I am intrigued by this SAMM. Can you give me a little more information?
Hershal is one of the foremost experts (IMHO) on calibration. Let me encourage you to go to him name, and search through his last 100 or so posts. It will really be beneficial to you.
Most everyone else here is quite good too (except me, I'm just their agent
). You have an appropriate standard, a decent procedure, the right numbers... You have a calibration. I hope you know what I mean. I just want to suggest a middle ground, reasonable approach. Calibration (and CoC) is not something everyone can do, and not something too difficult for anybody. Make sense.
As far as ISO 9001 is concern, the system is yours to decide. Basically, if it is an instrument utilized for impact, quality decision, measurement, etc., it will need a verification/ calibration, etc. to determine fitness for use. You will need to establish a program to ensure the equipment is adequately calibrated, and fit for use.
Please, I don't mean to come across too strong, so forgive me if it does. But... if you're company cannot afford a good calibration program, it needs to re-evaluate being in business (or at least going into an ISO initiative). If you are MFG. a product and you have instruments for quality assessment, IMO it's pretty important that they be accurate.
How many instruments are we talking about, and of what kind? I bet if you added it all up, you would save money sending it out for calibration. So I don't bore you do death, search on the Cove for internal calibration, and you'll find some detailed analysis by several people here.
Ok, enough of my rambling. I hope there's something here to help you.
Hershal is one of the foremost experts (IMHO) on calibration. Let me encourage you to go to him name, and search through his last 100 or so posts. It will really be beneficial to you.
Most everyone else here is quite good too (except me, I'm just their agent
). You have an appropriate standard, a decent procedure, the right numbers... You have a calibration. I hope you know what I mean. I just want to suggest a middle ground, reasonable approach. Calibration (and CoC) is not something everyone can do, and not something too difficult for anybody. Make sense.As far as ISO 9001 is concern, the system is yours to decide. Basically, if it is an instrument utilized for impact, quality decision, measurement, etc., it will need a verification/ calibration, etc. to determine fitness for use. You will need to establish a program to ensure the equipment is adequately calibrated, and fit for use.
Please, I don't mean to come across too strong, so forgive me if it does. But... if you're company cannot afford a good calibration program, it needs to re-evaluate being in business (or at least going into an ISO initiative). If you are MFG. a product and you have instruments for quality assessment, IMO it's pretty important that they be accurate.
How many instruments are we talking about, and of what kind? I bet if you added it all up, you would save money sending it out for calibration. So I don't bore you do death, search on the Cove for internal calibration, and you'll find some detailed analysis by several people here.
Ok, enough of my rambling. I hope there's something here to help you.
I too, was intrigued by SAMM: Malaysian Department of Standards laboratory accreditation program, Skim Akreditasi Makmal Malaysia [SAMM].
Here are some links referring to SAMM:
http://www.standardsmalaysia.gov.my/SAMM_Leaflet 1 & 2 - Fields & Charges.pdf
http://www.agilent.com/metrology/samm_schedule.shtml
http://www.pyrometro.com.my/calibration.html
Hope this helps.
Stijloor.
Last edited:
: