was also looking to see what percentage of calibration we did inhouse vs. sending out. He mentioned that he was happy to see that only the gaging we did not have the inhouse expertise to handle was sourced out. Remember: compliance and "effectiveness".

Using a micrometer to calibrate a pin gage, under most circumstances, is sufficient. Using a super mic or a laser mic is better, but not necessarily necessary (use the 10 Factor, 10x as sensitive). Use what gives you the most security. Just be sure that you are aware of the class of the Master gage blocks (probably the highest class) and the pin/plug sets and if the pin/plug sets are plus or minus pins.

I have read that many companies tend to send out all their gages for calibration to either avoid having to understand the qualifying/calibration activities or because they don't want to do it. This is neither cost effective or necessary. Your attempt to contain cost is, in my opinion, correct. A good, quick read you may want to consider is "Managing the Metrology System" by C. Robert Pennella. It will give you a pretty good overview of the Metrology process.

Back to the group...

[This message has been edited by Kevin Mader (edited 02-12-99).]
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 19th February 1999, 06:43 PM
Marc's Avatar
Marc Marc is online now
Your Elsmar Cove Host

Registration Date: Jan 1996
Location: West Chester, Ohio - USA
Age: 59
 
Posts: 15,857
Thanks Given to Others: 1,895
Thanked 1,566 Times in 1,018 Posts
Blog Entries: 4
Karma Power: 605
Karma: 11559
Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.
Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Marc is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.
Send a message via AIM to Marc Send a message via Skype™ to Marc
Default

All I can do is echo the 10X factor and that even though you send them out, someone still has to understand measurement systems (per MSA). Being automotive you have to do more than for ISO.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 29th March 1999, 10:03 PM
Mark W
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks for the input. I'll be sure to pick up a copy of that book you suggested.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 30th March 1999, 01:02 AM
Batman
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Default

I too echo Kevin and Mark, and add a couple of items to consider.
If the pin calibration by your own equipment serves, and can help reduce costs, go for it. I have seen this work well, and I have seen it deteriorate. Pins for example will wear at the edges, depending upon the product being measured, and unless you can detect this with your calibration equipment you could pass bad parts. Using a super mic or Laser, care must be taken to be able to detect this wear.

Also, since the Laser is a two-point contact method, any odd-numbered lobing on the pins may not be detected.

If you are using these pins to measure and approve features that are "critical," the calibration procedure and records should stand up to scrutiny.

I recommend good calibration procedures, good records, and a controlled environment for that calibration.

Just a couple of things to consider.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > ISO (International Organization for Standardization) Standards > ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories

Bookmarks


Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
AHP (Analytic Heirarchy Process) and Pairwise comparison a_masry Book, Video, Blog and Web Site Reviews and Recommendations 1 22nd November 2005 09:06 PM
Pairwise comparison and AHP (Analytic Heirarchy Process) - Need simple examples a_masry Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1 22nd November 2005 08:11 PM
Looking for Calibration / Reference Standards tracable to NIST Bob Gallinger ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 15 22nd November 2005 10:02 AM
Where no standards exist the basis used for calibration shall be recorded Andrews ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 4 24th August 2005 12:39 PM
Standards for determining calibration frequencies for gages MK ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 6 17th October 2001 04:27 PM



The time now is 03:30 AM. All times are GMT -4.
The time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.



   

All Y'All Come Back Now, Y' Hear?

Made With A Mac! FreeBSD OS Powered by Apache!
Using php4 Forums provided and maintained by Marc Smith Database by MySQL

FAIR USE and CORRECTNESS NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe herein constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. In addition, I do not guarantee the correctness of the content. The risk of using content from the Elsmar Cove web site and forums remains with the user/visitor.

Responsibility Statement: Each person is responsible for anything they post in the Elsmar Cove forum. Neither I, Marc Timothy Smith, nor any of the forum Moderators, are responsible for the content of posts people make. Liability for post content resides with the poster as does interpretation and/or acceptance and/or use of advice by the reader.

Complaints: If you have a complaint with a post in a forum discussion thread, including Content in general, fighting, flaming, copyright infringement, defamation and/or 'slander', please use the 'Report This Post Report This Post Button button which appears at the top of every post in every thread.

Site courtesy of:
Marc Timothy Smith - Cayman Business Systems, 8466 Lesourdsville-West Chester Road, West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929 - USA
(513) 341-6272

To contact me, click the Google Voice link below, enter Your Name and Your Phone Number and Google will ring your phone and connect you for free!

The Elsmar Cove Web Site is *CopyFree*
no new posts