Calibration/Verification of Banding Tools

[aegoode]

My company is using several banding tools for production assemblies, when I came on as a Quality Engineer I was asked to take over calibration from the person handling it previously. I noticed the banding tools were given labels of control numbers used for calibrated tools but did not have calibration labels and were not listed on the calibration register. After gathering more info, the tools were planned to be added to the list and included in calibration, but at some point someone just labeled them as "for reference only" and gave them back to production. My company wants to know if we can calibrate the tools in-house to save money, we have a calibrated verification tool that allows you to adjust the banding tools so they are in tolerance. One of the problems is that the verification tool itself can only be calibrated by the manufacturer, who has a lead time of at least a month and overcharges like crazy. Currently my company is asking the following questions:

1. Do banding tools need to be calibrated? Would "verify before use" or "for reference only" be possible for these tools? I personally don't like this idea since we would be relying on production personnel to adjust the tools before using them.

2. Do banding tools need the specific verification gage designed to adjust the tool, or can we use one from another vendor? I'm not sure if this is possible, but I also don't know enough about banding tools in general.

3. Is using the verification gage enough to say the tool is even calibrated? All we do to check after adjusting the tool is a pull test to see that it works as expected, so any records we keep are just these "pull test passed" records. Is there something I'm missing that we need to consider?

4. Expensive option: remove the tools and buy new ones from a company that we can also buy a different verification gage or even a digital calibration kit from (which could run anywhere from $6000 to $20000) but would also mean we would never have to worry about this process again. We're also a small company so this kind of budget is most likely out of the question.


I hope I explained that correctly, if there's any other options we haven't thought of yet, that would be appreciated.

I also forgot to mention that the reason my company doesn't want to send the banding tools for calibration, is because there at least ten of them and due to their nature of going out of tolerance fairly quickly due to constant use, we're looking at 3 month calibration intervals instead of a year, meaning we would constantly be paying to calibrate these tools.

 

[John Predmore]

Some people in industry use the word Calibration interchangeably with Verification. Because Calibration is used in industry with different meanings, for useful responses here, let's clarify our use of terminology.

Many in the Quality profession hold the term Calibration as a more stringent standard than Verification, the former includes traceability to national measurement standards and (often) includes extensive accounting of all sources and ranges of measurement variation. Because the word as sometimes used in industry means different things to different people, you don't want to pay a lot of money for services you don't really need.

Both Verification and Calibration are applied to gages and equipment that provide some functional indication. Both Verification and Calibration must be performed correctly, in order to achieve reliable result(s). Some believe you get more reliable results from a paid service, everything else being equal, but that is a fallacy. It is more validly a matter of training and adherence to proper procedure and equipment, as appropriate to your needs and requirements. It is possible for your firm to perform equally valid in-house Calibration/Verification, but that decision requires planning and commitment of company resources (you mentioned some figures in your post above). But first you must decide what are your needs.

Based on what I know of banding equipment, I assume the quantity you want to verify is force. What do you hope calibration to accomplish for you, beyond what is current practice (which sounds to me like verification)? What is the current problem you are trying to fix? Who is asking for your banding tools to be "calibrated"? What is the consequence when product is banded and force is out of tolerance? How often does out-of-tolerance cause you problems?

 

[dwperron]

1. Do banding tools need to be calibrated? Would "verify before use" or "for reference only" be possible for these tools? I personally don't like this idea since we would be relying on production personnel to adjust the tools before using them.

This can be legitimate. It is up to your organization to determine which tools require calibration based on use and risk. Not sure what you would use to "Verify before use"?

2. Do banding tools need the specific verification gage designed to adjust the tool, or can we use one from another vendor? I'm not sure if this is possible, but I also don't know enough about banding tools in general.

They are available and they make calibration simple. Not sure if they are interchangeable, would need to know actual manufacturer / model tof your tools to know what you need.

3. Is using the verification gage enough to say the tool is even calibrated? All we do to check after adjusting the tool is a pull test to see that it works as expected, so any records we keep are just these "pull test passed" records. Is there something I'm missing that we need to consider?

If the verification tool is calibrated you can use that to provide traceability for the accuracy of your banding tool, you would be calibrating the banding tool yourselves. You would need to set up a basic calibration system to records calibration dates, results, standards used, tec.

I also forgot to mention that the reason my company doesn't want to send the banding tools for calibration, is because there at least ten of them and due to their nature of going out of tolerance fairly quickly due to constant use, we're looking at 3 month calibration intervals instead of a year, meaning we would constantly be paying to calibrate these tools.

Tools that go out of tolerance quickly are risks, because you really can't know if you are getting valid results when you use them. If you don't care that the tool is accurate then why bother calibrating them, just so they have a sticker on them?
Our banding tools typically hold their tolerance.