Skip to Content
1
May 03, 2012 at 02:19 PM

Smaller than, greater than limits

1231 Views

Hi All,

I have come across a strange requirement. I would appreciate if someone reconfirm me or suggest few more ideas.

  1. In inspection plan one of the MICs is LENGTH which has only upper limits as 1.90mm
  2. I believe it does indicate that any reading which equals to or smaller than 1.90mm is valuated as Accept in QA32 during RR.
  3. Requirement is all the readings that are below or < 1.90 mm are acceptable but 1.90 should have Reject valuation.
  4. Is that feasible to apply some kind of rule for achieving this?

Alternatives that came in to my mind are,

  1. Upper limit should be changed to 1.89 or 1.899. As a result of which absolute 1.90 would result in Reject
  2. Or description of MIC should be LENGTH (< 1.90) with upper limit as 1.90 mm as the specification would be printed in COA. Thereafter user should valuate it manually and reject if reading is 1.90

Many thanks,

Anand Rao

I clarify few more aspects here,

Basically there are following possibilities for the values in fields of lower limit and upper limit.

  1. < 1.90 = All values below 1.90 are acceptable but 1.90 is not
  2. ≤ 1.90 = All values below 1.90 and equal to 1.90 are acceptable
  3. ≥ 1.90 = All values greater than 1.90 or equal to 1.90 are acceptable
  4. >1.90 = All values greater than 1.90 are acceptable but 1.90 is not

Is there any feasibility to accommodate above cases in specification in inspection plan

Anand

Message was edited by: Anand Rao