The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  Measurement, Test and Calibration
  Test & Measuring Equipment

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Test & Measuring Equipment
Ron Dooley
Forum Contributor

Posts: 10
From:Plain City, Ohio, USA
Registered: Mar 99

posted 02 February 2000 04:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ron Dooley   Click Here to Email Ron Dooley     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This question is a result of a survey by one of our customers.

The question:

Control of Test & Measuring Equipment.

"Requirement by our customer.
Calibration results to be analyzed using statistical techniques to establish frequency".

I know of no requirement for ISO or QS that has any language concerning statistical studies for calibrations to determine frequency.

Would appreciate any help. Thanks

IP: Logged

David Mullins
Forum Contributor

Posts: 248
From:Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02 February 2000 05:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for David Mullins   Click Here to Email David Mullins     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Good Management!
When you open the book that came with the equipment, what is the manufacturers recommendation on calibration frequency. Determining this frequency yourself can be an expensive and time consuming operation. Additionally, I know in Oz there are already numerous standards that provide this sort of guidance.
At the end of the day, the stats to determine frequency relate to the average time taken to exceed the acceptable degree of risk of the accuracy of the equipment.

------------------

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 02 February 2000 05:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I don't know that there is a specific requirement for statistical techniques but I would be ready to use cal records as evidence of stability during your cal interval. I would also be ready to say you evaluated the need for statistical analysis of calibration data and found it to not be value added based upon instrument stability. You don't need a graph to tell when the instrument is wearing or such - its stability will fall with use. If heavily used this could be a day or a week. Or it could be a month or a year. Lot's of possibilities.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 04 February 2000 11:50 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
By the way, graphing, as I understand it, is a 'statistical technique'. Have any of you run into this?

Because of it being calibration in nature, I'm moving this thread to the Calibration forum.

IP: Logged

Jerry Eldred
Forum Wizard

Posts: 136
From:
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07 February 2000 11:24 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jerry Eldred   Click Here to Email Jerry Eldred     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The QS9000 requirement is that calibration is done at an appropriate frequency (4.11(c)). At the end of QS9000 para 4.11 is Note 18, which says that ISO10012 may be used for guidance.

ISO1001201:1992(E), para 4.11 "Intervals of Confirmation" there is further detail. It does state that confirmation needs to be done at intervals which maintain an acceptable level of confidence that the instrument will remain in tolerance for the duration of the interval.

The problem with use of the manufacturers intervals is that it is not always correct, and not al manufacturers document a recommended interval. If you have a small calibration program, and you can provide a manufacturers documented interval for all instruments, you might stay out of trouble.

In my years of experience in calibration I have found that the manufacturer's recommended interval doesn't always work when equipment gets some age on it. A Hewlett-Packard signal generator, brand new out of the box, used in a clean, controlled environment, is very likely to stay within tolerances (as an example). But even with good brand name equipment, as that same unit ages, its ability to remain in tolerance for that same calibration interval will change. Or many other factors such as a less than ideal operating environment, or moving that piece of equipment often (a signal generator that is picked up, put on a cart and transported to another location repeatedly, for example) would not have the same probability of remaining within tolerance.

There is also an upside to adjustment of calibration intervals. A Fluke 77 multimeter, for example may have an interval of 12 months. If you had 100 of those meters and statistically evaluated its confirmation interval, I have seen intervals on that particular model extended up to 3 to 5 years. I seem to even recollect one company that did interval analysis on that model and ended up with no re-calibration required because they never had a single out-of-tolerance.

Interval evaluation in a small program may well be more work than it is worth in some circumstances. But in a large calibration program, many 10's or perhaps 100's of thousands of dollars per year could be saved, as well as the identification of porblem units. I had some DC millivolt calibrators in my program with a 12 month recommended interval. I had two units. Neither one of these, even after a factory overhaul could stay in tolerance for even three months. I eventually quarantined them and told the user to buy something else as a replacement. The process people ended up with test equipment which would do the job right. And risk to customers product was also minimized.

I have managed calibration programs with fixed intervals, but I am also sensitive that statistical interval adjustment is also sometimes a must in some circumstances.

Hope I didn't stir up the pot too much on this. But I am duty bound to tell the truth the best I can.

As for methods, there are many. I grouped similar instruments together annually (for example Fluke 70 series including model 73, 75, 77, then Fluke 77-II series as a separate family), calculated how many of these instruments (as a percentage) remained in tolerance through their calibration interval for any calibrations done that calendar year. I matched that percentage figure against a chart I developed. A given percentage figure correlated to either an increase, remain the same, or decrease in interval. Depending on the percentage figure, the change was incremental (i.e.: a very low percentage figure corresponded to a drastic decrease in interval, etc.).

------------------

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 07 February 2000 11:50 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I agree with you Jerry. My expectations are that whoever is running the show be knowledgable to look at the use of the device and to watch (and understand) the calibration record. In some companies this is a complex task - such as your environment. Some companies are small shops with maybe 5 or 10 devices total.

I believe QS9000's MSA requirement came from the fact that many companies have absolutely no one in-house who really understands the necessary concepts.

IP: Logged

Jerry Eldred
Forum Wizard

Posts: 136
From:
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07 February 2000 12:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jerry Eldred   Click Here to Email Jerry Eldred     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Marc,

Your point brought up a thought for any of those reading who may benefit. In my years working as a consultant/contractor, it was sometimes an option at some calibration contractors to offer management of small customers calibration programs. If a company is too small to have an in-house calibration program, they would also be likely not to have qualified personnel on staff to evaluate calibration intervals. One possible solution to this would be that if they use a contractor to do their calibrations, that if it is a reputable, properly qualified calibration contractor, find out if the contractor does interval evaluations.

------------------

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 07 February 2000 01:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have a client right now that is doing just that. GE has a cal lab (luckily) just down the street. They keep the database (customer gets a copy of database and software database is in) and the whole shooting match. I do still have to ensure the guy they recently put in charge of the quality program understands the basics, however.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!