Measuring Equipment on Injection Machine should be Calibrated by 3rd party?

Hershal

Metrologist-Auditor
Staff member
Super Moderator
#11
It's not necessarily an all or nothing. But right now, the items do not appear to be calibrated based on the initial question. Hence, the person has no clue what the machine is truly doing until the product pops out and is sent to QA.

If that is acceptable, then continue the current arrangement, or pull the monitoring equipment out so it has less chance of breaking and causing down time.

However, if it necessary to know what the machine is doing, then calibrate the equipment, complete with uncertainty.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Staff member
Moderator
#12
But right now, the items do not appear to be calibrated based on the initial question.
The initial question doesn't actually tell us so much. It's probable that they don't have formal calibration certificates, but is anything else completely useless? I reckon not.

or pull the monitoring equipment out so it has less chance of breaking and causing down time.
I believe you're not seriously suggesting that. To me, a formally-uncalibrated moulding machine is still better than one missing essential control circuits - it can make products.

However, if it necessary to know what the machine is doing...
In a sense they already know - what the machine is doing is making acceptable parts. They might not be aware of the exact actual parameter readings that occur while doing that, I agree.
 

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
#13
It's not necessarily an all or nothing. But right now, the items do not appear to be calibrated based on the initial question. Hence, the person has no clue what the machine is truly doing until the product pops out and is sent to QA.

If that is acceptable, then continue the current arrangement, or pull the monitoring equipment out so it has less chance of breaking and causing down time.

However, if it necessary to know what the machine is doing, then calibrate the equipment, complete with uncertainty.
This is just untrue. As I said most measurements on an injection molding machine are relative and not necessarily exact. Take the original post's reference to heating temperature. The relevant temperature is the material temp. You can't truly measure that easily. When you set the barrel heats at a setting, this is not the material temp. The machine may say 500 but the material temp is actually 575. I can change the material temp in several ways. So there may not really be a benefit to calibrating the temp gage -- as long as I know it is close and it can read hotter vs. colder, I should be good to go. If you really need to measure heats and pressures, then you need to incorporate sensors in the mold itself -- and if so, calibration of those items would probably be usefull.
 
C

cqt18060180

#14
This is just untrue. As I said most measurements on an injection molding machine are relative and not necessarily exact. Take the original post's reference to heating temperature. The relevant temperature is the material temp. You can't truly measure that easily. When you set the barrel heats at a setting, this is not the material temp. The machine may say 500 but the material temp is actually 575. I can change the material temp in several ways. So there may not really be a benefit to calibrating the temp gage -- as long as I know it is close and it can read hotter vs. colder, I should be good to go. If you really need to measure heats and pressures, then you need to incorporate sensors in the mold itself -- and if so, calibration of those items would probably be usefull.

your statement is make sense, actually i also agree that those measuring meters are work well no need to calibrate through the prouduct quality, but some auditor is hard to convince, the points of auditor may not correct, just because he or she is our god ... this is the logic
 

Hershal

Metrologist-Auditor
Staff member
Super Moderator
#15
Back to the original point. If it is not telling you something of value, and based on many posts in the thread it is not, then why bother with it? If it necessary to have it installed simply to operate the machine, OK, then simply accept the likely large amount of scrap or rework you will have if the machine messes up until you find the issue and live with it.

But if it is important to know what the machine is doing, then calibrate.
 

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Staff member
Moderator
#16
Back to the original point. If it is not telling you something of value, and based on many posts in the thread it is not, then why bother with it? If it necessary to have it installed simply to operate the machine, OK, then simply accept the likely large amount of scrap or rework you will have if the machine messes up until you find the issue and live with it.

But if it is important to know what the machine is doing, then calibrate.
This point was clear from your first post in this thread.

However, this is not stand-alone measuring equipment; it is an integral part of an injection moulding machine. Those probes' initial purpose is to allow the machine to operate, and only secondary to that to provide accurate or absolute records. It may not be telling an outside observer anything "of value" (let's assume that for the debate sake), but it is telling a lot to the machine itself. And once again, there are more ways to know what an injection moulding machine is doing, than only observing its parameters readings. Not very long ago (and I guess in some place to this date) IM machines didn't even provide all those fancy readings, though the probes were there; yet companies maintained well controlled processes with very acceptable scrap percentages.

Further on the scrap amount issue - I didn't merely suggest a go/no-go type QC. I suggested SPC, which should be telling the operator that something is wrong quite in advance before scrap actually starts mounting. With that and a bit of understanding of injection moulding processes, a skilled artisan should be able to identify and troubleshoot any pressure profile or temperature profile related problems before any significant amount of scrap is made.

Sorry if I wasn't elaborated enough before.

Cheers,
Ronen.
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#17
Measuring equipment on injection machine should be calibrated by 3rd party?
This was a findings during customer audit, he requested us to calibrate those measuring equipments which in the injection
machine. Any experience on this case please reply, customer insist this action.

if it does , Calibrate cost will be more
The issue here is does the parameter the gage "measures" affect the quality of the part. That is to say, you have to look at the tolerances and determined the effects of the parameter being measured.

I agree with Hershal as far as his basic statement goes - If it is not telling you something of value, it's not needed.

BUT (You were ready for this, right?) - A "Black Box" is harder to control than one with "relative" indicators. For example, probably everyone here drives some sort of vehicle with a gage telling them how much fuel is in the tank (or battery). In my car I also have an oil pressure gage, a gage which tells me if the alternator is charging the battery or not, a light that pops on when one of the tires is loosing pressure, and - Well, a *lot* of "information" - Even approximately how many miles I can drive before I have to stop for gas based upon how much fuel "it" thinks is in the tank taking into consideration it's analysis of the MPG the car has been getting over the previous 25 miles.

To some degree a gage may be *relatively* "critical", such as an oil pressure or engine temperature gage or light. None of these are calibrated, much less precise. But - They help me (and you) to understand some of the somewhat critical vehicle/engine operating parameters. If the engine oil pressure drops to zero and/or a light or alarm comes on you know to stop right away.

How "precise" is this? How "critical" is it? Is it useful? Should it be calibrated?
Gas%20Gage.jpg

This is no different from a lot of process equipment, including injection molding. There are often "relative" gages or measurement equipment which gives a person some idea what a piece of equipment is doing in certain aspects.

In years past I have gone through this with auditors many times. The answer is always simple: There has to be someone in the company (including everyone who operates that piece of equipment) who knows about, and can explain, every measurement device on a machine/process equipment and why it is there. They also have to be knowledgeable about the process.

This determination *should* have been made at the stage where the equipment was contracted for. That is the time when decisions about the Critical Characteristics of that process *should* have been identified and any critical process parameter measurement equipment defined. The Critical Process Parameters defined at that stage should be inputs for the Process FMEA and Control Plan for the process.

The person who deals with the auditor should be able to explain why every gage is on that piece of equipment and why each one is, or is not, *critical* to the process.

I have seen a couple cases where auditors did a calibration writeup because every measurement device in a company wasn't calibrated. Both were challenged and the auditor lost both times. There is no standard that I am aware of that says that every measurement device in a company, no matter what it's purpose, has to calibrated.

If a measurement device is *critical* to the process (and thus the quality of the product), or is used to measure the "quality" of the product, then it must be calibrated. Every company has some measurement equipment marked, and used as, "For Reference Only".
 

Attachments

Cindy China

Involved In Discussions
#19
Measuring equipment on injection machine should be calibrated by 3rd party?
This was a findings during customer audit, he requested us to calibrate those measuring equipments which in the injection
machine. Any experience on this case please reply, customer insist this action.

if it does , Calibrate cost will be more
noanyone qualified is ok
 

Cindy China

Involved In Discussions
#20
The issue here is does the parameter the gage "measures" affect the quality of the part. That is to say, you have to look at the tolerances and determined the effects of the parameter being measured.

I agree with Hershal as far as his basic statement goes - If it is not telling you something of value, it's not needed.

BUT (You were ready for this, right?) - A "Black Box" is harder to control than one with "relative" indicators. For example, probably everyone here drives some sort of vehicle with a gage telling them how much fuel is in the tank (or battery). In my car I also have an oil pressure gage, a gage which tells me if the alternator is charging the battery or not, a light that pops on when one of the tires is loosing pressure, and - Well, a *lot* of "information" - Even approximately how many miles I can drive before I have to stop for gas based upon how much fuel "it" thinks is in the tank taking into consideration it's analysis of the MPG the car has been getting over the previous 25 miles.

To some degree a gage may be *relatively* "critical", such as an oil pressure or engine temperature gage or light. None of these are calibrated, much less precise. But - They help me (and you) to understand some of the somewhat critical vehicle/engine operating parameters. If the engine oil pressure drops to zero and/or a light or alarm comes on you know to stop right away.

How "precise" is this? How "critical" is it? Is it useful? Should it be calibrated?

This is no different from a lot of process equipment, including injection molding. There are often "relative" gages or measurement equipment which gives a person some idea what a piece of equipment is doing in certain aspects.

In years past I have gone through this with auditors many times. The answer is always simple: There has to be someone in the company (including everyone who operates that piece of equipment) who knows about, and can explain, every measurement device on a machine/process equipment and why it is there. They also have to be knowledgeable about the process.

This determination *should* have been made at the stage where the equipment was contracted for. That is the time when decisions about the Critical Characteristics of that process *should* have been identified and any critical process parameter measurement equipment defined. The Critical Process Parameters defined at that stage should be inputs for the Process FMEA and Control Plan for the process.

The person who deals with the auditor should be able to explain why every gage is on that piece of equipment and why each one is, or is not, *critical* to the process.

I have seen a couple cases where auditors did a calibration writeup because every measurement device in a company wasn't calibrated. Both were challenged and the auditor lost both times. There is no standard that I am aware of that says that every measurement device in a company, no matter what it's purpose, has to calibrated.

If a measurement device is *critical* to the process (and thus the quality of the product), or is used to measure the "quality" of the product, then it must be calibrated. Every company has some measurement equipment marked, and used as, "For Reference Only".
thank you for the shareingthe 1st is to determine the necessary then, if necessary, go find a qualified partner
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Missing measuring equipment General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 6
B Measuring and monitoring equipment - Understanding which procedures to be compliant with ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
E ISO 13485 7.6 Control of monitoring and measuring equipment - Assess the Validity ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
G Posting Measuring Equipment Accuracy for User Information General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
S ISO 9001 7.1.5.2 - Actions Taken When Measuring Equipment is Found to be Unfit for Use General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 13
C AS9100D 7.1.5.2 / Calibration of Employee Owned Measuring Equipment AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
johnny johnson New measuring equipment selection (Cg/Cgk) Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 2
Claes Gefvenberg Worst measuring equipment ever? Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 6
A Calibration Interval - AS9100 - Control of Monitoring and Measuring Equipment Calibration Frequency (Interval) 8
R Auditing Fitness of Purpose for Monitoring and Measuring Equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
rob73 Advice/recommendations for equipment to measure a soft pvc tube - Optical Measuring? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
H Tolerance, decimal places, and measuring equipment capability Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
Q Scope in procedure and content for 7.6 Monitoring and Measuring Equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
L Inspection Equipment Accuracy - Measuring the diameters of small holes Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 5
x-files ISO 9001 Clause 7.6 - Test as Measuring Equipment... ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
S Measuring OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness) for each Job, not for Machine Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 2
M GRR approach for off line Measuring Equipment Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
D Does 7.6 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Equipment align with ISO 17025 ISO 17025 related Discussions 4
G Control of Monitoring and Measuring Equipment for Servicing Photocopiers ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
S ISO9001 Exclusion 7.6 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 16
B Meaningful MSA Study on Viscosity Measuring Equipment IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
P I need to Borrow or Hire a Surface Roughness (Ra) Measuring Equipment Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
W Moving M&TE (Measuring & Test Equipment) to New Facility General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
M 7.6 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Equipment - Monitoring vs. Measuring IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
GStough Human Capital: How to Meet Requirements of 7.6 (Monitoring/Measuring Equipment)? Service Industry Specific Topics 10
R ISO 17025 M&TE (Measuring & Test Equipment) Calibration Requirements ISO 17025 related Discussions 4
Anerol C Uncertainty Excel Spreadsheets for Measuring Equipment wanted Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 5
G 7.6 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Equipment vs. 7.6.1 Measurement Systems Analy IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 15
J Measuring and Test Equipment that must undergo MSA Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 8
Roberticus Gage R & R to different Specifications on Departmental Measuring Equipment Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 25
A Non-Contact Measuring Equipment Recommendations wanted General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
G Measuring Equipment - Does Uncertainty = Accuracy ? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 23
P Is it compulsory to send new measuring equipment for calibration / verification? Calibration Frequency (Interval) 3
Q Soldering and AS9100 - Are soldering irons "monitoring and measuring equipment"? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 10
B Looking for a Standard identifying SME's (Standard Measuring Equipment) General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
M Basis used for Calibration or Verification of Measuring Equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
N Control of Measuring and test Equipment - Flowchart wanted ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
D How to Protect Measuring Equipment from Damage and Deterioration ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
I Clarification of ISO 9001: 2008 Section 7.6 - Monitoring and measuring equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
G ANSI/NCSL Z540.3 (Requirements for the Calibration of Measuring and Test Equipment) General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
D Control of monitoring and measuring equipment - infrared thermometer for cross-check ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
W Computer Software - ISO 9001 Clause 7.6 Control of Monitoring and Measuring equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
J How can measuring equipment deteriorate? (Re: 7.6) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
J Configuration Management - ISO 9001 - 7.6 Monitoring and Measuring Equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
P Repetition (sample size) for measuring equipment accuracy determination General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
S Health care, social services and measuring equipment Service Industry Specific Topics 6
S Measuring Equipment and Monitoring Equipment - Verification ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 17
hogheavenfarm Extending control of measuring equipment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
A Is Calibration Required for Equipment/Devices Used for Measuring Support Services General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 6
K Measuring equipment different than scope - Accreditation document for our calibration General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom