Calibration/Verification Records (IATF 16949 7.1.5.2.1)

[Josh]

Morning all,

I have a query regarding the IATF 16949 7.1.5.2.1 cause (Calibration/Verification Records).

I've been helping out a sister site of ours (same business entity, just a different site down the country) in getting a measurement gauge ordered for a new project we are starting. The gauge allows you to locate a part, clamp in position, and then measure the gaps with a Go / No Go gauge, and also allows you to measure the part with a DTI. You move the DTI to various position across the gauge to get the measurement - i'm sure most of you from the Automotive world will have used something similar.

Anyway, my query is regarding the calibration and verification records of the new gauges.

The Go / No Go gauges have been added to the system as we have the measurement reports that are the "verification records", these will then be calibrated on a yearly basis internally.

However, the representatives at the sister site who is responsible for inputting all the gauges into their gauge database will not input the DTI into the system due to "not having the information regarding calibration". I'm being told i need a calibration certificate for the DTIs. These DTIs are from Mitutoyo, and they supply various bits of documentation, one of which contains the sentence
"This product conforms to the MITUTOYO inspection standard, and the standard(s) used for calibration is/are traceable to the national(international) standard(s)"

For me, this is the verification/calibration record of the DTI, and therefore can be input into the system on this basis. I do not feel this would cause an issue with an auditor.
Again, there is a procedure in place to calibrate the DTIs internally on a yearly basis.

Am i correct in what i think? Or have a misunderstood this completely!?

It would be much appreciated to get some input on this situation from some with extensive knowledge on this subject!

Thanks,

Josh

 

[SamuelB]

You would still need to calibrate the instrument on a regular basis, which in your case is once a year (it can be more or less, depending on your circumstances). The traceability to international/national standards can be obtained by using slip gauges that have been checked by a laboratory that is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 or equivalent. You can do the DTI check yourself using the gauges, just be sure that you have a properly defined laboratory scope.

That's how we did it ourselves in the case of ISO 9001.

 

[AndyN]

Josh - you will need some data which shows the DTI is, for example, linear and so on. Mitutoyo's paperwork isn't useful and they don't (in my experience) provide calibration results unless you ask/pay for them. If you can get that done internally, great. As far as keeping an auditor happy - wrong goal. Your aim, as with all measuring devices is to ensure they are fit for the purpose they're used for. Keeping an auditor happy is almost impossible, because you have no idea what they know about calibration etc.

 

[dwperron]

For IATF 16949 compliance (7.1.5.3.2) the calibration results from an outside lab that must "have a defined scope that includes the capability to perform the required inspection, test, or calibration, and either
* the laboratory shall be accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 or national equivalent...
* there shall be evidence that the external laboratory is acceptable to the customer"

Mitutoyo's calibration laboratories meet this requirement. Their factories...... if you can produce evidence that the lab is acceptable to your organization (and document the evidence) you are compliant.

The safe bet is to calibrate the DTI. Is the heartburn worth the calibration cost?

 

[Scanton]

I'm definitely on the side of calibrating the DTI's.

We are a small company (less than 50 employees) and have 5 mitutoyo DTI’s on site that are used for various component measurement and machine validation tasks. All 5 for these are purchased with a calibration certificate from a UKAS certified calibration lab and sent for calibration (to a UKAS certified calibration lab ) annually.

I know the DTI’s come with documentation from Mitutoyo however we have never used this as evidence of traceability to a national standard.

I know there is a technical argument to use the documentation that comes with the DTI from Mitutoyo that may be tangibly acceptable, however I personally like my calibrations documentation to come from a source that doesn’t require argument, as it speaks for itself .

 

[Josh]

Well thank you for the replies, it is very much appreciated!

It seems I may have misunderstood the standard! I believe this probably stems from the fact that my site has been using the Mitutoyo documents as calibration/verification evidence for a long period of time with no issues during audits. I've spoken to some other colleagues who deal with our gauges, and as far as i could see, we have not calibrated a DTI until a year after purchase.

However, after reading everyone reply, it do now agree that it we would be better off calibrating the DTI to make sure we are 100% compliant to the standard. Since we have the capabilities & resources to do this in house, it would seem daft not to use them!