Hi everyone,
I'm currently in a battle with our Ireland counterparts on the reporting of as found data. The conversation center around a company, Coherent, who manufactures Radiometers that we use in our process.
Their paperwork consists of 2 sheets: the actual calibration certificate, and a service report that has the received information if the unit was found out of tolerance during the check. They simply report the error on this sheet:
Out of published specifications by +.5% at 10600nm
Our Ireland counterparts insist on having actual before values or test points used in the calibration. We have not required this because it costs an extra $125 per unit, and it will only show 3 points used for the calibration. If the sensor is a 0-3 watt, then the calibration points would be 1, 2, and 3 watts.
I have always accepted the simple statement above (out of published specifications), because the error can be determined: .5% of 3w = 0.015w.
Thoughts?
Charlie
I'm currently in a battle with our Ireland counterparts on the reporting of as found data. The conversation center around a company, Coherent, who manufactures Radiometers that we use in our process.
Their paperwork consists of 2 sheets: the actual calibration certificate, and a service report that has the received information if the unit was found out of tolerance during the check. They simply report the error on this sheet:
Out of published specifications by +.5% at 10600nm
Our Ireland counterparts insist on having actual before values or test points used in the calibration. We have not required this because it costs an extra $125 per unit, and it will only show 3 points used for the calibration. If the sensor is a 0-3 watt, then the calibration points would be 1, 2, and 3 watts.
I have always accepted the simple statement above (out of published specifications), because the error can be determined: .5% of 3w = 0.015w.
Thoughts?
Charlie