the standard 13 mar08

8/8/2019 The Standard 13 Mar08

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-standard-13-mar08 1/21

Vol. 22, No. 1 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality March 2008

Continuous Process ImprovementContinuous Process Improvement

Got Any

Got

Any

Got

Any

New New New Ideas? Ideas? Ideas?

Also in this issue: Also in this issue: •• TUR

vs

‘GUM’

Expanded

Uncertainty

StatementsTUR

vs

‘GUM’

Expanded

Uncertainty

Statements

•• New ISO/IEC Guide 99New ISO/IEC Guide 99‐‐20072007

•• In Memoriam In Memoriam ‐‐ Professor Dr. Donald S. ErmerProfessor Dr. Donald S. Ermer

•• The Learning CurveThe Learning Curve

•• Plus Liaison Reports and news releasesPlus Liaison Reports and news releases



The Standard is published quarterly by the Measurement Quality Division of

ASQ; deadlines are February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15. Text infor-

mation intended for publication can be sent via electronic mail as an attachment in

MS Word format (Times New Roman, 11 pt). Use single spacing between sen-

tences. Graphics/illustrations must be sent as a separate attachment, in jpg format.

Photographs of MQD activities are always welcome. Publication of articles, prod-

uct releases, advertisements or technical information does not imply endorsement

by MQD or ASQ. While The Standard makes every effort to ensure the accuracy

of articles, the publication disclaims responsibility for statements of fact or opinion

made by the authors or other contributors. Material from The Standard may not be

reproduced without permission of ASQ. Copyrights in the United States and all

other countries are reserved. Website information: MQD’s homepage can be found

at http://www.asq.org/measure. © 2008 ASQ, MQD. All rights reserved.

The StandardVol 22, No. 1, March 2008

Managing Editor and PublisherJay L. Bucher 6700 Royal View Dr.De Forest, WI 53532-2775

Voice: 608-846-6968Email: [email protected]

Advertising Submit your draft copy to Jay Bucher , with arequest for a quotation. Indicate size desired.

Since The Standard is published ‘in-house’the requester must submit a photo or graphicof their logo, if applicable. The followingrates apply:

Business card size ............................ $1001/8 page ........................................... $1501/4 page ............................................ $2001/3 page ............................................ $250½ page ............................................. $300Full page .......................................... $550

Advertisements will be accepted on a ‘per issue’ basis only; no long-term contracts will be available at present. Advertising must beclearly distinguished as an ad. Ads must berelated to measurement quality, quality of measurement, or a related quality field. Adsmust not imply endorsement by the Measure-

ment Quality Division or ASQ.

Letters to the EditorThe Standard welcomes letters from members and subscribers. Letters should clearlystate whether the author is expressing opin-ion or presenting facts with supporting infor-mation. Commendation, encouragement,constructive critique, suggestions, and alter-native approaches are accepted. If the con-tent is more than 200 words, we may delete portions to hold that limit. We reserve theright to edit letters and papers.

Information for Authors

The Standard publishes papers on the qual-ity of measurements and the measurement of quality at all levels ranging from relativelysimple tutorial material to state-of-the-art.

Papers published in The Standard are notreferred in the usual sense, except to ascer-tain that facts are correctly stated and to as-sure that opinion and fact are clearly distin-guished one from another. The Editor re-serves the right to edit any paper. Please sin-gle space after sentences and use Times NewRoman, 11 pt font.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chair’s Corner ................................................................................. 3The Learning Curve ........................................................................ 4TUR vs ‘GUM’ Expanded Uncertainty Statements ........................ 7 New ISO/IEC Guide 99-2007 ......................................................... 9Continuous Process Improvement - Got Any New Ideas? ........... 10

IAS Report .................................................................................... 14Donald S. Ermer - In Memoriam .................................................. 17MQD Officers and Committee Chairs .......................................... 18MQD Regional Councilors ........................................................... 19LAB News Release ....................................................................... 21

FROM THE DESK OF THE EDITOR /PUBLISHER

As you might have noticed in the table of contents,we are again ginving notice of the passing of one of MQD, and ASQ’s illustrious members. Professor Doctor Donald S. Ermer passed away this past De-cember. His obituary can be found on page 17. Our thoughts and prayers go out to his family, friends,and associates. He will be missed. Godspeed.

This edition of The Standard starts our fourth year as Managing Editor and

Publisher. Since going electronic in March of 2005, we have saved ap- proximately $50,000.00 in printing and mailing costs for the MeasurementQuality Division. This edition is not the ‘smallest’ (as in fewest articles or number of pages), but it’s close to it. Lately, there has been a series of

Pepsi commercials on TV where they shout: “WAKE UP PEOPLE!”.I would like to do that right now - we need your articles, ideas and papers

to print in The Standard. I would like to think that this newsletter was not

for only one, two or three people to toot their horns or press their ideas tothe public. It is for our members to tell their stories, give their ideas, or seek solutions to problems that they have not found answers to; or better yet, where they have found the answers and are willing to share them withthe measurement/metrology/calibration community. Thanks for listening &

W W AKE AKE U U PP PPEOPLEEOPLE!!!!

http://www.asq.org/measure

mailto:[email protected]




http://www.asq.org/measure



MQD


CHAIR ’S CORNER By Dilip Shah

As I write the Chair’scolumn for this issueof The Standard, weare getting ready to participate in theMeasurement ScienceConference (MSC) inAnaheim duringMarch 13-14, 2008.The MeasurementQuality Division has been a co-sponsor of this conference sincethe division was

founded in 1991. This year, the Division is volun-teering its time in many ways. We have a sessionsponsored where Jay Bucher (MQD Treasurer

and The Standard Editor and Publisher) and Iare presenting papers. In addition, both Jay and Iare conducting two spearate workshops onWednesday, March 12, 2008.

We look for many opportunities to promote theCertified Calibration Technician exam as its divi-sion sponsor. This year, we requested ASQ Certifi-cation Department to administer the exam onMarch 12, 2008 at the Measurement Science Con-

ference. Our Past-Chair, Duane Allen is volun-teering to proctor the exam for ASQ with possiblesupport from local ASQ sections. Thank you,Duane for your dedication.

We also decided to hold a two-day CCT exam re-fresher workshop on March 11-12, 2008. Thiswould like a sort of a boot camp for exam prepara-tion. This was the first time that we have triedsomething like this and we had no idea how itwould pan out.

At this writing, we are pleasantly surprised to findthat over 35 people have signed up to take the CCTrefresher workshop and 21 have applied to take theexam.

The response was so strong for the workshop thatwe had decided to stop taking registrations after thefirst 30 attendees had signed up. But, the MSC con-

ference committee did not want to turn away anyregistrations. So, after some brainstorming with theMSC committee we added another concurrent ses-sion. As a result, we have enlisted Past-Chair,

Graeme Payne to concurrently teach the workshopwith me. The division is very appreciative of Graeme stepping in at such short notice to help outthe division.

As usual, we will also have table space at the MSC.We hope to see many of you at the conference and provide a report in the next issue of The Standard.

The Measurement Quality Division is about meas-urements of many different kinds. The science of measurement (metrology) is very important in our daily life. In order to conduct global commerce, weneed to standardize. It starts with physical measure-

ments. But, we also need another level of stan-dardization. That is the language of metrology andthe terms associated with it.

Since metrology is used everywhere in physics,chemistry, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology etc. it isimportant to standardize the definitions. The ISO/

IEC Guide 99:2007 cancels and replaces what isknown to us in the metrology field as the secondedition (1993) of the international vocabulary of basic and general terms in metrology (VIM). It isequivalent to the third edition of the VIM. It is

truly a global effort to harmonize many differentterms used in many industries to form a commonvocabulary.

ISO/IEC Guide 99 was developed by a joint com-mittee comprising representatives of the Interna-tional Bureau of Weights and Measures, IEC, ISO,the International Federation of Clinical Chemistryand Laboratory Medicine, the International Unionof Pure and Applied Chemistry, the InternationalUnion of Pure and Applied Physics, the Interna-tional Organization of Legal Metrology and the

International Laboratory Accreditation Coopera-tion.

I do not like to normally endorse anything outright, but I feel that everyone involved with measure-ments should have a copy for reference. It can be

(Continued on page 8)



MQD


THE LEARNING CURVE By Phil Painchaud

This is the fifty-third installmentin an uninterrupted coextensive

series of unverified treatisescharted to be on the general subject of Metrology Education.We have for the past sixteenyears been writing these openletters to our honorable Boss,the Managing Editor of this journal. Of late we have fre-

quently found it necessary as in this iteration todeviate from our charted subject because of a lack breaking news items of metrological interest. Atsuch times it becomes necessary to become tutorial

on metrological topics (some of which may be of dubious interest some readers). As usual this onewill be in the format of an open letter.

Dear Boss:

As I intimated in my previous column, it was grati-fying to discover that I do have a few readers eventhough it cost me several bucks out of my own pocket. You will remember that it concerned thegeneral topic of who, where, how, and why, etc.,invented the sealed glass thermometer. While I was

researching the matter, I discovered an undocu-mented statement claiming the Galileo also in-vented the hair hygrometer. (Now don’t get thatconfused with hydrometer . That device is used todetermine the specific gravity of liquids. Those of you who are old enough and have lived in colder climates will recall using such devices to check theantifreeze level in your car radiator before the ad-vent of the modern glycerol based coolants.) Asyou should know a hair hydrometer is one of sev-eral different devices that can be used to measurethe Relative Humidity of gases, especially the at-

mosphere.

I was unable to find any supporting data to thatstatement. Hence do not know when or where Gali-leo invented the device. I would be interested toknow if he invented it while he was still Professor of Natural Philosophy at the University of Pisa be-fore he fled the Inquisition to Florence to becomeunder the protection of the Medicis. Or if it was

while he was in Florence, and if so, did the Medici brothers Ferdinand and Leopold have a part in thedevelopment?

Naturally I called around to a few acquaintances tosee if they could help. All I could get was a reitera-tion of the old unban myth that the hair had to be a pubic hair of a Swedish virgin. Applying knownfactors that seem to make some sense because, aswas explained to me, the natural pigments in bru-nette, brownette, and red hair makes them unsuit-able for hydrometer use. Scandinavians, Swedes in particular, are predominately natural blonds, I wasalso told that there is something in the body chem-istry that excludes the use of male hair, and that infemales their body chemistry changes permanentlyupon pregnancy, hence the requirement for virgins.The need for pubic hair was justified by the re-

quirement that any hair to be used must never have been bleached, dyed, permanent waved, or havehad any other chemical treatment. Pubic hairs areunlikely to have had any of these treatments.

But the clincher came when I was told that thecraftsman building the hydrometer usually pre-ferred to start with a hair at least six inches long inorder to be able to cut and choose that segmentmost suited for his purpose I do not claim to be anauthority on pubic hair, but I am reasonably certainthat few ever grow to a length of six inches. An-

other urban myth shot down the drain! I will bemuch appreciative if anybody can fill me in withdetails of Galileo’s connection with the inventionof the hair hydrometer (with documented proof of course).

Now let us get down to our charted subject; Me-trology Education. There has been noticeable activ-ity of late by several organizations to establish“Scholarship Funds” for the education of people inMetrology. Our own MQD is loudly supportingsome of these efforts. But why when the true mar-

ket does not exist? I am not saying that is shouldnot exist. Quite to the contrary! I hold that we needto develop top level recognition that academicallyeducated Metrologists are an essential element inour economic, productive, and scientific ways of life. For anyone to expect that this truism can be




MQD


promulgated from the bottom up is productivelyinefficient, impractical, and /or probably impossi- ble. What is needed is a series of edits from the top, be it via Government Specifications, CorporatePolicy Documents, International Standards, or other criterion mandating that all Metrology effortsand organizations be guided by a properly qualifiedacademically educated Metrologist (or scientificequivalent).

What we have, in those few places where we haveany training efforts at all, are training programs for technicians and calibrators. All well and good, wealways need technicians and calibrators, but who isgoing to train them? When they are throughschooling and out in the cold world that is going tolead them through the inevitable new technologies?

Managerial personnel must somehow be convincedto shed the false concept that an MBA can manageanything. The fundamental concepts that are im- posed on a candidate for that degree are dichotomicto the principals practiced by a truly ProfessionalMetrologist.

I remembered that I had preached this same sermonin the past, so I researched my files of copies of previous Columns and I found in Column 13 writ-ten in 1996 the following:

In the October 1996 issue of QUALITY PROGRESS (all ASQ members receive that peri-

odical monthly), Dr. Mete Sirvanci, Professor of

Business and Economics at the University of Wis-

consin-Whitewater, posed the question “Are Stu-

dents the true Customers of Higher Education?”

The answer of course is obvious. In any education

process the students are the raw material being

fashioned into the product desired by the eventual

customer, an employer.

This is true irrespective of whether the education

is `higher’ or `lower’, primary or secondary, me-trology, or philosoph,. or engineering, or medi-

cine, or theological, or liberal arts, or what have

you. To continue production of any product, that

product must have an eventual customer who will

buy that product. But that product must also be

constructed from some sort of raw material.

We should look upon any educational institution

(any level, preschool through doctoral) as a sort

of factory. A “factory” where workers (the fac-

ulty) create a finished product (educated gradu-

ates) from raw material (matriculated students),

under the supervision of an established hierarchy

(school administration), according to policies laid

down by CEO’s and Boards of Directors (school

boards, trustees and/or the electorate where appli-

cable). I have occasionally in the past drawn a

direct analogy with an industrial facility with a

widely recognized product.

---Not very far from where I am writing

this, the Hunt-Wesson Foods Co.[Now Con-Agra]

had a facility where they annually processed hun-

dreds of kilo-tonnes of tomatoes fresh from the

fields into paste, sauce, catsup, and other desir-

able tomato products.

In this case are the tomatoes the custom-

ers? You bet they are not!! They are the raw ma-

terial being shaped into products that the custom-

ers (you and I and others) want to buy. Our de-

sires and willingness to buy specific products and

quantities of those products are translated by the

Directorate into policies for the Administration to

use in the direction and supervision of the work-

ers. They in turn following those directions, proc-

ess the tomatoes into the paste, sauce, catsup, and

so forth that we, the customers wish to buy.

The educational process is much the

same. Here the customers are the parents in the

case of the younger students, and the eventual

employers in the case of the more advanced can-

didates. These “customers” make their demands

known in the polling places for the younger stu-

dents by electing school boards of their choosing.

In the case of the higher level students, the em-

ployer (private or public sector) makes his wants

known by whom and how readily he hires which

graduates. In either case these wants are filtered back to the cognizant administration resulting in

changes of policy directions to the work force to

alter the product accordingly. If changes are not

made accordingly, in the long run, we can expect

the demise of that “factory”. No one will want its

product------i.e., no sales.

(Continued from page 4)




MQD


It is too often overlooked by both the students and the school administrations alike, that their

product, i.e., their graduates, must be “sold” to a “market” who want and need exactly that product,

just as Hunt-Wesson must sell their catsup to consumers who want and need that delectable stuff to

spread on their hamburgers and french fries.

Back in the 1960’s there started here in California a thing called the “Berkeley Free Speech

Movement”. It rapidly spread to other campuses over a wide area. Distilled down from all of the un-

rest, civil disobedience, and “filthy speech” which accompanied the movement, was a false philosophy

that essentially said that, “The students alone should control every aspect of the educational process”;

that the student alone had the right to dictate what, where, when, how, and by whom anything would

be taught; and how much if anything they might be required to pay; and for what levels of accom-

plishment if any, would degrees and other accolades be awarded. (I have been reading in current

newspaper articles how some of the leaders of that movement nearly forty years ago, are now be-

moaning the fact that they were ever associated with such a ludicrous premise).

Unfortunately this ridiculous postulate keeps reappearing in varying formats and facades.

Metrology education itself is not free of this insidious cancer. We are constantly besieged by indi-

viduals who have had little or no education in fundamental metrology and sometimes only scantytraining in some small area of instrument maintenance/calibration, and who seem to believe that they

are fully accredited Professional Metrologists, and who are demanding that recognition. No way!!

The road to full professionalism in metrology is long and arduous, but extremely satisfying. The

“Berkeley Movement” philosophies of “get it quick and easy, and on your own terms”, which even if

they were correct, could never apply in metrology. As well, no fiat by any company can create a

Metrologist especially where one does not already exist.

Well Boss, as the old saying goes, “The more things change the more they stay the same”. In the twelveyears since I wrote the above many things have changed but we seem to be ‘back to square one again’.How do we convince the MQD and other Metrology related organizations to develop programs designedfor educating top management personnel about Metrology Personnel requirements? I am open to sugges-

tions.

Boss that concludes my ‘soap boxing’ for this issue. If you or any of our readers want to contact me, andI don’t care if it is positive or negative, I am at the same old stand.

Phil Painchaud1110 West Dorothy DriveBrea, CA 92821-2017Phone: 714-529-6604Cell: 714-928-6084FAX: 714-529-1109e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]






MQD


TUR vs. ‘GUM’ Expanded Uncertainty Statements

Christopher L. Grachanen

Over the years I have heard many different opinions as to thesuitability of Test Uncertainty Ratio (TURs) being used in lieu

of expanded uncertainty statements (derived per the methodol-ogy recommended in ISO/IEC ‘Guide to the Expression of Un-certainty in Measurement’, commonly referred to as the‘GUM’) in order to comply with laboratory accreditation re-quirements per ISO/IEC 17025: 2005 ‘General Requirementsfor the Competence of Testing And Calibration Laboratories’. Ifound it useful to research the subject to substantiate my ownopinion.

First, a definition of TUR is in order. TUR is the comparison between the accuracy of the UUT (UnitUnder Test) and the estimated calibration uncertainty. This should not be confused with Test AccuracyRatio (TAR) which is the comparison between the accuracy of the UUT and the accuracy of the standard

performing the calibration. Key difference in these definitions is that TUR takes into consideration theestimated uncertainty of the calibration process i.e. calibration ensemble, which is composed of manydifferent uncertainty components such as ambient environment influences, stability, repeatability, etc.,of which uncertainty of the calibration standard is only one component. TAR is only concerned with theaccuracy of the calibration standard and not the calibration ensemble.

With that being said, ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994 states “The laboratory shall ensure that calibration un-certainties are sufficiently small so that the adequacy of the measurement is not affected ” It also speci-fies that the “Collective uncertainty of the measurement standards shall not exceed 25% of the accept-

able tolerance (e.g., manufacturer’s specification)”. NCSLI RP-3 ‘Calibration Procedures’, section5.2.10 ‘Tolerance Testing’ relates “Where calibrations provide for verification that measurement quanti-

ties are within specified tolerances, the probability that incorrect acceptance decisions (false accept)

will result from calibration tests shall not exceed 2% and shall be documented. Where it is not practica-ble to estimate this probability, the test uncertainty ratio shall be equal to or greater than 4:1.”

ISO/IEC 17025: 2005 section 5.4.6.1, ‘Estimation of Uncertainty of Measurement’ states, “ A calibration

laboratory, or a testing laboratory performing its own calibrations, shall have and shall apply a proce-dure to estimate the uncertainty of measurement for all calibrations and types of calibrations”. ISO/IEC17025: 2005 does not specify TURs are an accepted means for estimating and reporting the uncertaintyof measurements. However section 5.4.6.2, NOTE 2 does state, “ In those cases where a well-recognized test method specifies limits to the values of the major sources of uncertainty of measurement and specifies the form of presentation of calculated results, the laboratory is considered to have satisfied thisclause by following the test method and reporting instructions”. This ‘proviso’ is often interpreted tomean that TUR satisfy the requirements of estimating and reporting measurement uncertainty.

From an end user prospective, TURs implicitly reports measurement uncertainty where as GUM expanded uncertainty statements explicitly reports measurement uncertainty. I have found this explainedquite well in the April 2004 issue of the A2LA News: The Newsletter of the American Association for Laboratory Accreditation. “ Is Measurement Uncertainty Necessary on Certificates of Calibration for

Testing Laboratories? … Calibration certificates or reports can present measurement uncertainty either




MQD


explicitly or implicitly. Explicit statements are straight forward and are either applied to each data point or to the calibration process across the range of the calibration. Implicit statements typically appear as

either a ratio or as a statement referencing a specification with defined uncertainties. The test uncer-tainty ratio (TUR) is probably the most common statement of uncertainty and is defined as the ratio of the tolerance of the unit under test (calibrated item) to the expanded uncertainty of the measurand or

calibration process. If one knows the tolerance of the unit under test (found primarily in manufacturer’soperating manuals and/or method specifications) and the ratio is presented on the calibration certifi-cate, one can algebraically determine the expanded uncertainty….”http://www.a2la.org/newsletters/april2004/A2LANews_april2004.cfm

From the references sighted above one can reasonably surmise that TURs satisfies measurement uncer-tainty requirements for laboratory accreditation. I welcome further discussion on this topic. Please sendcomments / remarks to the editor of The Standard, Jay Bucher, for posting in a future issue.

=======================================================================


ordered from the ISO store for an equivalent of 189 CHF (Swiss Francs - approx. $ 172.00 USD) fromthe following link:

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=45324

After the Measurement Science Conference, we look forward to spring and the ASQ World Conferenceon Quality and Improvement (WCQI) in May 2008 in Houston, Texas.

If you are attending MSC and WCQI, please stop by the MQD booth and say “Hi”. We would love tomeet you and hear your ideas, comments and feedback. We would always love for you to get involved inMQD activities. We can use volunteers to help in many different capacities and make the division more

valuable for you, the members.

Sincerely,

Dilip Shah, ASQ CCT, CQA, CQEE = mc3 Solutions.E-mail: [email protected]


http://www.a2la.org/newsletters/april2004/A2LANews_april2004.cfm





http://www.a2la.org/newsletters/april2004/A2LANews_april2004.cfm



MQD


New ISO/IEC Guide on vocabulary of metrology

reflects evolution of science of measurement

ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and its partner IEC (International ElectrotechnicalCommission) have published a new guide on the vocabulary of metrology – the science of measurementand its application.

ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007, International vocabulary of metrology – Basic and general concepts and asso-ciated terms (VIM), which is an English-French publication, gives guidance on the concepts and termsused in various approaches to measurement.

Before people can communicate, they need to know and understand the words they wish to use. This isequally true in metrology, where concepts and terms such as "measurement result", "measurement error"and "measurement uncertainty" need to be agreed upon if they are to be used in a consistent manner.

Since metrology is in an evolving state concerning what is the best approach (e.g. classical versus uncer-tainty), it is especially important to have an international vocabulary that allows metrologists to commu-nicate clearly about the measurement approach that they are using.

ISO/IEC Guide 99 cancels and replaces the second edition of the International vocabulary of basic andgeneral terms in metrology (VIM). It is equivalent to the third edition of the VIM.

The need to cover measurements in chemistry and laboratory medicine for the first time, as well as toincorporate concepts such as those that relate to metrological traceability, measurement uncertainty, andnominal properties, led to this third edition. Its title is now International vocabulary of metrology — Ba-sic and general concepts and associated terms (VIM), in order to emphasize the primary role of conceptsin developing a vocabulary.

In ISO/IEC Guide 99, it is taken for granted that there is no fundamental difference in the basic princi- ples of measurement in physics, chemistry, laboratory medicine, biology, or engineering. Furthermore,an attempt has been made to meet conceptual needs of measurement in fields such as biochemistry, foodscience, forensic science, and molecular biology.

ISO/IEC Guide 99 was developed by a joint committee comprising representatives of the InternationalBureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM), IEC, ISO, the International Federation of Clinical Chemistryand Laboratory Medicine (IFCC), the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC), theInternational Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP), the International Organization of Legal Me-trology (OIML) and the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC).

www.iso.org

http://www.iso.org/

http://www.iso.org/



MQD


Continuous Process Inprovement—Got Any New Ideas? By Jay L. Bucher

Where do ideas come from? Do you have to be special in some way to get them? Are they reserved for the young, or just the young at heart? Is neccesity really the mother of invention? Or is it true that we

simply recycle old ideas when we tire of the way we currently do things?

Please allow me to ramble a bit while I try to get my arms around this concept of ‘Continuous ProcessImprovement’; AKA coming up with a new and/or better idea or way to do what is already being done.The general concept of what I am talking about is how do we, as a metrology and calibration commu-nity, complete the processes and procedures in our daily work environment while making improvements,saving time and money, and keeping upper management off our collective backs?

Where does the idea for going paperless come from? But more importantly, where does the idea of howto accomplish it come from? Is it an epiphany that happens in the shower (actually, for me, that is whereit has happened on several occasions. Not only is it a good ‘idea place’ for me, but I’m also hiegenicallysound). Or do you get your ideas when staring at the problem at work, while driving to or from work, or

while taking your aggressions out on your buddies on the raquetball court? No matter where they comefrom, why do we have them, and what can we do to increase and improve them? I don’t have the answer to any of these questions. But maybe YOU do!!

I believe that companies hire new graduates out of their respective schools (under graduate, graduate,trade, military and vocational schools) for several different reasons: they may have been trained in thelatest technologies, equipment, processes and procedures; they may have received their education fromthe best trained instructors, professors, and teachers available in their chosen fields; they may bring anew outlook and set of eyes to the problems and challenges that most companies face in today’s fastevolving markets; and yes—nepotisim is still alive and well in the work place. But having said that,fresh blood can also bring fresh ideas on how to accomplish a process or procedure that has been donethe same way for years, decades, or since the plant was opened!

Most of us know that if we work in any type of regulated industry (the FDA comes to mind, along withseveral others), that any change or modification to a process or procedure must be validated and/or qualified before that particular change can be incorporated into the aforementioned process or proce-dure. This must be documented, the personnel must be trained on the change, and their training recordsupdated to show that they have been trained and understand the new way to do business.

Right now, I can imagine a lot of the older crowd nodding their heads about what I have written. But inthe back of their minds they are really saying, “I’m going to let some new smart mouthed kid tell mehow to do my job. I’ve done it this way for 15 years and nobody has shown me a better way yet.” Cometo think of it, 15 years ago, this same ‘old timer’ was the new kid on the block, and what happened to hisor her new ideas? Probably the same thing that happens to the new ideas of today. Most are relegated to

‘we’ll see later if it works’ bin, and later turns into 15 years of the same old way of doing business.

You don’t have to be a rebel to get your ideas noticed. You don’t have to start a riot among your fellowworkers to get the attention of the supervisor or manager. All you have to do is use their terminology toget their attention. Words like ‘saving time and money’, or ‘think of the improved safety’, or maybe‘this could save all of our jobs from going overseas’. Continuous process improvement is really have




MQD


the mind set to look at how you do your job day in and day out, and being aware that possibly there is a better, quicker, safer, more efficient way to get the same job done, without costing more money or time.

Allow me to reprint some of the text from The Quality Calibration Handbook, chapter 16: Continuous Process Improvement :1

There are two items that must continually be updated: your process improvements and training. If aword or phrase were to be assigned to each chapter... the word for this [continuous process improve-ment] would have to be attitude . . . bold and italicized! To be successful, both within your departmentand when dealing with your customers, there is nothing more important than the group’s attitude.

To help ensure that all of the operations used in a calibration function occur in a stable manner, there

must be a quality calibration system. The effective operation of such a system should result in stable

processes and, therefore, in a consistent output from those processes. Once stability and consistency are

achieved, then it’s possible to initiate improvements. The more stable and reliable the quality calibration

system, the easier it will be to make improvements and spread the benefits out to all of the calibration

staff. Improvements in calibration procedures, record keeping, and the actual calibration process will

help make the calibration function more efficient and cost effective and increase the production totals as

improvements are implemented.

Continuous process improvement is not a fly-by-night axiom or flavor of the month. It is what makes

any and all processes worth their weight in gold. Life itself shows that without continuous process im-

provement, all beings, large and small, could not evolve or possibly continue to exist. By not inventing

the wheel or fire, humans might not be around today. Animals in all forms have continued to evolve

throughout the eons to be adaptable and survive life’s dangers.

Such is the nature of all things. Continuous process improvement does not mean we intentionally build

or develop something wrong or ineptly. It simply means that we must accept from the start that anything

developed from scratch can always be improved upon.

The same can be said for a quality calibration system. As time goes by and the system is put to use, eas-

ier ways to do things are found. More productive ways to accomplish calibrations, or to write proce-

dures, or to go paperless come along that had not been thought of before. Simply because they had not

been thought of (the technology or training was not previously available) does not mean anyone should

think less of themselves for not thinking of that particular improvement earlier. It is just the nature of the

beast to constantly find ways to make things better.

Take fire for instance. We no longer rub two sticks together to get a flame started. In some instances, a

flame is not even used or needed. Heat can come from many types of sources. Cooking is probably done

more without flame today than with it. Part of this improvement comes from safety (open flame does

have some detractors) and part from convenience. But over the long haul, it is an improvement upon anage-old idea of cooking with heat.

There are microwave ovens, convection ovens, portable camp stoves, and cans of Sterno. There is even a

system that has no matches, no flames, no electricity, and no water. It is called Sterno Flameless. This is

not an advertisement for or endorsement of this system or its parent company. It is just an example of





MQD


how far we have come since humans first saw fire from the sky (lightning and the byproducts of fire)

and starting rubbing two sticks together.

No matter how good your system or process may be there can always be improvement. If humanity was

at the end of its quest for improvements, then there would be no reason to have a patent office or copy-

right and trademark laws. We are always inventing new ways to do things, and then along comes another

person to improve upon the original idea.

How does one motivate a staff to not only come to work with a positive attitude, but also be willing to

look at each of their processes with a mind-set of continuous process improvement? Do they really un-

derstand the importance of what they do and how it fits into the big picture of the company they work

for? Have they been told the importance of the market they are involved in? Do they understand the im-

pact of poor quality on their products or services?

Motivation can be enhanced once the calibration technician understands the importance of what they do

on every aspect of their company’s products and customers. Let me repeat an example that can be found

previously in the aforementioned book.

A calibration staff comes to work every day and does nothing but calibrate pipettes for a biotechnology

company. They also calibrate a few odd items, spectrophotometers, thermal cyclers, balances, and water

baths. But the vast amount of their time and effort goes into the calibration of pipettes. How does one

motivate these calibration technicians to come to work every day to perform the mundane task of cali-

brating pipettes? What will the pipettes be used for? There are many functions that must use pipettes to

accomplish their jobs. Hospitals, pharmacies, universities, research institutes, biotechnology companies,

and pharmaceutical companies all use pipettes in their daily work. Is any of this important or critical to

society? Of course they are. No one knows if the pipette they just calibrated will be used for determining

the cause of a patient’s illness, dispensing the proper amount of drugs for prescriptions, completing the

experiments that allow students to understand the cause and effect of proteins and enzymes, or finding

the cure for cancer.

If any one of those situations doesn’t get one excited about calibration, then it would be very difficult to

motivate a calibration staff to come to work every day. They don’t have to work in one of those fields.

But somebody has to calibrate all those pipettes.

What about the calibration technicians that are responsible for all the gages and instruments used at an

airplane assembly plant? Or an automobile manufacturing facility? Their work is critical for the produc-

tion of quality parts that affect everyone that flies the skies over us or drives the highways that crisscross

America and the world. Hopefully, the wings are not falling off the airliners and the wheels are staying

on the vehicles, all due to the diligence and accuracy of the calibration technicians doing their daily

work.

Are they doing the same thing that was done 10 or 20 years ago? There had to have been improvements

in their processes and systems in order to upgrade to better, faster, and improved products. Somebody

had a hand in making those improvements. Somebody saw a way to make it better, faster, and less costly

and submitted an improvement to the system to get it implemented. It all falls under the heading of proc-

ess improvement.





MQD


Attitude. That says it all. Attitude in motivating your staff and yourself. Attitude in opening your mind

to see where improvements can be accomplished and then seeing that they get implemented. Part of the

process can be found during audits, when an outside set of eyes may see where improvements can be

made. But those happen only once or twice a year. The calibration technician working the same old sys-

tem day in and day out, when properly motivated, should always be on the lookout for an easier, less

costly, more productive way to get the job done.

Of course they still have to use calibration procedures (maybe they could be on a lap-top or HUD in-

stead of hard copy); and complete the calibration record (going electronic/paperless along with a wire-

less data collection system instead of hard copy and killing all those trees); and fill out the appropriate

calibration labels and CAMS (these could be automated along with the paperless calibration record and

time sensitive labels that change color after a predetermined time has passed). The opportunities for

making improvements will always be endless. Thus, the chance to make improvements should always be

close to the surface when doing your daily work.

Making continuous process improvement a part of your quality system as matter of course can go a long

way in helping to motivate the calibration staff. If they observe management and supervision looking for ways to make improvements, and walking the walk, instead of simply mouthing the words, they will

know that they have the backing of higher management when it comes time for them to submit their

ideas. Just because a certain idea is not used in its entirety doesn’t mean that a part of it cannot be used

along with somebody else’s input. By working together to make the calibration process easier, faster,

and more productive, while meeting the requirements of your quality calibration system, there will al-

ways be ways to improve how they do their jobs.1

And maybe, just maybe, that old timer will try to implement some of his or her old ideas that have been

perculating for all those years. Sometimes what was old can be new again, with the right attitude and a

sharp eye on how things are done. Process improvement - new ideas… sounds like a marriage made

heaven.

1. Jay L. Bucher, The Quality Calibration Handbook - Developing and Managing a Calibration Pro-

gram (Milwaukee: ASQ Quality Press, 2007), chapter 16.




MQD


IAS report4th Quarter 2007

IAS Announces Transition from

ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994 to ANSI/NCSL Z540.3-2006

IAS is pleased to announce transition from ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994 TO ANSI/NCSL Z540.3-2006.Beginning in January 2008, IAS accreditation certificates issued to its accredited calibration laboratorieswill reference the updated version of the standard.

The predominant American National Standard for calibration laboratories, Z540-1 was retired in thesummer of 2007, in favor of Z540.3. Many of the requirements from Z540-1 remain in Z540.3, and thenew Standard is aligned much closer to ANS/ISO/IEC 17025:2005. The provision for allowing the 4:1Test Uncertainty Ratio (TUR) also remains and is contained in Clause 5.3 of the Standard.

Assessment of calibration laboratories by IAS includes all requirements of ANS/ISO/IEC 17025:2005;and under Z540.3 Clause 5.3, IAS will ensure that the laboratory meets the requirements of that clause.

Specific assessment and documentation of the 4:1 TUR will be included as applicable. Assessment to allthe requirements of Z540.3 may not be needed for most calibration laboratories; however for those labo-ratories needing to demonstrate compliance, an assessment to all requirements of Z540.3 will be pro-vided upon specific written request. For more information, please contact Hershal Brewer at (562) 699-0541, extension 3309.

Intertek and NTA Become First to Achieve IAS

Product Certification Agency Accreditation

Intertek, a global leader in testing, inspection and certifica-

tion, and NTA Inc., a U.S.-based quality assurance and mate-

rials testing agency, have earned IAS Product CertificationAgency Accreditation. The accreditation signifies that both of

these organizations are using the latest testing and inspection

methods, internationally approved standards, and state-of-the-

art equipment to certify products.

Intertek tests and certifies consumer products, commercial

products, commodities, raw materials and many other items

for manufacturers worldwide. Intertek also conducts research

and testing aimed to establish vendor compliance with stan-

dards, so that their clients have confidence that certified prod-

ucts are safe and meet regulatory requirements.

NTA measures the structural performance of building materials and components using industry-

standard methods of evaluation, and develops custom methods if no standard test is available. In addi-

tion to testing, NTA's network of inspectors located across the United States assess manufacturers' in-

plant quality control procedures, ensuring consistent product quality.


Intertek Vice President Jeff Turcotte (center)displays an IAS Certificate of Accreditationwith IAS Vice President Pat McCullen (left)and IAS President Chuck Ramani.

http://media.iccsafe.org/news/ias-enews/1107/intertek-b.jpg

http://media.iccsafe.org/news/ias-enews/1107/intertek-b.jpg



MQD


IAS conducted full evaluations of NTA's and Intertek's primary product certification facilities. The

accreditation criteria used to assess certification agencies include compliance with ISO/IEC Guide 65,

General Requirements for Bodies Operating Product Certification Systems; verification of regular

product manufacturing or assembly plant inspections; on-site surveillance assessments; on-site witness

inspections; and validation of data generated by manufacturers.

During the accreditation process, IAS evaluators and technical experts carefully assessed critical ele-

ments of both firm's product certification operations and quality management systems for conformance

with the IAS Accreditation Criteria for Product Certification Agencies (AC370).

David A. Tompos, president and director of Inspection Services for NTA, commented, "We believe

that IAS accreditation, and the accreditation process, raises the bar in our entire operation. Through

this effort, we ensure that we are operating to the highest standards and using best business practices in

delivering quality service to our customers. It actually makes us a better company."

Today, product manufacturers are under constant pressure to verify that their products have been inde-

pendently certified to industry safety standards. To ensure product acceptance and market access, veri-fication must be by certification agencies that are independent, trusted and widely recognized. NTA

and Intertek both hold IAS Testing Laboratory Accreditation per AC89 and Inspection Agency Ac-

creditation per AC98.

"This is an outstanding achievement and demonstrates NTA's and Intertek's commitment to quality,"

said IAS President Chuck Ramani. "To achieve accreditation, both organizations underwent rigorous

assessments to verify that they operate under the highest ethical, legal and technical standards while

providing quality service to their customers."

World's Largest Structural Steel Tower Built on an IAS Foundation

The $600 million China Central Television (CCTV) Tower,located in Beijing, China, will reportedly become the world's

largest structural steel building upon its completion in 2008.

This unique structure will stretch 102 stories into the air and

ultimately incorporate over 120 tons of structural steel, of

which every component has been fabricated and inspected in

a facility that meets the highest international standards.

The structural steel members and components are fabricated

and supplied by the Shanghai Grandtower Steel Structure Co.,

Ltd. (SGSSC) (FA-396), which is an IAS-accredited com-

pany; meaning its in-plant inspection program for structural steel fabrication meets the highest stan-dards as outlined in Section 1704.2.2 of the International Building Code. As part of this accreditation,

the fabricator is regularly audited by Smith-Emery Company (AA-554), an IAS-accredited, independ-

ent inspection agency, to confirm that SGSSC continues to operate in accordance with the IAS Ac-

creditation Criteria for Fabricator Inspection Programs for Structural Steel (AC172).

"The international best practice standards upheld by both the fabricator and the inspection agency of



IAS was instrumental in the inspection andsteel fabrication used to build the CCTV tower.

http://media.iccsafe.org/news/ias-enews/1107/cctv-b.jpg





MQD


the Tower's steel materials sets a strong tone of quality and excellence for the entire project," stated

IAS Accreditation Officer Sandi McCracken. "We are proud that IAS fabrication inspection standards

have become an integral part of what will soon be an extraordinary architectural icon for Beijing."

The CCTV complex will serve as headquarters for all broadcasting activities. The country's largest TVstation, CCTV transmits a total of 270 hours of programming daily, reaching a domestic audience of

1.1 billion people, or 90 percent of the country's population. Signals from the 14 channels cover the

entire country via satellite. In addition, CCTV (International Channel) and CCTV (English Channel)

basically cover the whole world via satellite.

Submitted by Hershal Brewer




MQD


Donald S. Ermer

November 12, 1932 - December 13, 2007

Donald S. Ermer died on Thursday morning, Dec. 13, 2007, at Hospice Care in Madison. He was born Nov. 12, 1932, in Milwaukee. Don graduated from UW-Madison in 1954, worked in industry, served inthe U.S. Army and then, fortunate to receive a Ford Foundation Fellowship, completed his doctorate inmechanical engineering at UW-Madison in 1966. He and Phyllis Dettmann were married in 1959, dur-ing his student days. Their two children, Ellen and Eric, were born in Madison. Don and his familymoved to State College, Pa. in 1966, where he was part of the faculty in the industrial engineering department at Penn State. When he joined the faculty at UW-Madison in 1971, he and his family wel-comed the opportunity to return to their alma mater and native state. During the next years, as a member

of the ME department at UW-Madison, he established strong and lasting ties with the Far East, espe-cially Singapore. Don and his family spent a year there while he taught and worked for UNIDO. Don is

well-known for his passion for quality at the UW and beyond. He worked with companies large andsmall to improve their manufacturing processes. One of his major achievements was helping to establish

and promote the State of Wisconsin Forward Award. Don was a member of many professional societiesincluding the local chapter of the American Society of Quality. Don was a passionate sailor. He raced E-

scows, "the best ride in the world," with the Mendota Yacht Club and lately an Ultimate 20, thanks to anumber of dedicated and hard-working crew. In the winter, Don turned to iceboating and raced a Nite

with the Four Lakes Ice Yacht Club. When neither of those would do, there was a windsurfer under thefront porch or he'd look for a ride with someone from the Hoofers Sailing Club. He was a member of theAdvent Lutheran Church/Madison Christian Community. Don retired in 2002 from the UW ME and IEdepartments, where he was Proctor and Gamble Professor in total quality. He was quick to admit that he"flunked retirement," as his interest in mentoring students and their projects always drew him back to hisoffice on campus or a meeting on the Memorial Union terrace. Don is survived by Phyllis, his wife of 48

years; daughter, Ellen; and her children, Erik and Elyse; son, Eric (Gayle); and their children, Daniel,Brett and Samantha; his brother, Kenneth (Becky); and sister-in-law, Carla (Joseph) Moha. The familythanks the Physicians Plus Oncology Department and friends who unselfishly helped Phyllis care for Don at home during these last few months. Memorials, in lieu of flowers, may be directed to the Treas-ury of Love Fund, Advent Lutheran Church; Habitat for Humanity of Madison; UW Mechanical andIndustrial Engineering Building Fund; or a charity of choice. Visitation was held from 4 p.m. until 6 p.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 18, 2007, at CRESS FUNERAL HOME, 3610 Speedway Road. Funeral serviceswere held at 1 p.m. Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2007, at ADVENT LUTHERAN CHURCH.



MQD


Chair, Program Chair

Dilip A. ShahE = mc3 Solutions197 Great Oaks Trail #130Wadsworth, Ohio 44281-8215Voice (330) 328-4400 / Fax (330) 336-3974E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]

Chair-Elect

Craig (Woody) Niemann1489 Pheasant Run Dr. Newark, OH 43055-8046Voice (740) 788-5034E-mail: [email protected]

Secretary, Certification Chair, Website

Manager, NCSL International Representative

Christopher L. GrachanenManager, Houston Metrology Group HPP. O. Box 692000 MS070110Houston, TX 77269-2000Voice (281) 518-8486 / Fax (281) 518-7275E-mail: [email protected]

Treasurer, Publication Chair, Newsletter

Editor/Publisher, Share Point Administrator

Jay L. Bucher Bucherview Metrology Services6700 Royal View Dr.De Forest, WI 53532-2775Voice (608) 277-2522 / Fax (608) 846-4269E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]

Immediate Past Chair, Nominating Chair

Graeme C. PayneGK Systems, Inc.4440 Weston Drive SW, Suite BLilburn, GA 30047 USAVoice: (770) 931-4004 / Fax (866) 887-9344

E-mail: [email protected]

Joe Simmons Scholarship

Norm Belecki7413 Mill Run Dr Derwood, MD 20855-1156Voice (301) 869-4520E-mail: [email protected]

Standards Committee Representative

Robert M. GrahamPrimary AC Standards LabSandia National LaboratoriesP.O. Box 5800, M.S. 0665Albuquerque, NM 87185-0665Phone: (505) 845-0434Fax: (505) 844-6096E-mail: [email protected]

Examining Chair

Duane AllenU. S. NavyP.O. Box 5000, Code MS11Corona, CA 92878-5000Voice (909) 273-4783 / Fax (909) 273-4599E-mail: [email protected]

Historian

Keela SniadachPromega Corp.5445 East Cheryl ParkwayMadison, WI 53711Voice (608) 298-4681 / Fax (608) 277-2516E-mail: [email protected]

ASQ Division Administrator

Ms. Leta Thrasher Voice (800) 248-1946, x7423E-mail: [email protected]

MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION OFFICERS AND COMMITTEE CHAIRS



MQD


ASQ MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION R EGIONAL COUNCILORS

Regional Councilors represent the Division to members and Sections in their

geographic areas. Regional Councilors are appointed for renewable two-year

terms, and are advisory members of the Division leadership team.

Region 1 (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT)

Mr. Jun BautistaGenzymeCambridge, MA 02142E-mail: [email protected]

Region 2 (NJ, NY, PA)

Volunteer Opportunity!

Region 3 (CT, NJ, NY)

Mr. Eduardo M. HeidelbergPfizer Parlin, NJ 08859E-mail: [email protected]

Region 4 (Canada)

Mr. Alexander T. C. LauExxonMobilWhitby, ON L1R 1R1E-mail: [email protected]

Region 5 (DC, DE, MD, PA, VA)

Mr. Richard A. LittsLitts Quality TechnologiesDownington, PA 19335E-mail: [email protected]

Region 6 (AK, CA, HI, ID, MT, OR, UT, WA,

WY)


Region 7 (AZ, CA, NV, part of Mexico)

Mr. Randy D. Farmer Metrology SolutionsChula Vista, CA 91913E-mail: [email protected]

Region 8 (OH, PA)

Dilip A. ShahE = mc3 SolutionsWadsworth, Ohio 44281-8215E-mail:[email protected], [email protected]

Region 9 (IN, KY, OH)

Mr. Ryan Fischer, ASQ CCTLaboratory Accreditation Bureau New Haven, IN 46774E-mail: [email protected]

Region 10 (OH, MI)

Mark J. SchoenleinE-mail: [email protected]

Region 11 (NC, SC, TN, VA)Volunteer Opportunity!

Region 12 (IL, MN, ND, SD, WI)

Jay L. Bucher, ASQ Sr. Member, CCTBucherview Metrology Services, LLCDe Forest, WI 53532E-mail: [email protected]

Region 13 (CO, IA, KS, MO, NE, SD, WY)


Region 14 (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX, part of

Mexico)

Mr. R. Keith BennettTRANSCATKingwood, TX 77339E-mail: [email protected]

Region 15 (AL, FL, GA, LA, MS, Puerto Rico)

Mr. E. Bryan Miller ASQ FellowBryan Miller ConsultingFlorence, AL 35633E-mail: [email protected]

Region 25 (all other countries)




MQD




11627 Coldwater Rd., Ste. 101

Fort Wayne, IN 46845 Tel: (260) 637-2705 Fax: (260) 637-2791

www.L-A-B.com

December 7, 2007

NEWS RELEASE: Laboratory Accreditation Bureau (L-A-B) Becomes a Signatory to APLAC MRA

(Fort Wayne, IN) Laboratory Accreditation Bureau is pleased to announce that it has become a

signatory to the Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) Mutual RecognitionArrangement (MRA) effective December 6, 2007, after formal recognition at the recent APLAC meetingin Malaysia. L-A-B now advances to be a full member of the International Laboratory AccreditationCooperation (ILAC) whereby L-A-B will recognize, and be fully recognized by, the 58 ILAC signatoriesworldwide.

Signatories of ILAC and the APLAC MRA accredit laboratories to the International Standard ISO/IEC 17025: General Requirements for the Operation of Calibration and Testing Laboratories . CurrentUnited States signatories are: 1) the American Association of Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA), 2)National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP), 3) International Accreditation Services(IAS) and 4) ACLASS Accreditation Services (ACLASS). Laboratory Accreditation Bureau (L-A-B) isthe 5th accreditation body recognized by APLAC in the United States.

L-A-B Managing Director, Doug Leonard, stated: “We appreciate the efforts and hard work of ourL-A-B staff, accredited laboratories and advisors in achieving this recognition. We all look forward tocontinuing to conduct effective, efficient and highly competent calibration and testing laboratoryassessments.”

CONTACT: Douglas LeonardLaboratory Accreditation Bureau11627 Coldwater Road, Suite 101Fort Wayne, IN 46845

Tel: (260) 637-2705Email: [email protected] Website: www.L-A-B.com