saamf roadshow durban csir nml eddie tarnow metrologist: torque & automotive 14 june 2006 iso/ts...
TRANSCRIPT
SAAMF Roadshow Durban
CSIR NML
Eddie Tarnow
Metrologist: Torque & Automotive
14 June 2006
ISO/TS 16949:2002 certification – Meeting the requirements of clause 7.6
Slide 2 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Control of devices
Slide 3 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
Clause 7.6
Selection of appropriate test & measuring equipment
• Has an analysis been conducted to determine the measurement accuracy required? What uncertainty is acceptable?
• Have the instrument accuracy specifications been correctly interpreted? (especially taking into account environmental tolerance)
Slide 4 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Control of devices
Slide 5 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
Clause 7.6
Calibration of test & measuring equipment
• Is a full calibration conducted, or just a partial?
• Is the instrument calibrated according to the manufacturer’s recommended procedure?
• Has the instrument been adjusted to get it to within spec? Or have correction factors simply been determined?
• Have the results been recorded/reported “as found” as well “as left? (before adjustment & after adjustment)
• Has the instrument been calibrated at the same points as previous calibration, thereby providing a useful history?
• Has the calibration service provider evaluated the results for conformance to accuracy specification and reported a statement to that effect?
Slide 6 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Control of devices
Slide 7 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
Clause 7.6
Verification/validation of test & measuring equipment
• Definition: Verification – check that nothing has changed since the calibration
• Definition: Validation – check to see the instrument is indeed fit for purpose
• Has the required accuracy been proven by the calibration? (validation)
• Is there evidence that the instrument accuracy remains within the specification? (If compared to last cal & no adjustment performed, verification)
Slide 8 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Control of devices
Slide 9 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Measurement traceability
• Definition: Measurement traceability – unbroken chain of comparisons between the UUT and the national measurement standard, each step of which has an estimated uncertainty associated with it.
• Can the last step of the traceability chain be identified/described? (Is the identity of the standard used known and unique?)
• Was the calibration service provider SANAS accredited & was the calibration performed within the laboratory’s published accreditation schedule best measurement capability (BMC)?
• Is there an uncertainty of measurement reported with the results?
Slide 10 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Control of devices
Slide 11 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
To adjust or not to adjust during calibration
• Is there record of adjustments having been made during the calibration?
• If adjustment has been performed, are the results before AND after the adjustment reported?
• Does the calibration service provider have the technical ability to perform adjustments?
• Advantages of adjusting to within spec
• eliminates the need to apply corrections,
• facilitates ease of use for the operator,
• instrument can be used in other applications,
• can reduce the cost of calibration,
• simplifies the estimation of uncertainty of measurement when using the instrument
Slide 12 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
To adjust or not to adjust during calibration continued…
•Disadvantages of adjusting to within spec
• adjustment immediately invalidates (destroys) previous history, (this can be managed)
• can increase the cost of calibration (some calibration service providers refuse to perform adjustments or do not have the technical ability – typically a problem if not using the authorised agents as the calibration service provider)
• the natural drift of the instrument may be disturbed (the instrument may become more stable if left undisturbed for a long period of time)
Slide 13 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Control of devices
Slide 14 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Calibration status
• Can the calibration status, (valid or invalid calibration), easily be determined by the user? (How easily can the user inadvertently use an “out-of- calibration” instrument? Who’s responsibility?)
• On what basis is “Valid Calibration” status assigned to an instrument?
• Is the calibration expiry date indicated on the calibration label?
• If partially calibrated, is there indication to the user to prevent accidental usage for another application?
• How will the quality system prevent the use of an “un-calibrated” instrument?
Slide 15 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Control of devices
Slide 16 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Calibration integrity• Is the calibration validity protected in some way? (Can the user accidentally or intentionally interfere with the calibration?)
• Who is responsible for ensuring calibration integrity? (Cannot always be the calibration service provider as the user may have access to adjustments)
• Which methods of calibration integrity protection are employed?
Integrity seals over adjustment access points or chassis opening points? Password protection – who keeps the password?
Slide 17 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6 cont.
Control of devices cont.
Slide 18 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Evaluating the impact of an “out-of-calibration” instrument• Is there communication from the calibration service provider regarding an “out-of-calibration” instrument and any subsequent adjustment?
• Was the error larger than the required uncertainty of the measurement or test?
• Was the instrument out of cal at a point directly applicable to the measurement function being used or was it on another range, function?
• Has a risk profile of the measurement been drawn up? Will an erroneous measurement have major consequences which cannot be rectified?
• What actions have been implemented to reduce the risk such as:-
• reducing the calibration interval,
• performing in-between-calibration verification checks
Slide 19 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6 cont.
Control of devices cont.
Slide 20 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6
Measurement software validation
• Is there evidence that the software is fit for its intended purpose? (proof that the software produces the correct measurement/test results)
• Has this been “validated” by comparing software generated results with results obtained by means of manual measurements?
• How is the integrity of the software protected?
• can a different version be inadvertently installed over the original version?
• is a copy of the original version kept in a safe place?
• is a particular version easily uniquely identifiable? (traceability)
• if changes are made, are these adequately documented and controlled? (can the user of the software make changes?)
Slide 21 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
Laboratory requirements.
Slide 22 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
Internal Laboratory requirements
Laboratory scope
• Is there evidence of a laboratory scope listing the methods or tests/measurements which can be performed by the laboratory?
• Are the uncertainties, (Best Measurement Capabilities), for these methods or tests/measurements quoted?
• Is the technically responsible person, who confers validity to the tests/measurement reports, identified?
Slide 23 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
Laboratory requirements.
Slide 24 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
Internal Laboratory requirements
Competence of laboratory personnel• Since the responsibility of assessing whether or not the metrologist is competent is an internal one:-
• Have criteria for the required competence been drawn up?
• Is there evidence that the metrologist’s competence has been assessed against these criteria?
• Was the metrologist’s competence assessed by means of physically witnessing a measurement/test AND comparing the results obtained with results of known accuracy?
• To what extent have audit sample measurements, or participation in proficiency testing schemes, provided proof of acceptable measurement capability?
• Does the metrologist have a training file containing records of relevant training and experience?
• Is there sufficient depth of staff and is a designated “stand-in” identified in the quality system?
Slide 25 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
Laboratory requirements.
Slide 26 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
Internal Laboratory requirements
Testing of the product• Are the uncertainties of measurement in the test adequately estimated?
• Do decisions of conformance or non-conformance take the estimated uncertainty of measurement into account?
Slide 27 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
Laboratory requirements.
Slide 28 © CSIR 2006 www.csir.co.za
ISO/TS 16949: Clause 7.6.3
External Laboratory requirements
Acceptability to the customer
• If the external laboratory is NOT SANAS accredited, does it meet all the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025?
• If it is SANAS accredited and, or, meets the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025, does it meet the technical requirements of the customer? (Does the scope of the laboratory cover the measurements/tests required by the customer) SANAS accreditation does not by default mean the laboratory technically meets the requirement of the customer!!
Questions??