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 22nd May 1999, 08:01 PM
Mark W
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Default Accuracy Criteria

I was wondering if anyone knew of any published material related to acceptable accuracy criteria, or methods of determining, for measuring equipment. I have found information on R&R studies (0-10 acceptable, 10-20 marginal, etc.), but is there any way to determine acceptance criteria through statistical methods by somehow relating results to product tolerance, criticality, process spread, etc.? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 22nd May 1999, 11:07 PM
stefanson
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Default

I recommend you check out the subject of measurement uncertainty; start at: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Uncertainty/index.html

Send me an email if you have further questions.

NOTE: This message was edited to HotLink the url.

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 22 May 1999).]
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 23rd May 1999, 12:26 AM
Marc's Avatar
Marc Marc is online now
Your Elsmar Cove Host

Registration Date: Jan 1996
Location: West Chester, Ohio - USA
Age: 59
 
Posts: 15,859
Thanks Given to Others: 1,895
Thanked 1,569 Times in 1,020 Posts
Blog Entries: 4
Karma Power: 605
Karma: 11574
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

Thanks for the link!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 25th May 1999, 07:17 PM
JohnH
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Default

My company is a wholesale electrical distributor and we just went through our preassessment. Things went well until we came across the subject of calibration. We have a counter that measures wire we sell. As long as this counter doesn't short the customer its accuracy doesn't have to be that precise. The assessor mentioned that we have to be able measure a standard with a device whose accuracy can be traced back to a national standard. This seems like quite a bit of over kill for us. As long as we are only over/under a foot per thousand that is acceptable to our customer. Is there any way around this?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 26th May 1999, 05:43 PM
Don Winton's Avatar
Don Winton Don Winton is offline
dWizard

Registration Date: Nov 1998
Location: Tullahoma, TN
Age: 53
 
Posts: 475
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 9 Posts
Karma Power: 63
Karma: 488
Don Winton is appreciated, and has over 400 Karma points.Don Winton is appreciated, and has over 400 Karma points.Don Winton is appreciated, and has over 400 Karma points.Don Winton is appreciated, and has over 400 Karma points.Don Winton is appreciated, and has over 400 Karma points.
Default

Quote:
The assessor mentioned that we have to be able measure a standard with a device whose accuracy can be traced back to a national standard.
The assessor is not precisely correct. Reference paragraph 4.11.2(b), which states, in part "Where no such standards exist, the basis used for calibration shall be documented."

Quote:
As long as we are only over/under a foot per thousand that is acceptable to our customer.
That may be true, but you must have objective evidence that the measurement device meets this criteria, assuming the criteria is a documented one.

Now, the details. What does the manufacturer's manual state in terms of accuracy? Is there a statement in the manual that reads 'this counter is accurate for x number of uses or years' or something to that effect?

Check with the manufacturer. They may be able to help further. For example, the manual for one measurement device I use reads '…guarantees gage accuracy as long as the dial needle remains within the zero indicator when not in use.' A statement of this type should be acceptable objective evidence. In this case, the basis used for calibration is documented by the manufacturer's statement.

Regards,
Don

------------------
Just the ramblings of an Old Wizard Warrior.

Check Out dWizard's Lair:
www.ficom.net/members/donwinton/home.html


Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 27th May 1999, 06:45 PM
JohnH
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks for the Help.
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
What is maximum limit for MU (Measurement Uncertainty) or acceptable criteria? mmurat Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 5 11th April 2008 02:50 AM
Torque Calibration Accuracy Criteria Douglas E. Purdy ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 7 10th August 2007 04:45 PM
Portable CMM Accuracy Definition - Stating CMM accuracy as a volumetric accuracy Phil Fields ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 5 29th April 2006 10:12 AM
Accuracy on calibration certificates - How to calculate the accuracy of UUT calib_eng ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 3 23rd February 2006 11:39 AM
Calibration Discrimination - Acceptance criteria is not having the accuracy required? Andrews ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 2 29th March 2004 04:04 PM



The time now is 01:03 PM. 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