Calibration labels - Does all measuring equipment require a label to indicate status?

[DJN]

I am having a bit of an argument with a new Automotive Quality Engineer. It concerns the use of calibration labels. He has done an internal audit ahead of a customer visit and has found several items of measuring equipment either without calibration labels or labels that cannot be read(oily and dirty hands the culprit). I have replaced the labels. The question is, do all items of measuring equipment need labels to indicate their status? I can find no reference in TS16949 clause 7.6, which I presume is the correct clause, to labels. Incidentally, we do not have TS16949 accreditaion yet, but are working toward it. We do state in our quality management procedures based on ISO 9001 that labels may be omitted as long as the measuring equipment is uniquely identified.


Many thanks

 

[gpainter]

Labels are the easiest to way but you can number the instrument and train everyone how and where to look to determine if the instrument is good to use to determine if a product/component is conforming or not.

 

[s-bell]

I am having a bit of an argument with a new Automotive Quality Engineer. It concerns the use of calibration labels. He has done an internal audit ahead of a customer visit and has found several items of measuring equipment either without calibration labels or labels that cannot be read(oily and dirty hands the culprit).

TS16949 audit question (7.6q3a) states:

"How are measuring tools identified to enable the calibration status to be determined?"

In my opinion you are both correct in your approach to this issue, just looking through different eyes. The new engineer perhaps cannot tell imediately (customer focus) on the shop floor what the calibration status is, whilst you have a database showing the status of each piece of equipment (internal understanding).

Given that you have mentioned that

without calibration labels or labels that cannot be read(oily and dirty hands the culprit).

I would concentrate on the gauge reference approach for this audit as it would appear to comply with your current QMS. So long as you can relate a gauge reference back to a calibration status you comply with audit requirements. Labelling could be offered in the future to show the equipment user if the equipment is OK to use or not. It all depends on how much you wish to involve the operator.

 

[s-bell]

Labels are the easiest to way but you can number the instrument and train everyone how and where to look to determine if the instrument is good to use to determine if a product/component is conforming or not.

I agree with this train the operators on where to find calibration status.

 

[DJN]

Thanks for the replies folks. I guess it is fifteen all! The approach we have adopted is to have each gauge number engraved on the gauge itself and have an Access DB as the record source. The calibration status is the responsibility of the QA department, so the operator has no involvement in that side of things. I have considered using stability studies on each gauge. The operator would plot the results on a control chart at the begining of each shift. Obviously, any out of control points would immediately flag up action. Do you think that this is a reasonable way to go?

 

[s-bell]

Seems reasonable enough but may be overkill, you don't want to over do things and end up falling over in an audit for something that is for your own information.

If you are concerned about certain gauges wearing due to use, just increase the frequency of calibration. If you experience no problems then revert back to the original calibration period.

If you use this approach I don't think you'll have many problems.

Best of luck with the audit.

 

[Dawn]

Just my 2 cents - if you have gages that wear - do stability tests on them or put them into your gage r&r schedule - tis will give you a good heads up to prevent using the gage when it is worn out. Especially plug gages.

 

[qualitytrec]

My opinion fwiw is that calibration be tied to the type and serial number (most gages have one).
Also, to avoid calibrating more than necessary, we verify the gage before use where we can.

Mark

 

[CarolX]

The calibration status is the responsibility of the QA department, so the operator has no involvement in that side of things.

Just one question...how does the operator know if he/she is using a controlled gage that is within it's calibration frequency?