🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: bit.listserv.quality
Article #13542

Re: Test Equipment Calibration

#13542
From: Michael Solinas
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 1994 13:04
36 lines
3496 bytes
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > I have a question about the calibration of test equipment.  Any feedback
> > would be greatly appreciated.  The situation is this:  we calibrate all of
> > the test equipment that we use for formal acceptance testing.  Most of this
> > equipment we own, but some of it we rent or lease.  On the equipment we own,
> > we keep track of what equipment is used on a specific test.  So if, when get
> > that piece of equipment re-calibrated, we find that is was out of
> > calibration, we can trace back to the tests we performed and determine how o
 r
> > if they were affected by the out of calibration condition.
> Interesting approach!  I've been dealing with Quality System Audits for
> over 17 years and I've never had an auditor request how we trace back an
> out of calibration condition to a previously performed test...

I thought this was standard!  I've been involved in supplying military
components for years.  Most contracts call out MIL-STD-45662 as a calibration
standard - and you are required to be able to do this.

> Since you'll NEVER know when the out-of-cal took place (you assume that it
> was good when it left the lab), going back to a previously completed test
> seems illogical.  Do you assume that it was the equipment rather than the
> test item?  Do you re-test with a "known good" tester to see if a particular
> parameter was really in or out?  ...and how do you know that the other
> piece of equipment was really good??

In our case, we had a calibration failure.  We could demonstrate, by reviewing
the data sheet, that the error was causing us to test TOO TIGHTLY.  So - we
may have wasted some good product, but is wasn't necessary to recall and retest.
We got very, very lucky.

>                         Larry McElhiney, QE (ISO Coordinator)
>                         Plantronics, Inc.
>                         Santa Cruz, CA

How is your ISO certification going?  Are you certified?  We had our pre-
assessment, and will have the assessment the last week of this month.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <199406071302.GAA20245@netcom.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!netcom.com!msolinas

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1159be,8259fd8e044ed7db
X-Google-Attributes: gid1159be,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-06-07 06:13:37 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!netcom.com!msolinas
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.quality
Comments: ********************************************************
Comments: * The following "Approved" statement verifies header   *
Comments: * information for gateway passage.  No approval of the *
Comments: * content is implied.                                  *
Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU                              *
Comments: ********************************************************
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2014
Approved-By: "James W. Reese" <R505040@UNIVSCVM.BITNET>
Message-ID: <199406071302.GAA20245@netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 1994 09:04:24 EDT
Sender: TQM in Manufacturing and Service Industries Discussion List
              <QUALITY@PUCC.BITNET>
From: Michael Solinas <msolinas@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Test Equipment Calibration
In-Reply-To: <199406071150.EAA04800@mail.netcom.com> from
              "sandy47@cats.ucsc.edu" at Jun 7, 94 07:39:20 am
Lines: 35