C
cochranemurray
What gets your vote for most incomrehensible standard ? I would put the medical devices directive high up on my list.
What is the Most Incomprehensible Standard you have come across?
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
Wes Bucey
Prophet of Profit
I guess I never found any to be "incomprehensible."
I have had a private evaluation of some QMS Standards as "overkill" while others I was mystified that anyone would bother writing a Standard at all.
Product and material Standards, however, are the lifeblood of industry and commerce and I don't think any are written in anything other than completely stultefying language. I may be able to comprehend them, but most of them make ME look like the soul of brevity.
I have had a private evaluation of some QMS Standards as "overkill" while others I was mystified that anyone would bother writing a Standard at all.
Product and material Standards, however, are the lifeblood of industry and commerce and I don't think any are written in anything other than completely stultefying language. I may be able to comprehend them, but most of them make ME look like the soul of brevity.
N
nomisd
Standards I have loved
In a former life, I spent a couple of years working in the Editing department of BSI (which is how I got into this quality lark). I was responsible for preparing the electronic files for standards that were going to print. I spent many happy hours reading standards that I had no idea what they were going on about.
My particular favourite was BS5500, the standard for pressure vessels (now replaced by a European standard I think). It ran to a folder about 3-4 inches thick and had more tables and formulae than you could shake the proverbial stick at. It also had about 30 or 40 annexes. I always used to read it and think "I'm sure somebody understands this".
The other one that sticks in my mind was a standard for imperial screw threads. It had last been published in the 1940s and hence no electronic file of existed so I had to create one. It had a table in it that listed various dimensions of the pitches that had such obscure measurements as 3 15/16 inches so much use of the equation editor was required. The table was designed to be a foldout insert so was huge. And we were using Windows 95, P1s and 14" screens so crashing and locking every two or three minutes as the machines couldn't take it. Tell kids that today and they won't believe you.
In a former life, I spent a couple of years working in the Editing department of BSI (which is how I got into this quality lark). I was responsible for preparing the electronic files for standards that were going to print. I spent many happy hours reading standards that I had no idea what they were going on about.
My particular favourite was BS5500, the standard for pressure vessels (now replaced by a European standard I think). It ran to a folder about 3-4 inches thick and had more tables and formulae than you could shake the proverbial stick at. It also had about 30 or 40 annexes. I always used to read it and think "I'm sure somebody understands this".
The other one that sticks in my mind was a standard for imperial screw threads. It had last been published in the 1940s and hence no electronic file of existed so I had to create one. It had a table in it that listed various dimensions of the pitches that had such obscure measurements as 3 15/16 inches so much use of the equation editor was required. The table was designed to be a foldout insert so was huge. And we were using Windows 95, P1s and 14" screens so crashing and locking every two or three minutes as the machines couldn't take it. Tell kids that today and they won't believe you.
J
jmp4429
ANSI\ESD S20.20
I could probably comprehend it if I tried really hard, but it doesn’t seem worth the effort.
I could probably comprehend it if I tried really hard, but it doesn’t seem worth the effort.
I thought some of the medical device quality specs were bad. THEN I started to look at some of the IEC 60601 specs 
and the quality specs weren't quite as bad. Some of the 60601 specs are written in both French and English (one page in French, the same page in English, turn the page, repeat). It got to the point where the French version made more sense than the English version. Considering I don't speak French......
and the quality specs weren't quite as bad. Some of the 60601 specs are written in both French and English (one page in French, the same page in English, turn the page, repeat). It got to the point where the French version made more sense than the English version. Considering I don't speak French......
R
RG Ohidy
I have to agreee, the code for pressure vessels was totally confusing.
Similar threads
