In the latest issue of Contrôles Essais Mesuresour expert Jean-Michel Pou (Deltamu) proposed an article entitled : Measurement error, instrument error, calibration uncertainty: what's the difference?
He begins with these words: "The more time passes, the more I find our profession archaic. I wrote recently that metrology had missed its 3e revolution, and I know just how powerful this fiasco is when I run training courses. (...) How can I explain to these bright young people the sort of mess that the "ISO 9000" practice of metrology has collectively plunged us all into? I can understand why practitioners aren't shocked by what follows, because, like myself, they've been going through it all their lives. So they naturally think it's normal. But a few words of explanation based on official publications should eventually wake us all up... This awakening, which I hope and pray for, should lead to far-reaching changes in the services provided by "calibrators", who unfortunately haven't changed much in 30 years. Personally, I can't see any fundamental differences from when I started in the business in 1988... "...
Jean-Michel Pou backs up his statement with 4 points:
- Point 1: Calibrators owe us instrument errors, but in reality they only see measurement errors...
- Point 2. Demonstration
- Point 3: Consequences
- Item 4: Conclusion
And his conclusion is clear: "It's all for this?"
Would you like to read his article and position paper in full? Nothing could be simpler. subscribe to the magazine Contrôles Essais Mesures !