Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
20/05/13
responses close to the true value of the parameter being measured. Accuracy is a design specification and may be verified during calibration.5 The least significant digit on the micrometer will display either a 0 or 5. So the accuracy statement of +/- 0.0005 inches makes sense. The indicated reading on the micrometer can be read between +/-0.0005 inches of the actual (true) value. For example, an indicated measurement of 0.9000 inches can be anywhere between 0.8995 and 0.9005 inches. Do Not Assume We did not discuss the other factors that would have defined the tolerance on this particular piece of measuring equipment, such as method, environment, calibration and measurement uncertainty. We decided the conservative tolerance on this micrometer will be anywhere between +/-0.001 and +/-0.0005 inches (not 0.0001 inches) until we can quantify all the parameters effectively. We also came to the conclusion that this is a very simplified solution as the instrument in question just measures one parameter (dimension) and a specified range (0 to 1.0000 inches). If the analysis was to quantify the tolerance of a digital multimeter with a capability of measuring more than one parameter and multiple ranges, our task would be complicated because we would have to list the tolerance of more than one parameter, all the ranges and all the factors influencing the measurement. As quality and metrology professionals, we need to better educate each other and communicate with each other using standard terminology. Too often, we assume a measuring instrument that can display (resolve) a certain number of decimal points is accurate to the same number of decimal places. Resolution does not automatically guarantee the same level of accuracy. I got this individual to start thinking about various terms related to measurement and referencing the published data on the micrometer. That is a good start. Now we need to learn why making just one measurement is not a good idea. But that is a discussion for another column. Note: Phil Stein devoted his July 2002 Measure for Measure column Choose Your Words Carefully (p. 101) to specification and tolerances, and he devoted his July 2001 column All You Ever Wanted To Know About Resolution (p. 141) to resolution. The columns are available to all ASQ student, associate and regular members at www.asq.org (in the Quality Progress back issues archive) and serve as an interesting and educational primer.
R EFER ENC ES 1. Inte rnational Vocabulary of Basic and Ge ne ral Te rm s in Me trology, se cond e dition, Inte rnational O rganization for Standardization, 1993. 2. Jay Buche r, The Me trology Handbook , ASQ Q uality Pre ss, 2004. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid.
DILIP SHAH is the president of E = mc3 Solution, in Wadsworth, OH, a consulting practice that assists clients in the area of metrology, training and ISO 17025 laboratory accreditation. He is the current chair of the Measurement Quality Division and co-author of The Metrology Handbook published by ASQ Quality Press.
Be able to provide auditors with specific answers. Q UALITYPR O GR ESS I NO VEMBER 2004 I 83 84 I NO VEMBER 2004 I www.asq.org
MEASURE FOR MEASURE comment
If you would like to comment on this article, please post your remarks on the Quality Progress Discussion Board at www.asq.org, or e-mail them to editor@asq.org.
Please
2/3
20/05/13
C opyright 2005-2008 American Society for Quality. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of ASQ content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent. ASQ shall not be liable for any errors in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
3/3