FDA 483 Warning Letter for use of Calipers

J

jdm2008

#1
I'm writing some procedures for measurement(general). In particular I am looking into the use of calipers. I was looking through the FDA website and warning letters and I noticed the FDA issued a 483, for the use of calipers in the following manner. A part is listed as .25+-.005. Most calipers have a stated accuracy of .001. The FDA wrote this observation because the company didn't direct it's inspectors to reject a part that had a result of .250. Is this standard practice, in the use of calipers, so that a tolerance of .245-.255, is really .246-.254 when measured with a caliper?
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#2
Re: FDA 483 for use of Calipers

I'm writing some procedures for measurement(general). In particular I am looking into the use of calipers. I was looking through the FDA website and warning letters and I noticed the FDA issued a 483, for the use of calipers in the following manner. A part is listed as .25+-.005. Most calipers have a stated accuracy of .001. The FDA wrote this observation because the company didn't direct it's inspectors to reject a part that had a result of .250. Is this standard practice, in the use of calipers, so that a tolerance of .245-.255, is really .246-.254 when measured with a caliper?
I think there might be an error in your post. You say that the size/tolerance is .25 ?.005, but the FDA says that a measurement of .250 (the nominal) should be rejected?
 

Statistical Steven

Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#3
Re: FDA 483 for use of Calipers

I'm writing some procedures for measurement(general). In particular I am looking into the use of calipers. I was looking through the FDA website and warning letters and I noticed the FDA issued a 483, for the use of calipers in the following manner. A part is listed as .25+-.005. Most calipers have a stated accuracy of .001. The FDA wrote this observation because the company didn't direct it's inspectors to reject a part that had a result of .250. Is this standard practice, in the use of calipers, so that a tolerance of .245-.255, is really .246-.254 when measured with a caliper?
You lost me here....

First, 0.250 is in spec, why would I reject it?
Second, if the MSA on the caliper is acceptable, you do not change the specification, but rather decide to incorporate measurement error in setting your specifications.
 
J

jdm2008

#4
Re: FDA 483 for use of Calipers

Yes my error. The FDA says that .255 is out of spec(or should be).

"According to your firm's management, your calipers read out to 1/10000 of an inch(ie four decimal places). Suppose the measurement reads .2550 inches and so it is deemed to be with your design specification. However due to the precision limit of your firm's caliper, the actual flange height may be in fact be .2560 inches. Your firm's most recent revision of Standard Operating Procedure Titled Nonconformance/Deviation Report defines a non conformance as "the failure of a product, process, or Device History documentation to meet specified requirements. In this situation your firm would incorrectly allow the (redacted) to pass this particular check, as opposed to deeming the part to be a nonconformance per SOP(redacted)."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

normzone

Trusted Information Resource
#5
Re: FDA 483 for use of Calipers

Well, the measurement reliability is getting out on the hairy edge there. I don't know the answer to the question but I'm going to pose one that's related.

Back in the sticks, stones and bones days of precision measurement when I was helping to build the pyramids, the philosophy went that since the common man's dial caliper only discriminated down to .001 inch that your estimate of reliability had to take that into account. And if you take user skill into effect, then your measurement is even less likely to be correct when you have unskilled users making measurements.

Then the digital caliper came along, discriminating down to .0005 inch. Did our measurements suddenly become that much more precise when we were still using the same frame with a different readout device?

It's always been my approach that the caliper is the pair of pliers of precision measurement - good for lots of approximations under ideal conditions, but if you get out on the edge and the result is important then it's time to go get a tool better suited to the task, use the appropriate technique and make certain that the person performing the measurement is familiar with the area(s) of uncertainty and understands the reasons why.

Apologies if this neither answered the question or shed additional confusion on the issue.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#6
Re: FDA 483 for use of Calipers

Yes my error. The FDA says that .255 is out of spec(or should be).

"According to your firm's management, your calipers read out to 1/10000 of an inch(ie four decimal places). Suppose the measurement reads .2550 inches and so it is deemed to be with your design specification. However due to the precision limit of your firm's caliper, the actual flange height may be in fact be .2560 inches. Your firm's most recent revision of Standard Operating Procedure Titled Nonconformance/Deviation Report defines a non conformance as "the failure of a product, process, or Device History documentation to meet specified requirements. In this situation your firm would incorrectly allow the (redacted) to pass this particular check, as opposed to deeming the part to be a nonconformance per SOP(redacted)."
I have no experience in dealing with the FDA, but I'm having trouble following the logic in that quote. The letter as quoted says that the calipers "read out to 1/10000 of an inch..." Using an example of a thing being measured at .2550" (the upper spec limit), it goes on to say, "...due to the precision limit of your firm's caliper, the actual flange height may in fact be .2560 inches."

I don't see where that conclusion has any rational antecedent. While it's true that a measurement result of .2550 could be, say, .2551 and technically out of tolerance, I don't know how the .2560 figure can be justified without actual evidence. Everyone who has responsibility for measuring things should be aware that when results get close to specification limits the result should be confirmed either with a different device or the same type of device. This is, of course, where measurment uncertainty comes into play, and if the measurement results are likely to be affected by uncertainty, more precise means of measurement are called for.
 
J

jdm2008

#7
The caliper reads out 4 decimal places but is only accurate to .001. If you try and buy a caliper accuracy is only guaranteed to .001, and calibration is deemed pass if it is accurate to .001.
 
J

jdm2008

#8
http://www.mcmaster.com/#electronic-calipers/=sqiroj
If you look at the listings, you notice these calipers resolve to 4 decimal places. However the accuracy is listed as .001. so if the caliper is only accurate to .001, that is how they got .256(worst case if you get .255, and the caliper could off by .001, .255 is out of spec).
I am certain this is not an error(by error, i mean miscalculation, typo etc) but my question is, is this standard practice in fda regulated industry, that the tolerance window must be reduced by the accuracy of the device in order to be certain you are getting a in spec result for passing units.
So .250+-.005, is .246-.254 if you are using a caliper, .2451-.2499 is you are using a micrometer etc, etc.
 

dgriffith

Quite Involved in Discussions
#9
The caliper reads out 4 decimal places but is only accurate to .001. If you try and buy a caliper accuracy is only guaranteed to .001, and calibration is deemed pass if it is accurate to .001.
I don't think it's that cut-and-dry, is it? Many instruments are only guarenteed to a nominal value, yet individually can be much better in practice. I don't think that's why the FDA said what they did.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T FDA Form 483 Warning Letter - What next? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 7
K Where you can read other companys' 483 FDA Warning Letters 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
A FDA 483 Warning Letter Response Time Requirements 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
E How to Respond to a US FDA untitled letter - Form 483 or Warning Letter Other US Medical Device Regulations 2
J Manufacturing CRL - Class 1 or Class 2 Inspection (FDA form 483) US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
R Is it a requirement to notify my customer if I receive a 483 from the FDA? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 6
S What are the next steps after providing response to FDA 483 ? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 7
S FDA 483 Listing Observations - Mostly Corrective Action and Root Causes? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 5
S FDA Forms 482, 483 and 484 - MS Word documents US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 6
E 483 Process Validation - FDA Audit Observation 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 5
C Response by FDA for Form 483 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 8
U Response to FDA 483. Responded within 14 days and now waiting for reply US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 7
E FDA - Audit - Response - Observation form 483. Do we now receive a formal letter? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
C Non-sterile reusable surgical instruments - FDA sterilization requirement Other Medical Device Related Standards 2
D FDA Information - Revising the Instructions for Use US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 0
S Transitional Adolescent A and B - "CDRH PREMARKET REVIEW SUBMISSION COVER SHEET FORM FDA 3514" Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 1
B FDA requirement for CAPA Signoff ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
P MSDS for MVQ FDA White, Vinyl Methyl Silicone Rubber EU Medical Device Regulations 4
S Manufacturing Process FDA FOIA Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 3
S Manufacturing Process FDA FOIA US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
S Mechanical Test Under FDA Freedom of Information Act Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 5
A Medical Device Contract Manufacturer - Does the CM need to register with FDA? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
M Supplier requirements - Major supplier is a Non-Profit registered with ICCBBA (FDA UDI) Supply Chain Security Management Systems 12
C RA (Regulatory Assurance) Training (FDA) looking for resources Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 5
E FDA 513(g) Cover Letter US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
S Records - Do's and don't' of record entries (FDA - 21 CFR 820) Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 13
B New Facility register with FDA Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 4
K 510k FDA review, will they accept Biocompatibility result generated using feasibility product lots? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 8
J FDA regulation on decorative contact lenses Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 5
P Anyone have an Idea on UAE Medical device registeration- Class B with FDA only Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
F FDA classification for a mobile app Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics 3
Ed Panek IFU Contact Requirements - FDA and MDD/MDR US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
O Any info on release date of FDA “Computer Software Assurance for Manufacturing and Quality System Software” document? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 0
P Writing a presubmission to the FDA prior to the De novo submission US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
K FDA - Can we have more than 1 Initial Importer Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 4
K Two FDA questions regarding UDI (and potentially 803.52 MDR) Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
R Importers - For the FDA Registration/ Listing, is the CMO the importer? Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 6
Z Iterative development and FDA change requests IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 12
P FDA Approved Product Contact Parts ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
O Clarifying FDA definition of "finished device" and “capable of functioning” 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
A FDA guidance on non-sterile Medical Device Packaging Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 7
JoCam FDA Registration for Sub-contract manufacturers Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
M FDA News FDA Releases Draft Guidance Clarifying Application of ISO 10993-1 Biocompatibility Standard Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Is IEC 60601-1-2 required by FDA for all electronic medical devices? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
E Contract manufacturer FDA requirements foreign company US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 6
P Choice of FDA reviewer US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 6
J Is Device Tracking Card an actual requirement under FDA regulation? Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
T Definition Human Use (FDA) Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 7
K FDA 510k electrosurgery 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 0
J Leveraging FDA 510k Clearance for International Registrations Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom