The Standard Spring 01

8/8/2019 The Standard Spring 01

1/48


2/48


3/48


4/48


5/48


6/48


7/48


8/48


9/48


10/48


11/48


12/48

The STANDARD Spring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 12

practicing psychometrician to insure questions are notonly grammatically correct but also are not vague ormisleading to the intended audience. Common ratingscales are used in validation surveys, regarding do-mains, tasks and knowledge, dealing with criticalityand time / frequency. The validation survey undergoesseveral reviews before the final revision is printed andmailed. The actual number of surveys mailed is deter-mined by a sampling scheme reflecting the number ofestimated practitioners.

Validation survey results are compiled and summa-rized in a report using various graphic and tabularpresentations in order to highlight and discern trendsand outline similarities and differences. This informa-tion will be used to develop the Final CCT proposal.The Final CCT proposal is to be presented to theCertification board for approval where, if successful, it

will proceed to the PDC for consideration. Upon PDCapproval, the Board of Directors will make the finaldecision in determining if the CCT program will becomea reality.

So where is the CCT program pursuant to thesediscussed milestones as of this writing (late January2001)?

Written Initial CCT proposal unanimouslyapproved by Certification board (October2000)

Proposal for CCT Job Analysis Study byProfessional Examination Services(PES)(submitted December 2000)

Funding approved for Job Analysis Surveyby PES (January 2001)

Funding approved for Final CCT proposalexpenses (January 2001)

Job Analysis workshop scheduled for datesfollowing NCSL national conference (1,2August 2001)

Validation survey final report scheduled forDecember 2001

The timetables for the remainder of certificationmilestones i.e. Final CCT presentations will be final-ized in January 2002.

The CCT program has progressed to its presentstate through the hard work of many individuals whobelieve a program for certifying calibration techniciansis needed for many of the same reasons other ASQcertification programs were established. For thoseindividuals wishing to contribute to this important initia-tive or who may have questions / suggestions concern-ing the CCT program please contact the CCT chair at:

[email protected]

ASQs Measurement Quality Division is proud to be thedivisional sponsor for the ASQs CCT program.

If interested please E-mail MQDs committee chairat: [email protected].

Chris GrachanenASQ MQD Certification Committee Chair

Inspection Divisionby Navin Shamji Dedhia

The mission of the Inspection Division is to increasecustomer satisfaction through continuous improvmentby disseminating information relating to the quality ofproducts, goods and services through inspection andtest methodology. Its vision is to be the Worlds Lead-ing Authority on issues related to inspection technolo-

gies, tools, techniques, methods, principles, andapplications geared toward improving quality and pro-ductivity.

The Division is headed by Navin S. Dedhia as a Chair.He has been actively involved in ASQ activities at theLocal, Division, and National Level in various capaci-ties. He is the past recipient of the E. Jack LancasterAward from ASQ. He has received testimonial awardsfrom ASQ and been recognized by the organizationsand institutions around the world.

Jenny Persfull is the current Chair-Elect from IndianaState. She has been actively involved in the Local

Section, Certification Improvment Workshops, and Di-vision Affairs.

Greg Gay is the current Secretary of the Division fromMichigan State. He has been actively involved in theCertified Mechanical Inspection Examination processand workshop. He is also past recipient of the Inspectorof the Year Award.Bill Sherman is the current Treasurer and past Chair ofthe Division. Bill has been actively involved in theDivision Affairs for many years.

Other Council members, who are actively involvedinclude Jim Cooper as the past Chair and currentNewsletter Editor, Chuck Carter as the past Chair, JoyFlynn as the Vice Chair, Mollie Brown, Bruce Johnsonas the past Chair, Clarence Johnson, Lou Samudio,Charles Leach, Bill Prince and Bud Gookins.


13/48


14/48


Some Basic Measurement Theory

The use of measurement is common. We use mea-surements in everyday life to do such things asweigh ourselves in the morning or when we checkthe time of day or the distance we have traveled inour car. Measurements are used extensively in mostareas of production and manufacturing to estimatecosts, calibrate equipment, measure quality, andmonitor inventories. Science and engineering disci-plines depend on the rigor that measurements pro-vide, but what does measurement really mean?

According to Fenton, measurement is the processby which numbers or symbols are assigned to at-tributes of entities in the real world in such a way asto describe them according to clearly defined rules[Fenton-91]. An entity is a person, place, thing, event or time period. An attribute is a feature or property of theentity.

To measure, we must first determine the entity. For example, we could select a car as our entity. Once we selectan entity, we must select the attribute of that entity that we want to describe. For example, the cars speed or thepressure in its tires would be two attributes of a car. Finally, we must have a defined and accepted mapping system.It is meaningless to say that the cars speed is 65 or its tire pressure is 75 unless we know that we are talking aboutmiles per hour and pounds per square inch, respectively.

We will use the basic process model of input - process - output to discuss software entities. Software entities ofthe input type include all of the resources used for software research, development, and production. Examplesof input entities include people, materials, tools, and methods. Software entities of the process type includesoftware-related activities and events and are usually associated with a time factor. Examples of process entitiesinclude defined activities such as developing a software system from requirements through delivery to thecustomer, the inspection of a piece of code, or the first 6 months of operations after delivery. Process entities alsoinclude time periods, which do not necessarily correspond to specific activities. An example would be the periodbetween 1/1/93 and 2/1/93. Software entities of the output type are the products of the software process. Theseinclude all the artifacts, deliverables, and documents that are produced. Examples of software output entitiesinclude requirements documentation, design specifications, code (source, object & executable), test documen-tation (plans, scripts, specifications, cases, reports), project plans, status reports, budgets, problem reports, andsoftware metrics.

Each of these software entities has many properties or features that we might want to measure. We might wantto examine a computer's price, performance, or usability. We could looks at the time or effort that it took to executea process, the number of incidents that occurred during the process, its cost, controllability, stability, oreffectiveness. We might want to measure the complexity, size, modularity, testability, usability, reliability, ormaintainability of a piece of source code.

One of the challenges of software metrics is that few standardized mapping systems exist. Even for seeminglysimple metrics like the number of lines of code, no standard counting method has been widely accepted. Do wecount physical or logical lines of code? Do we count comments or data definition statements? Do we expandmacros before counting and do we count the lines in those macros more than once? Another example isengineering hours for a project besides the effort of software engineers, do we include the effort of testers,managers, secretaries, and other support personnel? A few metrics which do have standardized counting criteriainclude McCabes Cyclomatic Complexity and the Function Point Counting Standard from the InternationalFunction Point User Group (IFPUG). However, the selection, definition, and consistent use of a mapping systemwithin the organization for each selected metric are critical to a successful metrics program.

Introduction to the Twelve Steps

Based on all of the possible software entities and all the possible attributes of each of those entities, there aremultitudes of possible software metrics. So how do we pick the metrics that are right for our organizations? Thefirst four steps defined in this paper will illustrate how to identify metrics customers and then utilize the goal/ question/metric paradigm to select the software metrics that match the information needs of those customers.

Entity:Attribute:

Features &

Properties

Mapping:Numbers

&Symbols

Figure 2: Measurement Defined


15/48

The STANDARDSpring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 15

Steps 5-10 present the process of designing and tailoring the selected metrics, including definitions, models,counting criteria, benchmarks and objectives, reporting mechanisms, and additional qualifiers. The last two stepsdeal with implementation issues, including data collection and the minimization of the impact of human factors onmetrics.

Step 1 Identify Metrics Customers

The customers for a metrics are the people who will be making decisions or taking action based upon the metrics that is, the people who need the information supplied by the metrics.

There are many different types of customers for a metrics program. This adds complexity to the program becauseeach customer type may have different information requirements. Customers may include:

Functional Management - interested in the ability to apply greater control to the softwaredevelopment process, reducing risk and maximizing return on investment.

Project Management - interested in controlling the projects they are in charge of and commu-nicating facts to their management.

Software Practitioners - the people that actually do the software development. They are alsoresponsible for collecting a significant amount of the data required for the metrics program.

Specialists - including individuals performing specialized functions. (e.g., Marketing, QualityAssurance, Process Engineering, Configuration Management, Testing, Audits, and Assess-ments, Customer Technical Assistance).

Users - interested in on-time delivery of high-quality software products.

If a metric does not have a customer, it should not be produced. Metrics are expensive to collect, report, andanalyze; so, if no one is using a metric, producing it is a waste of time and money.

The customers information requirements should always drive the metrics program. Otherwise, we may end upwith a product without a market and with a program that wastes time and money. By recognizing potentialcustomers and involving those customers early in the metric definition effort, the chances of success are greatlyincreased.

When talking to our customers, we may find many of their individual needs are related to the same goal or problem

but expressed from their perspective or in the terminology of their specialty. Many times, what we hear is theirfrustrations.

For example, the Project Manager may need to improve the way project schedules are estimated. The FunctionalManager is worried about late deliveries. The practitioners complain about overtime and not having enough timeto do things correctly. The Test Manager states that by the time the test group gets the software its too late to testit completely before shipment.

When selecting metrics, we need to listen to these customers and, where possible, consolidate their various goalsor problems into statements that will help define the metrics that are needed by our organization or team.

In our example, all these individuals are asking for an improved and realistic schedule estimation process.

Step 2 Target Goals

Basili and Rombach [Basili-88] define a Goal/

Question/Metric paradigm that provides an ex-cellent mechanism for defining a goal-basedmeasurement program. Figure 3 illustrates theGoal/Question/Metric paradigm.

The second step in setting up a metrics programis to select one or more measurable goals. Thesemay be high-level strategic goals (e.g., minimiz-ing cost or maximizing customer satisfaction).They may also be specific goals (e.g., evaluatinga new design method or determining whether aproduct is ready to be shipped).

Goal / Question / Metric

Goal 1 Goal 2

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4

Metrics 1 Metric 2 Metric 3 Metric 4 Metric 5

[Basili-88]

Figure 3: Goal/Question/Metric Paradigm


16/48

Spring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 16 The STANDARD

Software metrics programs must be designed to provide the specific information necessary to manage softwareprojects and improve software engineering processes and services. Organizational, project, and task goals aredetermined in advance; and then metrics are selected based on those goals. The metrics are used to determineour effectiveness in meeting these goals.

The foundation of this approach is asking not so much what should I measure? but why am I measuring? orwhat business needs does the organization wish its measurement initiative to address? [Goodman-93]

Measuring software is a powerful way to track progress towards project goals. As Grady states, Without suchmeasures for managing software, it is difficult for any organization to understand whether it is successful, and itis difficult to resist frequent changes of strategy [Grady-92]. Measurements help both management and engineersmaintain their focus on their goals.

Step 3 Ask Questions

The third step is to define the questions that need to be answered in order to ensure that each goal is beingobtained. For example, if our goal was to ship only defect-free software, we might select the questions:

Is the software product adequately tested?

How many defects are still undetected?

Are all known defects corrected?Step 4 Select Metrics

The fourth step is to select metrics that provide the information needed to answer these questions. Each selectedmetric now has a clear objective to answer one or more of the questions that need to be answered to determineif we are meeting our goals.

When we are selecting metrics, we must be practical, realistic, and pragmatic. Avoid the ivory-tower perspectivethat is completely removed from the existing software-engineering environment. Start with what is possible withinthe current process. Once we have a few successes, our customers will be open to more radical ideas and mayeven come up with a few of their own.

Also, remember software metrics don't solve problems. People solve problems. Software metrics act as indicatorsand provide information so people can make more informed decisions and intelligent choices.

An individual metric performs one of four functions. Metrics can help us Understand more about our softwareproducts, processes, and services. Metrics can be used to Evaluate our software products, processes, andservices against established standards and goals. Metrics can provide the information we need to Control resources and processes used to produce our software. Metrics can be used to Predict attributes of softwareentities in the future. [Humphrey-89]. A comprehensive Software Metric program would include metrics thatperform all of these functions.

The objective for each metric can be formally defined in terms of one of these functions: the attribute of the entitybeing measured and the goal for the measurement. This leads to the following metrics objective template:

understand attributeevaluate in order

To the of the goal(s)control toentity

predict

An example of the use of this template for the percentage of known defects corrected: metric would be:

% knowndefects

To evaluate the corrected during development

in order to

all knowndefects arecorrected beforeshipment

Having a clearly defined and documented objective statement for each metric has the following benefits:

Provides a rigor and discipline that helps ensure a well-defined metric based on customergoals.

Eliminates misunderstandings about how the metric is intended to be used.


17/48


Communicates the need for the metric, which can help in obtaining resources to implement thedata collection and reporting mechanisms.

Provides the base requirements statement for the design of the metric.

Step 5 Standardize Definitions

The fifth step is to agree to a standard definition for the entities and their measured attributes. When we use termslike defect , problem report , size , and even project , other people will interpret these words in their own context withmeanings that may differ from our intended definition. These interpretation differences increase when moreambiguous terms like quality , maintainability , and user friendliness are used.

Additionally, individuals may use different terms to mean the same thing. For example, the terms defect report,problem report, incident report, fault report, or customer call report may be used by various organizations to meanthe same thing, but unfortunately they may also refer to different entities. One external customer may use customer call report to refer to their complaint and problem report as the description of the defect in the software, whileanother customer may use problem report for the initial complaint. Differing interpretations of terminology may beone of the biggest barriers to understanding.

Unfortunately, there is little standardization in the industry of the definitions for most software attributes. Everyonehas an opinion and the debate will probably continue for many years. Our metrics program cannot wait that long.The approach I suggest is to adopt standard definitions within your organization and then apply them consistently.You can use those definitions that exist within the industry as a foundation to get you started, for example,definitions from the IEEE Glossary [IEEE-83] or those found in software engineering and metrics literature. Pickthe definitions that match your organizational objectives or use them as a basis for creating your own definition.

Step 6 Choose a Model

The sixth step is to derive a model for the metric. In simple terms, the model defines how we are going to calculatethe metric. Some metrics, called metric primitives, are measured directly; and their model typically consists of asingle variable. Other more complex metrics are modeled using mathematical combinations of metrics primitivesor other complex metrics.

All modeling includes an element of simplification. This is both the strength and the weakness of modeling. Whenwe create a software measurement model, we need to be pragmatic. If we try to include all of the elements that

affect the attribute or characterize the entity, our model can become so complicated that its useless. Beingpragmatic means not trying to create the most comprehensive model. It means picking the aspects that are themost important. Remember that the model can always be modified to include additional levels of detail in the future.Ask yourself the questions:

Does the model provide more information than we have now?

Is the information of practical benefit?

Does i t te ll us what we want to know?

There are two methods for selecting a model: use an existing model or create a new one. In many cases, thereis no need to reinvent the wheel. Many software metrics models exist that have been used successfully by otherorganizations. These are documented in the current literature and in proprietary products that can be purchased.With a little research, we can utilize these models with little or no adaptation to match our own environment.

The second method is to create our own model. The best advice here is to talk to the people who are actuallyresponsible for the product or resource or who are involved in the process. They are the experts. They know whatfactors are important. If we create a new model for our metric, we must ensure the model is intelligible to ourcustomers, and we must prove it is a valid model for what we are trying to measure. Often, this validation can occuronly through application of statistical techniques.

To illustrate the selection of a model, lets consider a metric for the duration of unplanned system outages. If weare evaluating a software system installed at a single site, a simple model such as minutes of outage per calendarmonth may be sufficient. If our objective is to compare different software releases installed on varying numbersof sites, we might select a model such as minutes of outage per 100 operation months. If we wanted to focus inon the impact to our customers, we might select minutes of outage per site per year.

Step 7 Establish Counting Criteria

The seventh step in designing a metric is to break the model down into its lowest level metric primitives and define


18/48


the counting criteria used to measure each primitive. This defines the mapping system for the measurement ofeach metric primitive.

The importance of the need for defining counting criteria can be illustrated by considering the lines of code metric.Lines of code is one of the most used and most often misused of all of the software metrics. The problems,variations, and anomalies of using lines of code are well documented [Jones-86], and there is no industry-acceptedstandard for counting lines of code. Therefore, if you are going to use a metric based on lines of code, it is criticalthat specific counting criteria be defined. These criteria must also accompany the metric in all reports and analysisso that metrics customers can understand the definition of the metric. Without this, invalid comparisons with otherdata are almost inevitable.

The metric primitives and their counting criteria define the first level of data that needs to be collected in order toimplement the metric. To illustrate this, lets use the model of minutes of system outage per site per year. One ofthe metrics primitives for this model is the number of sites. At first, counting this primitive seems simple. However,when we consider the dynamics of adding new sites or installing new software on existing sites, the countingcriteria become more complex. Do we use the number of sites on the last day of the period or calculate someaverage number of sites for the period? Either way, we will need to collect data on the date the system was installedon the site. In addition, if we intend to compare different releases of the software we will need to collect data onwhat releases have been installed on each site and when each was installed.

Step 8 Decide Whats Good

The eighth step in designing a metric is defining what's good. Once you have decided what to measure and howto measure it, you have to decide what to do with the results. Is 10 too few or 100 too many? Should the trend beup or down? What do the metrics say about whether or not the product is ready to ship?

One of the first places to start looking for "what's good" is the customer. Many times, user requirements dictatecertain values for some metrics. There may be product reliability levels that must be met. The customer may havea defined expectation of defect reduction from release to release or a required repair time for discovered defects.Another source of information is the metrics literature. Research and studies have helped establish industry-accepted norms for standard measures. For example, studies have established that modules of source codeshould have a McCabe's Cyclomatic Complexity of


19/48


Step 9 Define Reporting Mechanisms

The ninth step is to decide how to report the metric. This includes defining the report format, data extraction andreporting cycle, reporting mechanisms, distribution, and availability.

The report format defines what the report looks like. Is the metric included in a table with other metrics values for

the period? Is it added as the latest value in a trend chart that tracks values for the metric over multiple periods?Should that trend chart be a bar, line, or area graph? Is it better to compare values using stacked bars or a piechart? Do the tables and graphs stand alone, or is there detailed analysis text included with the report? Are goalsor control values included in the report?

The data extraction cycle defines how often the data snap-shot(s) are required for the metric and when they willbe available for use for calculating the metric. The reporting cycle defines how often the report is generated andwhen it is due for distribution. For example, root cause analysis metrics may be triggered by some event, like thecompletion of a phase in the software development process. Other metrics like the defect arrival rate may beextracted and reported on a daily basis during system test and extracted on a monthly basis and reported quarterlyafter the product is released to the field.

The reporting mechanism outlines the way that the metric is delivered (i.e., hard copy report, email, on-lineelectronic data).

Defining the distribution involves determining who receives regular copies of the report or access to the metric.The availability of the metrics defines any restrictions on access to the metric (i.e., need to know, internal use only)and the approval mechanism for additions and deletions to access or standard distribution.

Step 10 Determine Additional Qualifiers

The tenth step in designing a metric is determining the additional metric qualifiers. A good metric is a genericmetric. That means the metric is valid for an entire hierarchy of additional qualifiers. For example, we can talk aboutthe duration of unplanned outages for an entire product line, an individual product, or a specific release of thatproduct. We could look at outages by customer or business segment. Alternatively, we could look at them by typeor cause.

The additional qualifiers provide the demographic information needed for these various views of the metric. Themain reason additional qualifiers need to be defined as part of the metrics design is that they determine the second

level of data collection requirements. Not only is the metric primitive data required, but data also has to exist toallow the distinction between these additional qualifiers.

Step 11 Collect Data

The question of what data to collect? was actually answered in steps 7 and 10 above. The answer is to collectall of the data required to provide the metrics primitives and the additional qualifiers.

In most cases, the owner of the data is the best answer to the question of who should collect the data? Thedata owner is the person with direct access to the source of the data and in many cases is actually responsiblefor generating the data. Table 1 illustrates the owners of various kinds of data.

Benefits of having the data owner collect the data include:

Data is collected as it is being generated, which increases accuracy and completeness

Data owners are more likely to be able to detect anomalies in the data as it is being collected,

which increases accuracy Human error caused by duplicate recording (once by data recorder and again by data entry

clerk) is eliminated, which increases accuracy

Once the people who gather the data are identified, they must agree to do the work. They must be convinced ofthe importance and usefulness of collecting the data. Management has to support the program by giving thesepeople the time and resources required to perform data collection activities. A support staff must also be availableto answer questions and to deal with data and data collection problems and issues.


20/48


renwO denwOataDfoselpmaxE

tnemeganaM seludehcS stegduB

sreenignE ksatreptnepsemiT stcefedgnidulcniatadnoitcepsnI tooR stcefedfoesuac

sretseT dessap / detucexe / dennaltseT psesac gnitsetmorfstropermelborP tseT egarevoc

stsilaicepStnemeganaMnoitarugifnoC fosen edociL degnahcseludoM

sresU snoitarepomorfstropermelborP sruohlanoitarepO

Table 1: Examples of Data Ownership

A training program should be provided to help insure that the people collecting the data understand what to doand when to do it. As part of the preparation for the training program, suitable procedures must be established anddocumented. For simple collection mechanisms, these courses can be as short as one hour. I have found thathands-on, interactive training, where the group works actual data collection examples, provides the best results.

Without this training, hours of support staff time can be wasted answering the same questions repeatedly. Anadditional benefit of training is that it promotes a common understanding about when and how to collect the data.This reduces the risk of collecting invalid and inconsistent data.

If the right data is not collected accurately, then the objectives of the measurement program cannot beaccomplished. Data analysis is pointless without good data. Therefore, establishing a good data collection planis the cornerstone of any successful metrics program. Data collection must be:

Objective: The same person will collect the data the same way each time.

Unambiguous: Two different people collecting the same measure for the same item will collectthe same data.

Convenient: Data collection must be simple enough not to disrupt the working patterns of theindividual collecting the data. Therefore, data collection must become part of the process andnot an extra step performed outside of the workflow.

Accessible: In order for data to be useful and used, easy access to the data is required. Thismeans that, even if the data is collected manually on forms, it must ultimately be included ina metrics database.

There is widespread agreement that as much of the data gathering process as possible should be automated. Ata minimum, standardized forms should be used for data collection, but at some point the data from these formsmust be entered into a metrics database if it is to have any longer-term usefulness. I have found that informationthat stays on forms quickly becomes buried in file draws never to see the light of day again.

Dumping raw data and hand tallying or calculating metrics is another way to introduce human error into the metricsvalues. Even if the data is recorded in a simple spreadsheet, automatic sorting, data extraction, and calculationare available and should be used. Using a spreadsheet or database also increases the speed of producing themetrics over hand tallies.

Automating metrics reporting and delivery eliminates hours spent standing in front of copy machines. It alsoincreases usability because the metrics are available on the computer instead of buried in a pile of papers of thedesk. Remember, metrics are expensive. Automation can reduce the expense while making the metrics availablein a timelier manner.

Step 12 The People Side of the Metrics Equation

No discussion on selecting, designing and implementing software metrics would be complete without a look at howmeasurements affect people and people affect measurements. Whether a metric is ultimately useful to an


21/48


22/48


Trusting Measurement ResultsIn

The Chemical and Process IndustriesDavid Files, CIC

The Chemical Interest Committee (CIC) of the Chemi-cal and Process Industries Division has just sent thisbook to Quality Press for publication prior to May 2001.At the 2001 AQC the CIC will highlight key points fromthe book in session T304 on Tuesday, May 8, at 3:45PM.

All members of the CIC, whether they generated orused measurement results, agreed that LACK OFTRUST was the BIG issue with Measurement Results.The work and costs being generated by lack of trust area total waste! Thus, the working title was The Mea-surement System Says: Trust this number; You ask:Why Should I?. If we could write a good comeback tothis we would have a book that had a chance of helpingbuild trust in measurement results and making our liveseasier.

In Part 1 we introduce our reasons for writing the bookvia stories and identify the two audiences for whom wehave tried to write this book.

1. People who are asked to make business decisionsbased on the numbers they are given.

2. People who are asked to generate the numbersgiven to the people making business decisions.

Both audiences need to quantify their trust of thenumbers and know how to use the numbers based onthe level of trust they have in them.

To help each of us quantify our trust in the numbersPart 2 of the book examines every step in the measure-ment system and what it means to our trust in thenumbers. A checklist is provided as a tool for measur-ing our trust in each measurement step and arriving atan overall measure of our trust in the reported number.

As with any physical product, design of the measure-ment system is critical to its capability to report trust-worthy numbers. Design of a measurement system

begins with the definition of the choice to be madebased on the measurement result that will be reported.Only through knowing the choice to be made can ameasurement system be designed that has the capa-bility of reporting a trustworthy number.

The actual measurement process starts with taking thesample and ends with reporting the measurementresult. Nothing is more important to a trustworthy resultthan the taking of the sample from the material. Nomeasurement system can compensate for a badsample. Also, proper sampling is essential for testingcost management.

Part 3 discusses what users inside and outside of themeasurement system can do with measurement val-ues and measurement results. All users must be in-formed of the nature of the number. Is it a measurementvalue or a measurement result? A measurement valueis the output of a single measurement event. Somerefer to measurement value as raw data. A measure-ment result is calculated based on one or more mea-surement values. A measurement result can be anumber adjusted for atmospheric conditions, bias inmeasurement process, an average of several mea-surement values, etc., depending on what the mea-

surement system design process determined to be thebest number to report for making the intended busi-ness decision.

Part 4 looks at the future of measurements in industry.What are the benefits and risks of the changes that arebeing made? What needs to be in place for thesechanges to deliver maximum benefit?

We hope the book will be a useful tool that will lead tobetter business decisions through Trusting Measure-ment Results.

David Files, Chair CIC

[Grady-92] Robert B. Grady, 1992, Practical Software Metrics for Project Management and ProcessImprovement, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

[IEEE-83] IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology, ANSI/IEEE Std 729-1983, TheInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, NY, 1983.

[Jones-86] Capers Jones, 1986, Programming Productivity, McGraw Hill, New York.[Humphrey-89] Watts Humphrey, 1989, Managing the Software Process, Addison-Wesley, Reading.

[Schulmeyer-98] G. Gordon Schulmeyer, James I. McManus, Handbook of Software Quality Assurance, 3rdEdition, Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998.


23/48


Profile on: NCSL InternationalNCSL International was formed in 1961 (as NCSL) topromote cooperative efforts for solving the commonproblems faced by measurement laboratories. Today,NCSL International has over 1500 member organiza-tions from academic, scientific, industrial, commercialand government facilities around the world. This widerepresentation of experience provides members a richopportunity to exchange ideas, techniques, and inno-vations with others engaged in measurement science.

NCSL International is a nonprofit organization whosemembership is open to any organization with an inter-est in the science of measurement and its applicationin research, development, education, or commerce.

VISION

Promote competitiveness of NCSL International Mem-ber Organizations by improving the quality of productsand services through excellence in calibration andtesting.

MISSION STATEMENTThe mission of NCSL International is to advance tech-nical and managerial excellence in the fields of Metrol-ogy, Measurement Standards, Instrument Calibration,and Test and Measurement, through voluntary activi-ties aimed at improving product and service quality,productivity, and the competitiveness of Member Or-ganizations in the national and international market-place.NCSL International accomplishes its mission throughactivities whose purposes are to:

Promote voluntary and cooperative efforts tosolve common problems faced by its Mem-ber Organizations.

Promote and disseminate relevant informa-tion that is important to its member organi-zations.

Formulate consensus positions of the mem-bership when requested by outside organi-zations and government bodies that will serveall or segments of the Member Organizations.

Advance the state-of-the-art in Metrology andrelated activities in both the technical andthe management area.

Provide liaison with technical societies, tradeassociations, educational institutions, and otherorganizations or activities that have commoninterests.

Assess Metrology requirements and developuniform, recommended practices related tothe activities of the membership.

Provide a forum to accomplish the objectivesof NCSL International through conferences,

regional and sectional meetings, committeeactivities, and publications.

Serve as an effective channel to assist vari-ous national laboratories disseminate infor-mation to Metrological communities, and tocollect and present information to strengthenand improve national measurement systemsand the horizontal linkages between thesesystems

NCLS Presidents Message: An Interview with John Ragsdale , NCSLI President

NCSLI at 40, the Best Years of Our Organi-zationalLives

As we enter the new century, and NCSL International

celebrates its 40th anniversary, it will be an especiallymemorable year as we reflect on past accomplish-ments and focus on the opportunities that the futurepresents. This year also marks the 100th anniversaryof the National Institute of Standards and Technology.The following interview will recognize and celebrateboth of these significant milestones at the NCLS an-nual Workshop and Symposium that will be held inWashington, D.C. July 29 - August 2, 2001. TheConference Committee is already hard at work toensure that the 2001 conference will be the best ever.Please begin making your plans to attend because thiswill truly be a conference to remember and one that you

definitely wont want to miss.The Standard: What is the State of the Society?

Ragsdale: At the October Board meeting held inOrlando, Fla., the Board completed the drafts of theLong Range Plan for 2001-2005 and the budget for2001. We expect to approve the final versions of bothplans at the January Board meeting. As part of theplanning process for 2001, the Board establishedseveral key focus areas to ensure NCSL Internationalscontinuing success. The three principal areas of focusare: Membership Growth, Financial Management, andConference Planning.

Membership Growth: International membership con-tinues to grow at an accelerating pace, while domesticmembership growth over the past three years has beenrelatively flat. However, with the continued expansionof the global marketplace, more and more companieswhose traditional focus has been on the domesticeconomy are being impacted, directly and indirectly, byinternational quality initiatives, documentary standards,quality system registration and laboratory accredita-tion. These companies can definitely profit from mem-bership in NCSL International, and they present anexcellent opportunity for significant growth in our mem-


24/48


bership. To take advantage of this opportunity, majorfocus will be placed on increasing the membership bycontinuing to recruit members from our more traditionalcustomer base while tapping into segments of theeconomy that have not previously been involved inNCSL International. To support this effort, and ensureour success, two important committee chair positionshave recently been filled. Larry Yates will chair theMembership Committee and Jim Tavernier will chairthe Publicity Committee. Working together they willdevelop a strategic marketing plan for the organizationdesigned to enhance the recruitment process and toidentify and access new areas of membership.

Another action of significance from the October Boardmeeting related to membership was the formation of anAd Hoc Committee to study the current structure ofNCSL International. The Committee will make recom-

mendations for enhancing the alignment of the organi-zation to improve services provided to the membershipand to more evenly distribute the workload for thevarious Vice Presidential areas. The Committee willreport the results of its study to the Board at the Januarymeeting.

The Standard: What is the Financial Managementprocess that NCLS uses?

Ragsdale: Managing the financial health of the orga-nization is an ongoing challenge for the Board and theBusiness Office Staff. Both continually look for ways toreduce operational costs while providing enhanced

and expanded services to the membership. This chal-lenge increases with each passing year as NCSLInternationals influence and participation continues togrow in regional metrology organizations, standardswriting bodies and accreditation cooperative organiza-tions. Leon Barnes, Treasurer, and Craig Gulka, Busi-ness Manager, have been working closely with ouraccounting firm to transition the current-cash basedfinancial system to an accrual-based system. The newsystem will give more accurate, up-to-date informationthat will enable us to keep a closer watch on ourexpenses and allow us to better manage our financesand plan for the future success of the organization.

Conference Planning: As mentioned previously, theConference Committee is hard at work planning the2001 Workshop and Symposium. They performed anoutstanding job last year with the Toronto conferenceand raised the quality for our conference to a new levelof excellence. While Toronto will be a hard act to follow,I m certain that they are up to the challenge. They arecontinuing to strengthen the technical sessions, ex-pand the pre/post conference tutorial programs, andare planning a number of recognition events celebrat-ing the 40th Anniversary of NCSL International and the100th Anniversary of NIST.

The Standard: What Types of challenges does theNew year bring?

Ragsdale: The new year begins with quite a turnoveron the Board of Directors. Bill Sorrells and Jim Pattersonare both retiring, and we wish them a long and enjoy-able retirement. Gary Shuler is also stepping downfrom the Board after 10 years of service. Gary plans toremain active in NCSL International but at a reducedlevel of involvement. We extend a warm welcome tofour new Board members whose terms begin January1, 2001. Georgia Harris will become Vice President ofPublications. Georgia previously served on the Board(1994-97) as Vice President of Measurement Scienceand Technology. Carol Hockert, previously Region 11Coordinator, will become Vice President of the CentralDivision; and John Wehrmeyer, former chairperson ofthe ANSI/NCSL Z540-1 Writing Committee, will be-

come Vice President of Documentary Standards Appli-cations. Jeff Gust, who was appointed last year to fillthe new position of Vice President Northeast Division,was elected to the Board and will continue in hispresent position. Other changes to the Board includeCharlie Motzko moving to the Executive Vice Presidentposition and Mike Suracis re-election to the Board andassignment as Vice President of Conference Manage-ment. Dave Nebel will move to Vice President ofEducation and Training, Woody Tramel will replaceCharlie Motzko as Vice President of Operations andMarketing, and Ed Pritchard has been appointed to fillthe vacant Vice President position for the Southeast-ern Division. Dr. Klaus Jaeger leaves the board aftercompleting his term of office as Immediate Past Presi-dent. Although Klaus will be leaving the Board, I hopethat he will continue his involvement with NCSLI.

Other retirements of note are those of Ernest Garnerand Sharrill Dittmann of NIST. Ernest and Sharrill havea long record of service to NCSL International, andtheir presence and wise counsel at our Board meetingswill be greatly missed. We wish them well in theirretirement. On behalf of the entire Board I extend ourthanks and appreciation to Dave Abell for his wisdomand strong leadership as President during the past

year. During his tenure we had our most successfulconference and for the first time held the conferenceoutside of the United States. Dave continued to buildstrong alliances with the North American NationalMeasurement Institutes and held meetings with theDirectors and senior management of NIST (US), IMNS/ NRCC (Canada) and CENAM (Mexico). He also repre-sented NCSL International at several internationalconferences and events throughout the year. I lookforward to working with Dave during my term as Presi-dent and will rely heavily on him for guidance andsupport.


25/48


The Standard: What message do you have for thereaders of The Standard?

Ragsdale: I encourage each of you to become moreinvolved in the activities of NCSL International. Volun-teers are needed at all levels of the organization butespecially at the Region and Section level. The Regionand Section meetings are the backbone of our organi-zation and our most important point of contact with thegeneral membership. It is through these meetings thatwe receive the feedback that is crucial in planning anddeveloping new products and services to meet theever-changing needs of our customers. It is especiallygratifying to see so many of our Regions and Sectionsturn in continued excellent attendance and impressivepresentation agendas.

Summary

During the last decade of the 20th century there hasbeen a significant increase in the recognition of Metrol-ogy and the important role it plays in improving produc-tivity, product quality, product defect reduction and,perhaps of greatest importance, its impact on globaltrade issues.

This increased recognition has made a significant shiftin NCSL Internationals traditional membership to amore widely diverse membership base. Companiesfrom the Chemical, Automotive, Optoelectronic, Air-line, Healthcare, Testing Laboratory, Wireless Com-munication, and Food and Drug industries have recog-nized the impact that Metrology has on their competi-tiveness.In response to this challenge they have formed strongcommittees within NCSL International to address mea-surement issues and requirements critical to theirbusiness success. Additionally, the emergence of newtechnologies, such as MEMS (Micro Electro Mechani-cal Systems) and other nanotechnology applications,web based interactive training and metrology inter-change will require new standards, measurement pro-cesses, measurement techniques, and managementtools to support their development and application.

As we move into the new century, conformity assess-ment, which includes metrology, standards, and labo-ratory accreditation, will become even more importantto the economic competitiveness of NCSLInternationals membership. An additional highlight ofthe 2001 Conference there will be a recognition ofNCSL Internationals 40th anniversary and the 100thanniversary of the US National Institute of Standardsand Technology (NIST).

There will be several events celebrating these mile-stones during the Conference, and there will be toursof the NIST laboratories at Gaithersburg, Md., onFriday after the conference.

Papers, Panels and Workshops:

The Workshop & Symposium offers papers, panels,and workshops that explore the theme and are orga-nized into three categories:

The oretical Applied Management/Qual ity

Networking :

The Workshop & Symposium provides many opportu-nities to meet other individuals in the field of Metrologyto work out problems, gain new perspectives, andsolve situations similar to yours.

Committees:

Join with the people who are doing the inside work onCommittees such as:

Accreditation Resources Air line Metro logy ANSI/NCSL Standards Writing Committee Automatic Test & Calibration Systems Automot ive Commit tee Benchmarking Programs Calibration/Certification Procedures Chemica l & Bio Defense Education Sys tems Equipment Management Forum Glossary Healthcare Metrology International Measurements Coordination Intrinsic & Derived Standards Laboratory Evaluation Laboratory Facilities Measurements Comparison Program Metro logy Pract ices Personnel Training Requirement Small Business Ini tiative Tra in ing Resources Utilities

Exhibits:

Meet face-to-face with key company executives andtechnical experts from 150 leading manufacturers sup-plying products and services to the measurementcommunity. Learn about:

New Equipment Demonstrat ions Applications Information Problem-Solving and Networking

Join other metrologists in Washington, D.C., July29 - August 2, 2001

TO CONTACT NCSL:NCSL International 1996-2001 All Content.1800 30th Street, Suite 305B, Boulder, Colorado80301-1026Tel: (303) 440-3339 Fax: (303) [email protected]


26/48


*


27/48



28/48



29/48



30/48



31/48

Spring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 31The STANDARD


32/48

Spring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 32

Operator WR(B) WR(C) Part

Average

The STANDARD


33/48



34/48

The ST ANDARD Spring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 34

stnevEgnimocpUtnatropmIecnerefnoC setaD noitacoL rebmuNtcatnoC

1002CQA 1002 / 9-7 / 5 CN,ettolrahC 6491-842-008-1

1002LSCN 1002 / 2 / 8-92 / 7 CD,notgnihsaW 9333-044-303

TSIN / DQM 1002,41-31.tpeS CD,notgnihsaW 0254-968-103


35/48


News UpdateA2LA One of Three Signatories ofNACLA MRA

On September 29. A2LA became one of the firstthree accrediting bodies (ABs) recognized by TheNational Cooperation for Laboratory Accreditation(NACLA), when representatives of the three ABs signedthe NACLA mutual recognition arrangement (MRA).Pete Unger, President, signed for A2LA. The other twosignatory bodies are NVLAP and ICBO EvaluationService.

NACLA is the private-sector, nonprofit voluntaryorganization whose mission is to coordinate U.S. labo-

ratory accreditation by granting recognition to compe-tent ABs.

The basis for NACLA recognition is a three-stepprocess: Careful review of the ABs documents andprocedures; a thorough on-site evaluation by a team ofNACLA experts to determine the ABs compliance withNACLA procedures and the international standard forABs (ISO/IEC 58); and review of the evaluation teamsreport and recommendation by a NACLA AcceptancePanel.

NACLA signatory ABs commit to the following:

To use equivalent procedures in the accreditation

of laboratories under ISO/IEC Guides 58 and25 (17025)

To recognize the test reports and calibrationlaboratories accredited by other signatory bodiesas being technically equivalent

To promote the acceptance by all users oftest reports and calibration certificates issuedby their accredited testing and calibrationlaboratories

To investigate all complaints resulting fromtest reports and calibration certificates issuedby their accredited testing and calibrationlaboratories

To inform the other signatories as soon aspossible, through the NACLA Secretariat, ofany significant changes that have occurredor will occur in the status and/or operationalpractices of their accreditation body

A2LA has been an extremely active member ofNACLA since its founding three years ago. RoxanneRobinson is currently a member of the groups Board ofDirectors, and Pete Unger is Chair of the TrainingCommittee.

New Traceability Policy IssuedThe Calibration Accreditation Policy and the waiver

form process were formally replaced by the Trace-ability Policy on August 28, 2000. The new Traceabil-

ity Policy continues to require that A2LA-accreditedlaboratories obtain accredited calibration reports fromtheir calibration providers or obtain calibrations directlyfrom a National Metrology Institute (NMI).

During the laboratorys on-site assessment, theAssessor will review the laboratorys calibration recordsand determine during the assessment if:

a. the lab can demonstrate that the calibrationwas performed by our national metrologyinstitute, NIST, or by another NMI; or

b. the lab can demonstrate that the calibrationwas performed by an A2LA-accredited cali-

bration lab or by a calibration lab that hasbeen accredited by one of our MRA part-ners. (Assessors must see a calibration cer-tificate with the accreditation body logo in-cluded, or which otherwise makes referenceto its accredited status.)

If the conditions noted above are not met, theassessor is required to cite a deficiency.

The laboratory should respond to the deficiencywith a corrective action outlining their plans to obtainaccredited calibration services, or else with their justi-fication for using the current calibration vendors. Labo-

ratories are no longer required to complete the waiverform. A decision on the acceptability of the correctiveaction will be made by knowledgeable staff at A2LAand the lab will be notified as to whether or not theresponse is deemed acceptable.

Since the formal waiver form process has beendiscontinued, the waiver forms will no longer be pro-vided. Waiver forms currently in-house or received dueto an assessment conducted before the process wasphased out will be reviewed and processed as usual.

It should be noted that in previous memos to ourassessor corps and to our accredited and applicant

laboratories, we had outlined a plan wherein resolutionof the deficiency would be agreed to by the assessorand the laboratory. In addition, this earlier plan allowedthe assessor some latitude concerning whether or notthe deficiency should be cited at all. However, somelaboratories and assessors raised the issue of poten-tial assessor variability in deciding whether or not agiven non-accredited calibration provider was accept-able. In addition, as part of maintaining our status as asignatory to the APLAC and EA mutual recognitionarrangements, A2LA must monitor the traceability sta-tus of our accredited laboratories. For these reasons,the initial plan was revised as noted above.


36/48


If you have any questions about the change of policyand procedure, any technical staff member should beable to answer your questions, or you can call ThomasAdams at 301-644-3219 or contact him via e-mail [email protected].

Thank you for your patience during our transitionperiod!

Electromechanical Advisory CommitteeInitiated

A2LA has established a Electromechanical Advi-sory Committee (EMAC) to provide the associationwith guidance in the electromechanical field of testing.The committee scope will include the development ofaccreditation guides for electrical product testing, cov-ering the following technical areas: electrical, electro-magnetic compatibility (EMC), product safety, tele-communications, environmental simulation and elec-tromechanical (functional). In selecting projects, theEMAC will coordinate with other A2LA committees andwith other organizations and individuals active in theelectromechanical field, so-as-to minimize duplicationof efforts.

Michael Tedaldi has been appointed Chairman ofthe new committee. He holds a Master of ScienceDegree in Physics and has extensive experience as anEMC Engineer, Senior Quality Assurance Engineer,and Safety Engineer.

Participatory membership on the EMAC is open toall interested parties. For more information about EMACmembership, please contact Trace McInturff, A2LAProgram Manager at [email protected].

ISO/IEC 17025 Transition UpdateThe A2LA leadership has adopted a new policy

directive and has published several new documents tofurther the organizations transition from the currentinternational accreditation standard (ISO/IEC Guide25) to the new one (ISO/IEC Standard 17025).

Policy Directive: As of January 1, 2001, A2LA willdiscontinue full on-site assessments against ISO/IECGuide 25 only. Laboratories will have two options;either a full ISO/IEC 17025 assessment, or an ISO/IECGuide 25 assessment with an ISO/IEC 17025 gapanalysis. (Details of this new policy are included in theTransition Plan chart printed in this newsletter.)

New Documents: In September 2001, all accreditedand applicant laboratories were provided with four newdocuments:

General Requirements for the Accredita- tion of Laboratories

This green booklet contains the interpre-tive guidance for ISO/IEC 17025 only. Theactual requirements of ISO/IEC 17025 arenot contained in the document. Laboratoriesare now required to obtain their own copy ofISO/IEC 17025. A2LAs web site containsinformation on how to order the standard.

A2LA Policy on Measurement Traceability The A2LA Policy on Measurement Trace-ability replaces the Calibration AccreditationPolicy and the Waiver Procedure, which havebeen removed from circulation. The policycontains new requirements that have beenadded to the ISO/IEC 17025 Assessor Checklist.Please refer to the related article in this editionof A2LA News.

Proficiency Testing (PT) Requirements for Accredited Testing and Calibration Labo- ratories The PT requirements for all fields of accreditationare printed in this new document. You areencouraged to review those sections relevantto you laboratorys field(s) of testing/calibra-tion.

A2LA Interim Policy on Measurement Un- certainty for Testing Laboratories Under Interim Policy on Measurement Un-certainty for Testing Laboratories may respondto a deficiency (or gap analysis finding) in

this area by submitting an implementationplan with its corrective action response. Thelaboratory will then have a year to obtaintraining, write its procedures and estimateuncertainty where it is applicable.

All these new documents are posted on A2LAs website, www.a2la.org.

A2LA ISO/IEC 17025 Transition Plan for2001 (revision date: 12/01/2000)

The International Laboratory Accreditation Coop-eration (ILAC) recently issued the following revisedtransition guidance to laboratory accreditation bodies:

Accreditation bodies shall require that the laboratories for which they grant and maintain accreditation comply with the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025 by December 31, 2002. No extra surveillance activities will be required to confirm this but all accredited labs must have been through a surveillance, evaluation or re-evaluation before this date. After this date all accreditation documents must refer to ISO/IEC 17025.

The chart noted below identifies the A2LA assess-ment options available to new and renewal laborato-


37/48


ries for 2001 to ensure that we meet our goal ofdemonstrated compliance to ISO/IEC 17025 by July of2002, six months in advance of the ILAC deadline.

NEW AND RENEWAL ASSESSMENTS

A2LA ISO/IEC 17025 TRANSITION PLAN(revision date: 12/01/2000)

AssessmentDate

Options Documentation Comments

Beginning OPTION I: ISO/IEC 17025 ChecklistJanuary 1, 2001 ISO/IEC 17025

OPTION II:ISO/IEC Guide 25 with anISO/IEC 17025 GapAnalysis

ISO/IEC Guide 25 and 17025 Gaps Checklist - document gap analysis byfilling out bolded (17025)items; Assessors will write

Note 1: Response to gapsdue at annual review(renewals) or surveillance(new)

up "gaps" in separate formattached to deficiency reportthat includes the followingstatements. "In order to be considered for accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025, objective evidence that the following items have been addressed

Note 2: Depending on thenumber and nature of thegaps identified during thegap analysis, an on-siterevisit may be required toverify compliance.

needs to be provided to A2LA with the annual review/surveillance."

Beginning OPTION I ISO/IEC 17025 ChecklistJuly 1, 2001 ISO/IEC 17025

Surveillance AssessmentsSurveillance assessment that occur during 2001 must automatically include the ISO 17025 Gap Analysis at

a minimum if the lab was assessed to ISO/IEC Guide 25 during the initial accreditation process. See Option IIabove.

An Idea that Changed the World of Metrology Forever:And the Man Behind It

Most of us never heard of Claude Shannon, which is apity. Because Shannon, who passed away last week-end at the age of 84, had an idea that changed theworld forever, especially the world of metrology andmeasurement.(news.cnet.com/news/0-1004-200-4968313.html).

The year was 1948 and Shannon was a young BellLabs scientist who had reached the startling conclu-sion that all information could be expressed in binaryformatas a series of 1s and 0s. Although the technol-ogy of the day wasnt advanced enough to take advan-tage of these findings immediately, they eventually

became the basis for measurement of digital technolo-gies as diverse as modems, magnetic storage, theInternet, and satellite transmissions. Other impressivecontributions in mathematics and cryptography fol-lowed.

Ironically, Shannon, a distant relative of ThomasEdison, was perhaps best remembered within thescientific community for his wacky inventions, such asthe rocket-powered Frisbee, and his freewheeling an-tics, such as riding his unicycle through the halls while

juggling balls in the air. Thank you, Claude ElwoodShannon, for all youve given us. This ones for you!


38/48


A2LA Training Course ScheduleeludehcSesruoCgniniarTyrotarobaLniytilauQAL2A

.wolebdetsilsesruocehtfonoitpircsedarof)gro.al2a.www(etist bewruoisivesaelP

AC,enivrI5.naJ seirotarobaLrofdradnatSweNehT,52071CEI / OSI

CS,notselrahC

72-62.beF82.beF

2-1hcraM6-5hcraM

noitatiderccAdna,52071CEI / OSIseirotarobaLrofdradnatSweNehT,52071CEI / OSI

secitcarPyrotarobaLnoitarbilaCytniatrecnUtnemerusaeM

DM,aibmuloC

21hcraM seirotarobaLrofdradnatSweNehT,52071CEI / OSI

AC,enivrI

6lirpA seirotarobaLrofdradnatSweNehT,52071CEI / OSIAL,snaelrOweN

42-32lirpA52lirpA

72-62lirpA5yaM-03lirpA

noitati52071CEI derccAdna / OSIseirotarobaLrofdradnatSweNehT,52071CEI / OSI

secitcarPyrotarobaLnoitarbilaCytniatrecnUtnemerusaeM

AC,enivrI

8enuJ seirotarobaLrofdradnatSweNehT,52071CEI / OSI

2001 Measurement Quality Conference September 13 14, 2001

Location: National Institute of Standards and Tech-nology, Gaithersburg, MD

Conference Hotel: Gaithersburg Holiday Inn

The 2001 Measurement Quality Conference will beheld at the National Institute of Standards and Technol-ogy in recognition of the 100 th anniversary of its found-ing as the National Bureau of Standards. The confer-ence will open with a special, dual session with NISTretirees delineating the history of NBS/NIST and NIST

managers giving a look into the next fifteen years forfour metrological discipline areas.

This special presentation will be followed by sessionson:

Laboratory accreditation in the context of ISO17025

Statist ics and uncertaint ies Measures of qua li ty

The Conference Banquet at the Holiday Inn on Thurs-day evening will provide further opportunities for net-working and discussion of quality issues.

The Conference will wrap up Friday afternoon withtours of NIST, including a look at the new AdvancedMeasurement Laboratory currently under construction

just south of the main cluster of buildings on the NISTGaithersburg campus.

Measurement Quality Division Meeting: On Wednes-day evening, September 12, there will be a meeting ofthe ASQ Measurement Quality Division at the Confer-ence Hotel, beginning at 7:30 PM. Division members

and prospective members are welcome to attend.Tutorial: On Wednesday, September 12, there will bea day-long tutorial on aspects of measurement qualityheld in NIST North, in the first floor conference room.Registration and fees for the tutorial are separate fromthose of the Conference. Refreshment breaks will beincluded. Lunch will be no-host in one of the manyrestaurants in the vicinity.

For more information contact Norm Belecki [email protected] .


39/48


Metrology/Technology BooksMetrologyAn Introduction to Measurement and Calibration , Campbell, Paul

Industrial Press, May 1995Paperback, $24.95 isbn: 0831130601

Fundamentals of Temperature, Pressure and Flow Measurements , 3rd Edition, Benedict,Robert P.Wiley, Jul 1984Hardcover, $131.25 isbn: 0471893838

Nonlinear Optics , 4th Edition, Bloembergen, Nicolaas World Scientific, May 1996Paperback, $18.90 isbn: 9810225997Hardcover, $33.60 isbn: 9810225989

Coherent Optics; Fundamentals and Applications , Lauterborn, W., Kurz, T. andWiesenfeldt, W.Mar 1995Paperback, $49.00 isbn: 0387583726

Eye and Visual Optical Instruments , Smith, George Cambridge University Press, Jun 1996Paperback, $57.70 isbn: 0521478200

Geometrical Optics and Optical Design , Mouroulis, Pantazis (Oxford Series on Optical and Imaging Sciences)Oxford University Press, Nov 1996Hardcover, $80.40 isbn: 0195089316

Time Domain Optics of Ultrashort Waveforms , Shvartsburg, A.B.(Oxford Series on Optical and Imaging Sciences)Oxford University Press, Aug 1996Hardcover, $99.00 isbn: 0198565097

Optical Holography; Principles, Techniques and Applications 2nd Edition, Harihan, P.(Cambridge Studies in Modern Optics)Cambridge University Press, May 1996Paperback, $41.95 isbn: 0521439655

Opticks , Newton, Isaac Jan 1952Paperback, $11.65 isbn: 0521439655

Nonlinear Optics and Quantum Electronics , Scubert, Max and Wilhelmi, Bernd (Wiley Series in Pure and Applied Optics)Wiley, Jul 1986Hardcover, $172.20 isbn: 0471088072

Nonlinear Optics , Moloney, Jerome V. and Newell, Alan C.(Advanced Topics in the Interdisciplinary Mathematical Sciences)Addison-Wesley, Apr 1992Hardcover, $53.35 isbn: 0201510146


40/48


The Physics of Moire Metrology(Wiley Series of Pure and Applied Optics) by Kafri, Oded Wiley, 1990Hardcover, $88.15 isbn: 0471509671

The Principles of Nonlinear Optics(Wiley Series of Pure and Applied Optics) by Shen, Y.R.J. Wiley, May 1984Hardcover, $121.80 isbn: 0471889989

Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles by Bohren, Craig F.Mar 1983Hardcover, $156.45 isbn: 047105772X

Physical/Dimensional MeasurementsApplied Measurement Engineering; How to Design Effective Mechanical MeasurementSystems

Wright, Charles P.Printice Hall, Aug 1994Hardcover, $70.35 isbn: 0132534770

StatisticsA Handbook of Introductory Statistical Methods , Cox, C. Philip Wiley, Jan 1987Hardcover, $97.60 isbn: 0471819719

Statistics for Experimenters; An Introduction to Design, Data Analysis and Model Buildingby Box, George E.P.Wiley, Jun 1978Hardcover, $73.45 isbn: 0471093157

Design and Analysis of Reliability Studies; The Statistical Evaluation of Measurement ErrorsDunn, Graham Jan 1993Hardcover, $94.45 isbn: 0470220651

TemperatureTemperature Measurement by Liptak, Bela G.Chilton Book Co., Jun 1993Hardcover, $32.95 isbn: 0801983851

Principles and Methods of Temperature Measurement , by McGee, Thomas D.Wiley, May 1988Hardcover, $89.20 isbn: 0471627674

Thermodynamic Properties of Cryogenic Fluids , by Jacobsen, R.T.Hardcover, $99.75 isbn: 0306455226

Thermodynamics and an Introduction to Thermostatistics 2nd Edition, Collen Wiley, Aug 1985Hardcover, $69.53 isbn: 0471862568

Advanced Cryogenics , by Bailey, Colin Alfred (The International Cryogenics Monograph Series)Paperback, $68.25 isbn: 0306304589


41/48

1994

Spring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 41The STANDARD

Experimental Techniques in Low-Temperature Physics , 3rd Edition, White, Guy K.(Monographs on the Physics and Chemistry)Clarendon Press, Aug 1987Paperback, $51.75 isbn: 019851381X

AcousticsPrinciples of Vibration and Sound , Rossing, Thomas and Fletcher, Nelville H.Springer-Verlag,Hardcover(Oct 1994) $54.95 isbn: 0387943048Paperback (Dec 1994) $34.50 isbn: 0387943366

The Physics of Sound 2nd Edition, Berg, Richard E.Prentice Hall, Oct 1994Hardcover $74.55 isbn: 0131830473

The Science of Sound 2nd Edition, Rossing, Thomas Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Jan 1990

Hardcover, $60.30 isbn: 0201157276

Theoretical Acoustics , Morse, Philip M Princeton University Press, Dec 1987Paperback, $51.98 isbn: 0691024014

Ultrasonic Absorption; An Introduction to the Theory of Sound Absorptionand Dispersion in Gases, Li , Bhatia, A.B.Dover Publications, Sep 1985Paperback, $10.76 isbn: 0486649172

Fundamentals of Acoustics , 3rd Edition, Kinsler, Lawrence E., Coppens, Alan B., Sanders Jan 1982

Hardcover, $105.53 isbn: 0471029335

Nonlinear Acoustics , Naugolnykh, K.A. and Ostrovsky, L.A.

Hardcover, $85.00 isbn: 1563963388

Handbook of Human Vibration , Griffin, Michael J.Academic Press, Dec 1996Paperback, $62.95 isbn: 0123030412

Fundamentals of Piezoelectricity by Ikeda, T.(Oxford Science Publications)Oxford University Press, Jul 1990

Hardcover, $117.60 isbn: 0198563396

AIP Handbook of Condenser Microphones; Theory, Calibration and MeasurementsWang, George, S.K.American Institute of Physics, 1995Hardcover, $85.00 isbn: 1563962845

CommunicationsCommunication Network Test and Measurement HandbookCoumbs, Clyde F.McGraw Hill, Sep 1997Hardcover, $89.50 isbn: 0070126178


42/48


General Science (Best Sellers)Fermats Last Theroem:Unlocking the Secret of an Ancient Mathematical Problemby Amir D. Aczel

Four Walls Eight Windows, Oct 1996Hardcover, $16.20 isbn: 1568580770

Visions: How Science Will Revolutionize the 21st Centuryby Michio Kaku Anchor Books, Oct 1997Hardcover, $22.45 isbn: 0385484984

Emotional Intelligence , by Daniel Goleman Bantam Books, Oct 1995Hardcover, $21.56 isbn: 055309503X

The Fabric of Reality , by David Deutsch

Penguin, Aug 1997Hardcover, $24.25 isbn: 0713990619

The Large, the Small and the Human Mind , by Roger Penrose, Malcolm Longair andStephen Hawking Cambridge University Press, Apr 1997Hardcover, $17.95 isbn: 0521563305

Eisteins Mirror , by Tony Hey and Patric Walters Cambridge University Press, Aug 1997Hardcover, $76.94 isbn: 0521435048

Pythegoras Trousers: God, Physics and the Gender Wars , by Margaret Wertheim Times Books/Random House, Aug 1995Hardcover, $20.70 isbn: 081292200X

Chaos Theory Tamed , by Garett P. Williams National Academy Press, Sep 1997Hardcover, $31.45 isbn: 0309063515

Why Arent Black Holes Black?; The Unanswered Questions at the Frontiers of Spaceby Robert M. Hazen and Maxine Singer Anchor Books, May 1997Paperback, $11.65 isbn: 0385480148


43/48


Measurement UncertaintyReference and Guidance Documents

NIST www.physics.nist.gov/pubs/guidelinesNIST Technical Note 1297, 1994 FreeGuidelines for Evaluating and Expressing the Uncertainty of NIST Measurement Results

NIST Special Publication 805, 1990 FreeUncertainty and Accuracy in Physical Measurements

ISO

ISO, 1995 cost $Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement

NCSL www.ncslinternational.org/publications/pubslist.cfm 303-440-3339

ANSI/NCSL Z540-2, 1997 cost $US Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement

NCSL RP-12, 1995 cost $Determining and Reporting Measurement Uncertainties

ASME www.asme.org 1-800-843-2763

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.1, 1998 cost $Measurement Uncertainty

UKAS www.ukas.com/pdfs/M4/PDF 44 181 917 8400

UKAS M3003, 1997 cost $

The Expression of Uncertainty and Confidence in MeasurementUKAS LAB 12, 2000 FreeThe Expression of Uncertainty in Testing

EA www.european-accreditation.org

EA-4/02-S1, 1997 FreeExpression of Uncertainty of Measurement in Calibration

SINGLA S w ww.sac_sci.org.sg 6 5 3 34 8566

SINGLAS Technical Guide 1 cost ?

EURACHEM www.vtt.fi/ket/eurachem/quam2000-pl.PDF 353 1 802 5800

EURACHEM/CITAC Guide, 2000 FreeQuantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement

NPL www.npl.co.uk01937 546000

A Beginners Guide to Uncertainty in Measurement, 1999, Bell cost ?

AMTMA www.amtma.com 313-642-3312

Searching for Zero, A Guide for Calibration and Uncertainty Factors in DimensionalMetrology, 1991 cost $


44/48


Measurement UncertaintyTraining and Consulting Sources

American Association for Laboratory Accreditation Frederick, Maryland301-644-3235 www.a2la.org

Benchmark Technologies Toledo, Ohio419-843-6691 [email protected]

Blue Mountain Quality Resources State College, Pennsylvania1-800-982-2388 www.coolblue.com

Coast Quality Metrology Systems San Clemente, California949-492-6321

Community College of Aurora Denver, Colorado303-365-8425 www.cs.cca.cccoes.edu/metrology

E=MC3 Solutions Wadsworth, Ohio330-328-4400 [email protected]

Excel Partnership Sandyhook, Connecticut1-800-374-3818 www.excelpartnership.com

Flow Dynamics Scottsdale, Arizona480-948-3789 www.flow-dynamics.com

HN Metrology Consulting Indianapolis, Indiana317-849-9577 [email protected]

Integrated Sciences Group Bakersfield, California661-872-1683 [email protected]

Philip Stein Consultants Pennington, New jersey609-737-9144 [email protected]

Quametec Detroit, Michigan810-225-8588 www.quametec.com

Tustin Technical Institute Santa Barbara, California805-682-7171 [email protected]

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Milwaukee, Wisconsin414-227-3139

Wavetek San Diego, California

1-800-874-4835 www.wavetek.comWorkplace Training Wayzata, Minnesota1-800-472-2564 www.state.net/wptraining


45/48

Spring 2001/Winter 2000 Page 45

Monthly Measurement Quality Division Regular Membership Totals

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Months

N u m

b e r o

f M e m b e r s

Members 5168 5161 5149 5221 3774 3949 4095 4212 4285 4412 4487 4517 4604 4606 4623 4671 3490 3635 3751 3836 3886 3994

Apr-99

May-99

Jun-99

Jul-99 Aug-99

Sep-99

Oct-99

Nov-99

Dec-99

Jan-00

Feb-00

Mar-00

Apr-00

May-00

Jun-00

Jul-00 Aug-00

Sep-00

Oct-00

Nov-00

Dec-00

Jan-01

The STANDARD

M Q D S E P O C T N O V D E C J A NR EG UL AR 4 7 1 1 4 7 4 3 4 7 6 9 4 8 2 4 4 8 4 2NEW 66 66 61 28 88UNPAID (SUBTRACT) 1092 102 0 98 6 954 92 0QUIT DIVISION 50 38 8 12 16

TOTAL 3 6 3 5 3 7 5 1 3 8 3 6 3 8 8 6 3 9 9 4RENEW 81 51 24 24 23COMP 22 22 24 24 24SENIOR 183 184 181 182 185NEW 0 0 0 0 1UNPAID (SUBTRACT) 5 5 5 5 4QUIT DIVISION 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 1 7 8 1 7 9 1 7 6 1 7 7 1 8 2RENEW 2 0 0 0 1COMP 0 0 0 0 0

FELLOW 35 35 38 38 38NEW 0 0 0 0 0UNPAID (SUBTRACT) 1 1 1 1 1QUIT DIVISION 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 3 4 3 4 3 7 3 7 3 7RENEW 0 0 0 0 0COMP 0 0 0 0 0HONORARY 2 2 2 2 2NEW 0 0 0 0 0UNPAID (SUBTRACT) 0 0 0 0 0QUIT DIVISION 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 2 2 2 2 2RENEW 0 0 0 0 0COMP 0 0 0 0 0STUDENT 49 49 49 49 50NEW 1 1 0 0 2UNPAID (SUBTRACT) 15 15 13 13 11QUIT DIVISION 1 1 0 0 2

TOTAL 3 4 3 4 3 6 3 6 3 9RENEW 1 0 2 0 1COMP 0 0 0 0 0SUSTAINING 675 674 673 664 657NEW 13 10 14 9 20UNPAID (SUBTRACT) 21 34 39 29 29QUIT DIVISION 0 0 1 1 4

TOTAL 6 6 7 6 5 0 6 4 7 6 4 3RENEW 32 28 35 32 41COMP 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL-QUIT DIVISION 51 39 9 13 22TOTAL-QUIT SOCIETY 1 3 5 1 4TOTAL DECEASED 0 1 0 0 0

4 7 8 1G RAN D TO TA L 4 5 5 0 4 6 5 0 4 7 3 4 4 7 8 0 4 8 9 8

6 4 4


46/48

Measurement Quality Division OfficersChairDuane Allen ....... ... .. .. ... .U.S. Navy, P.O. Box 5000, Code MS11, Corona, CA 92878-5000 909-273-4783 V

e-mail: [email protected] 909-273-4599 FPast ChairmanMark Schoenlein ........... Owens Illinois Plastics Group, One SeaGate 29L-PP, Toledo, OH 43666 419-247-7285 V

e-mail: [email protected] 419-247-8770 FChair ElectOpen

Vice Chair for RegionsSamuel Windsor ............ Filltronic Comtek 410-341-7751 V

31901 Comtek Lane, Salisbury, MD 21804 410-341-0330 Fe-mail: [email protected]

TreasurerColleen Gadbois ...........535 N.W. 112 th Ave., Portland, OR 97229-6116 503-646-1380 V

e-mail: [email protected] 503-646-1380 FSecretaryJoseph Filipowicz ..........Alliance Compressors

715 Oakland Dr., Natchitoches, LA 71457 318-356-4570 V

e-mail: [email protected] 318-356-4570 FAuditingKarl F. Speitel ................ 14 Kalleston Drive, Pittsford, NY 14534 716-385-838 H

CertificationChristopher L. Grachanen.....Manager, Standards Engineering

P.O. Box 692000 MS070110, Houston, TX 77269-2000 281-518-8486 VCompaq Computer Corporation, Corporate Metrology 281-518-7275 Fe-mail: [email protected]

ProgramsKeith Conerly ................ Dow Chemical Co. 517-638-7058 V

e-mail: [email protected] 517-638-6928 FMembershipKathy Hoath .................. Superior Technical Training 616-957-7750 V

2419 Brook Dr. S.E., Grand Rapids, MI 49512 616-318-9001 C

e-mail: [email protected] 616-957-7751 FEducationThomas A. Pearson ...... Automated Technology Associates 317-271-9545 ext. 224 V

1635 Expo Lane, Indianapolis, IN 46214 317-271-7974 Fe-mail: [email protected]

PublicationsJ.L. Madrigal .................. Oxford Worldwide Group 801-374-1790 V

1045 South Orem Blvd., Orem, UT 84058 801-374-1790 Fe-mail: [email protected]

Newsletter EditorFrank Voehl . ..................S t. Lucie Press, 280 Lake Drive, Coconut Creek, FL 33066 954-972-3012 V

e-mail: [email protected] 954-978-0643 FHistorianS.D. (Sal) Scicchitani .... 203 Golf Club Drive, Langhorne, PA 19047

Standards Committee RepresentativeDan J. Harper................ 535 N.W. 112 th Ave., Portland, OR 97229-6116 503-646-1380 H

e-mail: [email protected] 503-646-1380 FNCSL RepresentativeChristopher L. Grachanen..... See Certification

Simmons ScholarshipNorm Belecki ................. 7413 Mill Run Dr., Deerwood, MD 20855-1156 301-869-4520 H

e-mail: [email protected] ManagerGeorge A. MacRitchie ... Benchmark Technologies 419-843-6691 V

e-mail: [email protected] 419-843-7218 F

Please notify the editor of any errors or changes so that this list can be updated.


47/48

REGIONAL COUNCILORSRegion 1

Joseph Califano , Hemagen Diagnos-tics, Inc., 40 Bear Hill Road, Waltham,MA 02154 (417) 890-3766, FAX (617)890-3748

Region 2 Karl F. Speitel , 14 Kalleston Drive,Pittsford, NY 14534 (716) 385-1838

Region 3 Eduardo M. Heidelberg , CarterWallace, 61 Kendall Dr., Parlin, NJ08859 (609) 655-6521, FAX (609)655-6736

Region 4 Alex Lau , Imperial Oil, 111 St. ClairAve W, Toronto, Ont, Canada M5W-1K3 (416) 968-4654, FAX (416) 968-5560, E-mail: [email protected]

Region 5 Open

Region 6

J.L. Madrigal , Brigham Young Univ.,Dept of Statistics, BYU, 222 TMCB,Provo, UT 84602 (801) 378-7357,FAX (801) 378-5722, E-mail: [email protected]

Region 7 Rolf B.F. Schumacher , Coast QualityMetrology Systems, Inc., 35 Vista DelPonto, San Clemente, CA 92672-3122 (949) 492-6321, FAX (949) 492-6321

Region 8 Frank Weingard , Actco Metrology Ser-vices, 202, Westview Dr. Meadville, PA16335 (800) 382-0393, FAX (814)337-8288, E-mail:[email protected]

Region 9 Dr. Henrik S. Nielson , HN MetrologyConsulting, Inc., 5230 Nob Lane, India-napolis, IN 46226 (317) 849-9577voice and fax, E-mail: [email protected]

Region 10 George A. MacRitchie , CQE, PE,Benchmark Technologies Corp., 3161N. Republic Blvd., Toledo, OH 43615-1507 (419) 843-6691, FAX (419) 843-7218, E-mail: [email protected]

Region 11Raymond Perham , Michelin Tire Corp.,

Rt 4 Antioch Church, P.O. Box 2846,Greenville, SC 29605 (864) 458-1425,FAX (864) 458-1807, E-mail:[email protected], orhome E-mail: [email protected]

Region 12 Donald Ermer , University of Wiscon-sin Madison, 240 Mechanical Engineer-ing Bldg., 1513 University Avenue,Madison, WI 53706-1572 (608) 262-2557

Region 13 Thomas A. Myers , Bellevue Univer-sity, PMP, CQM, 1000 Galvin Rd. S.,Bellevue, NE 68123 1-800-756-7920ext. 3714, FAX (402) 293-2035, E-mail: [email protected]

Region 14 Chuck Carter , C.L. Carter, Jr. & Asso-ciates, Inc. 1211 Glen Cove Drive,Richardson, TX 75080 (972) 234-3296, FAX (972) 234-3296, E-mail:[email protected]

Region 15 Bryan Miller , Champion International,Inc., P.O. Box 189, Courtland, AL 35816 (205) 637-6735, FAX (205) 637-5202

Region 25 Nouman Ali Khan , Descon Engineer-ing Ltd, 38 Sir Agha Khan III Rd., Lahore54000, Pakistan V 92-42-6365134,FAX 92-42-6364049, E-mail: Nakhan

@descon.com.pk

Please notify the editor of any errors or changes so that this list

can be updated.

REGIONAL MAP


48/48

The Journal of the Measurement Quality Division

American Society for Quality

The Standard

American Society for Quality

Measurement Quality Division

Non-ProfitOrganizationU.S. Postage

PAIDMilwaukee, WI

Permit No. 5419

Spring 2001Winter 2000

f l