Accrediation based on test or method

« Back to Previous Page
6
0

When we perform for any test with specific method then what we say?? Our test is accrediated or our method...

Please to read the entire article.

Marked as spam
Posted by Samra Erum (Discussions: 1, Comments: 1)
Replied on January 6, 2018 12:00 am
35 views
0
Private comment
in my opinion and according to iso 17025 standard , we need to make a method validation to proof that it fit for purpose , and method validation is one criteria among others that you need to fulfill to reach the status ready for accreditation for specific test
Marked as spam
Posted by lilia Abdelli (Discussions: 0, Comments: 2)
Replied on January 5, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
Samra: You may be making more of this difference than is necessary. In many cultures the two terms are synonymous.

The word "test" is a measurement where uncertainties are NOT propagated to another instrument. Otherwise its definition is taken from the definition 4.2 of ISO/IEC 17000: "determination of one or more characteristics of an object of conformity assessment, according to a procedure (3.2)
NOTE “Testing” typically applies to materials, products or processes."

The word "method" is taken from the definition of "procedure" in 3.2 of ISO/IEC 17000: "specified way to carry out an activity or a process."

In short, a method is a way to conduct a test.

This help?
Marked as spam
Posted by Ned Gravel (Discussions: 0, Comments: 70)
Replied on January 5, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
Accreditation should be based on specific tests. A method describes a way to carry out a test. Depending on the scope of method that allows it to be applicable to more than one material or product. For Example, ASTM C 837 is a method to determine methylen blue index of clay but the results of this method to activated carbon is acceptable by customer. Therefore, when a laboratory apply for an accreditation scheme, the accreditation should be based on tests: determination of methylen blue index of clay and determination of methylen blue index of activated carbon, they uses only ASTM C 837.
Marked as spam
Posted by Nhat Nguyen Duc (Discussions: 1, Comments: 2)
Replied on January 6, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
when your method had validated properly with international standard as a references
Marked as spam
Posted by Sabda Nuha Maulana (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
Replied on January 7, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
There are multiple ways to get the same result. For example in the chemical testing lab, you can measure something through a deposition process where it is a gravimetric result or x Ray crystallography or mass spectrometry or FTIR or GC-FID or UV-VIS, etc. all may have various uncertainties and maybe some are cheaper and a customer doesn't require the level of precision.

Point being your scope cannot state that you measure something. It must state HOW that measurement is obtained and with what uncertainty.

In that regard, perhaps a “test” and “method” could be interchangeable. However I would consider “test” more generic like, “we are accredited to test 0.1 ppm -100% oxygen in gas (note the official scope would list it in mole fractions per fractions of balance gas) But that range may be made up of different instrumentation with different sensor technologies to test for for all ranges and a “method” to the standardized settings for each instrument required to get the expected results.
Marked as spam
Posted by Jeffrey Welter (Discussions: 0, Comments: 5)
Replied on January 8, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
Accreditation bodies normally ask for for the test &. the applicable method.There may be cases where more than one method is possible for conducting a test.So both are a requirement for the accreditation
Marked as spam
Posted by N Subramanian (Discussions: 1, Comments: 2)
Replied on January 8, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
So my two pence after many good answers. Your laboratory is accredited to perform Test or Calibrations accordingly with the List of methods (and ranges) in the accredited scope. Is this help you?
Marked as spam
Posted by Patrick Reposeur (Discussions: 1, Comments: 15)
Replied on January 8, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
Correct me if I am wrong but I think that more or less they go together. The accreditation scope is as it follows: product, parameter, test method. More test methods may be applicable for determining one parameter. One parameter may be applicable for different products (it depends how flexible your scope is). Still, no matter that you have validated or verified a test method for a certain product, in case you want to add the same method for another product then it is considered an extension of the scope. As a technical assessor to our NAB with more than 7 years of experience I have always wondered why the CAB has to prove that it is capable to perform the test according to a certain test method for a product when it has already done it once for another product and why it should be conaidered an extension of the scope.....but.....that's it. I have always been answered that it goes product, parameter/characteristic, test method..
Marked as spam
Posted by Valentin Belovski (Discussions: 0, Comments: 4)
Replied on January 8, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
I am alao a manager of a lab which is accredited according to EN ISO/IEC 17025.
Marked as spam
Posted by Valentin Belovski (Discussions: 0, Comments: 4)
Replied on January 8, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
Laboratories are accredited. Methods used in the accredited lab make up the scope of accreditation. For example, if the test method the lab used is a published or validated modified published method and is in the lab's scope of accreditation, then you may use the language that the laboratory is accredited per the accreditation body's prescriptive language (found in the standard). For a method to be included in the lab's scope of accreditation, is is listed when the laboratory applies for accreditation (or re-accreditation, as the case may be).
Marked as spam
Posted by Mark Lemley (Discussions: 0, Comments: 4)
Replied on January 9, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
in my opinion, it is the tests that are accredited
Marked as spam
Posted by JOSEPH OMONDI (Discussions: 0, Comments: 2)
Replied on January 9, 2018 7:00 pm
0
Private comment
We don't say your test is accredited or your method is accredited. In the metrology, your calibration or test laboratory is accredited to perform a calibration or a test with a specific method or procedure.
Marked as spam
Posted by Nekach Mustapha (Discussions: 0, Comments: 4)
Replied on January 11, 2018 7:00 pm
« Back to Previous Page