Testing vs. Calibration - Do I have to comply with ASTM E4-03?

[crendfrey]

Greetings all,
I’m not even sure this goes in this thread.
We are 17025:2005 accredited for calibration only.

Problem: A packing slip landed on my desk for a hydraulic driven force tester capable of compression and/or tension up to 60,000Lbs. hereafter know as Bertha. We also have acquired a super sensitive, accurate, stable etc. load cell for which I intend to have certified to ASTM E74-06 through a company accredited to 17025, ANSI Z540.

Directive: Make it fit into our scope by surveillance audit 1/07.

Question: Does Bertha take me into the field of testing?
Bertha will be used for the calibration of crane scales and strain gages up to 60K. This will eliminate a whole host of safety issues I have been screaming about for a while as well as giving us the ability to calibrate higher capacity equipment with much more accuracy than hanging dead weight.

Am I splitting hairs here? As long as the load cell (Bertha's Guts) is properly documented, am I still just calibrating? Do I have to comply with ASTM E4-03?

As you can imagine, I hesitate to go to my AB until I fully understand my options and put at least a few ducks in a row.

Thanks in advance for pointing me in the right direction.

 

[Hershal]

Re: Testing vs Calibration

The short answer is no.

The explanation is that you will most likely cal the compression machine under ASTM E 4. The lab that owns the machine is a test lab or similar entity. That you cal their machine does NOT put you into the test world, excpt as a calibration provider.

Welcome to a small group of cal providers.....may I ask who your AB is?

Hope this helps.

Hershal

 

[crendfrey]

Greetings and good morning.

Thank you Hershal for your input.
In effect, you gave me the answer I was looking for and also the one I DID NOT want to hear.
You see my company owns Bertha. We will be calibrating customer scales with her.
Last night I did do some more research. I believe my argument will be as follows:

While Bertha is a hydraulic machine, no readings are taken from the hydraulic forces involved. The lifting/pulling of the mechanism is used solely as a vehicle to apply pressure to the (certified) load cell from which calibration will be performed, similar to the crane on our test truck is used solely to place weights/weight cart on a truck scale. In this instance, the WEIGHT is used for calibration. With Bertha, the load cell is the certified weight. In my (limited, uneducated) mind, as long as the load cell is properly documented and maintained it should be treated as any other “calibration” tool.

This should in effect remove me from testing and put the lab that certifies the load cell in to the testing category.

Yes??

To answer your question, we are accredited by ACLASS.
They have applied for and been assessed to the APLAC MRA (our auditor was part of the witness portion). They have already made “improvements” to their policies I assume to further comply with the requirements. Fortunately, we (our auditor) were aware of these during our assessment and have not yet had to rewrite anything concerning their policies. Given this info, I fully expect them to be impeccably correct in their view of Bertha.
Hence, my caution and quest for as much info as possible concerning something I intentionally wrote out of our documents.

 

[Hershal]

In your situation, E 4 is likely the method you will use, but that is not a requirement. There are other procedures, but E 4 is the usual method.

Hope this helps.

Hershal

 

[crendfrey]

Thank you, We will see how it goes.
I always look forward to different opinions.
It truely helps me figure this stuff out