×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Calibration Standards

Calibration Standards

Calibration Standards

(OP)
I am looking for a standard calibration deviation tolerance.

i.e. if you have .010 ±.005 given to the machinist to cut. What will the + percentage be for some one to calibrate to, and is there such a thing?

RE: Calibration Standards

NASL and ISO standards recomend the manufacturer to establish a measurement uncertainty factor for dimension calibrations.

Years ago a 10:1 factor was used.  But it was expensive.  Now-a-days a 4:1 ratio is prefered.  Per your example of .010" +/- .005"  The tolerance of .005" is divided by 4.  Therefore your calibrating instrument myst be accurate to .00125 or better.

RE: Calibration Standards

Andy981 where is this 4:1 standered, I havent seen anything on this, I still ues the 10:1

Thanks

Scott Cobb
CSM Manufacturing, Inc
csm-mfg.com

RE: Calibration Standards

MIL-STD-45662 Calibration Systems Requirements, paragraph 5.2 Adequacy of measurement standards, states:

"...the collective uncertainty of the measurement standards shall not exceed 25 percent of the acceptable tolerance for each characteristic being calibrated. ..."

Note that this is somewhat tighter than what one might reasonably do with RSS'ing of the component tolerances, since the words imply a simple arithmetic sum of the tolerances.  Usually, though, most customers accept the argument for RSS'ing of the tolerances.

TTFN

RE: Calibration Standards

Sorry, missed a couple of bigger ones due to too much haste.  

MIL-HDBK-52B Evaluation of Contractor's Calibration System, paragraph 5.1 Calibration system requirements, states:

"...This is commonly called a 4:1 test accuracy ratio..."

Likewise MIL-HDBK-1839A Handbook Calibration and Measurement Requirements, paragraph 5.4.3 Test Uncertainty Ratio, states:

"The recommended TMDE shall be capable of measuring or generating to a higher accuracy than the measurement parameters being supported. Unless otherwise specified, a minimum TUR of 4 to 1 is desired. The actual TUR shall be documented."

TTFN

RE: Calibration Standards

(OP)
Thanks :) for all the info it has been a great help!

RE: Calibration Standards

Should point out that in a normal environment, you don't use the calibration standard for measurement purposes, such as checking finished parts.  You'd use calipers or someting similar.  These are at best secondary standards, so they're a 4:1 ratio from the primary or secondary standard, which in turn is 4:1 ratio from a NIST standard.  

Therefore, the NIST standard could be as much as 4x4x4=64 times smaller tolerance than anything you're actually measuring.  

For linear distances, the above is quite easily obtainable, since distance measurement is reasonably accurate down to the submicrometer level.  In other areas,  1% relative accuracy is pretty darn good.

TTFN

RE: Calibration Standards

I was reading this thread and it's very interesting.  I was looking around in the NIST website and trying to find this 4:1 standard, but was unable to locate it.  Do you have a URL or some sort of code/regulation number that references NIST as recognizing 4:1 as the standard?  I'd really like more information on this issue if possible.  Thank you.

RE: Calibration Standards

the 4:1 ratio is actually a military thing, per MIL-HDBK-52

TTFN

RE: Calibration Standards

I understand that.  I thought it was adopted by NIST as insdustry standard as well?

RE: Calibration Standards

ISO 10012-1 paragraph 4.3 page 5 Guidance indicates:

"The error attributable to calibration should be as small as possible.  In most areas of measurement, it should be no more than one third and preferrably one tenth of the permissible error of the confirmed equipment."

TTFN

RE: Calibration Standards

Back on March 7, Andy981 states that in the case of +/-.005 tolerance, the 4:1 ratio would apply to .005 for an accuracy requirement of .00125.  I have always thought the 4:1 ratio applies to the total tolerance, or .010 in this case, giving an accuracy requirement of .0025.  Comments?
Thanks
SMR

RE: Calibration Standards

+/-.00125, what's the issue?

TTFN

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Resources

White Paper - Strategies to Secure Connected Cars with Firewalls
White-hat hackers have demonstrated gaining remote access to dashboard functions and transmissions of connected vehicles. That makes a firewall a vital component of a multilayered approach to vehicle security as well as overall vehicle safety and reliability. Learn strategies to secure with firewalls. Download Now
White Paper - Model Based Engineering for Wire Harness Manufacturing
As complexity rises, current harness manufacturing methods are struggling to keep pace due to manual data exchanges and the inability to capture tribal knowledge. A model-based wire harness manufacturing engineering flow automates data exchange and captures tribal knowledge through design rules to help harness manufacturers improve harness quality and boost efficiency. Download Now
White Paper - What is Generative Design and Why Do You Need It?
Engineers are being asked to produce more sophisticated designs under a perfect storm of complexity, cost, and change management pressures. Generative design empowers automotive design teams to navigate this storm by employing automation, data re-use and synchronization, and framing design in the context of a full vehicle platform. Download Now
eBook - Simulation-Driven Design with SOLIDWORKS
Simulation-driven design can reduce the time and cost of product development. In this engineering.com eBook, we’ll explore how SOLIDWORKS users can access simulation-driven design through the SOLIDWORKS Simulation suite of analysis tools. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close