🚀 go-pugleaf

I would agree that they do not need daily "calibration" but they do need
daily checking especially when you have seen them used as screwdrivers,
ground sharp edged to act as auxilliary knives, bent in the process of using
them as slingshots.   (Some manufacturing personnel never seem to grow up).

I would suggest a daily check by the person using to check for damage that
might interfere with their measurement capabilities,  yeah I know that the
nearest 64th is the best they can be read to, but not when somebody buffs a
quarter of an inch off the end.


--
Irvine Simpson,
Irvine.Simpson@Pace.co.uk
(Opinions expressed are personal and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of my employer).
Daniel J O'Leary wrote in message
<8525666A.003FF6A3.00@ntssmtp.picker.com>...
>Eric Stern, commenting on my proposed method to deal with
>steel rules, said, "Daniel's solution seems to me equivalent
>to killing flies with heavy hammers.
>
>     "Wrist straps have several properties quite distinct
>from rulers: they are critical to the performance of the
>electronic equipment and they have the frequent habit of
>losing their effectiveness. For that reason they need to be
>constantly monitored.
>
>     "Rulers seldom loose their calibration and many of
>their uses are trivial and non-critical to performance. Daily
>checking is way out of proportion with the need for most situations
>that I am aware of."
>
>He is exactly right. the frequency of checking depends upon
>the probability of the instrument being wrong. clearly, a steel
>rule does not need daily checking!
>
>My point was intended to illustrate a method of control of
>a simple instrument that allows a high probability of
>good measurements with a low administrative overhead.
>
>Daily checks are necessary, I believe , for wrist straps. They
>are far too frequent for steel rules.
>
>Thanks for the correction.
>
>Dan O'Leary CQA, CQE CQM, CRE
>Business Process Executive for Manufacturing
>doleary@qbe.picker.com