The Standard Fall-2010

Vol. 24 No.
3 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality September 2010
The Standard TABLE OF CONTENTS
Vol 24, No. 3, September 2010
Managing Editor and Publisher
Chair’s Corner ................................................................................. 3
Jay L. Bucher Repeatability and Reproducibility, Type A Uncertainties .............. 4
6700 Royal View Dr. The Learning Curve ........................................................................ 6
De Forest, WI 53532-2775 MQD minutes from July, 2010 ....................................................... 9
Voice: 608-846-6968 MSC Fall Tutorials ....................................................................... 12
Email: yokota-69@charter.net
NCSL International Workshop & Symposium ............................. 15
MQD Officers and Committee Chairs .......................................... 19
Advertising Customer Satisfaction Survey Results .......................................... 20
Submit your draft copy to Jay Bucher, with a
request for a quotation. Indicate size desired.
Since The Standard is published ‘in-house’ FROM THE DESK OF THE EDITOR/PUBLISHER
the requester must submit a photo or graphic The plaques on the front cover are for two
of their logo, if applicable. The following
of our illustrious officers, Chris Grachanen and
rates apply:
Business card size ............................ $100
Dilip Shah. Please the Chair’s Corner for further
1/8 page ........................................... $150 details. Congratulations to both!!
1/4 page ............................................ $200 At the end of this issue you will find the
1/3 page ............................................ $250 results of the latest customer satisfaction survey.
½ page ............................................. $300 Thanks to Elias Monreal, our Membership Chair, for
Full page .......................................... $550 getting the data to us.
Advertisements will be accepted on a ‘per We have also thrown in some photos from this year’s NCSL Inter-
issue’ basis only; no long-term contracts will national Workshop & Symposium.
be available at present. Advertising must be Nobody submitted any answers for Phil’s quiz in the last issue of
clearly distinguished as an ad. Ads must be
The Standard, so it is still being carried forward. Please see his column for
related to measurement quality, quality of
measurement, or a related quality field. Ads further details.
must not imply endorsement by the Measure- Finally, if you have your ASQ CCT (certified calibration techni-
ment Quality Division or ASQ. cian) certification, and would like to volunteer to be a part of the CCT cut
score workshop the first part of December, please send me an email. The
Letters to the Editor only requirement is that you cannot have previously
The Standard welcomes letters from mem- participated in any CCT workshops. Thanks in ad-
bers and subscribers. Letters should clearly vance to those who wish to help make the CCT
state whether the author is expressing opin- exam the best it can be.
ion or presenting facts with supporting infor-
mation. Commendation, encouragement,
constructive critique, suggestions, and alter-
native approaches are accepted. If the con-
tent is more than 200 words, we may delete
portions to hold that limit. We reserve the
right to edit letters and papers. The Standard is published quarterly by the Measurement Quality Division of
ASQ; deadlines are February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15. Text infor-
Information for Authors mation intended for publication can be sent via electronic mail as an attachment in
The Standard publishes papers on the qual- MS Word format (Times New Roman, 11 pt). Use single spacing between sen-
ity of measurements and the measurement of tences. Graphics/illustrations must be sent as a separate attachment, in jpg format.
quality at all levels ranging from relatively Photographs of MQD activities are always welcome. Publication of articles, prod-
simple tutorial material to state-of-the-art. uct releases, advertisements or technical information does not imply endorsement
Papers published in The Standard are not by MQD or ASQ. While The Standard makes every effort to ensure the accuracy
referred in the usual sense, except to ascer- of articles, the publication disclaims responsibility for statements of fact or opinion
tain that facts are correctly stated and to as-
sure that opinion and fact are clearly distin- made by the authors or other contributors. Material from The Standard may not be
guished one from another. The Editor re- reproduced without permission of ASQ. Copyrights in the United States and all
serves the right to edit any paper. Please sin- other countries are reserved. Website information: MQD’s homepage can be found
gle space after sentences and use Times New at http://www.asq.org/measure. © 2010 ASQ, MQD. All rights reserved.
Roman, 12 pt font.
MQD Page 3
CHAIR’S CORNER
By Jay L. Bucher
I’d like to extend my congratulations to Chris Grachanen and Dilip Shah for
continuing to bring home the hardware during the 2010 NCSL International
Workshop & Symposium at Providence, RI. We have displayed their plaques
on the cover of this issue.
Chris’ plaques read as follows:

x For your significant contribution as a member of the “Find a Cool Career
in Metrology” DVD outreach project. Your efforts will be seen by thousands
of students and could change their life’s career path.
x In recognition of your service to the NCSLI 163 Workplace and Professional Development Commit-
tee in the development of the “Metrology Human Resource Handbook”. “In the pursuit of the goal
of uniformity in the field of instrumentation and measurement.”
Dilip’s plaque reads as follows:

x In appreciation of your dedicated efforts in providing tutorial training for 5 years during the annual
NCSLI conferences on the topic of: Statistical Analysis of Metrology Data for Laboratory Managers
and Technicians.
Also, I’d like to thank the group that volunteered to support our CCT Exam Review workshop held at
ASQ headquarters on August 6th and 7th. Their hard work and dedication to getting the most from the
time allowed not only helped to complete the exam review, but write some new test items, and review
previous items to be put into the item pool. Thanks to all for another successful workshop.
Back row: Shawn Mason, John Fuschino, Keith Kemsley, Kulwinder Basra, Rick Clark, James Ek
Front row: Jay Bucher, Tony Kutch, Ron Parker
Vol. 24, No. 3 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality September 2010
MQD Page 4
Repeatability and Reproducibility, Type A Uncertainties

By Christopher L. Grachanen
One of the requirements for calibration laboratories to be

awarded accreditation status necessitates performing measurement un-
certainty analysis. The purpose of this analysis is twofold, 1) identify
sources of measurement uncertainties and 2) estimating the magnitudes
of these uncertainties. Measurement uncertainty analysis is the means
by which uncertainties being propagated via the calibration process are
known and their impact on devices being calibrated assessed. Simply
stated, uncertainties are error components which adversely impact a
measurement device’s accuracy such that the greater the uncertainties
(error components) the less confident we are that measurement results made by the device are accurate.
Accredited calibration laboratories are required to have uncertainty statements for each measurement
parameter within their scope of accreditation. A calibration laboratory scope of accreditation lists meas-
urement parameters a laboratory is accredited to provide and is usually available for inspection via an
accreditation provider’s website.
Measurement uncertainty analysis activities, congruent with industry / agency accepted prac-
tices, are carried out per the methodologies recommended in ISO standard ‘Guide to the expression of
Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM)’. The GUM provides a standardized way of expressing the per-
ceived quality of a measurement result utilizing a mathematical framework for a) normalizing uncertain-
ties to applicable probability distributions, b) combining different types of uncertainties, c) determining
sensitivity coefficients for uncertainties as well as d) the handling of correlation between uncertainties to
name a few. The GUM uncertainty framework essentially constitutes the application of the conventional
laws of uncertainty propagation.
The GUM recognizes two types of uncertainties, Type A and Type B. Traditional definitions of
random and systematic uncertainties are not interchangeable with the definitions of Type A and B uncer-
tainties. Basically Type A uncertainties are those uncertainties which are obtained statistically and Type
B are all others. The International vocabulary of metrology, ‘Basic and general concepts and associated
terms (VIM)’ defines the following;
Type A Evaluation of Measurement Uncertainty – ‘evaluation of a component of measurement un-

certainty by a statistical analysis of measured quantity values obtained under defined measurement con-
ditions’
Type B Evaluation of Measurement Uncertainty – ‘evaluation of a component of measurement uncer-
tainty determined by means other than a Type A evaluation of measurement uncertainty’
Type B uncertainties are normally associated with measurement bias in regards to the closeness of a
measurement with the true value of the measurand (quantity intended to be measured). The VIM defines
measurement accuracy as ‘closeness of agreement between a measured quantity value and a true quan-
tity value of a measurand’ with the following three clarifications;
The concept ‘measurement accuracy’ is not a quantity and is not given a numerical quantity value.
A measurement is said to be more accurate when it offers a smaller measurement error.
The term “measurement accuracy” should not be used for measurement trueness and the term
measurement precision should not be used for ‘measurement accuracy’, which, however, is re-
lated to both these concepts.
‘Measurement accuracy’ is sometimes understood as closeness of agreement between measured
quantity values that are being attributed to the measurand.
Test equipment specifications, calibration uncertainties and ancillary equipment characterized
(Continued on page 5)
MQD Page 5
(Continued from page 4)

characteristics make up the bulk of Type B uncertainties and can be relatively easily found in test equip-
ment manuals, calibration certificates and supplier catalogs and advertisement brochures.
Type A uncertainties are uncertainties associated with the variability i.e. lack of precision, of a
measurement commonly expressed in terms of standard deviation or standard error of the mean. The
ISO standard 5725-2 ‘Accuracy (correctness and precision) of measurement methods and results’, Part
2, ‘Basic method for determining repeatability and reproducibility of standard measurement method’,
provides guidance in determining the two basic measures of measurement precision, repeatability and
reproducibility. The VIM gives the following definitions pertinent to understanding repeatability and
reproducibility;
Measurement Precision – ‘closeness of agreement between indications or measured quantity values
obtained by replicate measurements on the same or similar objects under specified conditions’
Measurement Repeatability – ‘measurement precision under a set of repeatability conditions of meas-
urement’
Repeatability Condition of Measurement – ‘condition of measurement, out of a set of conditions that
includes the same measurement procedure, same operators, same measuring system, same operating
conditions and same location, and replicate measurements on the same or similar objects over a short
period of time’
Measurement Reproducibility – ‘measurement precision under reproducibility conditions of measure-
ment’
Reproducibility Condition of Measurement – ‘condition of measurement, out of a set of conditions
that includes different locations, operators, measuring systems, and replicate measurements on the same
or similar objects’
It can be seen from the aforementioned definition that repeatability is an indication as to how
well a calibration laboratory can perform a repetitive measurement over a relatively short time interval
under the same conditions and that reproducibility is an indication as to how well a calibration labora-
tory can achieve acceptable measurement result under different conditions assuming a longer interval of
time.
Accreditation assessors frequently require repeatability and reproducibility Type A uncertainties
be determined by a calibration laboratory for each of the measurement parameters which appears in their
scope of accreditation. Repeatability and reproducibility values help assessors assess how well a labora-
tory can be expected to make precision measurements. Repeatability and reproducibility studies to de-
rive said values are analogous to classical Gage R&R studies. Accreditation assessors will more often
than not request documented evidence of repeatability and reproducibility studies. Calibration laborato-
ries can develop in-house procedures and templates for conducting and documenting repeatability and
reproducibility studies and/or can utilize the services of a proficiency test provider to facilitate studies
tailored to their specific needs and unique circumstances.
Calibration laboratory scopes of accreditation typically do not provide the granularity for identi-
fying what Type A and B uncertainty contributors are used to derive an uncertainty statement. It can be
surmised that Type A uncertainties in the guise of repeatability and reproducibility are choice attributes
for evaluating the likelihood a calibration laboratory can make calibrations with precision. Users of cali-
bration services are encouraged to request the results of calibration laboratory proficiency tests in order
to better assess calibration providers. It goes without saying that a calibration laboratory’s ability to
make precision measurements helps to reduce the chances of customers making bad business decisions
attributable to erroneous measurement data i.e. reduces measurement decision risk.
MQD Page 6
THE LEARNING CURVE

By Phil Painchaud
This is the sixty-third in a contiguous series of quarterly columns, originally charted

by our Founding Editor-in-Chief, as a vehicle for the exploration of the general sub-
ject of Metrology Education, and as a platform for the readers of this column to ex-
press their views on that subject. During the past eighteen years, publishable reader
views in response to this chartered subject have ranged from very scanty to zilch.
This apathy (or insouciance if the reader prefers), has at times required this author to
utilize a great deal of latitude in choosing alternate themes for certain columns and
for the continuation of his irreverent writing style. However this format appears to be
to the liking of certain readers as well as our current Boss, our most esteemed Execu-
tive Editor of this quarterly journal, as well. So, following our long established cus-
tom, this Column will again be in the form of an open letter to him.
Dear Boss:
In the last column (#62 of THE LEARNING CURVE) we published a simple test, one that the
late Dr. E.E. Watson had planned to use in his Measurement Science curriculum at California State Uni-
versity—Dominguez Hills. It was intended, he told me, “to separate dilettantes from the serious stu-
dents aiming for professional Metrology careers” early in the educational process. I offered what I
thought were substantial cash prizes for the highest scoring participants. You, Boss, in your alternate
role of Grand Vizier of this Division superseded my offering pittance by 500%! That alone should been
enough inducement to cause several dozen individuals to sign up and become dues paying card carrying
Division members just for a chance at one of those prizes.
When the deadline for returns, July 15, 2010, was reached, the total returns to both me and to
you, Boss, was a big fat ZERO. It is almost unbelievable that among the several thousand members of
this Division, that there are none interested in money. Something must have gone wrong. So what is the
solution?
Well the Executive Council of this Division has decided to, and has directed me to extend the
deadline for answering the questionnaire to November 1, 2010. That means the answers must be
physically in my hands by 2400 hours 11-1-2010! The other rules remain unchanged. Your answers
must be hard copy, typed format, no electronic transmission (i.e., e-mail, FAX, etc are not allowable).
U.S.A. respondents must use the US Postal System Certified or Priority Mail service (I recommend that
you request a Return Receipt in assure that I have received the document by the required time and date).
Non-U.S.A. respondents should use the equivalent services of their postal system. Any responses trans-
mitted by any other means or arriving after the cutoff date/time will be rejected!
Now for a bit of explanation that could help you in participating in this contest. First of all you
need the fifteen questions (Remember you must answer all fifteen and all parts of any multipart ques-
tions). Failure to answer any question in full, results in a zero score for that item. An incorrect answer
of any portion results in a negative score for the entire question. The will be no partial scoring. I shall
not repeat the questions here in this column. You can get them in full with all of the rules (except for the
change of cutoff date) by going back online and calling up the Division Website and downloading the
last issue of THE STANDARD and finding (Column 62) THE LEARNING CURVE. With a $500 po-
tential reward it should be well worth your effort to do so.
MQD Page 7
Now for a few explanations of the wherefore and why an examination of this nature came to be
in the first place. Dr. Watson firmly believed that a Metrologist, in addition to being a true Professional
should be a scientifically and culturally well rounded person. To that end he felt that his Measurement
Science students should be avid collateral readers of measurement related documents. I agree with that
philosophy whole heartedly and have so long before I ever met Gene Watson. I have from time to time
recommended collateral reading material many times in this column. He had a list of collateral reading
material that he issued to every student and strongly recommended that they acquire each item, read
them, and keep them as a core of their personal metrology library.
Several of the questions in the subject examination were taken directly (in some cases indi-
rectly) from several of the recommended collateral reading texts all of which have been recommended at
some time or another in this column.. I cannot remember which question came from where, but I do
recall three of the sources that were used, copies of which I also have in my personal collection.
These are:
THE SCIENCE OF MEASUREMENT, A Historical Survey, by Herbert Arthur Klein,

ISBN0-486-25839-4
ABSOULTE ZERO and the Conquest of Cold, by Tom Schachtman,
ISBN 0-395-93888-0
MEASURE for MEASURE, by Richard A. Young and Thomas J. Glover
ISBN 1-889796-00-X
I know that I have recommended these in this column in past issues.
I know that for some of you this is going to raise the question “What is Collateral Reading?”
“What has is got to do with me and my studies in the Measurement Sciences?” “How does it relate to
the text books and handbooks that I already have?”
Good questions, so get ready for another of my pontifications. For the purposes of this discus-
sion let us consider that all textual documentation pertaining to our subject of interest, Metrology, falls
into one of three categories; Text Books, Handbooks, and Collateral Reading Books.
Text Books are documents intended to be ancillaries to the teaching of a subject; a ‘Teacher’s
Aid’ if there is a teacher, or as a source material in self-study cases. A Text Book can broadly cover a
subject of interest or it can narrow into some detailed aspect. It can deeply explore the subject; or it can
be quite cursory and skim over some material lightly. All of this is at the discretion of the author and his
intentions for the document’s use.
Handbooks are intended to be reference documents to be used by those individuals who have
already attained some degree of proficiency in the subject. They are not intended to be the basic source
material providers for teaching a subject. They are intended to be where one might go to retrieve spe-
cific data such as the logarithm of a trigonometric function; or the melting point of a certain metal; or of
the characteristics of a semiconductor device; or the metric equivalent of a wine tun; or the color tem-
perature of a specific star; etc. Handbooks generally have little narrative text but on the other hand
should be loaded with tables, charts, graphs, and similar data formats. Item number three above is a rep-
resentative Handbook although its title does not so indicate. Again book titles are at the whim of the
MQD Page 8

author.
Collateral Reading Books are intended to broaden ones’ background on a general subject; they
are not intended to be the Text Books of a course on that subject. They are not intended to be studied as
would be a Text Book but rather to be read as one might read a novel, or a biography, or a travelogue.
This does not mean that there is not valuable information to be gleaned from the reading of them, but
that is a function of the mental retentively of the reader. When properly written, Collateral Reading
Books can be quite entertaining. They are mandatory for broadening one’s background in the general
area of interest.
For those of you who are interested in building your own Metrology library, this Division many
years ago published a rather complete list of recommended books (of all three types) in THE STAN-
DARD. This list was then emasculated and then printed in booklet format for handouts at the various
conferences. I have a few copies of that booklet if anyone is interested drop me a note with your name,
address, etc., and I shall be happy to send you a copy.
DO NOT GET ANY SUCH REQUESTS MIXED WITH ANY RETURNS OF THE EX-
AMINATION! KEEP THEM IN SEPARATE MAILINGS.
Now for a bit of personal pride, Fathers’ Day occurred this year after I had written Column 62,
but before you had received it, so I could not announce my Fathers’ Day present. Unbeknownst to me,
my two daughters connived (probably with my son) to give me a present of a Website. They got into my
hard drives (I have five, three internal and two external) and extracted such material that they felt best
described me and my past as they knew me from their perspectives. After they showed it to me, I was
allowed to go in and write preambles to certain documents, It is not completed as yet as there are many
family photos to digitize and install and some more documentation to install, and some to clean up, but
if anybody is interested try: www.philpainchaud.com
Well Boss that ought to do it for this issue. Let’s hope we have a flood of responses to try to
capture some of that cash for correct answers to the examination. Nest issue I intend to not only an-
nounce the winners and give the correct answers, but also the whys and wherefores of each question.
Phil Painchaud
1110 West Dorothy Drive
Brea, CA 92821-2017
Phone: 1-714-529-6604
FAX: 1-714-529-1109
E-Mail: painchaud4@cs.com or olepappy@juno.com
MQD Page 9
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF QUALITY – MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION (ASQ-MQD)

MEETING MINUTES
July 26, 2010
Call to order: The quarterly ASQ-MQD meeting was called to order at approximately 4:00pm (Eastern
Daylight Time). The meeting requirements for a quorum are met.
Roll Call: The meeting was held by conference call. The following persons were in attendance: Dilip
Shah (Chair-Elect) & Heather Wade (MQD Secretary) – both in attendance at NCSLI conference, Jay
Bucher (Chair), Chris Grachanen (Treasurer), Jessie Schultz & Cynthia Nazario (from ASQ).
Agenda Issues
ASQ-MQD Voice Of the Customer Survey
The 2010 survey was completed. Jay will post a summary of the results in the September issue of “The
Standard”. There were 92 respondents (248% increase over 2009 respondents). The survey was 10
pages, but only two will be posted in “the Standard”.
MQD’s performance in comparison to ASQ’s ratings: the only down point is that MQD didn’t host its
own conference. Overall satisfaction: 35.2% for MQD vs. 29.9% for ASQ.
MQD Financials
Chris Grachanen: Annual (financial) audit to be performed next week & to be submitted for August 15
deadline, for eligibility in ASQ’s Quality Management Process (QMP) Awards. Mike Sumich (MQD
Audit Chair) to send preliminary results. MQD in the black. Chris Grachanen sent a copy of the finan-
cials by e-mail after this meeting. A copy from the e-mail are included below:
MQD TREASURER’S REPORT
28 July 2010
Per June 2010 Bank Statement
MQD continues to have a strong balance sheet (Statement of Financial Position) with over $176,300.00
combined checking and saving account balances.
Commercial Checking Account Ending Leger Balance as of 30 Jul 2010: $95,397.11
Money Market Saving Account Ending Balance as of 30 Jul 2010: $79,806.95
Membership Revenue for 12 months ending 30 Jul 2010: $27,549.00
Investment Income for 12 months ending 30 Jul 2010: $198.00
Royalties Income from Jan to Dec 2009: $2,763.00
Total revenues for all sources for 12 months ending 30 Jul 2010: $30,511.00
Budgeted MQD Expenses for 12 months ending 30 Jul 2010: $25,319.00
Note 1: The second Metrology DVD matching sponsorship share ($10,000.00) invoice has not been re-
ceived as of this writing. This joint effort with the National Conference of Standards Laboratories Inter-
national (NCSLI) and the Measurement Science Conference (MSC) is moving to Phase 2 activities after
initial release of the DVD.
Note 2: As of this writing there are a total of $4095.00 outstanding checks which have not been posted
to Commercial Checking Account Leger.
Note 3: Annual MQD financial audit paperwork has been submitted. Preliminary analysis shows ledger
(s) agreement within $1.00.
Respectfully Submitted,
Christopher L. Grachanen
MQD Page 10

Phil Painchaud’s contest in “The Standard”
There was no response to Phil’s metrology contest published in “The Standard”. Possible reasons? Dilip
& Jay both poll MQD members if they can get “The Standard”. They all say they can. However, whether
they read it or not, we cannot control.
Jay has asked Jessie Schultz to find appropriate person at ASQ for web-hit counter so we can see how
many times “The Standard” is actually downloaded. Can be anonymous – we just want to know how
many are downloading it. Run counter through January/February 2011.
4. NCSLI Conference
x Dilip has asked if the MQD booth can be moved to a higher traffic area & stay with Learning & De-
velopment booth. Currently the MQD booth is located in back corner of exhibitor area.
x Goal for NCSLI 2010 Conference: 3-day Technician Track & 3 presentations Wednesday afternoon.
Recognition of MQD members at NCSLI:
Chris Grachanen recognized at July 26 lunchtime awards for working on the multi-media DVD,
“Cool Careers in Metrology”
Dilip recognized for 5 continuous years of doing Tutorial Workshops.
Joe Simmons Award Scholarship

Norm Bielecki has retired from the Joe Simmons Award committee.
Dilip will write a Memorandum of Understanding for MQD & NCSLI for Learning & Development, Joe
Simmons Scholarship, and rest of obligations. This to be reviewed by ASQ headquarters and NCSLI
Board of Directors by October 2010.
Mark Lapinskes is now the Education Vice-President.
MSC has withdrawn from supporting the Joe Simmons Award scholarship, a $3000 scholarship. What
about NCSLI & MQD share support for Joe Simmons Award 50/50, i.e., $1500 + $1500? Dilip wants
clarification on scholarship overhead costs. Mark to bring up to NCSLI. Dilip will champion this initia-
tive.
6. ASQ-MQD Exhibitor Booth

x Heather Wade suggests a dry erase board for posting announcements at the MQD booth. Dilip rec-
ommends a programmable, digital photo frame.
Heather recommends a survey for booth interaction. Jay will bring his laser lights for immediate give-
aways & possibly enter participants for a bigger drawing. Heather will champion the survey question
ideas and send to the board members for review. Goal is to launch this at MSC.
Action Item: Dilip to get a digital photo frame. Jay makes a motion to support this purchase. Heather
seconds the motion. Chris agrees. None are opposed. Suggested $200 limit and to get a carrying case.
7. New Business
x Jay announces that MQD has reached 100% of our goals.
x Jay thanks board members for their input on recent SOP.
x WCQI paper deadline: August 2, 2010. Dilip is working on getting an entire ANSI Z.540 track. Del
Caldwell & Steve Doty involved.
Jay to send pdf for Measure-For-Measure column
MQD Page 11

ASQ-CCT Exam Development
August 5-7, Jay at ASQ for CCT Exam Review.
December 2-4 for CCT cut-score
Adjournment
4:45 pm (EDT) Dilip makes motion to adjourn meeting. Chris and Jay second the motion. All approve.
Meeting is adjourned.
Meeting Minutes Submitted by: Heather Wade, Secretary August 2, 2010

Meeting Minutes Approved by: Jay L. Bucher
MQD Page 12
MSC Fall Tutorials

http://www.msc-conf.com/msc/2011_fall-tutorials.html
For the first time, The Measurement Science Conference is presenting a one day, short venue of
tutorials designed for basic Metrology Training. Hands-on training about Measurement Uncer-
tainty, Microwave R/F Measurements, Lean Thinking and Paperless Calibration. These will be
very practical sessions being presented at a reasonable price all in one day. A lunch will be pro-
vided.
The date is one day only, October 21, 2010.

The location is the Hyatt Regency in Irvine, California.
The price is $695 for the day.
(http://www.msc-conf.com/msc/2011_fall-tutorials.html)
1. Metrology Fundamentals
Emil Hazarian, NSWC Corona Division
2. Measurement Uncertainty: A Hands-on Workshop
Dilip Shah, E=mc3 Solutions
3. Microwave/RF Measurements
Adam Fleder, Andy Brush, David Simerly, Tegam, Inc.
4. 5S, Lean Thinking and Metrology Laboratories Project Management
Nat Russo, Raytheon SAS
5. Paperless Calibration Compliance for Domestic
and International Standards & Regulations
Jay Bucher, Bucherview Metrology Services, LLC
Metrology Fundamentals
Emil Hazarian, NSWC Corona Division
This workshop will reveal the basic metrology concepts and their applications including, accuracy, pre-
cision, measurement traceability, measurement uncertainty, establishing compliance with specification.
Also metrology classification, measuring methods, as well as the necessary metrology tools, will be
thought including basic statistics. Working examples will facilitate the understanding of lectured top-
ics. Managers, supervisors and technicians will benefit from attending this workshop.
Measurement Uncertainty: A Hands-on Workshop

Dilip Shah, E=mc3 Solutions
This is a beginner to intermediate level workshop targeted towards metrologists, technicians and engi-
neers. This workshop covers the Measurement Uncertainty fundamentals for metrology professionals
new to the subject. Statistical concepts relevant to Metrology and Measurement Uncertainty are intro-
duced, explained and demonstrated.
Using the ISO Guide to Uncertainty of Measurement (GUM) approach, the workshop breaks down the
MQD Page 13

Measurement Uncertainty estimation into a multi-step process. The workshop proceeds to cover practi-
cal examples encountered in calibration and testing environment using a hands-on method for estimating
Measurement Uncertainty. As each step is covered, a computer spreadsheet template is developed to
calculate and document the measurement uncertainty budget. Examples and techniques related to me-
trology and measurement; including Test Uncertainty Ratios (TUR), risk analysis, control charting
(SPC) applications in metrology are discussed during the workshop to ensure that participants leave the
session with practical and timesaving tools and techniques that can be utilized in their laboratory appli-
cations.
Although not necessary, workshop participants are encouraged to bring their laptops and/or calculators
to follow demonstrated exercises. Copies of Excel spreadsheet template developed for Measurement
Uncertainty Budget is shared with workshop participants.
Microwave/RF Measurements
Adam Fleder, Andy Brush, David Simerly, Tegam, Inc.
Here is what this tutorial will cover:

* Practical introduction to RF power transfer between two coupled ports.
* Gamma and how to use Gamma to calculate power transfer and port match.
* The importance of vector measurements to the precise knowledge of power transfer.
* Typical arrangements of RF Power Sensor Calibration stations.
* The step-by-step process of calibrating a power sensor.
* Contributing factors to uncertainty of a calibration factor.
* Practical example, with Excel Spreadsheet and real data, of calculating expanded uncertainty of a cali-
bration factor.
* A complete, end-to-end, demonstration of calibrating a power sensor using an automated station. This
demonstration will use industry standard equipment IN the workshop room, with hands-on opportuni-
ties.
5S, Lean Thinking and Metrology Laboratories Project Management

Nat Russo, Raytheon SAS
Many businesses are concerned about the growing cost of overhead services and calibration costs are
always undergoing scrutiny. With cost of capital equipment, expense items and labor, metrology ser-
vices are questioned as to their worth to the company. 5S, Lean Thinking and Project Management tools
can help the metrology lab reduce cost, improve their efficiency and show the company that not only are
their services valuable, but are performed with minimal cost.
Using the 5S methodology created by Hiroyuki Hirano, we will show how to use various tools to dem-
onstrate how Sort, Set in Order, Sweep, Standardize and Sustain will organize, order, clean, establish
processes and maintain improvements.
After setting the foundation of 5S, techniques and tools in Lean Thinking will be use to evaluate proc-
esses using flow charts, value stream maps, Kaizen events and Poke Yoke.
MQD Page 14

Project Management will demonstrate the value of using schedules, work elements, budgets and metrics
to monitor progress and report results to management.
Using these tools effectively will improve the operational efficiencies of a laboratory making a metrol-
ogy laboratory an asset to the company instead of a perceived drain to the company.
Paperless Calibration Compliance for Domestic

and International Standards & Regulations
Jay Bucher, Bucherview Metrology Services, LLC
This full day tutorial workshop will show metrology, calibration, and QA managers, supervisors and
technicians how to develop, evaluate and manage a quality calibration program that is in full compliance
with domestic and international standards and regulations. The attendees will learn the five easy steps
needed for a quality calibration program that is traceable to the SI for any sized company, as well as how
to design and create their own electronic records that meet 21 CFR Part 11 requirements. The learning
objectives include but are not limited to: writing calibration procedures, traceable calibration records,
out-of-tolerance programs, requirements for the various international standards (ISO 9001:2008 & ISO
13485:2003) and national regulations (FDA - 21 CFR Part 58, 21 CFR Part 110, 21 CFR Part 211, 21
CFR Part 606 & 21 CFR Part 820), passing your audits, equipment 'end-of-life' requirements, and how
to use Adobe Acrobat Pro for seamless, robust, electronic calibration records.
MQD Page 15
2010 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

The Measurement Quality Division booth in the background (notice the tall pop-up banner).
We were located next to NCSLI’s Learning & Development area.
MQD Page 16

Tom Ashby from NPL, UK, presenting during the Learning and Development Session
MQD Page 17

Howard Zion, Cory Peters, Georgia Harris, Elizabeth Gentry, get their recognition awards
as members of the “Find a Cool Career in Metrology” DVD outreach project.
Derek Porter, NCSLI President looking on.
Chris Grachanen on the next page with his plaques.
MQD Page 18
MQD Page 19
MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION OFFICERS AND COMMITTEE CHAIRS

Chair, Certification Chair, Publication Chair, Bucherview Metrology Services, LLC
Newsletter Editor/Publisher, Share Point 6700 Royal View Dr.
Administrator De Forest, WI 53532-2775
Jay L. Bucher, ASQ-CCT Voice (608) 846-6968
Bucherview Metrology Services, LLC E-mail: yokota-69@charter.net
6700 Royal View Dr.
De Forest, WI 53532-2775 Examining Chair
Voice (608) 846-6968 Duane Allen
E-mail: yokota-69@charter.net U. S. Navy
P.O. Box 5000, Code MS11
Chair-Elect, Program Chair Corona, CA 92878-5000
Dilip A. Shah Voice (909) 273-4783 / Fax (909) 273-4599
E = mc3 Solutions E-mail: duane.allen@navy.mil
3359 Styx Hill Road,
Medina, Ohio 44256-9755 Membership Chair, Voice of the Customer Rep.
Voice (330) 328-4400 / Fax (330) 336-3974 Elias Monreal
E-mail: emc3solu@aol.com, dashah@aol.com Industrial Tool Die & Engineering
4765 S. Overland Dr.
Treasurer, NCSL International Representative Tucson, AZ 85714
Christopher L. Grachanen Voice (520) 241-0478
Manager, Houston Metrology Group HP E-mail: emonreal@hotmail.com
P. O. Box 692000 MS070110
Houston, TX 77269-2000 Historian
Voice (281) 518-8486 / Fax (281) 518-7275 Brandon Downing
E-mail: Chris.Grachanen@hp.com 3054 Cross Creek Dr
Cumming, GA 30040
Secretary Voice (678) 983 9455
Heather A. Wade E-mail: bdowning42@comcast.net
Laboratory Calibration Officer, ASQ-CCT
NSF International Nominating Chair
789 N. Dixboro Road Craig A. Niemann, CMSgt, USAF
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Voice (734) 913-5712 Joe Simmons Scholarship
E-mail: wade@nsf.org Dilip A. Shah
E = mc3 Solutions
Immediate Past Chair 3359 Styx Hill Road,
Craig A. Niemann, CMSgt, USAF Medina, Ohio 44256-9755
Voice (330) 328-4400 / Fax (330) 336-3974
Website Liaison E-mail: emc3solu@aol.com, dashah@aol.com
Jay L. Bucher, ASQ-CCT
Bucherview Metrology Services, LLC
6700 Royal View Dr.
De Forest, WI 53532-2775
Voice (608) 846-6968
E-mail: yokota-69@charter.net
Standards Committee Representative

Jay L. Bucher, ASQ-CCT
Measurement Quality Division
TO: Measurement Quality Division(MQD) The Standard
FROM: Elías Monréal
DATE: 7-26-10
RE: Membership Report: 2010 ASQ Division Member Satisfaction Survey
2009-10 Member Unit Satisfaction and Loyalty Study:

On behalf of the executive board of MQD, thanks for the feedback you have given to the 2010 ASQ
Membership Satisfaction Survey. Your input provides guidance for creating opportunities focused on
your needs, and allows MQD to provide the products and services that are truly value added activities.
Jay Bucher, MQD Chair, heavily promoted the survey and placed a “reminder” on our website, to
complete survey. This effort proved positive results. This year we received a 248% increase of 92
completed surveys compared to 37 in 2009, 68 in 2008, 22 in 2006, and 40 in 2003. MQD received an
overall satisfaction rating of 6.6 (respondents rated the performance on a 10 point scale in which "10" is
the most positive and "1" is the least positive response) compared to 6.8 for all other ASQ Divisions.
Please review details/verbatim feedback from 2010 survey, attached after this article.
Complied Top 10 verbatim:

Q20. What is the one thing you would like to see improved in
your primary forum or division? (n=75) Count %
No Comments (Too new to division, Don’t know) 18 32.9
Communication(Activities, Contacts, Benefits, Info) 14 18.7
Certification- Education, Refresher, Online,Support 10 13.3
Networking(Best practices, Job posting) 7 9.3
Conference(Regional) 5 6.7
Diversity 3 4.0
Good(Well, Resources, Enhance) 3 4.0
Examples(Application, Case Study) 2 2.7
Information-FAQ 2 2.7
Website(blog) 2 2.7
<= Measurement Quality Division

Membership Distribution
Certified Calibration Technician =>
Certification Distribution
Q35. Additional Comments: ( n=30) Count %
Uplifting comment about MQD/ASQ 5 15.6
No Comment(None at this time) 4 12.5
Capitalist 2 6.3
Certification-Education 2 6.3
Unknown 1 3.1
Applied Content 1 3.1
ASQ email system 1 3.1
Busy 1 3.1
Case study 1 3.1
Company not pay dues 1 3.1
MQD Membership Numbers:

Please note, we are the 12th largest of 25 ASQ Divisions with 3110 members. Please view current
membership totals. Our current opportunity is to retain those 337 unpaid members and effectively
communicate our relevancy to the 120 new members.
TOTAL ADJUSTMENT 0
TOTAL NEW 120
TOTAL LATE PAID RENEW 19
TOTAL UPGRADES 0
TOTAL QUIT -44
TOTAL RESIGNED -4
TOTAL DECEASED -0
TOTAL MONTH_UNPAID 51
TOTAL 3110
TOTAL UNPAID 337
TOTAL RENEW 394
MQD Survey Update:

I anticipated releasing our inaugural survey by now but unfortunately, work/school has consumed by free
time. I will endeavor to complete this as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience and for your
participation in our upcoming survey.
Questions, comments, or concerns? Feel free to contact me at emonreal@hotmail.com or (520) 241-0478.
Adíos,
Elías Monréal
ASQ-CQIA,CMI,CQT,CSSGB,CCT,CQA,CQE
MQD Membership Chair
<= Measurement Quality Division

Membership Distribution
Certified Calibration Technician =>
Certification Distribution
ASQ Division Member Satisfaction Survey (2010)
Measurement Quality Division Report ( n = 92 )*
The following reports the results of the Division Satisfaction survey for your Division. Your scores are compared to the scores for all other ASQ
Divisions. Respondents rated the performance on a 10 point scale in which "10" is the most positive and "1" is the least positive response.
Primary
Forum/Division Forum/Division ASQ
2010 Rating* 2009 Rating* 2010 Rating
Top 2 Mean Top 2 Mean Top 2 Mean
Box Box Box
Perceptions of Your Division

My division offers significant networking opportunities with other professionals in my field 17.3% 6.19 17.6% 6.00 16.4% 6.38
My division sponsors conferences that provide critical new knowledge for quality professionals 13.4% 6.23 28.1% 6.50 21.7% 6.82
My division provides valuable resources and support pertaining to my specific industry and interests 14.5% 6.37 26.5% 6.71 19.5% 6.65
My division provides information that makes me more productive 19.5% 6.22 23.5% 6.38 19.1% 6.57
My division provides me with valuable ideas that have helped me and my employer 14.8% 6.05 23.5% 6.15 18.5% 6.47
My division leadership is accessible for questions, concerns and suggestions 19.7% 6.26 36.7% 6.93 20.6% 6.53
My division provides open opportunities to be active in leadership 16.0% 6.00 25.0% 6.59 21.1% 6.52
Overall Satisfaction with Your Division

How do you rate your overall satisfaction with your division? 18.8% 6.59 16.7% 6.31 21.4% 6.79
Notes: * Results should be interpreted with caution if the sample n is under 30.
** + / - indicate if your Division’s rating score is statistically significantly above ( + ) or below ( - ) the rating for your Division’s previous report at the 95% confidence level.
** Arrows indicate if your Division’s rating score is statistically significantly above ( ) or below ( ) the rating for All ASQ Divisions at the 95% confidence level.
The following reports the results of the Division Satisfaction survey for your Division. Your scores are compared to the scores for all other ASQ
Divisions. Respondents rated the performance on a 10 point scale in which "10" is the most positive and "1" is the least positive response.
Primary Primary
Forum/Division Division ASQ
2010 Rating* 2009 Rating* 2010 Rating
Top 2 Mean Top 2 Mean Top 2 Mean
Box Box Box
ASQ Satisfaction & Loyalty

Taking everything into consideration, how do you rate your overall satisfaction with your 35.2% 7.48 23.3% 7.23 29.9% 7.38
membership in ASQ?
How likely are you or your employer to renew your membership in ASQ? 60.4% 8.46 66.7% 8.83 63.5% 8.55
How likely are you to recommend ASQ membership to a business associate? 51.6% 7.88 44.8% 7.69 47.4% 7.84
** + / - indicate if your Division’s rating score is statistically significantly above ( + ) or below ( - ) the rating for your Division’s previous report at the 95% confidence level.
** Arrows indicate if your Division’s rating score is statistically significantly above ( ) or below ( ) the rating for All ASQ Divisions at the 95% confidence level.
The following reports the results of the Division Satisfaction survey for your Division. Your scores are compared to the scores for all other ASQ Divisions.
Primary Primary
Forum/Division Division ASQ 2010
2010 2009 Divisions
% n % n % n
About Yourself
What type of membership do you hold?
Regular ($129)** 36.0% 32 53.3% 16 37.1% 1,926
Senior or Fellow ($129) 52.8% 47 46.7% 14 53.3% 2,770
Associate ($74) 9.0% 8 0.0% 0 7.7% 400
Division ($31) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.1% 6
Student ($25) 2.2% 2 0.0% 0 1.8% 92
What is your ASQ market segment?
Manufacturing 45.7% 42 66.7% 20 40.0% 2,105
Service 31.5% 29 26.7% 8 28.9% 1,520
Government 2.2% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 107
Healthcare 1.1% 1 0.0% 0 4.2% 222
Education 1.1% 1 0.0% 0 2.1% 109
Other 6.5% 6 3.3% 1 4.7% 248
International 12.0% 11 3.3% 1 18.0% 949
** 2009 wording was "Full ($129)."
Primary Primary
2010 2009 Divisions
% n % n % n
About Yourself
What is your age?
18 or younger 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1
19-25 1.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.7% 39
26-35 12.0% 11 3.3% 1 11.6% 605
36-45 22.8% 21 36.7% 11 24.0% 1,258
46-55 39.1% 36 36.7% 11 37.8% 1,977
56-65 19.6% 18 16.7% 5 22.3% 1,167
66 or older 5.4% 5 6.7% 2 3.6% 188
Primary Primary
2010 2009 Divisions
% n % n % n
About Yourself
Which one of the following best describes your title or function?
Senior Officer (President/Vice President/C-Level) 6.5% 6 0.0% 0 4.8% 252
Director 2.2% 2 10.0% 3 10.9% 573
Manager 22.8% 21 3.3% 1 29.2% 1,535
Supervisor 5.4% 5 6.7% 2 4.8% 250
Engineer 13.0% 12 23.3% 7 18.8% 989
Technician 25.0% 23 43.3% 13 3.6% 191
Inspector 6.5% 6 0.0% 0 1.9% 100
Internal Consultant 3.3% 3 0.0% 0 6.0% 314
Independent Consultant 4.3% 4 6.7% 2 6.1% 323
Educator 1.1% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 104
Student 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 24
Other 7.6% 7 6.7% 2 8.7% 456
In Transition/Unemployed 2.2% 2 NA 2.1% 110
In Transition/Retirement 0.0% 0 NA 0.6% 34
Primary Primary
2010 2009 Divisions
% n % n % n
About Yourself
How long have you been a member of ASQ?
Less than one year 15.2% 14 NA 14.8% 779
1 year to less than 4 years 20.7% 19 NA 23.3% 1,225
4 years to less than 7 years 23.9% 22 NA 14.2% 748
7 years to less than 20 years 31.5% 29 NA 37.1% 1,951
20 years or more 8.7% 8 NA 10.6% 557
Who pays for your ASQ membership?
Myself 38.0% 35 36.7% 11 42.2% 2,217
My company/employer 57.6% 53 46.7% 14 52.8% 2,775
Both share costs 1.1% 1 13.3% 4 3.5% 185
Other 3.3% 3 3.3% 1 1.5% 80
Gender?
Male 85.6% 77 83.3% 25 73.6% 3,756
Female 14.4% 13 16.7% 5 26.4% 1,346
Where do you currently reside?
United States or Canada** 93.5% 86 96.7% 29 88.6% 4,661
All other countries 6.5% 6 3.3% 1 11.4% 599
** 2009 included only United States.
ASQ 2010 Division Member Satisfaction Survey
Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
20. What is the one thing you would like to see improved in your primary forum or division?
UniqueID: 28148652 Division: Measurement Quality
Doing well as is
more communication about what is offered to members.
Hold DIVISION conferences around the country
Communications
A division-specific e-newsletter.
To organize more activities, and to provide more information of our Division
Announcement of Cert labs to possibly visit periodically.
More refresher courses for certifications.
Can not think of anything.
Job posts/networking
©2010. Market Probe. All Rights Reserved.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
More local networking opportunities.
Same response as before.
Training on specific topics.
In today's economic climate, establishing a networking blog (with various pertinent themes) would be beneficial.
as described in section
more courses
Nothing specific comes to mind. Division is a good resource.
I'll need to think about it
Iam quite satisfied with the opportunities my forum provides in enhancing my profession
More information and training specific to measurement quality.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
I would like to see more division members participating in the division leadership by volunteering. This way, we can bring
in new ideas.
More diversity and frequency in education offered.
Cannot think of any suggestions at this time.
Refresher course for CQT, CMI, CQE,ect.
more information concerning my industry
Basic FAQ's added to discussion forums for repetitive questions.
I receive so little contact from my Division, that I'm actually not sure which Division I am in. My Division membership
might as well not exist.
I find value in the online information offered. I think my geographic location of Vancouver Island causes some isolation.
How many ASQ members are on Vancouver island that can be possibly put into contact?
I would like to see regional meetings.
I have only been a member of this division a short time so I really can't comment positively or negatively of what items
need improvement.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
personal engagement with the division
I have not been personnally involved with this division other than reading their newsletter. I do not have anything to
suggest at this time.
more opportunities for networking within the division instead of just within the section
don't have a suggestion
Opportunities to learn what others are doing.
not a division member.
More informative seminar/courses closer to my location.
More communication
Know who is in the section and what activities they are they involved in.
Networking / Job Notices

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
offer free on-line seminar/trainings
confrences/seminars more local
More information about the field of metrology
Explanations "translated" into english instead of formulas
nothing at this time
I cannot think of anything.
Regular communications with ALL members about upcoming meetings, opportunities for involvement, posting of updated
publications (The Standard) and changes to the Division website. I am only getting communications with ASQ proper -
nothing at all ever from the Division level.
Better support for certification exams
Who are they?
Newer idea's.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
can't think of anything
i don't have now.
More interaction with other techs and more information on the subject of good measurement practices.
Additional emails/newletters informing of activities in the field, maybe a collaboration with another professional society in
the same field
More activity, e-mail awareness.
don't know
I guess I really haven't paid much attention to my division. So perhaps they need to market themselves better.
I am just too new to ASQ to jusdge
More visibility by providing regular updates (quality measurements) by e-mail or by mail. Currently , most information
received are articles from Quality Progress
more training in monthly meetings

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
I don't receive or notice that I receive communication from the division other than a letter congratulating me on my latest
certification. I barely even realize they exist
I haven't been active in the Division so nothing readily comes to mind.
It is really not fair for me to make any criticisms at the moment, because I have not taken advantage of many benefits
which might be available if I were to look for them. I suppose an improvement could be more explanation or advertising of
the benefits that are available.
more information on training and certifiaction/education
nothing at this time
More case studies, examples.
NA I'm retired
Where possible, make available computer applications or describe how to create applications to solve common problems
division members may have.
Nothing I can think of at this time
communication

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
The annual meeting, which is not exclusively an ASQ event, is always in California. My chances of getting management
approval for a meeting in California are about as slim as can be.
Conferences
Sorry, but Ive had no involvement with the division level
More info on what MQD is doing at the local section level

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
30 other. Which one of the following best describes your title or function?
Specialist
metrologist
Deputy Quality Manager/Supplier Quality
Metrologist - Physical Scientist - Educator
Metrology specialist
Quality Engineer
Retired. was director and manager
31 other. Who pays for your ASQ membership?
Ranked as "Fellow" Retired and not working
I do currently. When I've been employeed my employer has paid it.
the membership is a site membership.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
34 other. How did you hear about this survey?
From Region 7 telecon

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
35. Additional Comments:
I'm pleased that my Section and Division have continuously shown progress in all my years associated with ASQ.
Regarding paying for membership: I selected that my company pays, but I am a single-person S Corporation so effectively
I pay for my membership myself - as I always have.
ASQ is too busy trying to make a buck rather than taking care (providing value for) of its members.
No--thank you!
Appreciate if ASQ can organize more activiies and provide more information on theories, methodology, case analysis in
this area.
AQS should have an excpert system for different management fields even guidance for engineering and services.
no thanks
I have been extremely satisfied with my membership in ASQ and the added professional expertise that the certifications
and magazine allow me to have. My peer recognition is enhanced by my CQT certification also.
Not at this time.
The main web site needs a better search function as basic searches bring up to much information thats not related or
using specific criteria the filter is too harsh and results in very little information.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
I maintain my membership in ASQ for certification purposes, and only because my employer pays the bill. I find little else
of benefit to me. I don't make much effort to seek out ways that membership could benefit me in other ways, however.
I like ASQ's quality focus on a sustainable future.
ASQ is a terrific organization with timely magazine articles, continuing education programs, relavent conferences and a
wide network that is nationally recognized for its principles and goals. Thank you.
I am the membership chair for my local section and need a way to communicate with members using an ASQ e-mail
address rather than using my personal or work e-mail addresses
this year we were notified that my company would not pay for professional dues
ASQ seems to be primarily an organization for consultants. Most articles in Quality progress have little applied content.
no time to read the Weekly - too much info for my situaiton. new to the org.
excellent survey, and do not increase the membership cost, offer free on-line training. keep up the good work !!
have a nice day
Almost did not renew this year.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
I was expecting more from ASQ than selling me things.
i don't have now.
I am proud of being an ASQ member and it would be great to introduce ASQ in the island in a more agressive way. To
make the industry aware of the importance of quality and what ASQ represents.
No comments
ASQ could make it easier for unemployed people to remain as members. The networking and skills upkeep is even more
important to unemployed people. I'm also trying to keep up my CQE. For my situation in particular, I'm primarily
unemployed because of a family geared decision and that decision has lasted about two years already and probably
another one or two years to come, but my unemployment is secondarily affected by the economy since I have found very
few positions to apply for.
make monthly meetings more training orientated
I like the ASQ, what it stands for, what it does, and how it does things. I think it is an excellent organization and wish I
were able to make more time to be involved with it than I currently do.
I would like to know more about training for certification
Technical support needs to improve. Online training & exams need to have people go through & test them before
charging for them.

Verbatim Report
Measurement Quality
As a Calibration manager my interest only lies in the Measurement Quality Div. Local ASQ sections are of no interest
Why not make certification test results/scores available. What harm will come to ASQ if I find out what my score was on a
cert exam I passed?!? I think it would be extrmely helpful to know if I did great, or barely passed - so I can know what
area(s) of the BOK I may still need to improve my knowledge of to make me a better quality professional. Doesn't that
make sense - even a little bit?

CALL FOR 2011
Tutorial Workshops Developers
Measurement Science Conference
“Metrology and Quality Through Education”

March 14-18, 2011
Pasadena Convention Center – Pasadena, CA
MEASUREMENT SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2011

Founded in 1970, MSC is dedicated to promote education and professionalism in measurement
science and related disciplines. MSC features topics of interest to all levels and disciplines in the
measurement and test community. Manufacturing, aerospace, medical, academic, research and
development, bio-engineering, health, defense, transportation, etc. are just few examples of
industries and domains touched by metrology, and brought into the practical and theoretical
workshops. At MSC, participants from government, industry and academia, meet to share the
most up-to-date information, from leading edge developments to practical applications.
Tutorial Workshop Developers

Professional experts in measurement science are invited to develop and present tutorial
workshops on topics of interest to the measurement community.
MSC has an extensive tutorial workshops program presented prior to the conference. You are
invited to develop and present a Tutorial Workshop by submitting a proposal on a topic in your
area of expertise to the MSC 2011 tutorial chair persons for consideration. The Tutorial
Workshops are either full day (8 hour) or half-day (4-hour) instructional seminars. This tutorial
submission could be in addition to or instead of a conference paper.
Please contact the MSC Tutorial Workshops Chairpersons at tutorials@msc-committee.com
regarding any questions or topics of interest concerning these workshops.
TOPICS
METROLOGY AND QUALITY THROUGH EDUCATION
The MSC tutorial workshops are addressing a large variety of measurement and measurement
related topics, including mass, length, time, electric current, temperature, frequency, flow,
pressure, etc. If you have a new approach, technique, or a refinement of an established
measurement to share, please send us an abstract of your tutorial workshop. Your measurement
expertise and experience are of high value, and practical workshops are in high demand.
Metrology concepts such as traceability, measurement uncertainty, proficiency testing,
inter-laboratory comparisons, metrology quality assurance and management, are just a few
examples of the challenging topics desired to be presented in these workshops. Other topics
desired include: accreditation, six sigma, training, metrology and quality standards, automation,
tele-calibration, equipment management, analytical metrology and mathematical analysis.
Please send your workshop abstract to the address below.
Tutorial Workshops Developers

Contact:
Milt Krivokuca at 310-243-3352,
mkrivokuca@csudh.edu
Nat Russo at 310-616-8043,
Nat.Russo@Raytheon.com
Tutorial Workshops Chairmen
or
1-866-672-6327 option 3 tutorials@msc-
committee.com www.msc-conf.com
CALL FOR PAPERS YEAR 2011
Measurement S
M Science
i C
Conference
f
“Metrology and Quality Through Education”
March 14-18, 2011
Pasadena Convention Center - Pasadena, CA
MSC features topics of interest to the test; metrology and calibration; and precision measurement communities. MSC was founded in 1970 to promote
education and professionalism in measurement science and related disciplines. Technical and managerial experts in the measurement sciences are
invited to lead sessions, panel discussions, and present papers or workshops on topics of importance to the global measurement community. Participants
from government, aerospace, medical, and environmental backgrounds meet to share the most up-to-date information.
You are invited to participate in the 2011 MSC Conference by presenting a paper on any topic of interest to those involved in the application of measurement
disciplines. Please notify the Program Chairman (programs@msc-conf.com) as soon as possible of your interest. You will be sent instructions on how to
submit a paper through EDAS (the technical paper management system we are using). To present at MSC, you must submit a paper.
If you are interested in developing a technical session, please contact the Program Chairman. Send
Session Chairs your name, address, telephone number, and a short abstract about your session to the Programs
Chairman. Preference will be given to the developers with a full slate of papers.
MSC has an extensive tutorial workshop program prior to the conference. The Tutorial Workshops are
either full day (8 hour) or half-day (4-hour) instructional seminars. You are invited to develop a
Tutorial Workshops Tutorial Workshop by submitting a proposal on the most demanded topics by the measurement
science audience. This could be in addition to or instead of a conference paper. Please notify the
Tutorial Workshops Chairman (tutorials@msc-committee.com) of your interest.
TOPICS
Measurements Processes Change & Challenge
The sessions are measurements form the These topics include: accreditation, six What does the future hold for metrology?
core of any MSC program. Changes in technol- sigma, training, quality standards, How will the economic downturn impact
ogy will lead to changes in measurements. automation, analytical metrology, metrology? What approaches will be
From Intrinsic Standards to Nano technology, mathematical analysis and equipment needed? What are the challenges faces by
from DC to Microwave, from dimensional to management. If there are any topics industry? These are some of the topics
mass, from temperature to chemical sensors; you are interested in, please let us for this track.
if you have a new approach, technique, or a know at programs@msc-conf.com.
refinement of an established measurement;
please send us an abstract.
Authors and Session Chairs Tutorial Workshops Tutorial Workshops

Contact: Patty Leyva Contact: Milt Krivokuca Contact: Nat Russo
Programs Chairman Tutorial Chairman Tutorial Chairman
Phone: 866.672.6327 Phone: 310-243-3352 Phone: 310-616-8043
programs@msc-conf.com mkrivokuca@csudh.edu Nat.Russo@Raytheon.com
www.msc-conf.com

The Standard Fall-2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Standard Fall-2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol. 24 No.

Chris’ plaques read as follows:

Dilip’s plaque reads as follows:

Repeatability and Reproducibility, Type A Uncertainties

One of the requirements for calibration laboratories to be

Type A Evaluation of Measurement Uncertainty – ‘evaluation of a component of measurement un-

(Continued from page 4)

THE LEARNING CURVE

This is the sixty-third in a contiguous series of quarterly columns, originally charted

(Continued from page 6)

THE SCIENCE OF MEASUREMENT, A Historical Survey, by Herbert Arthur Klein,

I know that I have recommended these in this column in past issues.

(Continued from page 7)

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF QUALITY – MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION (ASQ-MQD)

(Continued from page 9)

Joe Simmons Award Scholarship

6. ASQ-MQD Exhibitor Booth

(Continued on page 11)

(Continued from page 10)

Meeting Minutes Submitted by: Heather Wade, Secretary August 2, 2010

MSC Fall Tutorials

The date is one day only, October 21, 2010.

Measurement Uncertainty: A Hands-on Workshop

(Continued from page 12)

Here is what this tutorial will cover:

5S, Lean Thinking and Metrology Laboratories Project Management

(Continued on page 14)

(Continued from page 13)

Paperless Calibration Compliance for Domestic

2010 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

2010 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

2010 NCSL International Workshop & Symposium

MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION OFFICERS AND COMMITTEE CHAIRS

Standards Committee Representative

TO: Measurement Quality Division(MQD) The Standard

FROM: Elías Monréal

RE: Membership Report: 2010 ASQ Division Member Satisfaction Survey

2009-10 Member Unit Satisfaction and Loyalty Study:

Complied Top 10 verbatim:

<= Measurement Quality Division

MQD Membership Numbers:

MQD Survey Update:

Questions, comments, or concerns? Feel free to contact me at emonreal@hotmail.com or (520) 241-0478.

<= Measurement Quality Division

Perceptions of Your Division

Overall Satisfaction with Your Division

ASQ Satisfaction & Loyalty

UniqueID: 28148652 Division: Measurement Quality

UniqueID: 28148893 Division: Measurement Quality

more communication about what is offered to members.

UniqueID: 28149100 Division: Measurement Quality

Hold DIVISION conferences around the country

UniqueID: 28150596 Division: Measurement Quality

UniqueID: 28150956 Division: Measurement Quality

UniqueID: 28152140 Division: Measurement Quality

To organize more activities, and to provide more information of our Division

UniqueID: 28152493 Division: Measurement Quality

Announcement of Cert labs to possibly visit periodically.

UniqueID: 28152521 Division: Measurement Quality

More refresher courses for certifications.

UniqueID: 28152612 Division: Measurement Quality

Can not think of anything.

UniqueID: 28152680 Division: Measurement Quality