Verification defined

Tolerance verification is all activities by which organizations try to ensure that their product conforms to specifications and meets customer expectations, connected with measurement and testing functions to be provided in the industrial development process of the product. Tolerance verification defines inspection strategy and metrological procedures for functional requirements, functional specifications, and manufacturing specifications. It is very important to consider tolerance verification early in the design activities to be able to assess uncertainties. 

The verifications can be performed by the user himself, with electronic measurement equipment described in this project. The consequences of the application of future European standard are very important since is established a mandatory verification of each particular flaw detector, at least once a year. Their verification is to be performed according to a well defined procedure of measurement, including acceptance criteria for each parameter. 

The project review process involves multiple steps that should be definea in management gmdelines (CCPS, 1993, pp. 57-61). The steps include (1) review pohcy, (2) review scheduling, (3) reviewtech-nique, (4) review team representation, (5) review documentation, (6) review follow-up, (7) review follow-up verification, and (8) review procedures change management. These steps define how a review, whether it be a safety review, environmental review, pre-start-up review, or whatever, is conducted and how closure of review aclion items is achieved. 

Despite these limitations, mobile monitoring systems have been used to obtain useful information, such as the verification and tracking of the St. Louis, Missouri, urban plume. The measurement of a well-defined urban plume spreading northeastward from St. Louis is shown in Fig. 15-2 (7). These data were collected by a combination of instrumented aircraft and mobile vans. Cross-sectional paths were flown by the aircraft at increasing distances downwind. Meteorological conditions of low wind speed in the same direction helped to maintain this urban plume in a well-defined... 

If there are personnel involved with the identification, interpretation, promulgation, and verification of such regulations then their responsibilities and authority will need to be defined in the quality system. 

It is quite normal to provide sufficient resources to produce product. However, when it comes to verifying that you have done what you say you will do, there is a tendency to underestimate or to cut verification resources when costs escalate. These cuts are often seen as a risk worth taking. Another common weakness is defining requirements that are desirable rather than essential and then not verifying that they have been implemented. Being able to demonstrate provision of adequate verification resources is another sign of commitment to quality (see Defining commitment to quality above). 

Generically there are two types of requirements defining requirements and verification requirements. Defining requirements specify the features and characteristics required of a product, process, or service. (Within the standard these are termed specified requirements.) These may be wholly specified by the customer or by the supplier or a mixture of the two. Verification requirements specify the requirements for verifying that the defining requirements have been achieved and again may be wholly specified by the customer or by the supplier or a mixture of the two. With verification requirements, how-... 

By producing defining specifications that prescribe requirements for products or services and also the means by which these requirements are to be verified in-house in terms of the inspections, tests, analyses, audits, reviews, evaluations, and other means of verification... 

By producing separate verification specifications that define which features and characteristics of the product or service are to be verified and the means by which such verification is to be carried out... 

By producing a quality plan or a verification plan that identifies the verification stages from product conception to delivery and further as appropriate, and refers to other documents that define the specific requirements at each stage... 

Clause 4.6.2.1 requires that you define the extent of subcontractor control but neither this clause nor clause 4.6.4.1 requires you to plan, execute, or record any verification at... 

The product specification should provide all necessary processing requirements that need to be implemented when carrying out particular processes however, some of the requirements may need to be defined in separate process specifications which are invoked by reference. You may need to develop your own process specifications, but there are many national standards that may suit your needs and they come with the added benefit that they have been proven to work. The quality plan or procedures should not contain any further product requirements but may provide the verification methods to be employed, the precautions to be observed and the recording requirements to be met. You need to identify in your production plans each of these documents at the stage at which they should be applied, otherwise there is the possibility that they may be overlooked. 

The standard provides a choice as to whether you define the inspections and tests required in a quality plan or in documented procedures. You may of course need to do both. As the quality system is often designed to accommodate all products and services you supply, it may not specify inspections and tests which are needed for particular products. This is one of the roles of the quality plan. Within such a plan you should identify the verification stages during product development, production, installation, and servicing as applicable. These stages will vary depending on the product, so your quality plan will be product, contract, or project specific (see Part 2 Chapter 2). There may... 

If a quality record was intended to be any document generated or used by the quality system, the definition would surely have indicated this. If we decompose the definition further, requirements for quality are defined in ISO 8402 as the expression of the needs or their translation into a set of quantitatively stated requirements for the characteristics of an entity to enable its realization and examination. Clearly, such a requirement would be a contract, product specification, design requirement, etc. This implies that any product verification records are quality records, but it rules out any recorded information as being a quality record. 

Verification. Each PSM system will include a mechanism for verifying installation. This will either be the requirement for copies of documentation being sent to Corporate EHS, or another mechanism defined by the project team. 

Optical sensors and relay switches are used throughout the test routine for verification. For all possible problems, as well as the sequence in which they occur, the robot must recognize that there is a problem, define the problem, decide how best to resolve the problem, perform the necessary operations to overcome the problem, and enable the system to resume testing. This is an AI application area and a critical feature, mainly because the system operates unattended and measurements are taken overnight and during weekends. 

Laboratory experiments using natural consortia under defined conditions have particular value from several points of view. They are of direct environmental relevance, and their use minimizes the ambiguities in extrapolation from the results of studies with pure cultures. They provide valuable verification of the results of studies with pure cultures and make it possible to evaluate the extent to which the results of such studies may justifiably be extended to the natural environment. It should be appreciated, however, that in some cases the habitats from which the inoculum was taken might already have been exposed to xenobiotics so that natural enrichment (preexposure) could already have taken place. This has been discussed in Chapter 4. 

In their broadest application, CRMs are used as controls to verify in a direct comparison the accuracy of the results of a particular measurement parallel with this verification, traceability may be demonstrated. Under conditions demonstrated to be equal for sample and CRM, agreement of results, e.g. as defined above, is proof. Since such possibilities for a direct comparison between samples and a CRM are rare, the user s claims for accuracy and traceability have to be made by inference. Naturally, the use of several CRMs of similar matrix but different analyte content will strengthen the user s inference. Even so, the user stiU has to assess and account for all uncertainties in this comparison of results. These imcertainty calculations must include beyond the common analytical uncertainty budget (i) a component that reflects material matrix effects, (2) a component that reflects differences in the amount of substance determined, (3) the uncertainty of the certified or reference value(s) used, and 4) the uncertainty of the comparison itself AU this information certainly supports the assertion of accuracy in relation to the CRM. However, the requirement of the imbroken chain of comparisons wiU not be formally fulfilled. 

Brandt [200] has extracted tri(nonylphenyl) phosphite (TNPP) from a styrene-butadiene polymer using iso-octane. Brown [211] has reported US extraction of acrylic acid monomer from polyacrylates. Ultrasonication was also shown to be a fast and efficient extraction method for organophosphate ester flame retardants and plasticisers [212]. Greenpeace [213] has recently reported the concentration of phthalate esters in 72 toys (mostly made in China) using shaking and sonication extraction methods. Extraction and analytical procedures were carefully quality controlled. QC procedures and acceptance criteria were based on USEPA method 606 for the analysis of phthalates in water samples [214]. Extraction efficiency was tested by spiking blank matrix and by standard addition to phthalate-containing samples. For removal of fatty acids from the surface of EVA pellets a lmin ultrasonic bath treatment in isopropanol is sufficient [215]. It has been noticed that the experimental ultrasonic extraction conditions are often ill defined and do not allow independent verification. 

LEMMA 5.1 The quantifier-free formula V(P,a,A,B) as defined above satisfies the definition of a verification condition for path a in program P. ... 

The basic principle of heat-flow calorimetry is certainly to be found in the linear equations of Onsager which relate the temperature or potential gradients across the thermoelements to the resulting flux of heat or electricity (16). Experimental verifications have been made (89-41) and they have shown that the Calvet microcalorimeter, for instance, behaves, within 0.2%, as a linear system at 25°C (41)-A. heat-flow calorimeter may be therefore considered as a transducer which produces the linear transformation of any function of time f(t), the input, i.e., the thermal phenomenon under investigation]] into another function of time ig(t), the response, i.e., the thermogram]. The problem is evidently to define the corresponding linear operator. 

Approximate limits to the adsorbed layer thickness can be defined. The lower limit is about twice the radius of gyration for particles of the appropriate size. This particle size can b culated from the radius of gyration and the relationship <5aR The adsorbed layer thickness increases with increasing particle size, and the measured thicknesses are always greater than twice the radius of gyration, the difference increasing with increasing particle size. The upper limit cannot be defined at present. Moreover, these limits are conjectural and require more experimental evidence for their verification. 

The justification associated with a refinement can be formal or informal it could even simply say, Joe said this will work. The verification techniques can be applied in varying degrees of rigor, from casual inspection to mathematical proof. In between, there is the more cost-effective option of making refinements the focus of design reviews and basing systematically defined test code on the specifications (see Figure 6.43). 

Quality control verifications and NDE visual examinations shall be performed based on the following requirements. NDE visual examination shall be as defined in Chapter GR-1. Visual examinations of welds and components shall be performed in accordance with ASME BPV Code Section V, Article 9, including the following ... 

---