Calibration Stickers on instruments are NOT required!

I

isorin

#21
Marc, I quote :''Severely handicapped would not be placed in a position where that would be a problem (remember, they have to be 'qualified' to do a job).''
Even if they are in Special Work Center for H. Ppl?
OK I appologise for misunderstood :
1st I do not agree with stickers.
2nd My intention was only to show that sometime you are (like it or not) in position to deal with exceptions(and not pushing shit)
3rd I do agree with the fact that ppl are only lazy not stupid.

Final : The fact is that in the real world most ppl are lazy.

And BTW - on a personal note - I come to this board (not so often, I agree) because I can follow real discussions between ppl that have a certain degree of know-how and culture - not to find someone that I respect telling me that I pull shit.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
J

Jim Biz

#22
Whooa - (how do I say this without offending anyone?)

What was it that Barb posted about another discussion awhile back "ok guys tell us what you really think? ;) ;)

I have 2cents that I hope makes sense -- there are times that (joke-joke)
EVERYONE IS INTITLED TO THEIR OWN REDICULESS OPINION.. Part of the reason I visit is that here is a place where we can do just that express & exchange ideas even if they are our own opinions.

Dosent mean we always need to agree & dosen't mean we need to get overtly sensitive because we disagree? Clear to me that this one has more than one right answer depending on your paradigm (sp?) of how it works for you...

Regards
Jim
 
I

isorin

#23
To JimBiz :This is not about to agree or disagree, about the right to free speech, etc.

Each one have the right to express his own opinion but I think that the terms can be polite.

I mean would do like to tell you now that you are a stupid s**t who don't know how to spell ''ridiculous''(see REDICULESS )? - you see this is not polite.

Polite is to sit back and shut up my mouth because we are not all born in England or US and making mistakes is natural.

Enough for me and I wish you all a very nice day and a good weekend !
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#24
Having a sister who has been 'disabled' all her life I really took offense at what I considered a silly and offensive example. Now, you can reply in any way you wish. If I was a prick I'd just erase messages that personally offend me and be done with it. I do respect your opinion. Using the word **** is not a big deal to me. In these forums everyone has the access to post what they want. And as you know typing words does not carry across the 'feeling' which is why 'smiles' and such are often used.

I said you 'pulled **** out of the air' (I did not cally anyone a 'stupid ****' or any such like, by the way) because you cited a very, very unusual 'case', to say the least, and implied people are stupid. Let's face it - you were streching it to use the case you cited. But I didn't erase your message - rather I replied to it.

You implied (as I interpreted it) mentally handicapped people are too stupid to be trained. My comment may have been offensive to you because I used the word **** (someone in another thread recently said I mauled someone in a response) in a response to you. However your implication that handicapped people are stupid was by far and away more offensive than anything I could have said - in my opinion.

Often in internet forums responses in threads do get quite heated. These forums here are, I believe, relatively mild and there are not that many 'heavy' responses. But there are some passionate responses and there will be more in the future. It's the nature of the medium and of people. If this is a problem for anyone I suggest you not participate. About the only adjective/noun I do object to is spelling out the F word.

Yes - on these forums there will be passionate disagreements in the future and there will be misunderstandings as well. Anyone who is personally offended may want to stick to other quality related forums such as the ASQC's forums.

As a last 'heavy' comment, which none of you may like, this is NOT an issue of 'free speech' here. I have invited all of you 'into my livingroom' as friends and guests. I fund this out of my pocket and maintain it with my own time. It is not a public utility or organization. No - I do not censor and I have erased very few messages. I do not subject you to advertisements. I go out of my way to snag posts I think are interesting and/or controversial as 'feed' - just as this thread was started with - to put forth some ideas for us all to chew on. Many times I post things I do not even agree with just to provide an alturnative view. These forums are my attempt at an open, free (as in no fees), and unbiased information resource. MY gain is as I read every message/post (which I actually do) I typically learn something new or another way of looking at things.

I cannot thank enough folks like Kevin, barb, David, Laura, AJPaton, Tom, Ken, Jim Biz, John, Roger, Jerry Eldred, Andy --- heck - there are lots and lots of people I could mention - provide very valuable insight and understanding into issues. Everyone continues to educate me. And they (and sometimes I) help out people every day who are having problems. Even Allan had some good input from time to time between advertisements.

If you can tolerate some 'passionate' posts, you can learn a lot here. If a few words like **** disturb you, or if your ego is easily bruised, this may not be the place for you.

Now - let's get back to the subject at hand.
 
J

Jim Biz

#25
Subject at hand:

I am aware of 1 or 2 companies in out area that have actually implemented the elements of the 1994 standards... with no real intention of being registered - they knew they needed a quality system and have put the elements to work for them ... it will be interesting to see what if anything they change internally due to the newest versions..

Regards
Jim
 
O

Oscar

#26
I think the issue of tagging instruments that are not calibrated may be a carry over from the requirements of the old calibration stadanrd (45662). Para. 5.10 stated "Items not calibrated to their full capability or which have other limitations of use, shall be labeled or otherwise identified as to the limitations." Our quality system still requires tagging of instruments that are not calibrated. We have put exceptions in our procedures excluding wall clocks, fire system gages, etc. from this requirement.


------------------
Oscar
 
I

isodog

#27
Well! Since I started all this c**p (I'm tying to set a good example here)about calibation stickers, I'd like to make a point.

There is significance in the fact that the company (not suppler no more) is NO longer required to (4.11.2d) "Identify inspection, measuring and test equipment with a suitable indicator or approved identification record to show the calibation status." It just ISN'T there in the ISO 9000:2000 DIS.

Are you all going to continue to use stickers, or is there an alternative?

By the way, I can get passionate about a good wine, the Iowa Hawkeyes, the right lover or five inches of fresh powder at 7:00 in the morning, but NOT this stuff. Get a life!

Dave
 
J

Jim Biz

#28
Are you all going to continue to use stickers, or is there an alternative?

I don't plan to (and really never did) sticker "every" insturment in the plant...(we dont use "For reference only stickers)

The alternative we use are manufacturers identification numbers traced back to our calibration database.. Current condition, history & status verified when the device is "checked out" of the tool crib prior to use.

I really think this all boils down to "who controlls the actual calibration of the device"

If the employee is qualified to calibrate his own - then there should be no reason that he can not calibrate on either a set date or frequency that is appropriate and turn in the information to be recorded - sticker or not.

Jim
 
J

John C

#29
A relevant point is that this is not a case of either/or. If we choose to use stickers, then this is either for an extra level of protection or to reduce overall costs. We still have to hold records and identify items. The choice to invest money in the stickers process should be made on the grounds that there will be a positive return in value in reduced cost or customer satisfaction. This is the basis of the decision, not whether the auditor is for or against.
Personally, I favour the stickers. My experience tells me that most people need them to maintain customer satisfaction and that they reduce the cost, not add to it. I think Barb's message is similar, based on her wide experience.
I'm surprised that some people are hostile towards stickers. Maintaining stickers is such a small fraction of the overall cost and, if the auditor asks just once, to be taken to see the records instead of just checking the sticker, then Auditor, Guide and Supervisor will all treck across the plant and the half hour that it takes will negate the whole year's savings in time spent sticking on and on sticker material.
Of course, if your equation comes out the other way, then don't do it. But, if you get into an argument and don't have management's support, they'll probably overrule you - they're more scared of the registrar than they are of you. Better to save yourself for the day when there's something worth making a stand for.
rgds, John C
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
R Calibration stickers on gages or on boxes? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 16
R Validity of Calibration Stickers on Measuring Tapes and Rulers General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 26
K Calibration Stickers on Measurement Equipment - Compulsory or not General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 23
M Done date & due date on calibration stickers General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 12
V Gage Calibration Stickers in harsh environments - Are Calibration Stickers Required General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 14
J Source for calibration stickers - Narrow "For Reference Use Only" wrap-a-round General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
D Interesting Discussion Using "Not A Calibrated Device" or "No Calibration Required" stickers General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 63
D Illegible Calibration Stickers - Gages used in oily, dirty environment General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 5
P Calibration Stickers or Other Methods of Identifying when Gages are Due? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 32
Jerry Eldred Calibration Stickers - Do we have to put stickers on every gage and all equipment? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 38
lanley liao Question regarding the calibration of monitoring and measure equipment. Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 0
N IATF Calibration Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 4
Q Do these certificates of calibration meet ISO 9001 requirements for traceability to NIST? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
T Plug Gage Calibration Calibration and Metrology Software and Hardware 1
M Load Cell Calibration using a totalizer on a flow meter General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 0
E Calibration Records needed ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
D Limited Range Calibration - 5000 lb Industrial floor scale General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
D Calibration of Small Scales General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 26
C How to Establish the Calibration & Measurement Capability (CMC)? ISO 17025 related Discussions 1
I IQOQ or just initial calibration required? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
B Calibration in real life ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
J Calibration cycle for monitoring & measuring tools used in medical device manufacturing General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 5
A Is calibration of test weight required General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
S Calibration Frequency for Slip Gauge Kit used for CMM Calibration? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 0
S Calibration/Verification of customer fixtures IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
Ron Rompen Calibration by manufacturer ISO 17025 related Discussions 4
Q Calibration verification records 7.1.5.2.1 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
B AS9100D 7.1.5.2 Calibration or Verification Method using outside cal lab AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
W Next Calibration Due Date Calibration Frequency (Interval) 5
S Where do l get calibration standards to run a calibration lab? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 2
A OEM On-Site Calibration issues during Covid19 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
D Calibration tolerance question using Pipettes Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 1
M Calibration Certificate Result issued by an accredited external laboratory General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 9
G Calibration of "Master Parts" Used as Gauges Calibration Frequency (Interval) 5
R Calibration lab environmental monitoring General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
G Calibration of Rotronic probe but not digital readout? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
F Standard Calibration Procedures: Recommended Practice ISO 17025 related Discussions 0
T Temperature Requirements For In House Calibration - AS9100 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 16
B Gage calibration frequency, ISO and IATF - What are the requirements Calibration Frequency (Interval) 3
Crimpshrine13 Laboratory Scope - Calibration vs. Test Methods - IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
Crimpshrine13 Calibration of pH Meter Probe Calibration and Metrology Software and Hardware 3
F ESD workbench "calibration" Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
C Correct Calibration Method for Dial Depth Gage General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 6
F Nist traceable calibration certificates General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
G Tool tracebility and First calibration requirements for aerospace (AS9100) organisation AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
D Calibration of Digital thermometer with surface probe General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
T Calibration or Verification -> Cm and Cmk, etc. Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 3
G Is repeatability required for equipment calibration? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 10
was named killer AS 9100D - Calibration Instructions - Controlled documents? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 6
B Photovoltaic Tester Calibration General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 0

Similar threads

Top Bottom