Publications

Intrinsic standards are widely used in the metrology community because they realize the best level uncertainty for many metrology parameters. For some intrinsic standards, recommended practices have been developed to assist metrologists in the selection of equipment and the development of appropriate procedures in order to realize the intrinsic standard. As with the addition of any new standard, the metrology laboratory should consider the pros and cons relative to their needs before purchasing the standard so that the laboratory obtains the maximum benefit from setting up and maintaining these standards. While the specific issues that need to be addressed depend upon the specific intrinsic standard and the level of realization, general issues that should be considered include ensuring that the intrinsic standard is compatible with the laboratory environment, that the standard is compatible with the current and future workload, and whether additional support standards will be required in order to properly maintain the intrinsic standard. When intrinsic standards are used to realize the best level of uncertainty for a specific metrology parameter, they usually require critical and important maintenance activities. These activities can including training of staff in the system operation, as well as safety procedures; performing periodic characterization measurements to ensure proper system operation; carrying out periodic intercomparisons with similar intrinsic standards so that proper operation is demonstrated; and maintaining control or trend charts of system performance. This paper has summarized many of these important issues and therefore should be beneficial to any laboratory that is considering the purchase of an intrinsic standard.

Accreditation can offer many benefits to a testing or calibration laboratory, including increased marketability of services, reduced number of outside assessments, and improved quality of services. Compared to ISO 9000 registration, the accreditation process includes a review of the entire quality system, but in addition a review of testing or calibration procedures by a technical expert and participation in proficiency testing in the areas of accreditation. Within the DOE, several facilities have recently become accredited in the area of calibration, including Sandia National Laboratories, Oak Ridge, AlliedSignal FM and T; Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies Co., and Pacific Northwest National Lab. At the national level, a new non-profit organization was recently formed called the National Cooperation for Laboratory Accreditation (NACLA). The goal of NACLA is to develop procedures, following national and international requirements, for the recognition of competent accreditation bodies in the US. NACLA is a voluntary partnership between the public and private sectors with the goal of a test or calibration performed once and accepted world wide. The NACLA accreditation body recognition process is based on the requirements of ISO Guide 25 and Guide 58. A membership drive will begin some time this fall to solicit organizational members and an election of a permanent NACLA Board of Directors will follow later this year or early 1999.

This paper describes a new method for determining, improving, and controlling the measurement process errors (or measurement uncertainty) of a measurement system used to monitor product as it is manufactured. The method is called the Process Measurement Assurance Program (PMAP). It integrates metrology early into the product realization process and is a step beyond statistical process control (SPC), which monitors only the product. In this method, a control standard is used to continuously monitor the status of the measurement system. Analysis of the control standard data allow the determination of the measurement error inherent in the product data and allow one to separate the variability in the manufacturing process from variability in the measurement process. These errors can be then associated with either the measurement equipment, variability of the measurement process, operator bias, or local environmental effects. Another goal of PMAP is to determine appropriate re-calibration intervals for the measurement system, which may be significantly longer or shorter than the interval typically assigned by the calibration organization.

The history and present status of the NCSL intrinsic/Derived Standards Committee is presented, including a review of the current published Recommended Intrinsic/Derived Standard Practices (RISPs) and the four Working Groups that are in the process of developing new RISPs. One of the documents under development is a Reference Catalogue that documents important information associated with over forty intrinsic/derived standards. The generic information on each standard in the Catalogue, as well as its Table of contents, are presented.