Determining an as received OOT condition during calibration does not affect measurements taken prior to calibration.

#1
I am a CMM/Metrology Technician in the Automotive Industry. My company recently underwent certification to IATF standards. During our formal audit it was brought to our attention that our Roamer arm, which was recently calibrated by the OEM, had an as received OOT condition. as a result, we are required to verify in writing that the OOT condition did not affect our dimensional assessments conducted prior to sending the roamer arm out for calibration. As a Journeyman Calibration Technician trained by the Navy, I was taught that a Golden Standard (Type 1 level) was considered 10:1, a Calibration (Type 2 level) was considered 5:1, and a working standard (Type 3 & 4 level) was 4:1. However, I have been unable to locate that information anywhere outside of my own memory. I did find a thread contained here that alluded to the same understanding. Does such a standard exist, and if so, where can I find it for the purposes of referencing it? For the sake of discussion, the OOT of tolerance condition is in the neighborhood of 10 microns while our tightest part tolerance is no less than +/- 0.5 mm. Would it be acceptable to simply state the ratio between the OOT condition and the minimum customer tolerance meets a 50:1 ratio and therefore would not influence the stated results of measurements taken prior to the roamer arm calibration?
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
#2
I am a CMM/Metrology Technician in the Automotive Industry. My company recently underwent certification to IATF standards. During our formal audit it was brought to our attention that our Roamer arm, which was recently calibrated by the OEM, had an as received OOT condition. as a result, we are required to verify in writing that the OOT condition did not affect our dimensional assessments conducted prior to sending the roamer arm out for calibration. As a Journeyman Calibration Technician trained by the Navy, I was taught that a Golden Standard (Type 1 level) was considered 10:1, a Calibration (Type 2 level) was considered 5:1, and a working standard (Type 3 & 4 level) was 4:1. However, I have been unable to locate that information anywhere outside of my own memory. I did find a thread contained here that alluded to the same understanding. Does such a standard exist, and if so, where can I find it for the purposes of referencing it? For the sake of discussion, the OOT of tolerance condition is in the neighborhood of 10 microns while our tightest part tolerance is no less than +/- 0.5 mm. Would it be acceptable to simply state the ratio between the OOT condition and the minimum customer tolerance meets a 50:1 ratio and therefore would not influence the stated results of measurements taken prior to the roamer arm calibration?
In essence, yes. You should create a worksheet/record and show your data analysis and someone - with appropriate authority/competency - sign off. That should take care of it - and ensure the use is in your procedure etc.
 
#3
Thank you for your reply. I settled in on using the T.U.R. as an acceptability standard. Then wrote a memo describing those measurements and the use of TUR. Finally showing the ratio to be far in excess of 10:1 and formally accepting the romer arms as valid for use during the time leading up to its calibration and subsequent correction.
 

Miner

Forum Moderator
Leader
Admin
#6
You can take an alternative approach if you retained data for all of the measurements taken between calibrations. Simply add(subtract) the discrepancy from all your values, then determine whether the adjusted values would have changed the decisions made regarding the acceptability of the product.

And remember, you are not required to prove "...that the OOT condition did not affect our dimensional assessments..." Obviously, it did affect them. What you do have to provide is a risk assessment regarding the acceptance decisions that you made based on the measurements.
 
#7
This will require a CAR (corrective Action report) to do an impact study if the determination is that you still have sufficient accuracy for a 5to1 TUR then That is what you state on the CAR. you would than close the CAR as being investigated, and show it closed on your CAR log.
This is how it is addressed in both ISO/IEC 17025 & ISO 9001
Jerry Bambach
 

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
#8
This will require a CAR (corrective Action report)....
Ummmm...you're gonna have to "show me the shall" on that one. I see nothing in the standard requiring a CAR.

You can "determine if the validity of previous measurement results has been adversely affected" without a CAR.
 

Ron Rompen

Trusted Information Resource
#10
This will require a CAR (corrective Action report) to do an impact study if the determination is that you still have sufficient accuracy for a 5to1 TUR then That is what you state on the CAR. you would than close the CAR as being investigated, and show it closed on your CAR log.
This is how it is addressed in both ISO/IEC 17025 & ISO 9001
Jerry Bambach
Jerry, I disagree with your statement. ISO 9001: 2015 7.1.5.2 'The organization shall determine........and shall take appropriate action as necessary.
IATF 16949: 2016 7.1.5.2.1 c) 'an assessment of the risk of the intended use of the product.....condition'

Nowhere does it state that a CAR is required. Yes, there are actions that shall (should/could) be taken, but a CAR is not one of the mandatory ones.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
L Determining effectiveness and efficiency Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 6
C Need help in determining applicable clause for an audit finding (based on AS9120B) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
Q Kap.4.3 Determining the scope ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
U Determining population defect rate from sample defect rate Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4
T Determining FIPS 140-2 compliance in a medical device Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics 2
W Strategy for determining which components from a system should be "ME EQUIPMENT" -- home healthcare environment IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 6
J Process Capability - Determining the process capability of certain equipment Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 6
S Determining Sample Size and Method Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 12
S Determining a device category according to the MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 3
S Determining the requirements for the products and services ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
Q Determining Adverse Effects of Corrective/Preventive Actions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S Determining sample sizes for PQ Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 4
M Determining if an Insulin Pen Testing Machine is a Medical Device? EU Medical Device Regulations 4
M Determining a tolerance value for Measuring devices in-house inspection General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 12
D Determining the the maximum number of reprocessing cycles of attachments CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2
R Determining Uncertainty from Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
A IATF 16949 4.3.1 - Determining the scope of the quality management system - supplemental IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
D ISO 9001:2015 4.3 Determining the Scope of the QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
J Determining SPC tolerance Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 21
B Determining SAT Offsets vs TUS Offsets per SAE AMS 2750E AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
B Determining sample size for device sterility Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
D Determining of sample size for 'Operational Qualification' AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 5
R Question on determining defective units - I am not recording fixture to part rejected Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 5
S Clause 8.2.2 Determining the requirements for products and services ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
D Determining Calibration Frequency schedule for items used in production Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
C Determining if Maintenance Contractor is an External Service subject to ISO 9001 Clause 8.4 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 44
S AS9100D PEAR - Examples for organization's method for determining process results? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
I Determining Calibration Tolerance of a Measurement Device General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
J ISO 17025 Documented Procedure for 6.2.5 - Determining competency ISO 17025 related Discussions 4
V Determining FDA 820 (registration) vs ISO 13485 - Supplier gives us the kit ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
J ISO 9001 8.4.1 - Determining controls applied to externally provided processes ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
E Determining what is good and what is bad can be subjective - when is it a quality issue? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
F Determining what type of scrap to include in my internal PPM calculation Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 5
M Determining number of employees within the "Scope" of the QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
A Determining the Scope of the QMS during Stage 1? Registrars and Notified Bodies 11
W Minor Audit Nonconformance Against Determining the scope of QMS IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 12
D Determining Critical Components for conformity with IEC 60601-1 IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 21
Q ISO 9001, section 4.3 Determining the scope of our QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
R Determining Sample Size for Medical Device Component Validation Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 0
A What does 8.2.2.1, Determining the requirements related to products and services,mean IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
A Determining Retention Period for Medical Device QMS documents Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
S Surveillance Sampling Test - Determining Sample Size Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
F ISO 9001:2015 4.3 - Determining the scope of the quality management system ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
B Standards Needed In House - Determining what standards are applicable Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 3
W Determining Medical Device Classification in Mexico Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 5
K Determining Effect of Failure without a DFMEA (Design FMEA) FMEA and Control Plans 1
W Determining the Status and Importance of the Processes and Areas to be Audited Internal Auditing 7
T Determining Customer Requirements for the US Postal Service (USPS) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
Crimpshrine13 Rules of achieving and maintaining IATF recognition - Determining audit days IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
R Developing procedure for Determining Company's Context And Interested Parties ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 53

Similar threads

Top Bottom