Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
articles:optimizing_calibration_intervals [2023/02/01 18:37] – [Black-oxide Treated Gages] rrandall | articles:optimizing_calibration_intervals [2025/02/20 10:40] (current) – [Methodologies for the Determination of Calibration Intervals] rrandall | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Most M&TE are on arbitrary 12 month calibration intervals... as if “one size” fits all. These are typical “manufacturer-recommended intervals” - which are often extremely conservative because the manufacturer wants their calibration labs to stay busy. And most companies happily pay them to do so. Yes… over-calibrating M&TE reduces risk… but only to a degree((A MUCH better way to reduce risk is to increase the minimum " | Most M&TE are on arbitrary 12 month calibration intervals... as if “one size” fits all. These are typical “manufacturer-recommended intervals” - which are often extremely conservative because the manufacturer wants their calibration labs to stay busy. And most companies happily pay them to do so. Yes… over-calibrating M&TE reduces risk… but only to a degree((A MUCH better way to reduce risk is to increase the minimum " | ||
+ | [[https:// | ||
If M&TE calibration intervals were optimized based upon performance, | If M&TE calibration intervals were optimized based upon performance, | ||
Line 18: | Line 19: | ||
Methodologies for the determination of calibration intervals are defined in documents such as: | Methodologies for the determination of calibration intervals are defined in documents such as: | ||
- | * [[https:// | + | * [[https:// |
* [[http:// | * [[http:// | ||
There are many methods and theories to calculate calibration intervals, such as those found in NCSL RP-1, Method S1 (Classical Method), Method S2 (Binomial Method), and Method S3 (Renewal time Method). As a result, it can be difficult to choose the best method to determine the interval (Ref. [[https:// | There are many methods and theories to calculate calibration intervals, such as those found in NCSL RP-1, Method S1 (Classical Method), Method S2 (Binomial Method), and Method S3 (Renewal time Method). As a result, it can be difficult to choose the best method to determine the interval (Ref. [[https:// | ||
Line 25: | Line 26: | ||
[[http:// | [[http:// | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | + | {{ : | |
- | Perhaps the simplest and most widely used methodology for optimizing calibration intervals is the " | + | Perhaps the simplest and most widely used methodology for optimizing calibration intervals is the " |
==== Using the “Staircase” method ==== | ==== Using the “Staircase” method ==== | ||
Line 32: | Line 33: | ||
Each time an instrument is calibrated on a routine basis, the subsequent interval is extended IF it is found to be within a certain percentage (e.g., 80%) of the maximum permissible error that is required for measurement, | Each time an instrument is calibrated on a routine basis, the subsequent interval is extended IF it is found to be within a certain percentage (e.g., 80%) of the maximum permissible error that is required for measurement, | ||
- | Of course this method assumes that the company is being provided with “as found” data for each calibration performed. \\ | + | Of course, this method assumes that the company is being provided with “as found” data for each calibration performed. \\ |
- | [[https:// | + | A critical component when using this methodology is determining the percentage of the maximum permissible error. The higher the percentage, the greater the risk of an instrument being found Out-of-Tolerance (OOT); potentially resulting in nonconforming product escapes. The lower the percentage, the greater the cost associated with lowering the risk of an OOT condition; and reducing the potential for nonconforming product escapes. This percentage will often vary based on the type of instrumentation to which it is applied. \\ |
- | A critical component when using this methodology is determining the percentage of the maximum permissible error. The higher the percentage, the greater the risk of an instrument being found Out-of-Tolerance (OOT); potentially resulting in nonconforming product escapes. The lower the percentage, the greater the cost associated with lowering the risk of an OOT condition; and reducing the potential for nonconforming product escapes. This percentage will often vary based upon the type of instrumentation to which it is applied. \\ | + | |
- | Most often companies establish a " | + | Most often companies establish a " |
===== Initial Calibration Intervals ===== | ===== Initial Calibration Intervals ===== | ||