ISO/IEC 17025 Requirements for Dimensional Testing

Speaker/Author: Shawn Mason

Medtronic
7000 Central Ave.
Fridley, MN 55432
Phone: (763)-526-3626
[email protected]
Abstract
This paper will present the requirements for determining the Dimensional Testing requirements
for ISO/IEC 17025 accrediting labs.
Topics covered
What are the ISO/IEC 17025 requirements for Dimensional Testing:
o Certificate of Inspection vs Calibration Certificate
o What parameters are listed on scopes of accreditation, also relating to GD&T
o What are the uncertainty requirements
o What are the TUR values and requirements
The paper will give an example of the process with working with third party accredited labs to
meet ISO 17025 Dimensional Testing requirements.
Learning objectives:
You will have a better understanding of the following

Know the difference between a certificate of inspection versus a calibration certificate

What parameters are listed on scope of accreditation for dimensional testing
Have example uncertainty and TUR values
Have a better understanding of the Dimensional Testing requirements

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

1.

Introduction

Medtronic received ISO/IEC 17025 Accreditation for the (DA) Design Assurance and (RA)
Reliability Assurance Labs for Electrical and Mechanical Testing in 2013 and it is the Metrology
labs responsibility to make sure that they meet the ISO/IEC 17025, A2LA and Medtronics
requirements. Part of this process is to work with our Calibration suppliers. The Corporate
Quality system document mandates that all suppliers report TURs. The initial evaluation
indicated that most of the Calibration suppliers do not report TURs or document what their
decision rule is if it is less than 4:1. This paper will give an example of the process with working
with third party accredited labs to meet ISO/IEC 17025 Dimensional Testing requirements.
2.

Background

Clarification on Dimensional Testing requirements for ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation was

required for the following reasons:
1. Is Certificate of Inspection acceptable?
2. Do GD&T parameters (like Parallelism, Concentricity, Run-out, True Position,
Total run-out etc.) need to be explicitly included on the scope of accreditation?
3. Do derived units (like angle: measured using two linear measurements) need to
explicitly listed on the scope of accreditation?
3.

Objective

Clarification on TUR requirements for Suppliers was required for the following reasons:
1. Some suppliers report uncertainty but do not report TARs or TURs.
2. Most suppliers do not document what their decision rules is and what they do if it
is less than 4:1.
Objective was to document the gaps because of the above inconsistency and identify remediation
steps.
The following will provide the requirements from these sources: ISO/IEC 17025, A2LA,
ACLASS, NVLAP and ILAC.

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

4.

What are the ISO 17025 Requirements for Dimensional Testing?

[8] ISO/IEC 17025 section 5.10.2 Test reports and calibration certificates

Each Inspection report or calibration certificate shall include at least the following
information, unless the laboratory has valid reasons for not doing so

A title(e.g. Test Report or Calibration Certificate)

Certificate of inspection would be acceptable if it is listed on the
labs scope of accreditation per A2LA

ILAC does have a testing document [10] (ILAC-G17:2002)

A2LA and LAB offer generic scopes per the auto industry, ACLASS does not
5.

ISO/IEC 17025 GD&T Parameter Requirements

Run Out, Total Run Out and True Position

These are GD&T features and usually on a Dimensional Testing scope using a
CMM
ACLASS Accredited supplier requirement: The print is the procedure and
tolerance requirements and can be covered by referring to the print on the scope
of accreditation

Accredited supplier covers this through the 5.4 comment on their scope

A2LA requirement: For dimensional testing, if the unit under test is to be used to
measure another device, then this qualifies as a calibration where traceability must
be established. This is achieved by meeting ISO/IEC 17025 as well as the A2LA
R205 - Specific Requirements: Calibration Laboratory Accreditation Program.
For example, CABs with Dimensional Testing (a.k.a Dimensional Inspection) on
a Mechanical Testing Scope would be required to be evaluated for A2LA R205
and to indicate on the scope with a footnote that the result is deemed equal to that
of a calibration.
So, for example, when the fixture is used as an attribute go, no go gage to accept
product, then it qualifies as Dimensional Testing equal to a calibration, with the
print and range listed on the scope. The ACLASS supplier scope of
accreditation was updated to meet this requirement.
NVLAP requirement: Include GD&T parameters on the scope of Accreditation

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

6.

ISO/IEC 17025 Dimensional Testing Requirements (Angle)

Derived parameters (Angle)

Angle can be derived from a length, but A2LA and ACLASS do not allow
derived parameters unless included on the scope of accreditation for that
parameter.
[8] ISO/IEC 17025 does not say anything about derived parameters
See example Dimensional Testing Scopes in Appendix A
7.

Certificate of Inspection (COI) verses Certificate of Calibration (COC)

When a calibration Lab performs Dimensional Inspections (also known as Dimensional Testing
so as to not be confused with Inspection Body accreditation) it is normally performed to a
Testing scope of accreditation. A laboratory that is accredited for calibration cannot issue an
accredited inspection/test report or vice versa.
An inspection is not a calibration and the Inspection Certificate or Report is usually supplied for
a one time first article inspection of an item that will not be used to measure another device.
However, there are cases where the item is used to measure another device and in these cases
assurance that the measurement made is equal to that of a calibration with the same traceability
needs to be established. In the case of Medtronic, certificates of Inspection were supplied by a
laboratory accredited for Dimensional Inspection per their Testing Scope of Accreditation which
did not meet Medtronics quality requirements. In working to resolve this problem we discovered
that this particular supplier also had a Calibration Scope of Accreditation but the Dimensional
Inspection/Test capability was not included on that scope. Because the items that this supplier
was performing inspections/tests on used the same equipment, method, uncertainty, and
technicians as their Calibration Scope of Accreditation our Metrology department was able to
work with the supplier to have them update their Calibration Scope of Accreditation to include
the information related to Dimensional Inspection from their Testing Scope. The accredited lab
also provided a document stating what they did for Proficiency testing on their testing scope of
accreditation to meet this requirement.
The Accrediting Bodies in the United States that are signatories to the ILAC Mutual Recognition
Arrangement do not all treat Dimensional Inspection/Testing in the same way. For example, an
ACLASS accredited laboratory performing a Dimensional Inspection/Test that issues a
Dimensional Test report might not be accepted by an A2LA accredited laboratory if the
measurement process is not deemed equal to that of a calibration. This is primarily because
A2LA makes the distinction between Dimensional Inspections/Tests where the unit under test is
used to measure another device from those that do not. For those that are used to measure
another device the CAB is required to also meet A2LA R205 - Specific Requirements:
Calibration Laboratory Accreditation Program regardless of whether they hold a Mechanical
Testing scope with Dimensional Testing or a Calibration Scope with Dimensional Testing. This
ensures that the measurements made are in accordance with ISO/IEC 17025 calibration
requirements, ILAC P14 requirements and A2LA calibration requirements.
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Because of these inconsistencies, organizations such as Medtronic now have to decide for
themselves if a laboratory accredited for Dimensional Inspection on a Testing scope of
accreditation has established sufficient compliance with calibration and traceability requirements
to accept the results and must be able to defend our decision to the auditor(s) from our
Accreditation Body. In our case it was simply a matter of having the supplier add the capability
to the calibration scope of accreditation but other cases might not be so easily resolved.
To solve this problem it would be easier for end users if all Accreditation Bodies made a
distinction between Dimensional Inspection/Testing measurements that are equal to that of a
calibration from those measurements that are not. For Medtronic we would like to see these types
of measurements always included in a Calibration scope of accreditation.
According to A2LA Requirements a Certificate of inspection would be acceptable if it is listed
on their calibration scope of accreditation, and if is not part of a calibration scope of
accreditation, they would need a footnote to state that the (COI) Certificate of Inspection is equal
to the (COC) Certificate of Calibration, another words Certificate of Inspection is not traceable
because it is not a calibration.
8.

TUR Requirements

What are the TUR values and Requirements?

[1] A2LA:2014 P102 (T5) A2LA Policy on Measurement Traceability

If a calibration certificate or test report contains a statement of the measurement

result and the associated uncertainty, then the uncertainty statement shall be
accompanied by an explanation of the meaning of the uncertainty statement
Uncertainty statements in phrased in terms of TURs are implicit statements of
uncertainty: knowing the tolerance ratio allows one to determine the largest
possible value of the measurement uncertainty.
[7] ACLASS:2012 Guidance on Uncertainty for Testing Laboratories

Uncertainty statements phrased in terms of TURs is not acceptable.

If the TUR ratio is less than 4:1, the customer should be notified of the actual
TUR ratio.
Testing verses Calibration
Testing
Identify the products, materials or items tested
Identify the specific tests performed
Associated uncertainties, if applicable

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Calibration
Identify the measuring instrument type, system or reference materials
measured
Identify specific calibrations performed
Identify measurement uncertainties
Most suppliers stated that they have not had a request to provide TURs and guard banding on
their calibration certificates because they said that this was new territory. If they were not able to
add it to their calibration certificates because they would have to change their reporting software
I suggested that they put together a document stating what their TURs are and what their
decision rule if it is less than 4:1. Four out of the six suppliers that I was working with were able
to provide the document to meet our requirements and one is stating the TURs in the comments
section on the Calibration Certificate. See example TUR statements in Appendix B.
When dealing with GD&T parameters most suppliers only provide linear uncertainty and not
uncertainty of the measured parameter or process, therefore could not provide a TUR statement.
If the lab issues a statement of compliance with a specification, this shall identify which clauses
of the specification are met or not met, and the uncertainty of measurement shall be taken into
account.
In order to calculate a TUR you need a specification and uncertainty. In the case for a surface
finish that only has a one side tolerance like 32ui min of 64ui max, the TUR is not as simple to
calculate. You would need to bracket the specification in the following way: 32ui min would be
32ui to the maximum that the surface finish test can achieve in this case it would be 264ui (32ui
to 264ui). For the 64ui max example, it would be 32ui to 64ui. This would assume that the
parameter is the whole range and use the data as is.
9.

Uncertainty Requirements

In order for Medtronic to continue to sell product in Taiwan the Rice Creek RA/DA Lab needed
to become ISO 17025 Accredited by A2LA (American Association for Laboratory
Accreditation) by July 2013. A requirement by A2LA was for the Metrology Department to have
measurement uncertainty budgets established for instruments that are calibrated on-site within
the RA/DA Lab and that are customized, built by Medtronic.
Medtronic completed the measurement uncertainty estimation and budget process and have
completed the following deliverables: (a) Metrology Guidance Document for Estimating and
Reporting Calibration Measurement Uncertainty, (b) Metrology Uncertainty Excel Spreadsheet
Template with Validation Plan and Report, and (c) Uncertainty Estimate and Budgeting Training
to Users. We have also completed uncertainty estimates and budgets for over 90% of the
required instruments within scope of the RA/DA Lab ISO 17025 Accreditation requirements.
The Metrology Department and the RA/DA Lab have used the measurement uncertainty data to
improve the quality of their calibration and test lab results by evaluating the uncertainty
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

contributors, find the greatest contributors, and identify where reductions can be made to ensure
that calibration and testing results remain within process parameters to a 95% confidence level.
There have been many quality measurement decisions made as a result of analyzing the
measurement uncertainty estimate and budgets; that included determining that a calibration was
not the best method for a particular parameter or instrument, that the instrument was not reliable,
or that there was more measurement risk than what we were previously aware of.
A2LA and ACLASS has defined the following measurement uncertainty category (I-V below)
for the tests identified on the laboratory's proposed scope of accreditation:
Category I:

Qualitative or semi-quantitative tests, where no numerical measurements are

made, which measurement uncertainty budgets will not be required.

Category II:

Recognized test methods that specify limits to the values of the major sources of
uncertainty of measurement and specify the form of presentation of calculated
results.

Category III: Chemical, environmental, or biological test methods based on published

regulatory or consensus methods. For these types of tests, uncertainty estimates
are required and can be determined using appropriate, published guidance
documents such as the ISO Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in
Measurement, CITAC Guide 1, ISO 5725, CLSI: C51- Expression of
Measurement Uncertainty in Laboratory Medicine, etc.
Category IV: Newly devised Test methods that need identification of the major components of
uncertainty and a reasonable estimate of measurement uncertainty.
Category V:

Test methods used in Testing Labs that need identification of all components of
uncertainty and detailed measurement uncertainty budgets calculated in
accordance with published methods that are consistent with those described in the
ISO "Guide to

[10] ILAC G17:2002- All components able to influence the uncertainty of measurement have to

be considered, (at least an attempt to identify the sources and if possible estimate them).
Testing laboratories should not be expected to do more than take notice of, and apply the
uncertainty-related information given in the standard, i.e. quote the applicable figure, or perform
the applicable procedure for uncertainty estimation.
[11] P10:01:2013-For testing laboratories, the requirements given in 5.6.2.1 apply for measuring

and test equipment with measuring functions used, unless it has been established that the
associated contribution from the calibration contributes little to the total uncertainty of the test
result
[9] ILAC:G8:03:2009

In calibration, measurement uncertainty shall always be taken into account when

compliance with specification is made.
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

 In testing, a specification or a documented code of practice may require a

statement of compliance with specification in the test report, which does not take
into account the effect of measurement uncertainty.
[2] A2LA: R205:2014

Every uncertainty shall take into consideration the following standard contributors, even in cases
where they are determined to be insignificant, and documentation of the consideration shall be
made:

Repeatability (Type A)
Resolution
Reproducibility
Reference Standard Uncertainty
Reference Standard Stability
Environmental Factors

Regardless of the test category, all accredited testing labs are expected to have a procedure to
estimate the uncertainty of measurement for all calibrations and types of calibrations that support
their Testing Scope of Accreditation. Also, all uncertainty components which are of importance
in the given situation shall be taken into account using appropriate methods of analysis and the
recommended guidance of at least 10 readings for 9 degrees of freedom.
10.

Supplier Improvements

The following will provide the documentation from four suppliers of how they will be meeting
the 4:1 TUR requirement:
Executive summary of Remediation steps for high volume suppliers:
Weighing and Pipette vendor provided a TUR document that they will provide
annually.
Dimensional vendor has listed the TUR information on the Calibration Certificate
in the comments section (does not include GD&T parameters or Min/Max
Parameters).
Second Weighing vendor provided an updated certificate with TURs listed, and
will be on all certificates going forward.
Force vendor provided a TUR document that they will provide annually.
11.

What are the supplier Gaps, solutions:

Microscope vendor provided a Decision Rule Document and Uncertainty Budgets

Need to document the acceptance of TARs of less than 2:1 as their Best
Capability

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

 Dimensional vendor provided TUR information for Length on their calibrations

certificates

Need TUR information for GD&T parameters, Min/Max or one sided

tolerances

Look into using another Accredited lab that have some GD&T parameters
on their scope

Force vendor provided a Uncertainty and TUR document

They have TURs that are less than 4:1

Some suppliers state their Decision Rule is that they do not include uncertainty
for statements of compliance on their calibration certificates.
Some Suppliers state their Decision Rule is that they do include uncertainty for
statements of compliance on certificates and follow ASTM E617 and OIML
R111-1.
One Suppliers states their Decision Rule is ASME B89.7.3.1-2001 (simple
acceptance) on certificates.
One Supplier stated their decision rule if less than 4:1 would be to adjust to meet
4:1 to meet customer specified TUR
12.

Summary and Conclusion:

Summary of ISO/IEC 17025 Dimensional Testing Requirements

Per ISO/IEC 17025 requirements either Inspection (testing) or Calibration is
acceptable as long as the parameter range and/or print is listed on their scope of
Accreditation
ACLASS require a part number to be listed on the scope for GD&T parameters
(ACLASS scope states per blue print that might be acceptable)
A2LA and ACLASS do not allow generic scopes of accreditation
The ACLASS Accredited Labs scope has been updated an now meets our
requirements, except for angle
Summary note: ILAC indicates that Uncertainty should always be included in your
judgment call.
Conclusion-1 COI VS COC
The COI and COC are both acceptable forms of ISO/IEC 17025 accredited certificate, provided
they are listed in the appropriate scope of accreditation.

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

From Accredited supplier perspective, there is no difference between COI or COC

because they use the same equipment, same uncertainty budgets, same technician and
procedure
Obtained objective evidence from an Accredited supplier of proficiency testing of
technicians who work on the Inspections and the Calibration areas. `

Conclusion-2 GD&T Parameter Measurements

Depending on the accredited body the requirements are different.

The Vendor used is ACLASS accredited and they cover GD&T parameters per 5.4.101
comment on their scope.

The 5.4.101 method states Blue Print or Customer specification using

Vision, Two Dimensions, Touch Probe, Three Dimensions Single Point,
Scanning

Conclusion-3 Derived Parameter Measurements

According to ACLASS and A2LA the required Parameter needs to be included on

the scope of accreditation.

The Accredited supplier does not have Angle on their scope, will do the
following:
Find Accredited Lab that can measure the derived parameter in
question. Send new items to the Accredited Lab
Resend items already measured as ISO/IEC 17025 by an
Accredited supplier to an Accredited Lab that has Angle on their
scope of Accreditation.

Summary TUR Requirements

If a statement of compliance with a specification is made, this shall identify which
clauses of the specification are met or not met and the uncertainty of measurement
shall be taken into account.
When a statement of compliance with a specification is made omitting the
measurement results and associated uncertainties, the laboratory shall record those
results and maintain them for possible future reference.
The customer shall be notified if the TUR is less than 4:1
Will use TURs or other industry practices for adequacy of measurement and
decision rules

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Appendix A1:
Example Dimensional Testing Scopes
PARAMETER/EQUIPMENT

RANGE

CALIBRATION
AND
MEASUREMENT
CAPABILITY
[EXPRESSED AS
UNCERTAINTY()

REFERENCE
STANDARD
OR
EQUIPMENT

METHOD(S)

Dimensional
Inspection
Volumetric
Linear
Surface Finish
(Ra)

Up to (28
x 40 x
24) in
Up to 6
(0.01 to
300) in

320
in

CMM

Customer
Drawings

2.1 in

Profilometer

Customer
Drawings

Figure 1: Dimensional Inspection/Measurement

Dimensional Inspection
PARAMETER/EQUIPMENT

Dimensional
Measurement

RANGE

Up to 6
in Up to
20 in Up
to 18 in
Up to 1
in Up to
12 in Up
to 35 in

CALIBRATION
AND
MEASUREMENT
CAPABILITY
[EXPRESSED AS
UNCERTAINTY()
(550 + 3.4L) uin (27 +
6.5L) uin (7 + 7.5L)
uin (45 + 7L) uin (240
+ 2L) uin (160 + 5L)
uin

REFERENCE
STANDARD OR
EQUIPMENT

METHOD(S)

Caliper,
Bench
Micrometer,
Indicator,,
Micrometer
VMM, CMM

Accepted
Practices,
Customer
Requirements

Figure 2: Dimensional Inspection/Measurement

Appendix A2:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Example Dimensional Testing Scopes

PARAMETER/EQUIP
MENT

RANGE

Three Dimensional
Length2,3

8 ft spherical
volume
Up to 708 in

Depth

Up to 6 in

Form
Roundness
Cylindricity

CALIBRATION
AND
MEASUREMENT
CAPABILITY
[EXPRESSED AS
UNCERTAINTY()
(556 + 2.5L) in
(1360 + 3.1L) in
590 in

Up to 100
in
(100 to 500)
in

64 uin
53.2 uin

Up to 100
in
(100 to 500)
in

40 uin

Up to 120
in

3.7 uin

Surface Finish (Sa)

Up to 0.032
in

2.5 uin

Contour

Up to 4 in

(220 + 8.5L) uin

Surface Finish (RA)3

66 uin

REFERENCE
STANDARD
OR
EQUIPMENT

METHOD(S)

Romer Absolute
CMM Leica Laser
Tracker (MR) w/
T-probe
Depth Micrometer

Blue Print or
Customer
Specification

Mitutoyo
RA2200 AH
Roundness
Tester
Mitutoyo
RA2200 AH
Roundness
Tester
Mitutoyo
Surface
Roughness
Tester
Zygo
ZeGag
e
Mitutoyo Contracer

Figure 3: Dimensional Inspection/Measurement

Appendix A3:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Blue Print or
Customer
Specification
Blue Print or
Customer
Specification

Dimensional Testing Scope

PARAMETER
/
EQUIPMENT

RANGE

Length3One Dimension

Vision (Z)
Two Dimensions
(Vision
) (X &
Y)
TouchProbe
Three Dimensions
Single Point
Scanning

Up to 24 in
Up to 12 in
Up to 3.2
in
Up to 0.008
in Up to 0.03
in Up to 2 in
Up
Up toto1 in2
in
Up to 10
in

CALIBRATION
AND
MEASUREMENT
CAPABILITY
[EXPRESSED AS
UNCERTAINTY()]
(590 + 0.2L)
in
(512 + 0.2L)
in
124
in
130
(188 in
+ 1.0L)
310
in
in
(91+
0.7L)
120
in
in
116
in
(64 +
1.8L)
in
116
in
(110 +1.4L)
in

Up to 25
in Up to 1
in Up to 8
in
Up
in
99
to
Up
in

to
Up
in
67
to

67
to
Up
in
99

REFERENCE
STANDARD
OR
EQUIPMENT
Dial Height
Gage Calipers
Micrometers
Dial Indicator
Dial Indicator
Drop Indicator
Gage Pins
Tool makers Microscope
OGP Quest 450
OGP Quest 450
Gage Pins
OGP Flash
PMM-C 12107
B&S Xcel 122010
PMM-C 12107
B&S Xcel 122010

(25 + 3.4L) in
(58 + 6.7L) in
(35 + 3.1L) in
(110 +5.3 L)
in

Figure 4: Dimensional Inspection/Measurement

Appendix A4:

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

METHOD(S)

Blue Print or Customer

Specification

Blue Print or Customer

Specification

Updated Dimensional Testing Scope to Dimensional Calibration

PARAMETER
/EQUIPMENT

RANGE

CALIBRATION
AND
MEASUREMENT
CAPABILITY

REFERENCE
STANDARD
OR
EQUIPMENT

METHOD(S)

Gage Blocks

5.4 66
Mfg Procedure

UNCERTAINTY()
Horizontal Measuring
Machine2

Up to 0.0002
in (0.0002 to 2)
in (2 to 8) in

3.4 in
(3 + 0.8L) in
(2 + 1.1L) in

Up to 26 in
Up to 24.41
in Up to 3
200 in

(27 + 0.7L)
in (13 +
1.2L) in (3 +
1.4L) in

Coordinate Measuring
Machines (CMM)2
Linear Displacement
Accuracy

Volumetric Performance
Sphere Repeatability
Probing and Scanning
Form

Step Gage Step

Gage (Koba) Laser
Interferometer
Ball

(15 + 1.1L) in

Up to 36 in

Bar
3.6 in

(0.750 to 1.00) in

Sphere

ASME B89.4.1
ISO 10360-2
ASME B89.4.1
ASME B89.4.1
ASME B89.4.1
ISO 10360-2, -4

12 in

Surface Finish
Analyzers2

1 to 1.18 in
120 in at
0.03 in cut-off

2.2 in

Sphere
Master
Specimens

ASME B46.1

Surface Finish Specimen

(2-300) in

3.7 in

Surface Finish Analyzer

ASME B46.1

Surface Finish (RA)3

Up to 120 in

3.7 in

Mitutoyo Surface
Roughness Tester

5.4.101

(0 to 140) in
(0 to 140) in

66 in
19 in

Renishaw Laser
Repeat-O-Meter

GGG-P-463

Surface Plates2,6
Flatness
Repeatability

Figure 5: Dimensional Inspection/Measurement

Appendix A5:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Updated Dimensional Testing Scope to Dimensional Calibration (continued)

PARAMETER
/EQUIPMENT

RANGE

CALIBRATION
AND
MEASUREMENT
CAPABILITY

REFERENCE
STANDARD
OR
EQUIPMENT

METHOD(S)

UNCERTAINTY()
Vision (Z)
Two Dimensions
(Vision)
(X & Y)
TouchProb
e
Three Dimensions
Single Point
Scanning
Form

Up to 10
in
Up to 25
in Up to 1
in Up to 8
in
Up
in
99
to
Up
in

to
Up
in
67
to

(91+ 0.7L) in

OGP Quest 450

(64 + 1.8L) in
116 in
(110 +1.4L) in

OGP Quest 450

Gage Pins
OGP Flash

(25 + 3.4L) in
(58 + 6.7L) in
(35 + 3.1L) in
(110 +5.3 L)
in

PMM-C 12107
B&S Xcel 122010
PMM-C 12107
B&S Xcel 122010

5.4 101

67
to
Up
in
99

6.4 in
53.2 in

Mitutoyo RA2200
AH Roundness Tester

100 in
FigureUp6:toDimensional
Inspection/Measurement
(100 to 500) in

Appendix A6:

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Dimensional Testing Scope

Measured
Parameter or
Device
Calibrated
Precision Geometry / Form
Measuring Machines
Concentricity
Diameter: 14.5 in and
Height: 13.75 in
Cylindricity
Height: 1.0 in
and Diameter:

14.5
in
Height: 4.0 in
and Diameter:
14.5 in
Height: > 4.0 in to
13.75 in and Diameter:
14.5 in Height: 4.0
in and Diameter:
14.5 in
Height: > 4.0 in to
13.75 in and Diameter:
14.5 in
Flatness
Diameter: 14.5 in and
Height: 13.75 in
Parallelism
Diameter: 14.5 in and
Height: 13.75 in

Uncertainty
(k=2) Note 3,8

Range

0.004 in
> 0.004 in to 0.0040 in

12 in (0.3 m)
27 in (0.69 m)

0.0001 in
0.004 in

5 in (0.13 m)
15 in (0.38 m)

0.004 in
> 0.004 in to 0.040 in
> 0.004 in to 0.040 in

Remarks

25 in (0.64 m)
29 in (0.74 m)
35 in (0.89 m)

0.004 in
> 0.004 in to 0.040 in

3 in (0.08 m)
25 in (0.64 m)

0.004 in
> 0.004 in to 0.040 in

4 in (0.10 m)
25 in (0.64 m)

Figure 7: Dimensional Inspection/Measurement

Appendix A7:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Dimensional Testing Scope (continued)

Measured Parameter or
Device Calibrated
Perpendicularity
Diameter: 14.5 in and
Height: 13.75 in

Range

Uncertainty (k=2) Note 3,8

Remarks

0.004 in
> 0.004 in to 0.040 in

5 in (0.13 m)
25 in (0.64 m)

0.004 in
> 0.004 in to 0.040 in

4 in (0.1 m)
25 in (0.64 m)

Total Runout
Diameter: 14.5 in and
Height: 13.75 in

0.004 in

330 in (8.4 m)

Geometry / Form Measuring

Machines
Radial Departure

< 50 in

1.9 in (0.047 m)

Precision Sphere

< 50 in

1.2 in (0.03 m)

Optical Flat

< 10 in / in

1.2 in (0.03 m)

Precision Sphere

< 0.040 in

26 in (0.67 m)

Gage Blocks

< 2 m / 100 mm

5.9 in (0.15 m)

Straight Edge

< 10 m / m

87 in (2.2 m)

Cylindrical Square

< 10 m / m

281 in (7.7 m)

Straight Edge

Runout
Diameter: 14.5 in and
Height: 13.75 in

Field calibrations available

Note 4

Axial Deviation
Field calibrations available Note 4

Coning Error
Field calibrations available

Note 4

Probe Calibration
Field calibrations available Note 4

Straightness
Field calibrations available

Note 4

Z Axis Parallelism
Field calibrations available Note 4

X Axis Perpendicular
Field calibrations available

Note 4

Figure 8: Dimensional Inspection/Measurement

Appendix B1:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

TUR on Calibration Certificate

FUNCTION TESTED
Temperature

Nominal Value

o 002 c

As Found

OUI:afTol

02

As Left
Same

OI.I:IDf'Tol

Accuracy
50008

Correction
- 0.198

CAUBRATION TOLERANCE
-1.498 to 1 502 c
[EMU 0 58 'C][TUR 2 6 1I

51.0

Same

- 0.992

48 508 to 51508
[EMU 0.58 'CI[TUR 2.61]

1008

Same

- 0.796

98 504 to 101 504

[EMU 0 58 'C][TUR 2 6 1]

100 004

Table 1: TUR Statements

TUR statement for Force
Model Number
1610AJH-500
1610AJH-2K
1610AJH-10K
1110CWR-10K
1210ACK-10K
LBM-250
LBM-1K

Rated Output
2 mV/V 10%
2 mV/V 10%
4 mV/V 10%
4 mV/V 10%
4 mV/V 10%
2 mV/V 15%
2 mV/V 15%

TUR
400
250
250
250
250
600
300

TUR > 4:1

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Table 2: TUR Statements

Model Number
1610AJH-500
1610AJH-2K
1610AJH-10K
1110CWR-10K
1210ACK-10K
LBM-250
LBM-1K

Non-Linearity
0.030% FS
0.030% FS
0.035% FS
0.035% FS
0.040% FS
0.5% FS
0.5% FS

TUR
1.2
0.8
0.9
0.9
1.0
20.0
10.0

TUR > 4:1

No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes

Table 3: TUR Statements

Model Number
1610AJH-500
1610AJH-2K
1610AJH-10K
1110CWR-10K
1210ACK-10K
LBM-250
LBM-1K

Hysteresis
0.020% FS
0.020% FS
0.035% FS
0.035% FS
0.040% FS
0.3% FS
0.3% FS

Appendix B2:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

TUR
0.8
0.5
0.9
0.9
1.0
12.0
6.0

TUR > 4:1

No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes

Example TUR statements

TUR Statement Mass

Below are the current Uncerntainties and the Ucertainty to Tolerance Ratio for the
reported uncertainties for ASTM Classes 1, 2 & 3, Ultra Class and NIST Class S
Calibrations

Nominal
Value

1 mg
2 mg
3 mg
5 mg
10 mg
20 mg
30 mg
50 mg
100 mg
200 mg
300 mg
500 mg
1g
2g
2g
5g
10 g
20 g
30 g
50 g
100 g
200 g
300 g
500 g
1 kg
2 kg
3 kg
5 kg
10 kg
20 kg

(mg)

ToI.
(mg)

0.00064
0.00062
0.00062
0.00088
0.00112
0.00107
0.00107
0.0013
0.00138
0.00133
0.00133
0.00166
0.00181
0.00222
0.00222
0.0044
0.0074
0.0081
0.009
0.014
0.025
0.047
0.047
0.084
0.151
0.44
0.66
0.70
1.2
12.0

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.05
0.074
0.074
0.12
0.25
0.5
0.5
1.2
2.5
5
5
12
25
50

K=2

ID

Standard
TUR

15.6
16.1
16.1
11.4
8.9
9.3
9.3
7.7
7.2
7.5
7.5
6.0
18.8
15.3
15.3
7.8
6.8
9.1
8.2
8.5
10.1
10.6
10.6
14.3
16.6
11.4
7.6
17.1
20.8
4.2

TUR > 4:1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Table 4: TUR Statements

Appendix B3:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

TUR Statement Mass

Nominal
Value
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
20
20
20
20
20
50
50
50
50
50

Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb
Lb

Serial
No.
1
2
3
4
PB520
17
13
14
18
19
11
12
16
51PU
51PT
9
10
15
51PS
5J0D

Correction
As Found
-167.
-165.
-3.
-171.
-4.
-81.
-256.
-230.
-70.
-56.
-220.
160.
-390.
-190.
-210.
-410.
20.
-340.
-40.
-160.

(mg)
As Left
-167.
-165.
-3.
-171.
-4.
-81.
-256.
-230.
-70.
-56.
-220.
160.
-390.
-190.
-210.
-410.
20.
-340.
-40.
-160.

Table 5: TUR Statements

Appendix B4:
2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

ASTM E617 Class

As Found
As Left
6
6
6
6
4
4
6
6
4
4
5
5
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
6
6
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
4
4
5
5
4
4
4
4

Unc. (mg)
(k=2)
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
15.
15.
15.
15.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
110.
110.
110.
110.
110.

Example TUR statements

TUR Statement
The following table provides example calculates of TUR. In these examples, the only
pipette volumes which do not meet the 4:1 requirement are the micro volume 2.0ul
pipette. For this case, the chart shows a calculated range that would provide a TUR of
4:1.
Model
(vol in ul)

Acc Spec Tolerance

(100% setting)
.03
.2
1.6
120

2
20
200
20ML

Best Uncertainty
0.016
0.044
0.38
22

Worst Case precision

Exp Unc.
0.015
0.027
0.17
25

TUR at
worst case
1.9
4.5
4.2
4.9

Table 6: TUR Statements

TUR Statement on Calibration Certificate Comments Section
Comments:
TUR FOR DIMENSION .0508 = 85.1:1
TUR FOR DIMENSION .1311 = 84.4:1
TUR = TEST UNCERTAINTY RATIO.

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

Adj Acc Range

for 4:1 TUR
+/- 0.064
NA
NA
NA

13.

Reference Documents:

13.1.1 A2LA
[1]

P102:2014 A2LA Policy on Measurement Traceability

[2]

R205:2014- Specific Requirements: Calibration Laboratory Accreditation Program

[3]

P103:2013-Policy on Estimating Measurement Uncertainty for Testing Laboratories

[4]

G103:2008-Guide for Estimation of Uncertainty of Dimensional Calibration and Testing Results

[5]

G104:2012-Guide for Estimation of Measurement Uncertainty in Testing

[6]

G118:2014- Guidance for Calibration of Scopes of Accreditation

13.1.1.2
[7]

ACLASS Guidance on Uncertainty Reporting Calibration Laboratories

13.1.1.3
[8]

ISO/IEC 17025:2005

Section 5.10.4.2 Calibration Certificates

13.1.1.4
[9]

ACLASS:2012

ILAC:

ILAC G8:03:2009 - Guidelines on the Reporting of Compliance with Specification

ILAC G17:2002- Introducing the Concept of Uncertainty of Measurement in Testing in

Association with the Application of the Standard ISO/IEC 17025
[10]

[11]

ILAC P10:2013- ILAC Policy on the Traceability of Measurement Results

[12]

ILAC P14:01:2013- ILAC Policy for Uncertainty in Calibration

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

14.

References:

Roger Muse:

ACLASS

Trace McInturff, Pam Wright, Ashly Carter, Jason Poore, Vincent Pugh

A2LA Director of Accreditation Services

A2LA Calibration Accreditation Manager

A2LA Senior Accreditation Officer

A2LA Accreditation Officer

NIST Dimensional Division

Sandia National Lab

Ted Doiron:

Hy Tran

Jim Salsbury:

Mitutoyo Corporate Metrologist

Metrology Consultant

Tom Smith:

2015 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium