The STANDARD
Vol. 2000-3 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality
IN THIS ISSUE
Editor’s Column ............... 3
Contrarian Metrologist ..... 4
The Learning Curve ......... 7
CCT Update ...................... 9
History & Current Status of
Metrology Education ..... 10
Overview Profiles on Best
Practices ......................... 12
Reporting Capability
Numbers ......................... 20
Standards Scene ............ 25
NIST News ...................... 27
NVLAP Notes .................. 28
Standards Update .......... 29
NIST/NACLA Partnership
Proposal .......................... 30
A2LA News Update ........ 31
Profile on Metrology: What
is CAL LAB? ................... 32
Metrology Freeware ....... 33
Educational Institutions
that Offer Metrology
Programs or Classes ..... 34
Metrology Links ............. 35
Obituary .......................... 37
1999 MQD Member Survey
Results ............................ 38
MQD Council Minutes .... 40
Measurement Science
Conference ..................... 42
Membership Report ....... 43
Conference Calls ............ 43
Upcoming Events ........... 43
MQD Officers .................. 44
Regional Councilors ...... 45
A Message from the Chair…
Duane Allen
Please permit me to introduce myself. My
name is Duane Allen. I am the Measurement
Quality Division Chair for 2000-2001. My pri-
mary responsibilities as chair are to continue
MQD’s organizational health and to support
the MQD activities that support the measure-
ment and quality community.
The division is in good health, not great, but
good. The division did run into a problem with
an insufficient number of MQD members vol-
unteering to fill all the division organizational
positions. Several members have stepped
forward this year and joined the longer-serv-
ing division volunteers. If you check out the list
of officers, committee chairs, and regional
councilors in the last pages of The STAN-
DARD, you will see that there are still oppor-
tunities for you to serve the division.
What are the benefits of your serving in a
division organizational position? Service: You
will be supporting the MQD mission of service
to the measurement and quality community.
A Message from the Past Chair…
Mark Schoenlein
As my tenure with the MQD draws to a close I
am becoming increasingly fearful.
My experiences with the division over the past
year closely parallel what is going on at my
place of employment today as well as what is
going on in the Quality/Measurement field in
general. As I sit in my office writing this note to
you, many of my co-workers are preparing to
walk out the door for the last time. The offering
of a generous retirement package has emptied
the offices and cubes of many of our most
experienced professionals. My twenty years of
tenure with the company now puts me in the
“old man” category of employees.
The same fate has befallen our division. Many
of those pioneering individuals who started this
division ten years ago have moved on. Many of
the organizations that supplied that talent have
either downsized or disappeared. The short-
age of division volunteer officers has reached
Fall 2000
Skill improvement: MQD positions provide op-
portunities to exercise and improve your lead-
ership and communications skills. ASQ pro-
vides training for officer and committee chairs.
Networking: Taking a MQD position will defi-
nitely extend your network of contacts. Finan-
cial: There is not much financial reward, per-
haps a tax deduction. This is a volunteer orga-
nization. However, serving your community,
improving your skills, and enlarging your net-
work are usually worthwhile, long-term invest-
ments in one’s self.
There are several ways to serve: as a division
officer, as a committee chair or member, or as
a regional councilor. If you would like to serve
as a MQD division officer, the election will be
early next year. All offices will be open to
nominations. Mr. Mark Schoenlein, the Past
Chair, has volunteered to chair the nomination
committee. Please contact Mark if you would
like to serve as an officer or wish to nominate a
member for an office.
Continued on page 4
a critical point. I would like to encourage those
reading this newsletter to strongly consider
offering their time and talent to help strengthen
and grow the MQD.
I would like to thank Alex, Bryan, Chris, Chuck,
Dan, DeWayne, Don, Ed, Frank, George, J.L.,
Jason, Joe, John, Karl, Mel, Nick, Phil, Phil,
Ralph, Ray, Rolf, Ron, Sal, Steve, Tom, and
Annie-Kay for all
of the assistance
and support that
they have given
over the past
year. I would like
to wish Duane the
best of luck in
chairing the divi-
sion in the year to
come.
Take care.
 Page 2 The STANDARD Fall 2000

The STANDARD
The Journal of the Measurement Quality Division
Advertising Papers published in The STANDARD are
www.metrology.org not referred in the usual sense, except to
Submit your draft copy to Frank Voehl, the
Advertising Manager, with a request for a ascertain that facts are correctly stated
quotation. Indicate size desired. Specify and to assure that opinion and fact are
whether you will provide camera-ready clearly distinguished one from another.
copy or desire that we produce final copy. The Editor reserves the right to edit any
paper and will usually exercise that right.
The following rates are for the space only. Enclose a short letter saying what the
Copy preparation and typesetting will be manuscript is, and send it to the appropri-
Publication extra, if provided by the The STANDARD. ate Associate Editor with your manuscript.
Staff Business card size ................... $100 Show your complete address (both mail
1/8 page ................................... $150 and e-mail) for correspondence.
Executive Editor
Frank Voehl 1/4 page ................................... $200
St. Lucie Press 1/3 page ................................... $250
280 Lake Drive 1/2 page ................................... $300
Coconut Creek, FL 33066 Full page .................................. $550
Tel: 954-972-3012
Fax: 954-978-0643 Advertisements will be accepted on a “per Publication Information
E-mail: FVoehl@aol.com issue” basis only; no long term contracts The STANDARD is published quar-
will be available at present. terly by the Measurement Quality Divi-
Associate Editor sion of ASQ; deadlines are March 15,
Europe and Asia Advertising must be clearly distinguished
as an ad. Ads must be related to measure- June 15, September 15 and Decem-
John Shade
ment quality, quality of measurement, or a ber 1. Advertising deadlines are March
Good Decision Ltd.
related quality field. Ads must not imply 1, June 1, September 1, and Novem-
Dunfermline, KY11 3BZ
endorsement by the Measurement Qual- ber 15. Input for text material by email
Scotland
ity Division or ASQ. or on 3 1/2" diskette in Microsoft Word
Tel: +44 1383-733553
saved in Rich Text Format (RTF). If it
Fax: +44 1383-733588 Letters to the Editor is not feasible to send text in electronic
E-mail: js@gdl.co.uk The STANDARD welcomes letters from form, clean printed text can be submit-
Associate Editor members and subscribers. We offer the ted. Graphics or illustration material
U.S. and Canada following guidelines. Letters should clearly can be sent in eps, tif, pict or jpeg
Open state whether the author is expressing format. Photographs of MQD activities
Advertising Manager opinion or presenting facts with support- or people would be especially appreci-
Frank Voehl ing information. Commendation, encour- ated.
St. Lucie Press agement, constructive critique, sugges-
Publication of articles, product re-
280 Lake Drive tions, and alternative approaches are ac-
leases, advertisements or technical
Coconut Creek, FL 33066 cepted. Berating is not appropriate. If the
information does not imply endorse-
Tel: 954-972-3012 content is more than 200 words, we may
ment by The STANDARD or the Mea-
Fax: 954-978-0643 delete portions to hold that limit. We re-
surement Quality Division of ASQ.
E-mail: FVoehl@aol.com serve the right to edit letters and papers. While The STANDARD makes every
Publications Chair Information for Authors effort to ensure the accuracy of ar-
J.L. Madrigal The STANDARD publishes papers on the ticles, the publication disclaims respon-
Oxford Worldwide Group quality of measurements and the mea- sibility for statements of fact or opinion
1045 South Orem Blvd. surement of quality at all levels ranging made by the authors or other contribu-
Orem, UT 84058 from relatively simple tutorial material to tors.
Tel/Fax: 801-235-1899 cutting edge or state-of-the-art exposi- Material from The STANDARD may
E-mail: jim_oxford@msn.com tion. not be reproduced without permission.
We particularly encourage thoughtful pa- Copyrights in the United States and all
pers from engineers, users, regulators, all other countries are reserved.
levels of management, and others. The The editor may be reached at 954-
STANDARD welcomes controversy and 972-3012 or by fax at 954-978-0643.
reasoned polemic but does not permit E-mail address is: FVoehl@aol.com.
ranting and raving.
© 2000 ASQ, MQD. All rights reserved.
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
The Editor’s Column
The Evolving Field of
Metrology
by Frank Voehl
During the past few years, I have had the pleasure
of serving as the Associate Editor of The Standard
under the extremely capable leadership of DeWayne
Sharp. My job was to secure articles, write about
pertinent emerging topics in the field of Metrology, and
help DeWayne in whatever ways I could make myself
useful. Now, DeWayne has decided that it is time to call
it a day and I have been given the dubious task of
following in his footsteps. A tall order indeed! But I will
do my best to keep our labs, our equipment, and our
people up-to-date with current developments, as well
as in a state of preparation for future developments. In
other words, to fulfill the mission of The Standard.
For metrology is all about the science of measure-
ment, and measurement is all about the science of
improvement. And it is this emphasis upon improve-
ment that underlies the entire systematic approach
through which we quantify quality characteristics, a
concept that is in actuality thousands of years old. In
the beginning, units of measure, of bigness and small-
ness, were in terms of parts of the human body. The
ancient Egyptian unit of measure for length was ex-
pressed in terms of the royal cubit–which was the
length of the forearm of the reigning Pharaoh.
With the birth of international commerce, the early
metrologists evolved systems of international units of
measure, which evolved into the two prevalent and
sometimes competing measurement systems—the
metric and the English. And as every metrologist
knows, the existence of two *competing* systems of
measurement has become a serious handicap to inter-
national commerce. For at the beginning of the 1970s,
writes Dr. Joseph Juran, all industrialized nations, with
the single exception of the USA, had either adopted the
metric system or decided to do so.
In the United States, resistance to the metric system
arose from the heavy investment in the English system,
coupled with the previous low volume of international
trade relative to the total size of the American economy.
Due to the absence of a national plan for converting to
metric, the USA is in a slow process of conversion to
metric, which will likely take at least another fifty years
or more to complete. This conversion, however slow it
may be, is being driven by three significant interrelated
breakthroughs of the past ten years: (1) the develop-
Page 3
ment of the Systeme International d’Unites–known as
SI, (2) the global Knowledge Management revolution
and (3) explosion and popularity of the internet.
The SI system consists of:
• Six fundamental units of international mea-
sure–for length, mass, time, electric current,
temperature, and light intensity.
• Two supplemental units for plane and solid
angles.
• A long list of units based upon 1 and 2 above.
• A standardized nomenclature and terminol-
ogy for multiples and subdivisions of all units
of measure.
The SI system is fully compatible with the metric
system, but not with the English system, and has six
fundamental units that (except for the kilogram) are
defined in terms of natural phenomena: meter (m),
kilogram (kg), second (s), degree Kelvin (k), ampere
(A), and candela (cd). This system has made it possible
for all industrialized countries to create its own National
Bureau of Standards, whose function includes the
creation and maintenance of primary reference stan-
dards. In addition, professional societies have evolved
the standardized testing methods for measuring many
quality characteristics not covered under the SI Sys-
tem of units and measures. For example, the American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). In practice,
it’s not practical for a National Bureau of Standards to
calibrate and verify the accuracy of the enormous
hierarchy of test equipment utilized in, and by, test labs
and shops. Instead, a hierarchy of secondary stan-
dards and labs, along with a documentation system of
certified accuracy, has become both commonplace
and legal, a hierarchy upon which the practice of
metrology now largely rests. These are the hard facts
of the world of measurement.
Our brief look at SI makes it clear that revolutionary
changes have been extensive over the past century. In
the single parameter of length, several new technologi-
cal principles have emerged in the past thirty years to
take over the bulk of precision measurement. And in
the area of non-destructive testing, as well as in the
added functions associated with measurement, the
growth of new technology has been nothing short of
explosive. Developments such as these make it clear
that much additional effort will be needed on a continu-
ing basis to keep our labs, equipment, and people up-
to-date with current and future developments.
Enter Knowledge Management Metrology, on the
soft side of the measurement world. For Knowledge
Management to live up to its promise (if it ever does),
a corresponding hierarchy of measurement standards
needs to evolve, in much the same way that SI has over
the past twenty years. And the same holds true and
 Page 4 The STANDARD
seems to be happening with the Internet, and its vast
promise to internationalize the economies of the world.
In a series of articles, beginning with this edition, The
Standard takes a behind-the-scenes look at the emerg-
ing Knowledge Management Metrology field and the
companies that are leading the charge.
Future editions will cover the emergence of the
measurement standards for telecommunications and
the Internet. The scope of measurement diversity
within telecommunications includes literally DC to light,
and there are unique measurement areas within telecom
Continued from page 1
Chair’s Column
Please contact me if you would like to serve in one of
the open committee chairs. Or contact the committee
chair if you would like to serve on a particular commit-
tee.
Please contact me if you would like to become the
regional councilor for Region 13, which covers the
central Midwest, or Region 25, the international com-
munity.
There are three MQD business meetings in 2001 that
you, as a member, may want to attend. There will be a
meeting at the Measurement Science Conference
2001. The time and place is most likely late afternoon
on a Thursday, January 18, 2001, in a meeting room in
The Contrarian Metrologist
Calibration Buyers, Beware!
by Philip Stein
Editor’s Note: The following article was also selected
to be published in September’s Quality Progress.
Measurements are pretty useless without calibra-
tion. Of course, you can buy or build a new instrument
and trust that the answers it gives you are okay, but
sooner or later you should wonder how long that trust
is warranted. All measuring systems are subject to
change after time, and some-
times outside influences (be-
ing overloaded, mishandled
or dropped) can have an ef-
fect as well.
Calibration, and the choice
of how often to calibrate, is
dependent on economic risk.
Calibration costs something,
often quite a bit. And not cali-
brating will eventually cost a
great deal when the measure-
Fall 2000
that provide for some very challenging metrology tasks.
The metrologist is tasked with calibrating system test
equipment that support all systems, being challenged
across the spectrum of ordinary test equipment cali-
bration and very specialized test equipment, some-
times on a daily basis. One of the key related questions
is whether the evolution and growth of SI and its
lessons learned can be applied to the Internet Tele-
communications and the field of Knowledge Manage-
ment Measurement. Stay tuned for further details.
the Disneyland Conference Center. Specific time and
location will be posted at the MQD booth at MSC.
The second business meeting will be at the 55th Annual
Quality Congress in Charlotte, North Carolina in early
May 2001. The third meeting will be at a NIST confer-
ence in Gaithersburg in September 2001.
I welcome correspondence. I’d like to, but I don’t expect
to, meet all approximately 4000 MQD members during
my tenure as Chair. You can help me reach my goal of
having about 2000 e-mails, phone calls, and letters
occur during my tenure. So, please submit articles to
The STANDARD, e-mail me with ideas for MQD activi-
ties, and volunteer for MQD positions.
ment is wrong and expensive rework or a catastrophe
is the result. The calibration interval is therefore an
economic tradeoff in which you balance the frequency
of calibration against the cost of calibration and against
the potential consequences and costs of not calibrat-
ing.
Regulators and international standards (such as
ISO 9000) play a part as well. Most of the standards
that require measurements also require periodic cali-
bration. This is done to increase the trust that custom-
ers place in the measurements provided by an organi-
zation. In addition, all standards and regulations that
require calibration require traceability—the calibration
must be able to be related to national standards (ex-
cept in some unusual circumstances).
Buyer beware
Now comes my warning to buyers. Calibration can
be achieved in many ways. You can do it yourself—
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
even managing the traceability in many cases. How-
ever, this requires expertise and can be quite expen-
sive. If you’re part of a large industrial or government
organization, you may decide that it’s cheaper to do it
all in-house, and you may be right.
For the rest of us, though, the method of choice is
usually to hire a commercial calibration laboratory to
perform the work. Even if you do the simpler hand tools
and electronic meters yourself, you may very well need
to use a commercial service to achieve traceability
between your work and the top of the pyramid. If you
are near the top of the pyramid, you will probably send
your reference standards directly to the National Insti-
tute of Standards and Technology or to the standards
body of another country.
Commercial laboratories are businesses and, as
such, compete on several fronts. One is price and
another is quality of service, neither of which differs
significantly from other retail operations. Calibration
labs may also choose to register their quality systems
to ISO 9002 or even ISO 9001. As a quality profes-
sional, you know how to factor registration into your
buying decision, but beware: ISO 900X registration
does not testify to the correctness or traceability of the
answers a laboratory provides. As with all other ISO
900X processes (at least the 1994 version), registra-
tion only addresses the quality system and not the
quality or fitness for use of the final product. You may
infer that a registered company is more likely to do a
good job because it has a conformant quality system,
and you will probably be right, but it’s no guarantee.
Laboratory accreditation
Calibration and testing laboratories do have a way
of distinguishing themselves—laboratory accredita-
tion. Being accredited to perform specific work offers
strong assurances that the answer, the work you’re
paying for, will be correct and traceable. Laboratory
accreditation is with reference to ISO/IEC Guide 25,
recently replaced by ISO/IEC Standard 17025 but still
in use for the next year or two. In addition, the U.S.
standard ANSI/NCSL Z540-1 adds unique U.S. re-
quirements to Guide 25.
While there are no absolute guarantees and nothing
in this world is perfect, accreditation is the best evi-
dence available that a calibration supplier is trustwor-
thy, traceable and likely to get the right answer. (Test-
ing labs can be accredited too, but this is a measure-
ments column so we’re discussing the issues using
calibration as an example).
Accreditation is accomplished through a third party
process very similar to ISO 9000. Accreditation bodies
send out assessors who collect data, evaluate the
applicants and, eventually, issue certificates. Accredi-
tation bodies acknowledge each other through mutual
Page 5
recognition agreements and accreditation coopera-
tives. Three such cooperatives now exist: a European
cooperative, an Asian-Pacific cooperative and one that
is being organized to cover North America.
Here’s another reason to beware. The accredited
laboratory you use may or may not be accredited by a
body that is a signatory to one or more of these
cooperatives. If it is not, its work might be fine, but it
probably won’t be recognized as accredited. This is
especially important when something you have had
calibrated needs to be traceable. Traceability deliv-
ered by organizations that aren’t members of these
clubs may not be good enough to pass muster by a
thorough assessor. By the way, these clubs aren’t
exclusive. Any organization can join, but it will be
thoroughly assessed to ISO/IEC Guide 58, the stan-
dard of behavior for accreditation bodies.
Confused yet? There’s more.
The next item to be aware of is the scope of
accreditation. Each accredited laboratory is issued a
scope indicating the measurement parameters and
ranges for which it is accredited. In addition, every
accredited organization is permitted to use the logo of
the accrediting body on their advertising, product litera-
ture, and calibration reports or certificates. Therefore,
even if a laboratory advertises that it is accredited, and
places a logo on their reports, it may not be able to do
your job within its scope—and it’s up to you to find that
out.
Some labs will accept both accredited and nonac-
credited work (and maybe charge different prices). If a
quotation, solicitation or certificate has a logo but some
of the work is not within the scope, it must disclose that
clearly. But continue to beware: the rules are clear but
you need to pay attention as your supplier may not
emphasize these distinctions.
Are there circumstances under which you must use
accredited labs? Well, yes and no. While there are no
fixed rules, your customer or regulatory agency may
require that you use an accredited lab. Similarly, an
accredited lab may be necessary for some projects and
measurement parameters, but not for others.
Accreditation and the automotive industry
The most important regulation, however, comes
from the automotive industry. Paragraph 4.11.2.b.1 of
the third edition of QS-9000, states that “commercial
independent calibration facilities shall be accredited to
ISO/IEC Guide 25 or national equivalent, or shall have
evidence, e.g. assessment by an OEM (original equip-
ment manufacturer) customer or an OEM customer-
approved second party that they meet the intent of ISO/
IEC Guide 25 or national equivalent.” Similar rules are
stated for commercial testing laboratories.
 Page 6 The STANDARD
At first glance, this seems pretty rigorous, but actu-
ally, it’s as porous as Swiss cheese. The laboratory you
use could be accredited, but not by a body that has
signed one of the collective agreements. In fact, you
could use an accredited laboratory that did not have an
approved scope that included the particular services
you need, but you’d still be in conformance with the
standard. Your lab could be accredited to perform the
required services, but it will charge you more for an
accredited certificate. You could have contract for the
cheaper work and save some costs, while still following
the QS-9000 standard.
To make matters even worse, the auto industry has
been under quite a bit of pressure to ease up on the
rules. QS-9000 registrars would like to get a piece of
the business but don’t have the technical knowledge or
experience to pass muster with Guide 58. Some of
these companies are offering “registration to the intent
of Guide 25” or “registration of the laboratory quality
system to Guide 25.” Sort of an ISO/IEC Guide 25-Lite!
My understanding is that, at least for now, some
automakers are viewing these alternatives as accept-
able responses to 4.11.2.b.1. Some registrars are
actually trying to gear up to deliver ISO 17025 accredi-
tation, but it will take a while for them to sign on to a
cooperative agreement. What a mess!
What’s an organization to do?
The first thing you need to do is decide whether you
or your customers want and need fully accredited
calibration services. If your customers are demanding
it, it’s a no-brainer. If not, it’s still a very good idea
because of the high degree of confidence you can
place in the results. You will then need to balance extra
costs against what that high confidence is worth to you.
Personally, I think that confidence is priceless but
that’s my bias. It’s only fair to disclose at this point that
I am a Guide 25 lead assessor under contract to the
American Association for Laboratory Accreditation
(A2LA), one of two U.S. signatories of the laboratory
accreditation agreements.
You can pressure your regular calibration supplier
to become accredited if it is not already. If you have the
expertise, you can assess the supplier to the require-
ments of 17025 yourself rather than require that it
become accredited. But if the supplier goes through
the trauma with you, it might as well do so for a third
party accreditation body and get its ticket punched for
real.
See the sidebar “Buying Calibration Services Check-
list” for a summary of everything you need to look for
when interested in calibration services. While the check-
list is written as if you need fully conformant services,
you can waive some of the requirements due to costs
Fall 2000
or simply because you don’t think you need accredited
work.
Sidebar - Buying Calibration Services Checklist
1) Is the laboratory from which you want to buy calibra-
tion services accredited to ISO/IEC Guide 25, ISO/
IEC 17025 or ANSI/NCSL Z540-1?
Remember that a statement of conformance is worth
nothing. The laboratory must be accredited. Use of a
logo is usually the easiest way to identify its accredita-
tion status.
2) Is the body that accredited this laboratory a signa-
tory to one of the laboratory accreditation agree-
ments?
There are now only two such bodies in the United
States: A2LA and NVLAP (National Voluntary Labora-
tory Accreditation Program). Another signatory, ICBO
(International Conference of Building Officials), does
not accredit general-purpose calibration services. Many
other countries have accreditation bodies that are
signatories, and they are allowed to accredit labs in any
country including the United States.
3) Are the measurement parameters you wish to have
calibrated listed on the laboratory’s scope of ac-
creditation? Are the ranges of the parameters you
have chosen within the scope?
4) Have you specified accredited service on your
purchase order to the laboratory?
5) Do all the certificates you received from the labora-
tory have a logo from the accreditation body, and
are there no exceptions taken for specific results?
Look for a statement that when the instrument was
received, it was operating within acceptable limits;
otherwise, you have to see if it could have made any
significant mistakes before it was sent out.
If you can answer “yes” to all five items on the checklist,
you’re probably okay using the calibration service.
Philip Stein is a metrology and quality consultant in
private practice in Pennington, NJ. He holds a master’s
degree in measurement science from The George
Washington University, in Washington DC, and is an
ASQ Fellow. For more information, go to
www.measurement.com.
Philip Stein, A2LA Lead Assessor, is a Past
Chair of the MQD, a past member of the Board
of Directors of ASQ, and is an ASQ Fellow
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
The Learning Curve
This is the twenty-seventh in a contiguous series of
frequently rambling commentaries on the general sub-
ject of Metrology Education ver-
sus Calibration Training. In the
past, these have, been in the form
of open letters to our former most
Exalted Editor-in-Chief who has
understandably resigned; (I might
also, if I had his problems.) We will
continue the open letter format to a
new and as yet untested boss (un-
til he decides to shut us down.)
Phil Painchaud
Dear New Boss:
I opened my last column with the comment that the
preceding quarter had been most traumatic for the both
of us (referring to my old Boss). I didn’t figure that things
could get much worse; but early in May, while working
alone in my backyard and while moving at high speed,
I tripped on a step and landed on the concrete on my
right knee. Fortunately, there were no broken bones,
just severe muscle and ligament damage. This re-
sulted in four hours in surgery, two weeks of hospital
and rehab facility, and a month in a cast. I am now
wearing an immobilizing brace and probably will be
doing so for another four to six months. You might
correctly say that I have been in no mood to write this
column. Nevertheless, I shall try anyhow.
In the last several columns, I have been delineating
the progress being made toward the development of a
degreed curriculum in the measurement sciences at
the California State University—Dominguez Hills. In
this issue, I will direct your attention to a separate article
entitled, THE HISTORY AND STATUS OF METROL-
OGY EDUCATION AT THE CALIFORNIA STATE
UNIVERSITY—DOMINGUEZ HILLS. I feel what I said
in that article is quite complete and current and needs
no further amplification in this column.
In the last issue of this Column, I told about a lecture
I had given at a Butler County Community College
sponsored seminar in 1987. I also quoted a long
passage describing the individual in a well-constituted
Metrology Organization who I refer to as “THE ADMIN-
ISTRATIVE METROLOGIST”. I also threatened if you
readers did not send letters demanding I cut it out, that
I would continue quoting from that lecture. Thus, I
Page 7
would be marinating you with knowledge of the proper
qualifications for other individuals in a properly consti-
tuted metrology organizational structure. In this col-
umn we shall concentrate on the individual I refer to as
“THE REFERENCE STANDARDS METROLOGIST”.
That is the person responsible for the maintenance of
the Reference Standards artifacts and for the dissemi-
nation of the proper and true values of those standards.
However, before we go on, just what is a Reference
Standard? On the other hand, what is any kind of a
Standard for that matter? I was up against that problem
myself many years ago. I was the Administrative Me-
trologist in a rapidly expanding Metrology organization.
There seemed to be no standardization of nomencla-
ture among the other Metrology organizations with
which we were required to interface. Even our custom-
ers, all three of the military services were using differ-
ent languages. To make things worse, I was supposed
to be writing a Policies and Procedures Manual for my
Metrology Organization.
So I turned to my Reference Standards Metrologist
for help. I have mentioned this man before in this
column; he was the late renowned Electro-Metrologist
George D. Vincent. When he saw the vast collection of
unrelated terms and definitions I had accumulated for
standards, he threw his hands up. So I sent him East
to Washington to the National Bureau of Standards
(NIST as yet did not exist and the NBS had not as yet
moved to Gaithersburg). He spent several days confer-
ring with most of the authorities there. He came back to
California with the following piece of startling informa-
tion; as far as NBS was concerned, the only Primary
Standards in this country are those at that National
Laboratory. Therefore, we promptly outlawed the use
of the term Primary Standard, and of Secondary and
Tertiary as well.
Based on the authoritative information George
brought back we devised the following set of opera-
tional definitions for measuring equipment. These were
later sent to Washington where they were concurred
with almost unanimously:
• STANDARD – Apparatus that embodies a
realization of a multiple of a physical unit in
such a manner that the embodied realiza-
tion is usefully available for comparison.
• NATIONAL REFERENCE STANDARDS –
Standards maintained the National Bureau
of Standards (NIST today) and which are by
act of Congress the legal standards of the
United States.
• MASTER REFERENCE STANDARD – A Stan-
dard of the most accurate and reliable type
and grade available. It establishes the mag-
nitude of a physical unit for measurement
 Page 8 The STANDARD
purposes. It may be a group or part of a
group.
• REFERENCE STANDARD – A Standard of
the most accurate and reliable type and grade
available to the Metrology Organization of
interest. It must meet all of the other requirements
of the Master Reference Standard.
• WORKING STANDARD – A Standard for use
in the calibration or authentication of appa-
ratus and measurements where the level of
accuracy does not require direct comparison
with the Reference Standards.
• INTER-LABORATORY STANDARD – A Standard
which travels between laboratories for the
sole purpose of relating the magnitude of the
physical unit represented by the standards
maintained in the respective laboratories.
• TRANSFER STANDARD – A Standard which
responds measurably to a characteristic com-
mon to two otherwise unlike phenomena, the
common characteristics being known quanti-
tatively in one phenomena and not in the
other, thus permitting comparative determi-
nation of the unknown quantity. (Examples:
Thermal Transfer Voltmeters, Bomb Calorim-
eters, Bolometers. etc.)
• STANDARDIZATION EQUIPMENT – Appa-
ratus or an assembly of apparatus of the highest
order, reserved especially for use in the com-
parison of standards with each other, or in
the calibration of high-order measuring equipment
against Reference Standards. (Examples: Stan-
dard Cell Comparitors, Ratio Sets, Potenti-
ometers, etc.)
• CALIBRATION ASSEMBLY – Apparatus or
an assembly of apparatus especially reserved
for specific calibrations.
• WORKING INSTRUMENT – Any device which
measures, records, generates, or transforms
physical quantities and is usable as inspec-
tion or test criteria or media and does not fit
any of the preceding definitions. These are
the instruments usually available for general
use.
(NOTE: The above definitions were extracted, ed-
ited, and annotated from the NORTHROP/
NORTRONICS (Anaheim), METROLOGY
MANUAL, Branch Directive M. B. C-9; Revision
Effective Date 1 March 63)
In my organization, the Reference Standards Me-
trologist was the individual who headed the sub-orga-
nization that was responsible for the maintenance of
the Reference Standards, the Inter-laboratory Stan-
dards, and the Standardization Equipment. They were
also responsible for the calibration of the Calibration
Fall 2000
Assemblies. Now let us describe that individual (quoted
from my, before referenced Butler County Community
College lecture):
“–––The Reference Standards Metrologist: In many
organizations, this slot is unfortunately too often filled
by a Senior Technician with long experience in the
organization and with the specific items of standards
hardware which he is expected to maintain. But, in
doing so, there is an almost certain risk of causing
deterioration of the integrity of the measurement refer-
ences, the very heart of any measurement (quality)
assurance program.
Most internal operating systems in Metrology, par-
ticularly those of an advanced technical nature require
continual systemic maintenance and upgrading. There
is an old adage which says, “Familiarity breeds con-
tempt.” A corollary might be derived from this: “Rote
repetition breeds ill advised shortcuts.” This is pre-
cisely what has happened to those many organizations
that have been deprived of a Professional Metrologist
constantly monitoring and supervising the system. The
para-professionals, usually unknowledgeable of the
fundamental “whys” at the roots of the systems and
procedures, frequently attempt to modify them (and
usually with the best intentions). The results invariably
are a slow deterioration of the measurement assur-
ance system. While this is generally true for all of the
systems in Metrology as a whole, it is particularly true
of those in the Reference Standards area. Unfortu-
nately here the effects of deterioration are more far-
reaching, more subtle, making detection more difficult,
and are usually more difficult and expensive to repair.
In most such cases, it probably would be necessary
to locate and to engage the services of an experienced
Reference Standards professional with supervisory
potential and to depend upon him to establish (or to
rebuild) the Reference Standards Activity under the
general guidance and direction of the Administrative
Metrologist.
The minimum ideal qualifications required for such
a Reference Standards functional head are as follows:
1. He must be thoroughly familiar with the “classical”
methods of Reference Standards practice in all
disciplines. Conversely, he must be thoroughly
aware of the progress being made in the state-of-
the-art and will continue to stay currently informed.
No one forever lives in the past or upon the accom-
plishments of the giants of yesterday. He must be
eager and able to evaluate, accept, and implement
new developments when and if they apply to the
organization’s needs.
2. He must intimately know and have close personal
contact with the leaders of today’s metrology pro-
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
fession. This requires established and maintained
communications with these leaders and enables
more rapid evaluations of them and their work.
3. He must be thoroughly qualified in Physics, Chem-
istry, and Mathematics—the basic sciences under-
lying Metrology.
4. He must know the equipment of today’s Metrol-
ogy—the advantages and disadvantages, the ca-
pabilities, and the limitations of particular items. Of
equal importance, he must understand the prin-
ciples upon which each item operates. Only through
this knowledge can the organization avoid costly
mistakes and buy the most for its equipment dollar.
5. He must understand the relationship between statu-
tory requirements and contract requirments on the
one hand, and the implications and limitations of
certificates and standards on the other.
6. Of paramount importance to a cost effective opera-
tion, he must readily recognize the delicate balance,
economically and technically, between the difficult
and/or the costly improvisation, and the expedient
but also costly specialized equipment.
––”
The above was obviously written in the masculine
gender, but I refuse to apologize as it obviously also
Certified Calibration Technician (CCT) Program Update
October 21, 2000 marks completion of the first
major milestone in the development of an ASQ certifi-
cation program for calibration technicians. The mile-
stone occurred at ASQ headquarters, Milwaukee, Wis.,
where an initial proposal developed by MQD’s certifi-
cation committee was presented to ASQ’s certification
board for consideration.
ASQ’s certification board, comprised of program
administrators and ASQ members representing each
of ASQ’s existing certification programs, is responsible
for determining the viability/practicality of new certifica-
tion programs. The proposal, presented as a Certified
Calibration Technician (CCT) program, was the cumu-
lative effort of six months work by MQD’s committee
whose members span commercial and private sectors,
laboratory accreditation bodies (A2LA, NVLAP),
academia, training providers and various government
agencies (NASA, DOD, DOE).
The written CCT proposal addressed market needs,
market trends, support and commitment issues, avail-
able technical resources, general program content,
etc. This written proposal was provided to board mem-
bers prior to its formal presentation so that questions
could be prepared beforehand. Shortly after the CCT
Page 9
applies to those of the distaff side among us. I was
brought up in a culture that holds that the English
language has four, not three nor two genders, as do
most other languages of the world. These include the
usual Masculine, Feminine, and Neuter genders, as
well as a COMMON gender. Common gender pro-
nouns are usually taken from the Masculine, but one
differentiates by usage.
Unless I am showered with letters demanding that
I quiet these tutorials, in the next issue we will talk about
the qualifications for the METROLOGICAL ENGINEER-
ING and ANALYSIS SUPPORT HEAD. That is the
individual heading the sub-organization that furnishes
the non-hardware and analytical support for the orga-
nization. In addition, maybe we will be able to talk some
more about the developments at the California State
University—Dominguez Hills. Meanwhile, for your ve-
hement letters of protest (I am not expecting many
letters of approbation), I can be reached at the same
old stand:
Phil Painchaud
1110 West Dorothy Drive
Brea, California, 92821-2017
Phone: (714) 529-6604
FAX: (714) 529-1109
e-Mail: 72320.134@compuserve.com
initial proposal was presented and follow up questions
answered, ASQ’s Certification board voted unanimously
to support the proposal.
The next step in the ASQ certification process is the
creation of a CCT job analysis survey that will be sent
out in mass mailings to industry/academia/govern-
mental agencies to help determine the skills, training
and experience necessary for a CCT. If you would like
to contribute to this important initiative and help shape
tomorrow’s calibration practitioners, MQD’s certifica-
tion committee is looking to add new members from
consulting, academic, commercial and government
sectors.
If interested please E-mail MQD’s committee chair
at: chris.grachanen@compaq.com.
Chris Grachanen
ASQ MQD Certification Committee Chair
 Page 10 The STANDARD
The California State University - Dominguez Hills Story:
HISTORY AND CURRENT STATUS OF
METROLOGY EDUCATION
By: Phil Painchaud
The fact that the California State University—
Dominguez Hills (CSUDH) is seriously considering the
establishment of an academic degreed course involv-
ing the measurement sciences has been touched upon
several times in THE LEARNING CURVE column in
this publication. On May 18, 2000, the Curriculum
Advisory Board of the Division of Extended Education
of that University met under the aegis of Dean Margaret
Gordon. This prestigious body, (composed of a bal-
ance assembly of university administrators, academ-
ics, current faculty, graduate students, and measure-
ment and quality experts from the interested public),
reviewed and approved a preliminary four year curricu-
lum leading to a Bachelor of Science Degree in Quality
(with a Measurement Science Option). I say “prelimi-
nary” because it still needs “fine tuning” for the latter
years. However, it is nearly ready to go for the fresh-
man year. However, we must keep in mind that final
approval must be by the University hierarchy and not
by this Committee, or even by Dean Gordon herself.
This may require some explanation, especially for
those individuals who have not been following the
story: a decided lack of opportunities for academic
education in the measurement sciences (Metrology)
currently existing in this country. There are a number of
institutions providing vocational training. Some of
those institutions are doing so quite well. However,
only one, Butler County Community College, in Butler
PA, is attempting to teach measurement science aca-
demically; and then only as a two year program. Their
graduates have no place to go to continue on from the
basic metrology education they have received at But-
ler. They must either go to work in industry and forego
a degree in four years or matriculate into some other
institution’s engineering or science curriculums for a
full four-year degree.
Conventional science and engineering schools for
the most part have been reluctant to even discuss
Metrology as a separate academic curriculum. They
generally feel that a course or two in measurements,
specific to the Engineering or Science discipline in
question, and taught within that curriculum, is all that is
needed. This may possibly be true if all the student
wants is a degree in that specific discipline. However,
any true Metrologist must be omni-disciplinary, i.e.,
they must cover the entire spectrum of technical disci-
plines.1
Fall 2000
It is generally agreed that we must somehow re-
place our present generation’s supply of Metrologists,
who are dying off at an alarming rate. This journal has
printed obituaries for at least three in the past few
issues. Some institution has to do it; we do not have the
time for the luxury of the conventional path of educating
PhD’s in Physics and/or Chemistry and then convert-
ing them (if they are interested) into Metrologists.
Institutions approached in the past have just not been
interested in establishing true Metrology curriculums
when they looked at it from a pure business standpoint.
Whether we like it or not, we must recognize that a
university is a business—it must have a cash flow. It
must examine its market to ascertain if it has sufficient
potential paying students to support the costs of any
new program. (When our esteemed former Editor-in-
Chief saw this, he commented, “I couldn’t agree more.
We have to establish the discipline and show there are
jobs for them. When that happens the Universities will
come panting and begging to teach such a program.”)
This is where CSUDH came into the picture. They
have been very fortunate to have Dr. E. Eugene
Watson heading their Graduate Program for Masters
of Science in Quality. Gene Watson is a former head of
Physical Metrology for a major aerospace/defense
company as well as a noted Acoustical Physicist in his
own right. This Master’s Program has been most
successful. It has been in existence for about ten years
and has recently graduated its three hundredth Mas-
ters in Quality. It has pioneered in “Distance Learning”
and has off-site classes at local industrial plants and
several hundred on-line (via Internet) students as well
as the more conventional on-campus classes.
Watson soon discovered, among his Master’s stu-
dents, a gross lack of comprehension of Metrology—
what it is, and its importance to the Quality Function. He
also came to realize that his Master’s Program had no
“feeder” program, i.e., a program turning out Bachelors
of Science in Quality.2 He reasoned—in common mod-
ern industrial practice Quality and Metrology are often
closely related, “So why not try to ‘kill two birds with one
stone’?” He realized that he would have problems
selling the concept of a pure Metrology Program to the
University System hierarchy. However, selling the con-
cept of a “feeder program” to an existing successful
(spelled “financially lucrative”) Quality program would
be much simpler—and it was.
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
He also knew that once a basic program was
approved, there would be few complaints about adding
options relating to the main direction of that program.
Thus came the idea of an academic course leading to
the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Quality with a
Measurement Science Option. The Administration
applauded and assigned the task of developing this
Program to Dean Gordon and her Division of Extended
Education. This, at the same time, was both very
unusual and very fortunate. First, it is very uncommon
for a baccalaureate level undergraduate program to be
administered by a school of Extended Education, which
is generally intended to further the education of per-
sons who have already attained their baccalaureate.
And second, Dean Gordon is just the person to accom-
plish such a task. She is one remarkable and impres-
sive lady.
Her first move, about a year ago, was to have Dr.
Watson assemble a Curriculum Advisory Board for the
Program. As this developed, it became a distinguished
panel of authorities in Quality and Measurements, as
well as University personnel well versed in the
University’s requirements and the State of California
requirements for the granting of a degree. Their objec-
tive was to include everything necessary for the proper
education of a degreed professional in Quality or in the
optional Measurement Science, but, on the other hand,
to try to use as many of the existing courses in the
University Catalog as feasible. The Board has met
monthly for nearly a year and subcommittees as often
as once a week. On May 18, 2000 they finally approved
a preliminary curriculum. It still needs considerable
fine-tuning and several of the required courses do not
exist yet, as several course descriptions need to be
written.
Since the “fine tuning” is at this time incomplete, we
will not attempt to delineate a precise schedule here;
we will however list some of the specific courses, upon
which agreement has already been reached:
THE FIRST YEAR:
• To start the freshman so that he can intelli-
gently and articulately communicate: Fresh-
man Composition, Technical Communications,
and Foundations of Speech.
• To start the freshman’s familiarity with his
mathematical tools: College Algebra and
Trigonometry, and Calculus I.
• To begin immersing the freshman scientist
in the sciences: Principles of Biology.
• And, to provide the freshman scientist with
current tools: Computer Applications for Sci-
entists.
THE SECOND YEAR:
• During the sophomore year, the technical courses
start to become more stringent: Elementary
Page 11
Statistics and Probability; General Physics;
Fundamentals of Quality and ISO 9000; In-
troduction to Computers and Basic Programming
I & II; Critical Thinking and Problem Solving;
and General Chemistry.
THE THIRD AND FOURTH YEARS:
• In the upper division, the third and fourth
years, we have: Science and Technology: the
History of Quality and Measurement; Elec-
tronics; Measurement Science: Fundamen-
tals; Statistical Quality Control; Measurement
Science: Advanced (Electrical and Physical
Metrology); Design of Experiments; Advanced
Technical Communications; Measurement Un-
certainty; Dimensional Analysis; Profession-
alism, Ethics, and Leadership; and two se-
mesters of Major Senior Projects (Measurement
Related).
(EDITORIAL NOTE: In THE LEARNING CURVE
column, of this issue, the author discusses the qualifi-
cation requirements for certain Metrology staff mem-
bers. This curriculum as outlined above does much to
support those requirements for entry level Metrolo-
gists. Of course further education and training is nec-
essary to bring the neophyte up to senior level, and
nothing can replace years of practical experience. We
strongly recommend you study the current issue of
THE LEARNING CURVE. fv)
We have delineated above only those courses
applicable to the Measurement Science Option; there
are many others peculiar to the main track Quality
preference. Most of these would be of but minor
interest to a Metrology candidate, but are available if so
desired.
Naturally, along with these technical courses are
both the University requirements as well as the State of
California required courses for a degree. Also included
are electives and liberal arts courses. These are obvi-
ously required to form the well rounded, cultured,
articulate Professional that every Metrologist is sup-
posed to be.
Constructive criticism is solicited from the knowl-
edgeable Metrology Community. Critiques and/or ques-
tions may be addressed to me (my address is in
LEARNING CURVE column), or (in writing only) di-
rectly to Dean Margaret Gordon, Division of Extended
Education, at the California State University—
Dominguez Hills, Compton, CA, 90747-1000.
1
I once had the head of the Mechanical Engineering Department of a very
prestigious state university tell me directly that Metrology does not exist, and
hence we could not even discuss it!
2
True, all of his Master’s candidates were required to have an acceptable
Bachelor’s degree in some allied field before matriculating into the Master’s
Program, but none of these Bachelor’s degrees were in Quality.
 Page 12 The STANDARD Fall 2000

Knowledge Management Metrology:

Overview Profiles on Best Practices
by Frank Voehl

In its initial stages, Knowledge Management Metrology (KMM) has been applied most fully in industries that are
process-intensive, research-driven, information-based, logistical or subject to deregulation. From this base,
knowledge practices will spread to many more sectors in the years to come.
Telecommunications: With an explosive mixture of technology and competition providing the infrastructure for
the new economy, the business differentiator is knowledge.
A/E/C: The architecture, engineering and construction of large building projects requires the creation and
exchange of knowledge among the parties involved.
Transportation: Moving people and freight is the end result, but increasingly transportation is all about
information. Logistics systems ensure profitable operations.
Media and Entertainment: The content industries sell information as product. Increasingly, digital media are
replacing traditional forms of media as core segments are redefined.
Energy: Competition in the gas and electric utilities market will drive innovations. Petroleum discovery, extraction
and refining are knowledge-based processes.
Pharmaceuticals: Development of new drug therapies is a knowledge-enabled process, from the biological
science to the product development to the regulatory approval.
Chemicals: Regulatory compliance and production efficiencies weighed against risk assessment yield knowl-
edge-based product innovation and market advantage.
Technology: Silicon and software embody knowledge as functionality. The information industries rely heavily on
management of intellectual property rights.
Financial and Legal Services: From banking to insurance to securities to law offices, new financial products and
services are information-based. Managed knowledge accelerates innovation.
Consumer Products: Packaged goods are developed, marketed and delivered to the consumer via information
systems. Retailers are on the front lines of customer service.
Healthcare: Changes in the health-care system are enabled by knowledge–from insurance to hospital adminis-
tration to the methods of individual health workers.
KMM Strategies
Technology access is such a basic strategy that virtually every company with a successful knowledge
management metrology program adheres to it. The strategies of the six organizations profiled all feature the
common denominator of technology. PeopleSoft employees, for instance, get a portable computer loaded with
Lotus Notes and other software that allows them easy access to corporate data from wherever they happen to be
working. Employees from all departments also utilize a corporate intranet.
Pillsbury uses a virtual library to warehouse key data sources and patents. At Ernst & Young, every professional
is provided with a laptop and access to the vast resources of the firm's KnowledgeWeb from anywhere in the world.
According to CKO John Peetz, “The only way for an extensive knowledge management process to function at
optimum performance is to possess the technology that facilitates that process.” Accordingly, Avery Dennison has
tapped into the $100 billion annual patent market with innovative 3-D data warehousing and expects its licensing
revenues to increase to over $125 million annually by the end of the year 2000.
Long Island College Hospital has tapped into a $19 billion information sharing industry to gain competitive
advantage and share vital information. Buckman Laboratories also outfits employees with mobile technology.
“Knowledge workers don't turn off their brains when they leave the office,” said knowledge specialist Rumizen.
“Their creativity, desire to share knowledge, and dedication to the job are not bound to regular working hours and
the prescribed workplace. We give them the opportunity to work when and where they choose.”
Dave Sriberg, vice president of information technology at Brodeur Porter Novelli agreed: “When building
applications to expand knowledge-sharing capabilities, you must look at how the people work, and then give them
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 13

the tools to do their work more easily.” Mike Sockol, director of interactive services at the same firm, concurred:
“You need to create a utility that is intuitive, sensitive, and addictive. It needs to be easy to use, even for
technophobes. It should address the needs of its users by providing an improved alternative to existing systems.
And it should become so valuable that the user cannot imagine working without it.”
The following 10 Profiles/Case Studies are the first in a series of three (30 case studies overall) that will focus on
the practical application of Knowledge Management Metrology best practices and tools in the world of business
today.
Profiles/Case Studies
1. Cooking up Knowledge Management at comes because the technology is not as creative as the
Pillsbury people who use it.”
Profile: Pillsbury, which has brought us such house- Outlook: The R&D program is only a pilot, but smaller
hold staples as the Jolly Green Giant and the Pillsbury knowledge management activities are underway all
Dough Boy and owns the Haagen Dazs ice cream over Pillsbury. Parent Diagio is watching closely to
brand, launched a KM pilot in its R&D division in May assess prospects for knowledge programs in its other
1997. business units.
History: Founded in 1869 as a flour miller, Pillsbury is 2. Long Island College Hospital is Off the
now a $6.2 billion-a-year market leader in many baked Critical List Thanks to its Use of Data Ware-
and frozen food categories. In 1989, the Minneapolis- housing for Cost Management.
based food company merged with UK conglomerate Profile: When Don Snell took over as CEO of the Long
Grand Metropolitan, which later combined with Island College Hospital (LICH) two years ago, the
Guinness (beer) to form Diageo. Diageo's four main patients weren't the only ones who were sick. The New
businesses are Burger King, Pillsbury, Guinness, and York state teaching hospital, with some 516 beds,
United Distillers & Vintners. 2,700 employees, and 200 residents and medical
KMM Strategy: Bring new products to market more students, was hemorrhaging some $1.5 million a month.
quickly by implementing knowledge management prac- With only about $5 million in reserves it was nearing
tices in the company's 550-person research and devel- bankruptcy. Yet there was hardly a laptop in sight.
opment organization. History: The healthcare industry has been amassing
Structure: Pillsbury's knowledge metrology effort a wealth of information on patients, their treatment
breaks down into four divisions–Information Manage- histories, and costs for years. But only recently have
ment, Continuous Learning & Performance Support, hospitals started to mine that data to restore profitabil-
Technology Knowledge Center, and Knowledge Man- ity and determine how to deliver the most cost-efficient
agement Strategy, which fall under two officers of the and effective care in the process. Snell recalled. “All
company, the CIO and CTO. While three sections reporting and accounting was done pretty much by
report up to the CTO, Information Management, which hand.” To make matters worse, New York state was
deploys information systems, reports on the dotted line just about to deregulate its schedule of fixed fees for
to the CIO. services and the hospital had no way of figuring out
Success Story: Under the old system, it took 17 what to charge to make a profit. “We had a desperate
signatures and nearly 90 days to run a label design need for an information system,” said Snell, “yet we
through the entire organization. Each label had to get couldn't afford some of the megasystems, which can
approval from marketing, food safety, nutritionists, cost in the millions.”
consumer response, and many other internal divisions KMM Strategy: To get the hospital back on its feet,
that contribute to what goes on the label. With the Snell presented a plan to slash $25 million from oper-
knowledge management program in place, it takes just ating expenses and late last year he purchased a
nine days to approve a new label. $30,000 decision support system. The system was
Special Projects: Creating a virtual library, where HealthShare One from HealthShare Technology, Inc.,
employees can find research patents, recipe specs, a small privately held software company in Acton,
and engineering processes, as well as business and Mass., and it gets at least some of the credit for the
technical documents. resulting financial turnaround. “The chief medical of-
ficer has quantified potential savings of 1.5 million in
Hurdles: Making it easier for people to use the virtual two departments alone,” Snell said. HealthShare Tech-
library. “People are creative, and illogical at times, in nology is a relatively small player in a fast-growing
getting information,” says Brenda Stewart, Knowledge $330 million niche of the $19 billion medical informa-
Management Strategy Project Leader. “Frustration tion technology industry, according to G2R Inc., a
 Page 14 The STANDARD
market analysis firm based in Mountain View, Calif. A
number of competitors (including the Baltimore-based
HCIA Inc., with $83 million in revenues; Transition
Systems, Inc., of Boston, with revenues of $44 million;
and HBSI International, Inc., of Bellevue, Wash., with
$18 million in revenues) offer similar databases that
help hospitals make competitive decisions, said Charles
Singer, vice president of First Consulting Group of
Boston, one of the largest healthcare information tech-
nology consulting firms in the country.
Structure: When HealthShare Technology constructs
databases, which form the core of the decision support
system, the company gathers discharge data reported
by hospitals to agencies in the majority of states.
Information on some 800,000 patients comes from
Massachusetts alone. Aside from the patient's name,
which is kept confidential, each record includes almost
every other detail from age and gender to the name of
the patient's physician and payer. There's information
on illnesses and their severity, treatment, tests per-
formed, length of stay, and the amounts hospitals
charge for each factor. To complete the competitive
picture, HealthShare marries that data with actual
costs of that care from reports each hospital must
prepare for the federal government to receive Medi-
care reimbursement.
Success Story: The information provided by
HealthShare One, which is based on ACI US Inc.'s 4th
Dimension, is so detailed, Snell used it to determine his
own hospital's internal costs, negotiate fees with
healthcare providers, and to review the practices of the
hospital's physicians. “You have your costs and rev-
enue per DRG [Diagnosis Related Group, a standard
healthcare diagnosis classification system], per proce-
dure, per physician, and per patient if you want it,” he
said. Now, a new version of the software, called Health
Share Two, will “allow LICH to generate a more de-
tailed level of product line cost analysis and will be used
in negotiations with managed care companies,” Snell
said.
Special Projects: HealthShare Technology is a small
company with a big idea. Company president Richard
Siegrist realized back in 1992 that the medical profes-
sion was sitting on an untapped gold mine of publicly
available information that ought to be the envy of data
mining proponents everywhere. Imagine an industry
where you can not only track your competitor's market
share and the prices they charge, but also know the
detailed history of each customer, the quality of the
products your competitors offer and how much it costs
to produce them. “Hospitals have had access to this
type of information for about fifteen years,” said Siegrist.
“But it is not until the last four or five years they have
started to make use of it.”
Fall 2000
Hurdles: Instead of fancy data flythroughs or statistical
analyses, HealthShare Technology has added a set of
features that executives can use to automatically pre-
pare a printed report comparing any hospital unit to that
of its competitors. The report makes recommendations
on ways to reduce costs and illustrates them with
charts and tables. Though small, HealthShare Tech-
nology has gathered an impressive list of customers.
These include New York's Beth Israel and Sisters of
Charity health care systems, the Partners Healthcare
System in Massachusetts, and two multi-state HMOs:
Oxford Healthplan and Healthsource. For Snell,
HealthShare One proved critical in contract negotia-
tions with a commercially managed care organization.
Snell determined the hospital would actually lose $200
a day on an offer to pay a flat per diem fee for treating
patients. “Within half an hour we knew what it was
costing every single one of our competitors and that we
had the second lowest cost on the market, so we could
walk away from the contract,” he said. Eventually the
hospital was able to renegotiate the contract with a
reasonable profit margin.
Outlook: The hospital has also used the software to
cut down costs by figuring out what fees it should pay
a group of physicians for the use of their ultrasound
kidney stone crushing machine and what to charge
patients for the procedure. “We negotiated a reason-
able fee that gave them a profit margin and kept ours
as well. In the past they were able to take advantage of
our organization because we couldn't do the analysis,”
he said.
Hospital Best Practices: But the most important
contribution to cost cutting by HealthShare One and
Two is likely to be long range, as the hospital figures out
the best and most cost-effective ways of treating pa-
tients. To this end, the hospital has prepared a profile
of each of its physician’s practices to determine which
were doing the best job at keeping costs down. Physi-
cians who order unnecessary tests or prescribe longer
hospital stays have been asked to change their prac-
tices to conform to their colleagues, said Snell. “We
had a problem with patients staying too long. Now we
can compare each physician's length to the best prac-
tice within their department and to those of other
hospitals as well.”
Figuring out these “best practices” and getting the
physicians to build them into standard protocols is one
of the major benefits of this type of software, said Doug
O'Boyle, the director of healthcare information strate-
gies practice at the meta Group, Reston, Va. “This is
where the big performance gains in healthcare will be.
All hospitals will need software like this.”
Next Step: Centers of Excellence. HealthShare One
and Two are giving Snell a leg up on the competition at
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
the moment. But the value of the system won't diminish
once everyone has access to the same data. Hospitals
will simply specialize in what they are best at. O'Boyle
already sees hospitals creating “centers of excellence,”
he said. “They will still provide other services, but they
will focus on those that can establish them as market
leaders.”
3. Avery Dennison Visualizes Gains in Rev-
enue from Intellectual Property Licenses.
Profile: Avery Dennison is one of those invisibly every-
where companies. The $3 billion school and office
supplier holds the leading position in various product
categories with brands (Marks-A-Lot and Hi-Liter) that
are among the most recognized in the industry.
History: Even more invisible to the consumer are
Avery Dennison's intellectual property assets. The
company's patents form one of their main revenue
channels for many consumer products (notebooks,
three-ring binders, organizing systems, glues, fasten-
ers, business forms, tickets, tags, imprinting equip-
ment, and components), which gives them a key com-
petitive advantage over their top competitors, including
3M, Esselte, and Fortune Brands.
KMM Strategy: The hidden source of wealth in intel-
lectual assets has provided companies with billions of
dollars in licensing revenues from under-utilized pat-
ents and similar amounts from infringements on pat-
ents related to key product lines. The number of
patents issued in the United States has increased 150
percent since 1980, and patent-related revenues like-
wise increased from $3 billion to almost $100 billion in
the same period. With the explosion in activity, compa-
nies have had a difficult time managing their patent
assets and applications.
Structure: Avery Dennison's Pasadena, Calif.-based
Research and Development Division has overcome
the restrictions of the traditional hard-copy patent re-
view process by applying Intellectual Property Asset
Management (IPAM) software from Aurigin Systems of
Mountain View, Calif. In turn, Aurigin’s product incor-
porates data visualization technology from In-xight
Software, a Xerox PARC spin-off in Palo Alto, Calif.
The combination is already yielding big benefits.
Success Story: As manager of intellectual property at
Avery Dennison, it is Lori Morrison's responsibility, as
she described it, “to transform human knowledge into
economic wealth.” With Aurigin’s IPAM, “I can see how
to improve the quality of my patent. I can see what my
competitor is doing and compare or contrast with our
in-house patents.” Using a 3D presentation feature, the
program not only enables Morrison to visually separate
patents by type and division, but can also track the
corporation’s top inventors through patent visualiza-
tions, improving opportunities for inventor incentive
Page 15
programs. Morrison said that her turnaround time in
individual patent evaluation has been reduced from
weeks to a few hours. “This is a patent attorney's
dream,” she said.
Special Projects: The visualization component of the
Aurigin's software is built using Inxight's 3D Hyperbolic
Tree technology. It displays data in a branching design
that lets users view and navigate 10 to 100 times the
amount of information on screen than might be view-
able in a traditional file and folder or spreadsheet
interface. It enables users to visualize and understand
complex relationships between their patents and com-
petitors’ patents. Inxight licenses its Hyperbolic Tree
technology to other software companies in other mar-
kets and applications.
Hurdles: The use of 3D visualization software in busi-
ness is groundbreaking. Visualized data capitalizes
upon the human brain's innate visual interpretative
biology and allows the instant interpretation of mean-
ingful patterns and knowledge versus the more time-
consuming review of textual data. Aurigin President
Dan'l Lewin said, “Our software allows critical informa-
tion to be distilled quickly from what would otherwise be
an overwhelming amount of patent data.” The Aurigin
software also allows Morrison to share analytical data
via the corporate intranet to research and development
sites in Ohio and Asia, enabling instant collaborative
analysis. The information is secured via the IPAM
system, allowing Morrison to limit access to qualified
users. She said that the communication level in online
discussions has improved due of the information pro-
vided by the visualizations.
Outlook: Avery Dennison has not yet quantified the
impact of IPAM upon company revenues. But Dow
Chemical has estimated that it expects to boost licens-
ing royalties from $20 million today to $125 million by
2000, an increase partially due to the assistance of the
decision-support tools from Aurigin. Dow also plans to
cut $40 million in tax maintenance over 10 years by
identifying unused patents that it can let expire. That's
a lot of impact from knowledge management technolo-
gies. Avery Dennison may keep a low profile, but those
kinds of dollar swings are very visible on the corporate
balance sheet.
4. Spotlight on team players at Ernst and Young.
Profile: Ernst & Young is the nation’s fastest-growing
professional services firm, with 29,000 employees and
87 locations. The Center for Business Knowledge
(CBK) is Ernst & Young’s “secret weapon,” said John
Peetz, chief knowledge officer. The CBK incorporates
many programs, including EY/InfoLink and the EY/
KnowledgeWeb.
History: The Ernst & Young staff visits the EY/
KnowledgeWeb 20,000 times daily, making it resound-
 Page 16 The STANDARD
ingly successful. Using features such as scalability,
Lotus Notes connectivity, and advanced search capa-
bility technologies from Verity, EY/KnowledgeWeb in
1997 went from a pilot program to full U.S. implemen-
tation in eight weeks.
KMM Strategy and Structure: The system provided a
uniform repository for the firm's collective knowledge
as well as that of outside sources such as industry
analysts and reports. According to Peetz, some reluc-
tance by employees to adapt to such systems is to be
expected. “Any organization embarking on KM initia-
tives encounters resistance. It can take many forms:
‘this is client confidential’ (which is sometimes true);
‘only I know how to use this, someone else will foul it
up’; or ‘if I share this, it will leak outside the firm’.”
Success Story: How did E&Y overcome these barri-
ers? “We were blessed with a collaborative culture to
begin with,” Peetz continued, “so changing this mindset
was less difficult for us. We incorporated sharing into
the compensation system, trained people to use what
was shared, encouraged people to visit the KWeb,
wherein they found value, and did all the usual commu-
nicating to explain the vision. Peetz credits top man-
agement support in Ernst & Young's implementation of
its KM plan. “We have an extremely supportive man-
agement group. They talk and walk the game every
day. Knowledge management and the CBK are firmly
embedded in the company's business strategy. But
ultimately, people contribute because they get value
out the back end. There's a critical mass principle
operating here.”
Outlook: Another strong reason for Ernst & Young
employees to share what they know is that the com-
pany values their participation. “Ultimately, being rec-
ognized as an expert is a critical career goal for most of
our people. And the best way in today's environment to
become known as an expert is to publish. If someone
needs a toy manufacturer supply chain specialist, the
best way to locate one is to find our best material in that
area and find out who created it. If you don't contribute,
you don't become known.”
5. Provide open access to collected infor-
mation at Peoplesoft.
Profile: PeopleSoft builds client/server applications
that redefine traditional approaches, putting power in
the hands of users while adapting to the ever-changing
nature of business.
History: “The PeopleSoft culture was designed around
sharing information and tacit knowledge,” said Tracy
Leighton, manager of the PeopleSoft Knowledge De-
velopment Team. Leighton credits Lotus Notes
groupware with moving the company toward a self-
service knowledge management system, before the
collaborative process was begun in earnest. “Once we
Fall 2000
got the intranet knowledge solution (called Eureka!-
The PeopleSoft Knowledge Base) online, we soon had
requests from departments that wanted to add their
knowledge for all to share.”
KMM Strategy and Structure: The company’s knowl-
edge base was started with third-party content from
Inference, a customer relationship management soft-
ware provider. Inference enabled new PeopleSoft us-
ers to customize content for their specific issues and
solutions. PeopleSoft’s policy is to give all employees
access to all the collected knowledge databases. “In-
formation becomes knowledge only when it’s useful to
someone,” said Marcia Connor, of PeopleSoft’s Cor-
porate Education Services. “We can’t second-guess
where and when the information becomes useful. Just
because I don't see information as useful to any given
individual doesn't mean that it isn’t or won't become
useful to them.
Hurdles: “To limit access to information is diametri-
cally opposed to the PeopleSoft core value of how we
treat ourselves and our customers. We provide all the
tools for every person so that they can do their job the
best way they know how.”
6. Acorda Therapeutics Offers Tangible In-
centives for Sharing.
Profile: Acorda Therapeutics develops recuperative
and rehabilitative products for spinal cord injury and
other central nervous system conditions. The company
devised a “team or die” approach for its core group of
research scientists that includes direct financial incen-
tives.
KMM Strategy: Ron Cohen, president and CEO of
Acorda Therapeutics, said that the scientists were
selected based on two key criteria. Each had to be at
the top of fields deemed critical to the company's
mission, and each had to be prepared to contribute
within a team structure. “We emphasized teamwork in
conversations with every scientist and proposed to
them that they might achieve worthy goals by working
together and sharing information with their peers,”
Cohen said.
Structure and Projects: They illustrated the concept
with historically successful examples, such as the
Huntington's Gene Project of the ‘80s and the Manhat-
tan Project. Finally, we employed a carrot-and-stick
technique, telling the scientists that teamwork was the
most important operating principle of the company,
and if they participated, they would benefit by being
part of a team of superb scientists working on cutting-
edge projects. They would also vest stock in the
company over time. “Along with the incentives, Acorda's
approach included a healthy dose of disincentives,”
Cohen said. “Lack of teamwork would result in imme-
diate dismissal from the company’s projects and forfei-
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
ture of all benefits. We asked every person we invited
to be part of the organization to agree explicitly to these
terms.”
Success Story: Cohen said a consensus has emerged
that the only way to ensure truly open cross-communi-
cations within the company is to guarantee each mem-
ber the security of their ideas, data, and knowledge
until such time as they choose to make these more
publicly available outside of the company. So far, this
system seems to be working well.
Hurdles: Cohen compares the sharing culture with his
experience as an oarsman in college rowing in an
eight-man shell with coxswain. “I preferred this to
individual sculling,” he said. “The victorious sculler
receives individual glory; the eight receive glory as a
varsity boat. But when you row in an eight, you feel as
though you possess the strength of the whole team.
That feeling cannot be replicated in a single scull. And
even a mediocre eight will always beat an Olympic-
quality sculler.
Outlook: “Overall, I believe that many people want to
feel that they are part of a mission that is bigger than
themselves, that gives meaning to their lives, and that
they could not possibly accomplish outside of a team
structure. As long as they trust that everyone else in the
enterprise is playing by the same rules, they will share
knowledge.”
7. A Young Company Demonstrates the In-
dividual and Group Value of Shared Knowl-
edge.
Profile: Brodeur Porter Novelli, a fairly young growing
team devoted to public relations and client service, has
developed a sophisticated system of ensuring that all
employees have access to the collected intelligence.
KMM Strategy: This is done through a series of
databases, including the company intranet, which is
used for internal knowledge sharing and metrology
management, and The Knowledge Network, a custom-
ized internal system that shares information about
employees, services, and skills.
Structure: These databases, networked with the Lo-
tus Notes Domino backbone, put people in contact with
each other for true collaboration, according to Jennifer
Wysocki, marketing communications manager at
Brodeur Porter Novelli. “If you needed an expert on
HTML programming who is fluent in French and has
experience developing extranets, you could execute a
search, and the Knowledge Network will tell you who
meets that search criteria,” she said.
Success Story: When the company rolled out its
knowledge management system in December 1996, it
was quickly adopted partially because upper manage-
ment was involved from the start, Wysocki said. “Man-
Page 17
agement, in turn, rallied the troops, getting their buy-in
early on. We empowered the people to drive this
initiative, having teams identify client and employee
needs, along with the best systems and practices to
meet both. And then we made it measurable so we
could track responses and usage to refine the system.”
Employees tap into the Knowledge Network system
through the company intranet, Connect, so response
and usage can be measured similar to hits on Web
sites. By monitoring such feedback, management is
able to address lower-usage areas using focus groups,
small team meetings, and informal surveys.
Hurdles: “Once we identify some causes for low us-
age, we can make adjustments, put it back on Connect,
and let people know what’s changed. Then we're back
to measuring usage again. It’s an ongoing cycle, but if
KM is going to work it’s necessary,” Wysocki said.
“Generally, the end users see value in the process and
haven’t needed any additional incentives.”
Outlook: As Jan Lawlor, senior vice president, put it:
“We want to tap into each other’s brains.”
8. Making certain that Management is Enthu-
siastic and Involved at Buckman Labs.
Profile: Buckman Laboratories, headquartered in Mem-
phis, with 22 offices in 19 countries and operations in
more than 80 countries, is a manufacturer of specialty
chemicals.
KMM Strategy and Structure: Buckman associates
use K’Netix, an interconnected system of knowledge
bases, to share solutions and to ensure that their
customers get fast and accurate responses to ques-
tions or concerns.
Company lore holds that CEO Bob Buckman con-
ceived of K’Netix when he was bedridden with a bad
back. Frustrated at being out of touch with his com-
pany, Buckman drafted a prototype of the perfect
information-sharing network. It makes a good story,
said Melissie Rumizen, assistant to the chairman for
knowledge sharing at Buckman Laboratories, but “our
KM efforts predated that incident.”
Success Story: She said the company first began an
effort to identify and disseminate best practices across
the corporation. Designated employees busily gath-
ered practices and trotted around the globe. However,
the information took too much time to collect and
distribute, and the practices were invariably out of date
by the time they were disseminated. Seeking a better
way to share knowledge, Buckman's engineers de-
signed a network that could tap the knowledge of all
employees and provide a means to share information
as quickly as possible in response to customer needs.
That was the real start of K’Netix.
 Page 18 The STANDARD
Special Projects: Initially implemented using
CompuServe (now Worldcom Advanced Networks), a
new version of K’Netix running under Lotus Domino
integrates standard Internet services and includes a
document repository. The client side uses Microsoft
Outlook Express for email and newsgroups. Internet
Explorer is used to access document libraries both for
contributions and search and retrieval, while Microsoft
NetMeeting is used for online interactive chat func-
tions.
Hurdles: Buckman employees are comfortable with
the technologies for sharing, but it wasn't always that
way. “In the beginning,” Rumizen said, “the first system
operator for K’Netix would check usage of the system
and give Bob [Buckman] the names of those not
participating. Bob then would send a pleasant email:
‘Hi. I have noticed that you haven’t been active on the
system. Is there something we can do to help you? Do
you need some special training?’ Word quickly got
around the company that Bob was personally tracking
individual participation.”
Outlook: Rumizen contends that there has to be active
assistance when moving from command-and-control
to collaboration. “You have to teach people how to be
mentors rather than bosses,” she said, citing Managing
By Influence (Schatz and Schatz, 1988), which con-
tends that the key to successful leadership is evoking
commitment rather than imposing authority. “Also, the
answer is not just to trash middle managers for not
‘getting it.’ We have to remember that these individuals
are the best and brightest in the company. We pro-
moted them. The key question is how do we get them
committed to this new direction? We have to teach
them how to influence others. “Time does wonders,
Rumizen said. “As our people became more comfort-
able with the very significant cultural change, collabo-
ration increased and is now part of the fiber of the
company. Culture change takes significant chunks of
time, and it has to involve top management if it is going
to be successful. You cannot delegate it.”
9. Rewriting the Unwritten Rules at Rutgers.
Profile: Rutgers University (State University of New
Jersey) has 50,000 students and 5,000 researchers
and faculty scattered among a dozen campuses in the
state.
KMM Strategy: To facilitate communication, Rutgers
is spending $100 million to lay high-speed fiber optics
that will link all of its classrooms, offices, laboratories,
and dormitories. Professor Wise Young, director of the
Neuroscience Center at Rutgers, is currently engaged
in establishing a new collaborative research facility at
the university. The center is being designed for knowl-
edge sharing, not only for laboratories within Rutgers
but in conjunction with over 60 other research labora-
Fall 2000
tories around the world. Every part of the laboratory is
specialized for efficient communication and sharing of
visual, audio, and numerical data, as well as real-time
personal interactions. Even many of the laboratory
instruments are designed to allow groups of users to
access them remotely.
Structure: The center will use primarily two types of
software for remote collaboration: Timbuktu Remote
and CU-SeeMe. Timbuktu allows people to work on
computers as if they were physically sitting in the
central lab. CU-SeeMe allows up to eight individuals to
video conference with each other. “Both programs are
cheap and powerful, and are flexible enough to accom-
modate a variety of Internet bandwidths,” Young said.
Success Story: Young’s future purchase plans in-
clude a microscope (the Zeiss 510) with state-of-the-
art video cameras that can collect and store slide
images in the form of movies. “Instead of throwing a
slide on the wall to show an image, a lecturer can
access a server over the Internet to play a high resolu-
tion video movie,” Young said. “In Osaka (Japan), for
example, there is a high-voltage electron microscope
that can be used over the Internet.
Hurdles: Costing millions, such microscopes and fa-
cilities are beyond the means of individual scientists. It
is also important to allow such a facility to be used
around the clock, to make the most of the investment.
This is the wave of the future he said. Such cutting-
edge technological advancements require people to
work together in new ways, as well. “One has to learn
to collaborate. It doesn't come naturally,” Young said.
Outlook: “Because our academic and business orga-
nizations are predicated on competition, there is a
natural reluctance to share and to give. But it can and
does happen. As a member of a team, you begin to
realize that the whole is greater than the sum of the
parts. You realize that being part of the team allows you
to do things that you would never otherwise be able to
do.”
10. New Hardware-software Alliance Between
Compaq and Lotus hopes accidents Will
Happen.
Profile: You might say that Houston-based Compaq
Computer Corporation is learning about knowledge
management the hard way. The world's largest com-
puter manufacturer has been trying to absorb two
enormous acquisitions: After buying Tandem Comput-
ers in June 1997, it merged with Digital Equipment
Corporation only half a year later.
History: Retention of both customers and employees
depended on getting the right information to the right
people quickly and reliably. “As we’ve seen with all the
mergers and acquisitions going on lately, it’s very
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
important to have a good information infrastructure.
You need to keep the sales force up to speed, and you
need to address all the needs of your customers,”
according to Sharon Fortmeyer-Selan, director of en-
terprise solutions marketing at Compaq. “We’ve expe-
rienced these challenges firsthand.”
Strategy: This experience comes in handy for
Compaq’s latest venture. In July, the company an-
nounced a new alliance with Lotus Development Cor-
poration to offer customers integrated knowledge man-
agement solutions. The alliance is counting on
Compaq’s leadership in the NT server market and
Lotus’ expertise in collaboration and KM. “Knowledge
management is a big market,” explained Andrea Ramon,
director of strategic alliances at Lotus. “We’re looking
at how to expand together.” By being one of the first to
lead and support customers through the entire knowl-
edge management process—from hardware to con-
sulting—they expect the alliance to capture the KM
market.
Structure: For Compaq, Lotus was a clear choice
since the companies have a large mutual customer
base. At the same time, Lotus’ applications fit well into
Compaq’s KM strategy, Fortmeyer-Selan said. Compaq
now offers a hardware line that stretches from the
palmtop to the desktop to corporate data centers. It
also has a service network capable of supporting
business customers with global account management.
Lotus, meanwhile, now provides a single architecture
structure for Internet, messaging, knowledge manage-
ment and enterprise integration. Together, the alliance
aims to make high-performance Web-based collabo-
ration and messaging systems easier to deploy. “With
Lotus we can provide a much more robust solution to
customers.”
Success Story: Fortmeyer-Selan said, “It’s a com-
plete solution based on customers’ needs, not a pre-
defined set of answers. “Compaq is determined to
create the same kind of success partnering with Lotus
as it did with Siebel Systems, a leader in sales informa-
tion systems. They teamed up in March 1997 to provide
integrated enterprise solutions for automating sales,
telemarketing and call-center information systems.
Compaq became Siebel's preferred deployment plat-
form for Microsoft Windows NT and ended up with
nearly 65 percent of that market.
Special Projects: Compaq and Lotus kicked off the
partnership with two Notes- and Domino-driven KM
applications developed by two Lotus Premium Busi-
ness Partners, Cipher Systems and GlobalServe Cor-
poration. The first, Cipher’s Knowledge-Works, helps
companies process and analyze competitive intelli-
gence. Tapping into employee sources and outside
expertise, data is translated into a summary that iden-
Page 19
tifies information sources and rates them according to
importance and reliability. The second, GlobalServe’s
Research Accelerator, helps R&D organizations iden-
tify critical knowledge, reduce research redundancy
and facilitate researcher collaboration. It also provides
protection for valuable intellectual properties.
Hurdles: Alliance partners Lotus Services Group and
Cambridge Technology Partners offer consulting ser-
vices to guide and advise customers if necessary.
“Our customers want knowledge translated into action.
They want to look downstream and see immediate
benefits that justify their investments,” explained An-
drew Mahon, senior manager for strategic marketing at
Lotus.
Contact the following websites: Compaq Computer
Corp., www.compaq.com, (281) 518-5970
Lotus Development Corp. , www.lotus.com/solutions/
knowledge.nsf, (617) 577-8500
Outlook: Generally, today's early adopters of KM tools
enjoy quick results since they are predisposed to
change, Mahon suggested. Many have experience
with discussion databases such as Lotus Notes, which
accelerate the sharing of information and expertise.
But information sharing is not necessarily knowledge
management, Mahon emphasized. Using the informa-
tion is what counts. Sometimes two employees pass in
the hall, “accidentally” exchange information about
their current projects and elicit help from each other.
“Our goal is to make sure these knowledge accidents
occur all the time,” said Mahon.
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
These profiles/case studies are part of an upcoming
book on “Knowledge Management Metrology for Re-
sults” by Frank Voehl and are offered here as a follow-
up to a previous article by the author titled “Business
Development, Metrology, and Knowledge Manage-
ment.” Frank Voehl is the Editor of The Standard and
the Chair of ASQ’s Community Quality Council Com-
mittee. He can be reached at FVoehl@aol.com or at his
website: www.strategyassociates.cc
 Page 20 The STANDARD Fall 2000

Reporting Capability Numbers

Richard DeRoeck
QA Engineer/Alpha Industries
Rderoeck@alphaind.com
(617) 824-4447
“The more you know what is wrong with a figure the more useful it becomes.”
John Tukey
Statistician
Introduction
So…what’s the Cpk of your process? Does this sound familiar? It should. Today, capability indices such as
Cpk, Cp and Ppk have become the latest fad in judging product/process quality. This question is often raised by
your customer, usually a quality auditor possessing little knowledge about capability numbers and their meaning,
looking for some “magic” number such as 1.33, 1.50, 2.00 or thereabouts. It has also been my experience that
these capability numbers are always requested without consideration of process stability or distribution shape. I
believe this fixation with capability numbers have actually become a detriment to continual quality improvement
efforts, such as variation reduction through identifying and eliminating special cause variation. But don’t despair,
all is not lost. The inevitable questions about process capability provide an opportunity to educate and perhaps
impress your customer on the uncertainties and limitations of using such numbers, along with demonstrating a
capability analysis that can be easily understood by those with little statistical training. This method assess the
capability of your process by calculating multiple capability indices, such as Cpk, over time and to plot these
numbers on a Process Behavior chart (also known as a XmR chart), along with a histogram of the individual values
to provide context for interpreting these numbers. Although not an exact method, by calculating and charting
capability numbers over an extended period of time, instead of providing a one-time value, a truer picture of your
processes’ capability can be established.
The following methods are simple (no confidence intervals, statistical tables, complex formulas, normality
assumptions or lack of fit tests). Although there has been recent criticism to these simple but proven methods by
those trained in “classical” statistical studies, the aim of this paper is to help those working in the trenches in a real
manufacturing environment better understand and interpret the capability of their processes. In such an
environment, the quality of raw materials is often inconsistent, equipment and machines break down, preventive
maintenance procedures and schedules are haphazard or nonexistent, measurement systems inadequate, work
instructions fuzzy and unclear, and operator training sporadic while goals and schedules need to be met. It’s where
fine statistical theory collides head-on with the realities of production. It’s a world where quality professionals work.
The following case study uses common statistical tools and formulas to evaluate and display the process
capability of a die bond process in a semiconductor manufacturing operation. It does so by monitoring process
stability over time and then calculating an average capability value.
Note: For readers of the STANDARD, this is same manufacturing process published in a previous article titled:
The Design of a Measurement Process Plan.
Three Statistical Tools used to for the Capability Study
X, R Process Behavior chart
XmR Process Behavior chart
Histogram of individual values

Formulas used to Perform Study

Estimated standard deviation = R/d2
Cpk = X - LSL/3(R/d2)
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 21

A Description of the Die Bond Process

An ASM die bonder picks silicon die from a 4-inch wafer and places each die onto a very thin layer of conductive
epoxy that has been deposited on a ceramic substrate for bonding. After the die and epoxy have been cured for
1 hour, a sample is tested for bond strength. A die shear tester records the force required in grams to shear off
the die. A 3-piece sample is sheared every 2 hours and the results recorded on an X , R (Average and Range)
Process Behavior chart (Figure-1). This chart shows approximately 3 months of die shear data n = 3, k = 304 .
Before any capability study is to be performed, the process must show a reasonable degree of stability. While
determining process stability seems rather straightforward, it’s not quite that simple. This is because there is no
definitive set of detection rules that govern whether a process is in statistical control. Walter Shewhart, the inventor
of the control chart, used only one detection rule to identify what he referred to “special cause” variation. Other
well-known detection rules include the 4 Western Electric (W.E.) Zone Tests and those published by statistician/
author Lloyd Nelson. While these additional rules will improve the charts’ ability to detect moderate size process
changes it does so at the expense of increasing its false alarm rate (attributing special cause variation when only
common cause variation exists). This is a price Hi-volume production areas are not willing to pay. In such a
manufacturing environment, to stop production is a last resort; therefore the process behavior chart is generally
used as a conservative analytical tool (few false alarms while allowing some missed signals). As with any
manufacturing process, deciding what detection rules to use is a matter of sound judgment, economics and
process knowledge. This is not a theoretical/academic question but a practical one. In other words, what detection
rules make sense for a particular process? For the die bond process the decision was made to use only W.E. Zone
Test 1 (points beyond the process limits) for monitoring this process. In Figure 1, the first 100 subgroups were used
to calculate process limits. The resulting process behavior chart of the die shear data is predictable with no
measurement values beyond the process limits on either the X or R chart. Since the chart displays a process in
statistical control, as defined by our choice of detection rules, it therefore qualifies for a process capability study.
The capability study compares the natural process limits to the product specification. For this particular die size
area (18.5 mil*18.5 mil) the product specification is 425 grams minimum.

X and R Process Behavior chart

 Page 22 The STANDARD Fall 2000

A Graphical Method for Displaying Process Capability (Cpk)

The following steps were used to calculate and display process capability for the die bond operation.
Step 1:
For the die bond process each week’s die shear data from the X and R process behavior chart were collected
and the following summary statistics calculated:
The process estimated standard deviation R/d2
The process mean X
Step 2:
Using the formula shown below, a Cpk value for each week’s die shear data was calculated. Approximately 50
die shear measurements were taken and these data were used to calculate the Cpk values. Vertical lines were
drawn in on the X and R chart (Figure-1) to denote each week’s data used to calculate its Cpk value.
Cpk = X − LSL/d2
LSL = 425 grams
d2 = 1.693 for n = 3
Cpk calculations for weeks 1 though 17
Week 1=1133-425/3(225)=1.048 Week 10=1196-425/3(154)=1.666
Week 2=1175-425/3(241)=1.039 Week 11=1181-425/3(183)=1.279
Week 3=1172-425/3(223)=1.117 Week 12=1209-425/3(178)=1.465
Week 4=1168-425/3(134)=1.850 Week 13=1192-425/3(197)=1.299
Week 5=1088-425/3(177)=1.250 Week 14=1181-425/3(191)=1.322
Week 6=1175-425/3(151)=1.654 Week 15=1250-425/3(160)=1.721
Week 7=1147-425/3(183)=1.317 Week 16=1217-425/3(127)=2.070
Week 8=1184-425/3(196)=1.288 Week 17=1155-425/3(172)=1.414
Week 9=1119-425/3(194)=1.195
Step 3:
Plot each week’s Cpk values on an individuals process behavior chart. On this chart the X-axis represents time
(17 weeks) while the Y-axis denotes the weekly Cpk values. Once you have collected a dozen or so values,
calculate process limits and averages lines for both the X and mR chart. While it is preferable to have at least 25
subgroups before setting process limits, useful limits can be calculated with fewer values; therefore using 16
moving ranges for setting your limits is sufficient. Of course, as more data becomes available, the process limits
should be revised.
Cpk Process Behavior Chart
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 23

Step 4:
Construct a histogram of the individual measurements from the process behavior chart. More than 900 individual
measurements (taken from the 304 subgroups) were used to generate the histogram. (Figure-3).
Histogram of Die Shear Measurements

Step 5:
Interpretation of the Cpk Process Behavior Chart and Histogram:
The XmR Process Behavior chart of the weekly Cpk values shows a more realistic picture of the processes’ true
capability by the use of multiple values. A fairly large sample size used for calculating each weeks Cpk number
is required to ensure a valid estimation. The mean or average of the X chart is 1.41. This is the best estimate of
process capability for the die bond process. This average Cpk number is slightly higher than the one-time value
(1.37) calculated from all the data (see figure-3). Of course, the real benefit of using multiple Cpk values to assess
your processes’ capability is to understand the variation associated with such a value so that a proper
interpretation can be made. For the die bond capability performance, the 3-sigma limits are:

UCLx = 2.23
LCLx = 0.59
UCLR = 1.00
LCLR = 0
These limits indicate that the average Cpk value of 1.41 can vary from 0.59 to 2.23 without indicating a change
in the capability of this process! In other words, unless the die bond process is changed in some fundamental way
and remains predictable, the capability will continue to fluctuate between these two Cpk values. In addition,
consecutive week-to-week values can vary as much as 1.00. How do we interpret the shape of the histogram?
First, all of the 912 individual measurements taken over a 3-month period are well beyond the lower specification
limit (LSL) of 425 grams. This, along with the process being predictable, tells us quite a bit about the capability
of the process. But what about shape of the histogram, does it provide any useful information that we don’t already
know? As a general rule I look to see if the shape of the histogram is approximately normal (bell-shaped and
symmetrical about the mean) to determine whether the average is a good statistic to use for calculating capability
formulas. If the histograms drawn from your measurements show a heavily skewed distribution shape, you could
substitute the medium statistic (the half-way point of the data set) for the average statistic in order to calculate your
Cpk value. If for example the distribution of die shear data were positively skewed, with a lower specification limit
of 425 grams minimum, the standard formula used would underestimate the capability of the process. On the other
 Page 24 The STANDARD Fall 2000

hand, if the distribution were negatively skewed an overestimate of process capability would result. In our example
the histogram seems to follow, at least approximately, a normal bell-shape curve and therefore the average is an
acceptable estimate for central tendency of the die shear data. A word of caution: as Lloyd Nelson has pointed
out, it is dangerous to read too much into the shape of a distribution. Also, a recent book on the Normal Distribution
and its relationship to the Process Behavior Chart (1) warns us of the misleading outcomes that can result when
trying to fit data to an expected probability model.
Some Issues Regarding Capability Indices (A Personal Perspective)
It seems as though not a week goes by without me reading, in some technical journal, about another way of
characterizing process capability (as if I’m not confused enough!). Author Don Wheeler refers to this as Capability
Confusion (2). A partial list of capability indices include the following:
Cp Cpm Cpu
Cpk Z-upper Cpl
Ppk Z-lower Pp
CR Zmin Pr
Cm DNS Cmk
With so many different capability indices to choose from, it’s no wonder why many quality professionals are
confused as to their meaning, their differences and applications. A recent book published on process capability
runs to nearly 900 pages! (3) Then there is the issue of normality to consider. If process capability analysis fails
to account for the non-normality of the data it may produce inaccurate long-term yield estimates (4).
If statistical thinking and methods are ever to be embraced by industry, they have to be
presented in a way that makes them assessable and understood by the non-statistician.
While there will always be situations that require the use of advanced statistical tools (Design of Experiments,
Analysis of Means, Analysis of Variance, Regression) and the help of a qualified statistician, there also is an
unnecessary fixation on complexity for its own sake. There also exists a widening gap between the statistical
methods/tools being published in today’s technical journals and those methods commonly used in industry as part
of a continual improvement methodology. Until production workers and management discover for themselves the
benefits of using statistical methods, not much will change. Fortunately, some in the statistics community, working
with practitioners, have recognized this problem and have taken steps to remedy the situation. In order to help
bridge this gap, many simple but proven statistical graphs/methods are being introduced by well-known
statisticians/authors (i.e. Joiner, Wheeler, Balestracci and Pyzdek) in order to make these techniques available
to a wider audience. Hopefully this trend will continue as the philosophy of statistical thinking becomes more
widespread.
Some Lessons Learned
For any single capability value to have meaning, I recommend that the following steps be taken:
1. Verify that the process under evaluation displays a reasonable degree of control/stability. How one defines
stability is determined by traditional SPC methods and process knowledge. Both issues need to be carefully
considered.
2. Plot capability values over time. Capability numbers (such as Cpk) vary even when the process being monitored
is stable, therefore knowing the uncertainty associated with such a number is needed in order to interpret it
correctly. Calculating an average Cpk value and valid statistical process limits provides a simple way of knowing
whether your processes’ capability has actually changed or is just subject to common cause variation.
3. Construct a histogram of your process data. Knowing the relative shape of your distribution will help you better
interpret these capability numbers.
Summary
All statistics vary over time, and capability indices such as Cpk are certainly no exception. By plotting these values
on a time-series chart one can easily generate meaningful capability indices.
Whether we like it or not, capability indices will continue to be used in the foreseeable future. Since that’s today’s
reality, doesn’t it make sense to use them in a way that best characterizes the capability of your process and can
be understood by your customer? So the next time your customer asks you to report on a process capability
number, show them a better way.
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
Reference:
1. Wheeler, Donald J. Normality and the Process Behavior Chart (Knoxville, Tenn. 2000)
2. Wheeler, Donald J. Beyond Capability Confusion (Knoxville, Tenn.: SPC Press. 1999)
3. Bothe, Davis. Measuring Process Capability (McGraw Hill. 1997)
4. Pyzdek, Thomas. Pyzdek’s Guide to SPC Volume Two (Tucson, Arizona: Quality Publishing. 1992)
The Standards Scene
Dan Harper
th
This year, the last of the 20 Century or the first of
the 21st – depending on how you measure–has had a
lot of action in the standards development arenas. The
big attention getter for most folks has been the finaliz-
ing of the new ISO 9000:2000 series–the three new
standards replacing the 1994 versions.
For those of us in the calibration and metrology
areas, there’s been the impact of the first year out for
ISO 17025:1999, and its adoption as an American
National Standard. Then of course, there is the devel-
opment of the new ISO 10012–intended to replace ISO
10012 Part 1:1992 which addressed a confirmation
system for measuring equipment, and ISO 10012 Part
2:1997, which covered control of measurement pro-
cesses.
First, the new ISO 9000, 9001 and 9004 have been
advanced to the Final Draft International Standard
level and are currently out for vote. No more com-
ments, just a vote yea or nay by the members of ISO
Technical Committee 176. The last of the issues were
resolved at the Kyoto Japan meeting in July.
If you haven’t been keeping tabs on the work on
these three key documents, the new ISO 9000:2000
covers quality management system fundamentals and
terminology. It has quality management concept dia-
grams and explanations, with the old ISO 8402 defini-
tions and a whole bunch of new definitions integrated
into it. The terms and definitions are separated into
separate sections for general areas of quality manage-
ment topics and activities. There are separate sections
for terms relating to quality; management; organiza-
tion; process and product; characteristics; conformity;
documentation; examination; audit; and last but not
least, for QA for measurement processes.
Actually, there is some potential misunderstanding
in a few of the terms in the new 9000. For example, the
word “traceability”, which I think we have considered
“ours” – has a definition different than that in the VIM.
There’s a note that says that for metrology the VIM
definition is the accepted version.
For the new ISO 9001:2000 - the title is “Quality
management systems – Requirements.”
Page 25
The first thing you may notice is that the format and
organization of the document is different from the 1994
version. The most important thing is that the 2000
version emphasizes a process approach in quality
management and achieving customer satisfaction.
The venerable clause 4.11 in 9001:1994 has
transitioned to Clause 7.6 in the 2000 version, and lays
out the requirements for monitoring and measuring
device control. Let’s take a quick look at those require-
ments.
First, Clause 7.6 says that you have to decide what
monitoring and measuring you’re going to do and what
equipment you need to demonstrate conformity of
product to requirements. It then directs you to develop
processes to ensure that the work is done in a manner
meeting the requirements called out for the measuring
and monitoring.
From the hardware standpoint, there is a short list of
things to be done when necessary to achieve valid
measurement results. This is a familiar list, basically
from 9001:1994 Clause 4.11: calibration against trace-
able standards; adjustment when needed; cal status
identified; sealed or safeguarded to prevent unautho-
rized tweaking; and protection from damage etc.
There are also the requirements for confirmation of
software as fit for use, records, and for reviewing
records, etc., if the equipment is suspect and a require-
ment for corrective action on the equipment and on any
product affected.
Notice something? No mention of documented pro-
cedures in this clause. The key to this is found back at
the beginning of the requirements, Clause 4 of
9001:2000.
In Clause 4.1 and 4.2, it is clearly stated that the
organization has to identify the processes needed
throughout the organization; not only identify, but also
ensure, that the criteria, methods, resources and infor-
mation are available to get the work done.
Another item that might shake a few of us up – no
specifically stated requirement for measurement un-
certainties to be estimated or documented, etc. But
 Page 26 The STANDARD
then, there is a requirement for calibration, and estima-
tion of uncertainties is part of that, isn’t it?
Keep in mind that required documentation includes
whatever is needed to ensure the planning, operation
and control of the processes is done correctly. Wide
open. Not specific, but it’s clear that you have to have
control of the processes, and you have to spell out in
documentation and procedures what is needed to be
done. An additional requirement is for a quality manual
for the organization. And, the user is referred to ISO
10012 Part. 1, and 10012 Part 2 for additional guid-
ance.
Maybe this will give you some idea of the new
direction that ISO 9001:2000 takes. You can’t just go to
Clause 7.6 and think that’s all you have to do for
monitoring and measuring equipment. You have to
read and digest the whole document and define how
you’re going to control your processes and prove that
your product meets stated requirements.
Enough on 9000. So what’s doing on ISO/IEC
17025:1999? This replacement for ISO/IEC Guide 25
has been on the market for almost a year. Since it’s
intended for demonstration of laboratory technical com-
petence and the accreditation of laboratories, the tran-
sition to 17025 will take a while. 17025 has more
requirements that Guide 25, and whether or not there
is major heartburn with it will come out as the accred-
iting organizations such as A2LA and NVLAP start
assessing to it.
The major news about ISO/IEC 17025 is that the
adoption as an American National Standard is under-
way – and by three organizations working together.
Yep, the American Society for Quality, American Soci-
ety for Testing and Materials, and NCSLI (new name
for the National Conference of Standards Laborato-
ries) are all making the adoption. This is a very good
thing, for all have a deep-rooted interest in 17025, and
the common effort will surely open the way for other
similar project in the future. It is my understanding that
the names of all three organizations will appear on the
cover – sort of like the VIM, which lists the seven parent
organizations involved with its development.
So what’s new on 10012?
Currently titled “Measurement control system”, this
new standard is in the Committee Draft 3 stage. That
means that it’s been through iterations and out for
comment to the international community. It is intended
to provide the requirements to ensure your measure-
ment process is a good one – that the measurement
results are valid, whether the measurement process is
in a cal lab, on the production floor, inspection, wher-
ever.
Fall 2000
In combining ISO 10012 Parts 1 and 2, most of the
requirements of both those standards have been re-
tained, although there is a lot of re-wording, setting
basic requirements but not so prescriptive that you are
directed on HOW to meet the requirement. Yes, mea-
surement uncertainty is still required, as is traceability,
records, and identification of measuring equipment
status but not specifically labeling on the equipment,
etc. It is much, much more definitive than ISO 9001:2000
in what is required to ensure a valid measurement or
monitoring process.
What is it not? It is not a calibration system standard.
It is not intended to be a stand-alone document for any
type of calibration or testing laboratory registration or
accreditation. It does not tell you how to do things at the
lowest level but only that you must do them. The
management and the metrological function of the orga-
nization have some latitude in tailoring the measure-
ment processes to meet the business needs.
There is a long bibliography in an appendix and four
normative references: ISO 3534-1:1993: Statistics-
vocabulary and symbols – Part 1: Probability and
general statistical terms; ISO 9000:2000: Quality man-
agement systems – Fundamentals and vocabulary;
the VIM: 1993: International vocabulary of basic and
general terms used in metrology. BIPM, IEC, IFCC,
ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, OIML; and the GUM: 1995: Guide
to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. BIPM,
IEC, IFCC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, OIML.
Well, that’s enough for this time on the three big
things for this year. There are more things going on that
may impact us in the future – the revision of the VIM is
underway, as is revision of ISO 3534 series. The
NCSLI will be reviewing Z540 for possible revision to
come into alignment with ISO 17025; and of course
there are the industry specific standards such as ISO
14000, QS9000, AS9000, TL 9000, and a bunch of
others. ISO 19011, the new auditing standard replac-
ing the current 10011 series, is somewhere in the CD.2
– CD.3 phase. And new work items in ISO are being
proposed, such as a standard for handling complaints,
and one for selecting a consultant.
More later.
Questions or comments? Call, write or e-mail
me.
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
NIST News
NIST News for Today's Metrologist
and Metrology Practioner
New Noise Measurement System Now in
Service at NIST
Manufacturers of electronic components and sys-
tems used in the 4-12 gigahertz range, such as tele-
communications gear, satellite receivers and amplifi-
ers, cellular phones and radar equipment, now have
access to an improved service at NIST for the mea-
surement and calibration of noise.
A new calibration system just placed in service,
which includes an automated coaxial (GPC-7) radiom-
eter, will provide faster, more economical measure-
ments at multiple frequencies. The system uses a
vector network analyzer to measure reflection coeffi-
cients and asymmetries, and stores them in a lookup
table. The new strategy is much faster than using six-
port reflectometer measurements.
A description of the new system and its uncertainty
analysis has just been published as NIST Technical
Note 1518, Design and Testing of NFRad:A New Noise
Measurement System. To obtain a copy of TN 1518,
contact Chriss Grosvenor, MC 813.01, NIST, Boulder,
Colo. 80303-3328; 303-497-5958; chriss@boulder.
nist.gov.
Weights and Measures Documents Now
Available on the Internet
NIST Handbook 44, Specifications, Tolerances,
and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and
Measuring Devices, and NIST Handbook 130, Uniform
Laws and Regulations in the Areas of Legal Metrology
and Engine Fuel Quality, are now available on the
internet.
Manufacturers, as well as international weights and
measures organizations, can now easily access ac-
cepted specifications and tolerances for scales and
other measuring devices in NIST Handbook 44. They
also can view model weights and measures laws and
regulations, which have been adopted by most states,
in NIST Handbook 130. NIST's Office of Weights and
Measures posted these documents to increase their
dissemination and availability.
Both NIST Handbook 44 and NIST Handbook 130
are published by NIST and have been adopted by the
National Conference on Weights and Measures, a
Page 27
voluntary standards organization that works closely
with NIST to ensure uniform weights and measures in
the United States.The two handbooks are now avail-
able at www.nist.gov/owm under "General Informa-
tion."
NIST Office of Weights and Measures
Selects New Chief
Henry Oppermann has been selected to replace Gil
Ugiansky as Chief of the Office of Weights and Mea-
sures. Oppermann was Deputy Chief of NIST's Global
Standards Program. Gil Ugiansky has been promoted
to the position of Deputy Director, Office of Measure-
ment Services.
ACT, EDS and WorkPlace Training Partner
to Provide Nationwide Calibration Training
ACT, Inc., the organization best known for its ACT
assessment in college entrance and placement exams
and EDS, a global information services company, have
joined with WorkPlace Training in developing a nation-
wide system of computerized training centers located
at community colleges and technical schools.
The ACT Centers™ will provide training for busi-
nesses and individuals aimed at boosting the skills of
the nation's workforce. The program is currently avail-
able in 40 host institutions in 22 states, and a goal of
250 locations has been set for year's end 2001. Four
states, Colorado, Kentucky, Oklahoma and Hawaii,
have committed to establishing the ACT Centers
throughout their community college systems.
WorkPlace Training has provided training modules
for the program in: introductory measurement and
calibration, precision electrical, dimensional, tempera-
ture, pressure, flow, mass, force/torque measurement,
uncertainty and SI metric. In addition to calibration
subject areas, WorkPlace has also provided courseware
in adult literacy/employability skills, computers and
information technology, industrial safety and technical
skills.
For further information on ACT locations and
WorkPlace Training courses, contact WorkPlace Train-
ing at tel 800-472-2564 , phanssen@wptraining.com.
 Page 28 The STANDARD
Edmunds Gages Celebrates Golden
Anniversary
Edmunds Gages celebrates their 50th Anniversary
this year. Founder Robert "Bob" Edmunds began the
company as a parts machining business that grew into
gage manufacturing in 1950. The company today
offers a wide selection of sophisticated dimensional
measurement equipment backed by a world class
calibration facility.
Edmunds Sr. still works at his desk for a few hours
each day, but the company helm has been passed to
son, Robert F. Edmunds Jr.; and grandson Robert
Edmunds III works in the company as well.
The company's website at:
www.edmundsgages.com offers tech tips on dimen-
sional measurements and quality assurance, as well
as product information.
Common Time Scale Set for North America
The official time scales of North America are coor-
dinated through regular comparisons among the Ca-
nadian National Research Council, the Mexican Centro
Nacional de Metrologia, and the NIST. After several
years of international comparisons and negotiations,
NRC, CENAM and NIST recently have declared that
their respective versions of Coordinated Universal
Time (known as UTC) are equivalent to within five
millionths of a second for time measurements and
within one part in a trillion for frequency measure-
ments.
The common time scale defined by the declaration
is known as UTC North America; and within the stated
uncertainties, the time supplied by any of the three
national laboratories - UTC(NRC), UTC (CENAM) or
UTC (NIST) - can be used as UTC North America
without corrections or conversions.
This declaration supports trade and technology
across the region, especially for such things as time
tags for financial transactions and scientific observa-
tions. The three institutions hope that a common time
eventually can be extended to include all members of
the Interamerican Metrology System (SIM-Sistema
Interamericano de Metrologia), an organization whose
members include nearly all of the nations in North,
Central and South America and the Caribbean.
To access the official time in any U.S. time zone, go
to www.time.gov. For times outside the United States,
the site offers links to a UTC display and an interna-
tional time zone web site.
Fall 2000
PTB Develops Infrared Standards
Applications of infrared remote sensing (IRS) are
rapidly increasing in a variety of fields such as mete-
orology, environmental monitoring, agriculture, mining
and oil exploration. Therefore, it has become important
for national measurement institures to develop stan-
dards for infrared instrumentation.
A recent cooperative project between the
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), Ger-
many, and the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology
required calibrated detectors for the investigation of
ocean temperature. Temperature changes of only 0.1
K in the ocean have a crucial impact on the CO2
content of the earth's atmosphere. The PTB has devel-
oped heat-pipe blackbody radiators as primary infrared
radiation source standards for calibrations of low tem-
perature IRS instruments with large target areas. Their
spectral radiation emission can be calculated from
their temperatures on the basis of Planck's radiation
law. The heat pipes are operational in the temperature
range from -60&degC to 960&degC. Their tuneable
temperatures are directly related to the SI base unit of
temperature with standard uncertainties between 30
mK and 190 mK by means of standard platinum
reistance thermometers.
The calibration standards will enable PTB to comply
with the growing demands in the fields of radiometric
thermometric calibrations for wavelengths of 1&microm
to 50 &microm. For further information contact J.
Fischer, fax +49-30-34-81-510, email: joachim.
fischer@ptb.de.
Notes
David Alderman Named New NVLAP
Chief
David Alderman has been selected as NVLAP's
new chief, succeeding Jim Cigler, who retired. Alder-
man has been with NVLAP for 12 years. He served as
program manager for NVLAP's asbestos program and
was responsible for the accreditation of over 600 labo-
ratories. In 1994 he was named Deputy Chief of NVLAP,
managing day-to-day operations, as well as serving as
program manager for NVLAP's Fasteners and Metals
Program.
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
Standards Update
The US Standards Group on QEDS is pleased to
offer us news on the latest standards-related develop-
ments in quality management, environmental man-
agement, dependability and statistical methods.
These short bursts of information, courtesy of The
Informed Outlook, are designed so that we all can
quickly stay abreast of all those changes in these types
of standards which will impact our businesses and way
of life.
Draft International Standards Are Now
Available
The Draft International Standards (DIS) of ISO
9000:2000, ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9004:2000 are
now available for purchase from the American Society
for Quality (ASQ).
Jack West, Chairman of the US Technical Advisory
Group (TAG) for ISO/TC 176 stated, “Certainly, some
minor changes may be expected before the new inter-
national standards are published, but the DISs are
fairly mature and organizations may now start to plan
their transition to the new revisions.”
These revisions have been long awaited and will be
followed shortly by a validation survey on ISO/DIS
9001:2000 and ISO/DIS 9004:2000 to ascertain their
impact on the business community (see news brief
entitled “Validation Program for ISO/DIS 9001:2000…”
week of Nov. 22, 1999).
West also noted that “The revisions to the ISO 9000
family of quality management system standards are
being made so that they reflect a more modern under-
standing of quality. With an increasing interest in these
quality standards by more non-traditional organiza-
tions, there is a greater need to revise ISO 9000 in
terms of presentation, terminology, format and require-
ments to ensure that users around the world are better
served.”
If the DISs receive a positive vote, there will be one
more brief vote on the Final Draft International Stan-
dards (which will incorporate any changes adopted
based on DIS comments) prior to the release of the final
International Standards. It is anticipated that this con-
sensus building process will result in the revised stan-
dards being published late in the fourth quarter of 2000.
You are encouraged to get copies of the DISs, read
them, make plans for adjusting your system as re-
quired — and submit comments to reflect your con-
cerns about the DIS language (special comment proto-
col applies, and questions regarding the comment
Page 29
process may be directed to Margie Wirth, Standards
Coordinator, at 800-248-1946, ext. 7256). Comments
are being welcomed from everyone, whether a mem-
ber of the US TAG or not.
You may order copies of the DISs by contacting
ASQ Quality Press customer service at (800) 248-
1946 or through their web site at http://
qualitypress.asq.org. The cost is $40 US and the item
number is T1600. All three DIS documents are in-
cluded in one package (117 pages).
Lofgren Elected IATCA Chairman;
Succeeds John Hulbert
George Lofgren, QMS President of the Registrar
Accreditation Board (RAB), was elected chairman of
the International Auditor and Training Certification
Association (IATCA) during the organization’s plenary
meeting in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Lofgren, who will serve a two-year term as chair-
man, succeeds John Hulbert, formerly of the Joint
Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand
(JAS-ANZ). Hulbert has taken on the newly created
role of executive director in which he performs the day
to day operations for IATCA.
“George’s election as IATCA chairman is a tribute to
the years of work and travel he has devoted in helping
to create and launch IATCA’s worldwide programs,”
stated Joseph Dunbeck, RAB chief executive officer.
Lofgren previously served as the vice chairman of
the organization and was chairman of working group
two which is responsible for auditor training course
provider and training course criteria.
“IATCA was originally created because there were
disparate systems for auditor certification throughout
the world. The organization set about to provide con-
sistency in the certification requirements and the ad-
ministration of those requirements. In a relatively short
time, I believe we have made great progress toward
those goals,” Lofgren stated.
To date, RAB has certified 165 RAB IATCA Senior
Auditors and 19 RAB IATCA Auditors. On the course
provider side, the ANSI-RAB NAP has accredited
seven IATCA QMS auditor training courses.
Chelsea Football Club Scores with ISO
9000
Chelsey FC, one of Britain’s top football clubs, has
become the first in the world to score with ISO 9000.
The club — which has achieved its best league position
in 29 years and qualified for the European Champions
 Page 30 The STANDARD
League — has received an ISO 9002 certification of the
quality system operated by its merchandising activity.
Chelsea Village Merchandising is responsible for
more than 3,000 product lines for Chelsea fans. “Our
successful registration to ISO 9002 shows that we
meet international quality standards,” said Chris
Manson, managing director of Chelsea Village Mer-
chandising.
“We needed to be able to show that our manage-
ment systems met the expectations of our customers
and began the registration process last year. BSI
(British Standards Institution) assessed our on-site
activities, examined our documented procedures and
surveyed our overall operations,” said Manson.
BSI was Chelsea’s registrar. In order to gain ISO
9002 certification, Chelsea was required to identify its
quality needs, established a quality program, devel-
oped quality manuals, trained staff to use the quality
program and monitored its use and effectiveness.
“It is very exciting that we are the first football club
in the world to achieve this accolade,” said Manson.
“We honestly believe that in today’s market-place, the
key to success is quality.”
NIST/NACLA
Partnership Proposal
The National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) and the National Cooperation for Laboratory
Accreditation (NACLA) have proposed a partnership to
achieve a broadly recognized laboratory accreditation
system in the United States, thereby simplifying pro-
cesses for demonstrating that products comply with
domestic and foreign requirements. In a notice pub-
lished in the May 19 Federal Register, the two organi-
zations said they plan to sign a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) that will reduce the redundancy
and complexity in the often puzzling and duplicative
realm of laboratory accreditation.
Laboratory accreditation is a form of conformity
assessment to assure that products, processes or
systems comply with regulations or voluntary stan-
dards. Such activities include tests of components and
accreditation methods for assessing the proficiency of
testing laboratories. They also include procedures for
evaluating the competency of laboratory accreditors,
which is the focus of the proposed NIST-NACLA agree-
ment.
A copy of the draft MOU will be posted on June 1,
2000, on the NIST website at www.ts.nist.gov. Written
public comments can be sent to NACLA Comments,
Office of the Director, Technology Services, NIST, 100
Fall 2000
Bureau Drive, Stop 2000, Gaithersburg, Md. 20899-
2000.
In the United States, there are an estimated 50,000
testing laboratories and more than 100 laboratory
accreditation programs, nearly all of them in the private
sector. Although it has effectively addressed safety
and consumer-protection needs, this decentralized
conformity assessment system is sometimes criticized
as inefficient.
Many testing laboratories, for example, undergo
multiple accreditation audits to satisfy various govern-
ment and industrial programs, even though their re-
quirements and scopes of accreditation are similar. In
addition, federal agencies differ greatly in their ap-
proaches to assessing whether products or services
meet their procurement or regulatory requirements.
Trade agreements introduce yet another variable.
Under several, including the U.S.-European Union
Mutual Recognition Agreement, which went into effect
in December 1998, NIST is responsible for designating
U.S. testing laboratories, product certifiers and other
conformity assessment bodies to carry out MRA activi-
ties.
Donald N. Heirman, president of NACLA and former
manager of Lucent Technologies’ Global Product Com-
pliance Laboratory, says the proposed relationship
with NIST will advance the goals that motivated several
private and public sector organizations to create NACLA
in the first place. NACLA was incorporated in 1998.
For NIST, the proposed relationship will help it
promote greater government use of voluntary stan-
dards and reduce the complexity of federal, state and
local conformity assessment requirements. These re-
sponsibilities were assigned to NIST in the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995.
It is anticipated that accrediting bodies that have
been recognized by NACLA under the provisions of the
MOU will be deemed competent by NIST to support
trade agreement activities where NIST is a designating
authority.
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 31

He noted further that there had been significant

News Update
At 2000 Assessor Conclave & Annual
Meeting, A2LA Team Prepares for New
Challenges
This May, more than 100 individuals from the A2LA
assessor corps, Board of Directors and staff gathered
in Columbia, MD, for the best part of a week, for
intensive training and discussion aimed at equipping
“Team A2LA” for the many challenges that lie ahead.
Doug Berg provided ample evidence of success in
his Chairman’s State of the Association address at the
May 22 Annual Meeting. He reported that a number of
new records had been set in 1999:
• 356 new applications for accreditation received
• A total of 1348 laboratories accredited
• A full-time staff of 29 and 110 on-site asses-
sors
• An all-time high of 486 association members
on December 31
growth in the number of attendees at A2LA’s training
courses and, at year’s end, a substantial income sur-
plus and a healthy balance sheet.
However, self-congratulation about past accom-
plishments was not the spirit of the group nor the tone
of the many different meetings held in Columbia.
Rather, attendees focused on substantial recent and
imminent changes in the accreditation world and the
steps that A2LA is and will be taking to meet the
challenges and continue to improve its performance.
To enable A2LA to satisfy the rapidly increasing
demand for its accreditation services, a three-day
assessor orientation course was held on May 17-19,
under the tutelage of Daren Valentine, A2LA Training
Manager. Thirty candidates took the course; at its end
they took an exam that must be passed as part of the
assessor qualification requirements.
Over the course of the next three days, the Accredi-
tation Council and the Criteria Council held meetings,
and there were a series of training and discussion
sessions for veteran assessors. The highlights of these
gatherings are described in accompanying articles.

A2LA ISO/IEC 17025 TRANSITION PLAN

(Goal: Compliance demonstrated by all labs by July 2002.)
(as of 05/23/2000)

Assessment Options apply to all labs: Documentation Comments

Date (New, Renewal, and
Surveillance Labs)
July, 2000 OPTION I: ISO/IEC 17025 Checklist ISO/IEC 17025 Checklist must be
ISO/IEC 17025 (new requirements bolded) provided to the assessor(s) prior to
the on-site assessment.

OPTION II: a) ISO/IEC Guide 25 Checklist Bolded items of ISO/IEC 17025

ISO/IEC Guide 25 and b) document gap analysis using the Checklist must be completed and
ISO/IEC 17025 Gap new ISO/IEC 17025 checklist, but provided to the assessor(s) prior to
Analysis only filling out bolded (new) items; the on-site assessment.
Assessors will write up "gaps" in
separate form attached to Response to gaps due at annual
deficiency report that includes the review (renewals) or surveillance
following statements. "In order to (new).
be considered for accreditation to
ISO/IEC 17025, objective evidence
that the following items have been
addressed needs to be provided to
A2LA with the annual
review/surveillance."
OPTION III: ISO/IEC Guide 25 Checklist All labs selecting this option will be
Guide 25 only required to undergo an ISO/IEC
17025 on-site surveillance the
following year. (This is already a
requirement for new labs.)
January 2001 OPTION I or II only
July 2001 OPTION I only
 Page 32 The STANDARD
Transition to ISO/IEC 17025
A2LA’s plan for transitioning from ISO/IEC Guide 25
to ISO/IEC 17025 is outlined in the table printed in this
newsletter. The plan has been approved by the A2LA
Criteria Council and endorsed by the Board of Direc-
tors.
A2LA’s objective is to have all related documents,
including updated General Requirements for Accredi-
tation of Laboratories and the Assessor Checklist, in
final form by mid-July.
According to the plan, laboratories undergoing as-
sessments during the period of July 1 through Decem-
ber 31, 2000, have three options: full assessment to
17025, assessment to Guide 25 with gap analysis for
17025, or assessment to Guide 25 only. For renewal
labs, the third option requires an on-site surveillance
Profile on Metrology: What is CAL LAB?
CAL LAB is a publication (and now web page) that
seeks to further the science of metrology (measure-
ment) and the industry of calibration through the shar-
ing of information about developments in the field. It is
not a magazine empire: it is a handful of dedicated
metrology enthusiasts that belong to and/or support
the National Conference of Standards Laboratories
(NCSL) and the Measurement Science Conference,
the National Council of Weights and Measures, ISA,
IEEE, International Society of Weighing and Measure-
ment, and American Society of Quality (ASQ).
CAL LAB receives news information from national
labs and organizations including NIST in the United
States, the NPL in the United Kingdom, the STQC
Directorate in India, the Metrology Society of Australia,
ISA, IEEE, ASQ, ISO and contacts from many compa-
nies and laboratories around the world. Sometimes
engineering, sometimes physics, sometimes confused
with the study of weather (which it has nothing to do
with except that its instrumentation depends on it)
metrology is the science of measurement in all physical
areas from electrical to dimensional and mass (weight)
to time, and all other properties and characteristics that
we can measure in our universe.
Metrology, as a science, continues to grow and
develop astonishing new levels of measurement accu-
racy and exciting new devices that provide these
higher levels of measurement with greater speed and
convenience. Calibration, the function of providing
verification that measurements are what they should
be, is essential to industry and commerce. With the
growing international adoption of the ISO standards for
quality, safety and environmental concerns in manu-
facturing and services, manufacturers and govern-
Fall 2000
visit the following year (automatic for new labs). The
third option is not available to laboratories being as-
sessed after January 1, 2001. After July 1, 2001, all
laboratories will be assessed to 17025.
Assessors will contact laboratories scheduled for
assessment during this transition period to ascertain
which option they prefer. In the meantime, if you have
any questions regarding the A2LA transition plan,
please contact A2LA at 301-644-3248.
Status of 2000 A2LA Directory
The 2000 Directory is expected to be ready for
distribution by the end of July, 2000. All directories
mailed to laboratories, users, etc. will be in CD-ROM
format only. A limited number of hardcopy directories
will be available upon request.
ments are realizing the importance of measurement
and calibration in commerce. We must harness that
momentum and use it to establish better educational
and training opportunities for people in metrology and
calibration, higher funding for research and develop-
ment, and increased involvement in the management
and quality processes in companies.
Carol Singer, CAL LAB Editor and Publisher, has
reported that they have recently added a special sec-
tion to their web page called Art Cohee's World that
takes us from lab bench measurements to other places
in the universe where metrology has been used to bring
us everything from art to photos of planets and nebulas
to the building of the Great Pyramids of Egypt. Says
Carol: *sometimes we need to remind ourselves of the
"bigger picture" of what metrology has really given us
and inspire ourselves to realize that the work we do
results in some pretty fantastic things. And sometimes
we just need a moment to reflect on the beauty around
us–beyond our concrete and glass buildings and
struggles to turn in a report by the end of the day, there
is something that we, as humans, need nearly as much
as food and shelter–beauty, wonder, the excitement of
exploration! My favorite site for instant visual gratifica-
tion and inspiration is http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/
astropix.html.*The vision at CAL LAB is to provide a
media for the exchange of information about, and for,
the field, and in so doing, to further its development and
enhance the experience of those working in it. For
further information, contact Carol Singer at:
csinger@callabmag.com
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 33

Metrology Freeware
1. Surface Roughness and Roundness Software and for determining mismatch loss for either
visit digitalmetrology.com a perfect load or source.
2. Chris Grachanen of the Corporate Metrology Download Mismatch Uncertainty Calculator
Department at Compaq Computer has de- (1.5Mb) for Windows95. (Proper installation
veloped Windows (TM) compatible freeware requires both Disk 1 & 2.)
to assist labs in calculations for uncertainty, 6. Measurement Conversion Software
tolerance, and mismatch.
Dalby Data Measurement Conversion Program
His published articles on the freeware:
Freeware:Uncertainty Calculator Dalby Data of Denmark has developed a new
Freeware:Tolerance Calculator calibration software program that includes a
Freeware: Mismatch Calculator measurement conversion function. This download
is a stand-alone version of the measurement
3. Uncertainty Calculator 2.5 conversion program.
Uncertainty Calculator is a Windows95 pro- Download Dalby Data Unit Conversion
gram designed to compute and express mea-
surement uncertainty in simple, straightfor- DCM is an affordable system for the com-
ward manner, for a vast majority of pany with focus on quality assurance and
measurements scenarios congruent with the efficient management of calibration. DCM can
basic guidelines contained within national/ also be used gauges which aren't calibrated,
international publications. since DCM has a wide range of features for
general gauge management.
For older systems only - Download Uncer-
tainty Calculator 1.0 (602kb) for Windows3.1X Download fully functional program with a 30
(602KB) day trial limit at www.dalbydata.dk
4. Tolerance Calculator 3.0 7. NAPT Measurement Conversion Program
Tolerance Calculator is a Windows 3.1 pro- Chuck Ellis of the National Association for
gram designed to perform calculations asso- Proficiency Testing (US organization) has con-
ciated with the interpretation of equipment tributed his favorite measurement conversion
tolerances and other Metrology related func- program.
tions such as test uncertainty ratios (TUR), Download the NAPT Unit Converter by visit-
accumulated uncertainties, consumers and ing the National Association for Proficiency
producers risk, etc. The Tolerance Calcula- Testing.
tor is intended to provide users with a 'bot-
tom line' method for evaluating equipment
specifications using the same nomenclature
equipment manufacturers use when adver-
tising their equipment capabilities, i.e. % of
range, parts per million (ppm) of reading, %
of span, etc.
Download Tolerance Calculator 3.0 (833kb)
for Windows95.
5. Mismatch Uncertainty Calculator 1.0
Mismatch Uncertainty Calculator is a new Win-
dows 95 program designed to perform un-
certainty analysis associated with microwave
mismatch components, conversions between
Reflection Coefficient, Return Loss and SWR
as well as various other microwave calcula-
tions. This program is especially useful for
calculating uncertainties associated with
calibrating 2-port symmetric devices such as
attenuators, directional couplers, filters, etc.,
 Page 34 The STANDARD Fall 2000

Educational Institutions
that Offer Metrology Programs or Classes
USA Students may see all Metrology courses Piedmont Technical College
available in the current course schedule at: Greenwood, SC 29648-1467
Butler County Community College
http://www.cca.cccoes.edu/adm/ Contact: Ron Ingle
College Drive, Oak Hills
_schedule.html (803) 941-8470
Butler, Pennsylvania 16001
Students may register for all available (800) 868-5528
(412) 287-8711
courses on-line at http://www.cca. Instrumentation Technology, Electronic En-
AAS Metrology
cccoes.edu/adm/_schedule.html by ac- gineering Technology
California State University cessing their personal account and follow-
Dominguez Hills, MSQA Program ing subsequent instructions Ridgewater College
Carson, CA 90747 2 Century Avenue
Contact: Dr. Gene Watson Madison Area Technical College Hutchinson, MN 55350-3183
(310) 243-3880 2136 Anderson Street Contact: Herbert O'Neil
http://www.csudh.edu/msqa Madison, WI 53704 Tel (800) 222-4424
gwatson@webtv.net Contact: Robert L. Brown Fax 320-587-9019
MSQA, Metrology Courses (608) 246-6861 herbo@hut.tec.mn.us
Offers MSQA through the internet Machine Tool Technology, Dimensional Certificate, AAS Metrology
Classes
The CCA (Community College of Au- Sinclair Community College
rora) Metrology Program 444 West Third Street
McComb County Community College Dayton, Ohio 45402
Located in the HEAT (Higher Education
14500 Twelve Mile Road Contact: George Sehi
and Advanced Technology) Center on the
Warren, MI 48093-3899 (513) 226-7921
Lowry Campus
Contact: Ben Selleck QA Tech, AAS Certificate, QE Tech, Di-
Manufacturing Technology Building III
(313) 445-7472 mensional Classes
9136 East 10th Place
Dimensional QA, AAS, Certificate
Aurora, CO 80010
Yuba College
Monroe County Community College 2088 Beale Road
Terrelle Wilson, Program Director
1555 S. Raisinville Road Marysville, CA 95901
Voice: (303) 365-8425
Monroe, MI 48161 Contact: Don Schrader
Fax: (303) 340-2130
(916) 741-6934
E-mail: terrelle@cs.cca.cccoes.edu
Michael Mohn AAS Measurement Science/Metrology
web site: http://cs.cca.cccoes.edu/
Assistant Professor of Materials Technol- Physical Mechanical Emphasis
metrology
ogy
Phone: 734-384-4122 Fax: 734-242-9711 CANADA
AAS (Associate of Applied Science) in mmohn@mail.monroe.cc.mi.us
Fleming Institute for Training in Metrol-
Metrology and Advanced Precision Mea- www.monroe.cc.mi.us/mmohn
ogy
surement with emphasis in Electrical or AAS in Metrology Technology. Empasis on
Sir Sanford Fleming College
Physical/Dimensional Measurements Cer- dimensional metrology with training on
743 Monaghan Road
tificates are provided for selected CMMs.
Peterborough, Ontario
coursework Canada, K9J 5K2
Some Metrology courses are available on- Ohio State University Contact: R. Munshaw
line (through the internet) Coordinate Metrology and Measurement (705) 876-1611
Laboratory Advanced Certificate
Students may enroll in the college on-line
Department of Mechanical Engineering
at: http://www.cca.cccoes.edu/adm/
206 West 18th Avenue
_adm_reg.html
Columbus, OH 43201
Students may view a description of on-line Tel (614) 292-8718
Metrology courses at http://cs.cca. Fax (614) 292-3163
cccoes.edu/infosheets/disciplines/mtr/
metrology.htm
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 35

BRAZIL FINLAND SWEDEN

Instituto de Pesquisas e Estudos Helsinki University of Technology, Me- Swedish National Testing & Research
Industriais trology Research Institute http:// Institute, SP
E-mail:jmaia@cci.fei.br www.hut.fi/HUT/Measurement/ http://www.sp.se/metrology/
Home-page http://www.ipei.com.br The main research areas of the Metrology Box 857, S-501 15 Boras, Sweden
Tel 5511 419 0200 r 274 Research Institute are in physics of mea- Tel +46 33 16 54 44
Fax 5511 419 0999. surement and measurement elec- Fax +46 33 10 69 73
(Engineering High School - Industrial Prepa- tronics.The responsibilities and research Dr L R Pendrill
ration Courses) projects of the laboratory are concentrated mailto:leslie.pendrill@sp.se
on electronic and optical metrology, on the
DENMARK development and maintenance of the pri-
Randers Tekniske Skole mary standards of length, wavelength and
Teknikerakademiet various detector-based optical power
Vester Allé 26\ scales. Metrology Research Institute is also
DK-8900 Randers a National Standards Laboratory for opti-
Denmark cal quantities.
Tel (0045) 87 10 04 00 Courses in electronics and optical mea-
Fax (0045) 87 10 04 33 surement technology both in undergradu-
Kvalitets- og Maaleteknikeruddannelsen ate and graduate levels.
Metrology Courses

A Compilation of Some Useful Metrology Links

by Frank Voehl and Carol Singer
A sincere word of appreciation to CAL LAB and Art Accreditation Bodies
Cohee at Accu-Trace Metrology for their thoughtful A2LA - American Association for Laboratory Accredita-
and significant contribution of listings covering the tion
following categories: APLAC - Asian Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Coop-
• Accreditation Bodies eration
• College & University Sites ILAC - International Laboratory Accreditation Coop-
• Conference Organizations eration
• International Standards Organizations IMEKO - International Measurement Confederation
• National/International Metrology Organizations NATA - Australian National Association of Testing
• National Standards Bodies Authorities
• Standardizing Organizations NVLAP - National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation
• U.S. Government Metrology Sites Program
• U.S. National Laboratories DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program - US Depart-
• World National Laboratories ment of Energy
Visit the CAL LAB website at www.callabmag Conference Organizations
for more details. MSC - Measurement Science Conference
NCSL - National Conference of Standards Laborato-
Calibration Products & Services (Commercial Sites) - ries
Includes Training International Standards Organizations
For additional useful links in other areas like physics, CIE - International Commission on Illumination
astronomy, science, nature and even art, check out the IAEA - International Atomic Energy Agency
section of our web site known as Art Cohee's World. IEC - International Electrotechnical Commision
Visitor Count ISO - The International Organization for Standardiza-
tion
ITU - International Telecommunication Union
 Page 36 The STANDARD
National Standards Bodies
Australia - SAA - Standards Australia
Canada - SCC - Standards Council of Canada
Colombia - ICONTEC - Instituto Colombiano de Normas
Tecnicas y Certificacion
Denmark - DS - Dansk Standard
Finland - SFS - Finnish Standards Association
France - AFNOR - Association franÁaise de
normalisation
France - EDF - ElectricitÈ de France Bienvenue chez
EDF
Germany - DIN - Deutsches Institut fur Normung
Greece - ELOT - Hellenic Organization for Standard-
ization
Hong Kong - Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation
Scheme
Ireland - NSAI - National Standards Authority of Ireland
Iceland - STRI - Icelandic Council for Standardization
Italy - UNI - Ente Nazionale Italiano di Unificazione
Japan - JISC - Japanese Industrial Standards Commit-
tee
Malaysia - DSM - Department of Standards Malaysia
Morocco - SNIMA - Service de Normalisation Industrielle
Marocaine
Netherlands - NNI - Nederlands Normalisatie-instituut
New Zealand - SNZ - Standards New Zealand
Norway - NSF - Norges Standardiseringsforbund
Portugal - IPQ - Instituto PortuguÍs da Qualidade
Saudi Arabia - SASO - Saudi Arabian Standards Orga-
nization
Singapore - SISLAB - Singapore Laboratory Accredita-
tion Scheme
Slovenia - SMIS - Standards and Metrology Institute
Spain - AENOR - Asociacion Espanola de
Normalizacion y Certificacion
Sweden - SIS - Standardisaeringen i Sverige
United Kingdom - BSI - British Standards Institution
USA - ANSI - American National Standards Institute
USA NSSN - ANSI National Standards System Net-
work
Standardizing Organizations
ASTM - The American Society for Testing and Materi-
als
EIA - Electronic Industries Association
ISA - Instrument Society of America
OSA - Optical Society of America
SMPTE - Society of Motion Picture and Television
Engineers
SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engi-
neering
UL - Underwriters Laboratories
National / International Metrology Organizations
AIP - American Institute of Physics
AIST - Agency of Industrial Science and Technology
(JAPAN)
Fall 2000
ASQ - American Society for Quality
International Society for Weighing and Measure-
ments
MSA - Metrology Society of Australia
NCSL - National Conference of Standards Laborato-
ries
U.S. Government Metrology Sites
Defense Standardization Program (MIL-SPEC
reform)
DOE Technical Standards
GIDEP - Government Industry Data Exchange
Program
Navy Primary Standards Laboratory, San Diego
NIST - National Institute of Standards and Technol-
ogy
NIST Boulder Facility
NIST Time and Frequency Division
NWAD - Naval Warfare Assesment Division
Oak Ridge Metrology Center
Sandia National Laboratories
TMDE - Army Metrology Page
USMC TMDE - Marine Corps Metrology Program
U.S. National Laboratories
ACL - Advanced Computing Laboratory
Ames Laboratory
ANL - Argonne National Laboratory
Brookhaven National Laboratory
EML - Environmental Measurements Laboratory
Fermilab - Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
INEL - Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
LLNL - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Los Alamos National Laboratory
FETC
National Biodynamics Laboratory
National Energy Research Supercomputer Center
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Pacific Northwest National Lab
Pantex
Princeton Plasma Physics Lab
Sandia National Laboratories
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
U.S. Department of Energy
World National Laboratories
Australia - CSIRO - Commonwealth Scientific and
Industrial Research Organizations
Canada - INMS - NRC Institute for National Measure-
ment Standards
Denmark - DFM - Danish Institute of Fundamental
Metrology
Germany - PTB - Physikalsch-Technische
Bundesanstalt (English)
Germany - PTB - Physikalsch-Technische
Bundesanstalt (German)
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 37

Ireland - Irish National Metrology Laboratory

Italy - IEN - Istituto Elettrotecnico Nazional Galileo
Gerraris
Obituary
Japan - ETL - Electrotechnical Laboratory On the Passing of Phil Katz
Korea - KRISS - Korea Research Institute of Standards Submitted by Frank Voehl
and Science
Malaysia - SIRIM BERHAD News of Phil Katz’s death was just made public
Netherlands - Nederlands Meetinsituut earlier this year but most of us may have missed the
Slovenia - SMIS - The Slovenian Standards and Me- news. You may never have heard of Phil Katz, but
trology Institute chances are, if you practice metrology in any of its
South Africa - NML - National Metrology Laboratory forms, you’ve used the product he’s known for.
Sweden - SP - Swedish National Centre of Metrology Back in 1986, Katz developed a file format–which
United Kingdom - National Physical Laboratory he called “ZIP”–that allowed files to be compressed
to a fraction of their original size and later restored,
University & College Sites unscathed, to their previous state. He designed a
Astro-Metrology - University of Maryland simple but effective program to do this and named
Center for Precision Metrology - University of North it PKZip, using his own initials (and ensuring for
Carolina himself some degree of immortality in the process).
Coordinate Metrology and Measurement Laboratory
- Ohio State University The program was a massive shareware hit, and ZIP
Department of Metrology - Penza State Technical quickly became the industry standard compression
University (RUSSIA) format. More dreamy innovator than businessman,
Metrology Research Institute - Helsinki University of Katz was never able to fully capitalize on his ubiq-
Technology uitous creation, and when he died on April 14, 2000,
Measurement and Information Technology - of complications from alcoholism at the age of 37,
Tampare University of Technology his passing was largely ignored. But his legacy lives
on. Nowadays, most files downloaded from the
Additional Metrology Resource Sites Internet bear the suffix .zip. In fact, many of us at
CMM Metrology Forum - sponsored by Axis-Metrol- ASQ are involed with a showdown between the
ogy latest versions of WinZip and Netzip, the best
CNMS - Canada's National Measurement System known of today’s ZIP utilities. Phil, this byte’s for
Comite Consultatif poru la Definition du Metre you.
Working Group for Dimensional Metrology Includes
listing of world contacts in dimensional metrology.
Directory of Organizations and Institutes Active in
Environmental Monitoring
European Organization for Testing and Certification
Euromet Points of Contact for Length Measurements
Euromet Length Bulletin
Federal Institute of Physics and Metrology
Metrology Forum sponsored by Agilent Technolo-
gies, U.K.
Hong Kong Standards & Testing Centre
IAEA--International Atomic Energy
ITS-90 - Temperature resources and information
sponsored by Isotech, Ltd. UK.
National Center for Physical Acoustics
PMEL For and about PMEL Personnal
San Diego Supercomputer
Standardization Organizations - European Business
Directory
Swedish National Testing and Research Institute
Valid Measurements - Information and articles on the
Anderson Loop developed at NASA and related topics.
Chosen;
Not
Ranked Topic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Total
Page 38

Section A:

1 1. Laboratory management 4 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 19
2 2. Laboratory accreditation (NVLAP and A2LA) 2 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 16
1 3. Interlaboratory/Intralaboratory comparisons 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 21
4 4. Proficiency testing 1 2 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 4 1 22
3 5. Determination of uncertainty-types A & B 15 1 6 5 1 1 3 1 2 1 26
4 6. Measurement systems analysis 6 3 4 3 4 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 29
5 7. Variable gage R&R 3 3 3 3 1 4 2 2 3 1 1 25
1 8. Destructive testing correlation 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 11
2 9. Attribute appraiser evaluation 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 13
7 10. Measurement process control 4 7 4 1 3 5 3 1 4 2 1 1 33
4 11. Standards traceability 3 1 1 3 2 7 2 1 3 3 1 1 26
7 12. Calibration requirements 4 1 1 4 3 7 3 7 2 1 2 33
3 13. Fixture verification 1 1 4 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 17
3 14. Software evaluation and validation 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 15
3 15. Validation of systems 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 2 20
The STANDARD

5 16. National and International standards activities/changes 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 4 5 3 1 25

RANKING (1 through 15)

7 17. AS 9000, ISO 9000, & QS 9000 linkages to measurements 3 1 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 5 1 2 23

4 18. Examples of work instructions/ISO documentation 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 22
5 19. Training of metrology personnel-sources/materials 5 1 2 1 2 2 1 4 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 29
4 20. Measurement programs offered by colleges/universities 4 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 3 2 22
(number in cell = number of times topic was selected)

3 21. Business measurements and metrics 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 18

1999 MQD Member Survey Results (52 Surveys Returned)

2 22. Metrology in other sectors 1 1 2 2 2 1 8 1 16

4 23. Best practices of other organizations 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 4 1 1 1 2 2 2 25
6 24. Metrology websites 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 3 2 4 1 4 24
4 25. Upcoming conferences 1 2 1 1 4 1 3 2 3 17
1 26. Employment in measurement and testing 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 3 14
2 27. Six Sigma Programs (selected twice with no ranking) 0
Fall 2000
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 39

Section B:
1. I am interested in metrology certification activity at the following levels:
Technician: (6) Engineer: (2) Manager: (8) Scientist: (4)
2. I have visited the MQD website recently. I would rate it a: (1 = worst; 10 = best)
1: (0) 2: (1) 3: (2) 4: (2) 5: (3) 6: (1) 7: (3) 8: (5) 9: (3) 10: (0)
I liked:
• Discussion forum, because it was the only thing that worked
• The available information (2)
• Links
• Articles from the Standard
• The standards & layouts
• Books area and link to Amazon.com
• Articles on website and metrology talk
• Attribute evaluation
• Very little
I would like to see more/less of:
• LESS political management issues
• MORE published papers
• MORE technical & research articles
• MORE current information (2)
• MORE ISO documentation
• MORE of the good job being done by the division
• LESS outdated information and cross linked messages
• MORE about accreditation
COMMENTS:
• I like to printout or file articles. My Netscape does not wrap all articles, only some. Can you look into this?
• Would like to see our site updated
• Page could not be displayed
3. I would rate the MQD “Standard” newsletter a: (1 = worst; 10 = best)
1: (0) 2: (0) 3: (2) 4: (1) 5: (4) 6: (2) 7: (10) 8: (8) 9: (10) 10: (6)
I liked:
• News articles
• The article on establishing metrology training
• ALL
• NIST news
• The Contrarion Metrologist (5)
• The Learning Curve (5)
• Broad range of issues–theoretical, practical, informative
• Anything Phil Stein writes (5)
• The wide range of subjects
• Events
• Practical advice
• The variety and balance
• A2LA news update
• Editor’s column
• The Standards Scene
• The idea of Doctor/PhD
• The articles and links to other information and sources
• Everything
• The article on ASQ certification
I would like to see more/less of:
• MORE practical applications
• LESS 6 Sigma advertisement disguised as articles
• MORE titles reflecting topic discussed since articles are long and not immediately to the point
• MORE information on metrology techniques
• MORE articles like the Learning Curve/Mech. Measurement specific articles/Gauge R&R articles
• Some articles on the statistical software used or favored by the analysts
 Page 40 The STANDARD Fall 2000

• MORE commentary
• MORE ISO 17025
• LESS scientific analysis
• MORE business measurement topics
• MORE education on different fields of equality
• MORE “how to” articles
• MORE published papers
• MORE technical articles in uncertainty
• MORE Frank Voehl
• MORE case studies
• MORE gage R&R methods and training seminars
• LESS of Management Corner
• MORE articles on practical metrology techniques, best practices
• LESS articles complaining about present metrology state of affairs
• MORE articles and letters to Editor
• A thicker newsletter
• Book reviews on metrology
• MORE tutorials on ISO 25/17025
• MORE uncertainty
• MORE traceability
• MORE job floor/lab related articles, not just concepts
COMMENTS:
• It’s a great publication. Thanks!
• Write it so that you don’t need a degree to understand it
• Just received first copy—Appearance is dull and cheap looking
4. Have you recently (in the last year) called someone in the MQD for help? Yes: (3) No: (43)
If yes, how long was it until you got a response? One answer = Days; Another answer = 8 hours
10 weeks (called F. Voehl for help)
GENERAL COMMENTS:
• Just joining MQD with 2000 membership renewal!
• Still waiting

Measurement Quality Division

American Society for Quality
Executive Council Meeting Minutes
January 20, 2000
5:30-7:30 PST
Location: Teleconference and meeting Sal Scicchitani–Historian
Measurement Science Conference Karl Speitel–Auditor and Region 2
Disneyland Hotel, Anahiem, CA Councilor
Attendance: Guests:
In Person: Annie Kay Erbie-Newell-Headquarters
Duane Allen–future Chair Elect Div. Rep.
Chris Grachanen–Certification Chair Paul Hanssen–Workplace Training
Dan Harper–Standards Committee Rep. Terrelle Wilson–Community College of Aurora
Tom Pearson–Past Chair Brian Slattery–Tustin Technical Institute
Phil Painchaud–Std Columnist Jim Simons–Sandia National Labs
Mark Schoenlein–Chairman Dilip Shah–E=MC3 Solutions
DeWayne Sharp–Newsletter Editor Donald Finney–Member
Phil Stein–Programs
By Phone:
Don Ermer–Region 12 Councilor
Rolf Schumacher–Reqion 7 Councilor
 Fall 2000 The STANDARD
Minutes: Mark Schoenlein
The minutes from the division October 28th confer-
ence call were briefly reviewed. DeWayne motioned to
accept the minutes and the agenda. Tom seconded.
The vote was unanimous for approval.
Chris Grachanen made his presentation first so that
some of our guests could leave early. The content is
covered under Certification in the minutes.
Chairman’s Report: Mark Schoenlein
Mark reported that headquarters along with the
Inspection Division is fast tracking a new certification
for the Quality Practitioner. It appears to be similar to
what is called a “Green Belt”.
The Statistics Division is getting ready to release a
new publication about business process measures.
Bob Mitchell has said that he would like to work closer
with the MQD.
New Business:
As Mark was reviewing the various deadlines for
awards, nominations, and testimonials Phil mentioned
that the MQD also has its Max Unis award. The award
has not been given a couple of years. There was
discussion about a process during which Sal agreed to
follow up on the details.
Dan Harper asked if Mel Fechner was still the NCSL
representative. The answer was no.
Treasurer’s Report: Steve Cook
Mark passed out a summary of 1st half year 2000
budget requests. He asked that each functional area
and/or individual review their needs and get back to
him to get the budget firmed up.
He also reiterated about making sure to include a
division check req. form with requests for payment.
Secretary’s Report: Lowell Nicodemus
The secretary was not present. Mark recorded the
minutes in writing and on tape.
Education Chair’s Report: Open
Phil Stein commented that the division should continue
to do training courses like the Uncertainty pre-confer-
ence tutorial he taught at the Midwest Quality Confer-
ence held in, Toledo, in September of 1999. He feels
that there is a demand for courses on varying topics.
Phil Painchaud suggested that someone talk to Dr.
Gene Watson about the possibility of becoming the
division education chair. Phil Stein volunteered to
approach him about it tomorrow.
Mark proposed that a division liaison position be cre-
ated to encourage closer interaction with the schools
and institutions involved in metrology and measure-
ment education.
Page 41
Auditing Chair’s Report: Karl Speitel
Karl reported that he has had no contact or involve-
ment in auditing of the division’s finances for some
time. He said he is working with Paul Bowe at head-
quarters to understand what he should be doing.
The division treasurer’s manual doesn’t require that
auditing be done by a division auditor or committee.
Phil Stein read the (unadopted by MQD) model division
bylaws which say that a committee is required. Annie-
Kay will send Karl a manual.
Division finance updates are being sent to the
treasurer, by headquarters, monthly.
Examining Chair’s Report: Phil Stein
for Mel Fechner
Our nominated fellow candidate Ragu Kacker from
NIST was turned down because he did not have
enough time as a senior member.
Programs Chair’s Report: Open
Phil Stein reiterated the need to get a committee
organized to plan for a Measurement Quality Confer-
ence in Atlanta in the Fall of 2000.
The 2001 conference would be held jointly at NIST for
their 100th anniversary.
Plans are set for the AQC in May 2000. Tom Pearson
will be presenting in the MQD track on Wednesday,
May 8.
Membership Chair’s Report: Open
Mark has asked for a list of MSC attendees. There
appears to be an increased interest by the conference’s
military attendees in the commercial metrology field,
especially around standards. This is a sector that the
division has not done much with. Annie-Kay stated that
headquarters might be able to help with a mailing to
these folks.
Vice Chair for Regions Report: Mark
Schoenlein
Mark reported that he has received 10 phone calls in
the last 3 months. He requested that Annie-Kay work
with the headquarters, service call center, to get the
calls referred to the Regional Councilors.
Sal reported that he is working with the GTC to study
how to better serve the membership.
Newsletter Editor’s Report: DeWayne
Sharp
The Winter 2000 issue was mailed late to ASQ for
printing. A self stamped interest survey was included.
The next deadline is 3/15/00 for the Spring issue.
 Page 42 The STANDARD Fall 2000

Website Manager’s Report: Open divisions may already have a director on the board. The
Mark reported that he has approached George names were read and votes tallied. The candidates
MacRitchie, Region 10 Councilor, to help with the site. selected were Donald Ermer, Kymm Hockman, Michael
Murphy, and Bill Sherman. Phil Stein moved to accept
Historian’s Report: Sal Scicchitani the selections, Dan seconded, all approved. The re-
Dan asked about guidelines for what materials to sults were sent to headquarters on 1/27/00.
save.
Division officers nominations were due the day after
Standard’s Committee Representative: the meeting. Duane Allen volunteered to be Chair-
Dan Harper Elect.
Dan will submit a written report. Next Meeting:
Certification Chair’s Report: Chris Grachanen The next MQD meeting and conference call will be
Chris reported out on the formation of the commit- from the AQC on May 5th with the time to be announced.
tee to work on the development of a Metrology Techni- Update: this meeting was cancelled but the officers did
cian (unofficial) certification. He reported that there is a meet informally. A follow up conference call was held
need for certification first based on current industry and on May 22.
military trends and that there has been overwhelming Adjournment:
support for the project. The completion and presenta- Phil Stein motioned to adjourn. Dan seconded. All
tion of a written proposal to the chair of the ASQ approved.
certification board is targeted for either the May or
November Biannual meeting.
An initial investment of $20,000 in non-refunded
funding from the MQD would be required up-front to get
started. The first step would be to contract an outside
firm to undertake a job analysis by 1st quarter of 2001.
Chris mentioned that it would be a good idea to take a
look at the analysis and proposal done for the CQT
before starting. He is also gathering information about
past DOD training programs, an job NSF study, and
courses being provided by post secondary education
institutions. It was also suggested that some of the
other divisions may want to become involved in the
committee.
Chris would like to use the MQD website to solicit
comments in an endeavor to collect information for a
BOK and potential questions. There was some con-
cern about facilitating input on the site, due to the
absence of a webmaster. Phil suggested that Bill
Caste, who is currently hosting the MQD site, might be
able to help. Measurement Science
Chris asked for approval for travel expenses to
prepare for and present to the Certification Committee.
Conference
Phil Stein made a motion to approve $2,500 for those
Measurements in a Global Economy is
expenses. Sal seconded. All approved.
the theme for the annual conference that
Regional Councilor’s Reports: All will be held in Anaheim, CA on January
Region 2: Karl Speitel-received 1 call recently
18 and 19, 2000.
Region 7: Rolf Schmacher-received 1 call recently
Region 11: Ray Perham (by email)-no activity Review details on http://www.msc-
Region 12: Don Ermer-no activity conf.com/.
Past Chair and Nominating Chair Report:
Tom Pearson
Mark passed out the list of GTC nominees for 2000/
2001 National Directors. Sal mentioned that some
Fall 2000 The STANDARD Page 43

Membership Report

Monthly MQD Committee

Conference Calls
To improve communication and planning, a confer-
ence call has been scheduled for the 2nd Wednesday of
each month.
Time: 2:00 pm Eastern Daylight Time
Number: 1-877-233-7852
Code: 329178
Division meetings and conference calls may also be
scheduled during some of the upcoming conferences.
Watch for announcements.

Important Upcoming Events

Conference Dates Location Contact Number

MSC 2001 1/18 - 19/2001 Anaheim, CA 714-847-7380

AQC 2001 5/7 - 9/2001 Charlotte, NC 1-800-248-1946

NCSL 2001 7/29 - 8/2/2001 Washington, DC 303-440-3339

MQD/NIST Fall 2001 Washington, DC 301-869-4520

 Page 44 The STANDARD Fall 2000

Measurement Quality Division Officers

Chair
Duane Allen .................. U.S. Navy, P.O. Box 5000, Code MS11, Corona, CA 92878-5000 909-273-4783 V
e-mail: allendk@corona.navy.mil 909-273-4599 F
Past Chairman
Mark Schoenlein ........... Owens Illinois Plastics Group, One SeaGAte 29L-PP, Toledo, OH 43666 419-247-7285 B
e-mail: mark.schoenlein@owens-ill.com 419-247-8770 F
Chair Elect
Open

Vice Chair for Regions

Open

Treasurer
Colleen Gadbois ........... 535 N.W. 112th Ave., Portland, OR 97229-6116 503-646-1380 V
e-mail: cdblflat@home.com 503-646-1380 F
Secretary
Open

Auditing
Karl F. Speitel ................ 14 Kalleston Drive, Pittsford, NY 14534 716-385-838 H

Certification
Christopher L. Grachanen ..... Manager, Standards Engineering
P.O. Box 692000 MS070110, Houston, TX 77269-2000 281-518-8486 B
Compaq Computer Corporation, Corporate Metrology 281-518-7275 F
e-mail: chris.grachanen@compaq.com
Programs
Duane Allen .................. MSC 2001
Norm Belecki ................. Fall Conference 2001

Membership
Open

Education
Thomas A. Pearson ...... Automated Technology Associates 317-271-9545 ext. 224 B
1635 Expo Lane, Indianapolis, IN 46214 317-271-7974 F
e-mail: tap@ataindy.com
Publications
J.L. Madrigal .................. Oxford Worldwide Group 801-374-1790 B
1045 South Orem Blvd., Orem, UT 84058 801-374-1790 F
e-mail: jim_oxford@msn.com
Newsletter Editor
Frank Voehl ................... St. Lucie Press, 280 Lake Drive, Coconut Creek, FL 33066 954-972-3012 B
e-mail: FVoehl@aol.com 954-978-0643 F
Historian
S.D. (Sal) Scicchitani .... 203 Golf Club Drive, Langhorne, PA 19047

Standards Committee Representative

Dan J. Harper ................ 535 N.W. 112th Ave., Portland, OR 97229-6116 503-646-1380 H
e-mail: dharper.hqa@home.com 503-646-1380 F
Kathy Hoath

NCSL Representative
Open
Simmons Scholarship
Norm Belecki ................. 7413 Mill Run Dr., Deerwood, MD 20855-1156 301-869-4520 H
n.belecki@ieee.org
Website Manager
George A. MacRitchie ... Benchmark Technologies 419-843-6691 B
e-mail: george.macritchie@benchmark-usa.com 419-843-7218 F
Please notify the editor of any errors or changes so that this list can be updated.
 Fall 2000
REGIONAL COUNCILORS
Region 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, Carter
Wallace, 61 Kendall Dr., Parlin, NJ
08859 • (609) 655-6521, FAX (609)
655-6736
Region 4
Alex Lau, Imperial Oil, 111 St. Clair
Ave W, Toronto, Ont, Canada M5W-
1K3 • (416) 968-4654, FAX (416) 968-
5560, E-mail: alex.lau@esso.com
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: madrigal
@byu.edu
Please notify the editor of any errors or changes so that this list can be updated.
REGIONAL
The STANDARD
Region 7
Rolf B.F. Schumacher, Coast Quality
Metrology Systems, Inc., 35 Vista Del
Ponto, San Clemente, CA 92672-3122
• (949) 492-6321, FAX (949) 492-6321
Region 8
Frank Weingard, Actco Metrology Ser-
vices, 202, Westview Dr. Meadville, PA
16335 • (800) 382-0393, FAX (814)
337-8288, E-mail:
actomet@toolcity.net
Region 9
Dr. Henrik S. Nielson, HN Metrology
Consulting, Inc., 5230 Nob Lane, India-
napolis, IN 46226 • (317) 377-0378
voice and fax, E-mail: hsnielson
@worldnet.att.net
Region 10
George A. MacRitchie, CQE, PE,
Benchmark Technologies Corp., 3161
N. Republic Blvd., Toledo, OH 43615-
1507 • (419) 843-6691, FAX (419) 843-
7218, E-mail: george.macritchie
@benchmark-usa.com
Page 45
Region 11
Raymond Perham, Michelin Tire Corp.,
Rt 4 Antioch Church, P.O. Box 2846,
Greenville, SC 29605 • (864) 458-1425,
FAX (864) 458-1807, E-mail:
ray.perham@us.michelin.com, or
home E-mail: r.perham007@aol.com
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
Open
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
Region 15
Bryan Miller, Champion International,
Inc., P.O. Box 189, Courtland, AL 35816
• (205) 637-6735, FAX (205) 637-5202
Region 25
Open
MAP
 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division
American Society for Quality

The STANDARD Non-Profit

Organization
U.S. Postage
PAID
Milwaukee, WI
American Society for Quality Permit No. 5419

Measurement Quality Division

Fall 2000

American Society for Quality

Measurement Quality Division
611 E. Wisconsin Ave
P.O. Box 3005
Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005
TIME VALUED MATERIAL