Corrosion prevention is vital for quality assurance in metal goods manufacturing. It helps avoid production delays and customer complaints from rust. Key strategies include four types of corrosion testing: VIA, humidity and salt fog, and iron chip testing. These tests aid in selecting effective protection methods and the right rust preventative dosage.

This article is an adaptation of my popular presentation, “Beyond the Sticker & the Cert (Ensuring Better Measurements & Reducing Risk).” Product manufacturers, testing labs, and calibration labs often overlook the importance of thoroughly reviewing calibration certificates, leading to potential measurement inaccuracies and increased risks.

The official document is titled ISO/IEC 17025: 2017, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. It is the international reference for laboratories performing calibration and testing activities.

Whether you are an OEM testing an airframe or a third tier supplier testing high strength alloys, it is crucial to use a reliable tensile testing system that can produce repeatable results.

Simply stating that your gage passed or failed a calibration does not tell the whole story.

Many company owners or managers are frequently asked by staff to consider bringing gage and instrument calibration in-house.

I often take shots at those companies with great quality systems that get their calibration reports, scan them for red flags and then file them away if none are present. 

Anyone involved in medical device manufacturing knows that their industry is highly regulated. Almost every medical device manufacturer or pharmaceutical supplier uses materials testing systems in their quality control and research laboratories or outsources their testing to approved third-party laboratories. 

A few customers are requesting that reports show the actual lab humidity during calibration of their equipment. I realize that this can be a critical consideration for some types of calibration but when it comes to fixed limit gages, I have never heard the rationale for such a request other than it’s what their customer expects.

Calibration reports are supposed to be clear and concise so the reader can understand the details. In fact, the ISO 17025 standard has a section that deals with this topic in specific terms so it would seem there should be no room for misinterpretation.