Clarification of terminology

It is with pleasant surprise that I have received a follow-up kindly sent in by James Rand relating to one of my previous Memoranda:

“Your article in NDT News, Issue 211, March 2021, concerning calibration terms was of great interest. May I propose a suggestion with respect to this problem? For ‘internal’ test technician calibration, let the term be ‘site calibration’ to denote point-of-work screen setting; for external test-house calibration, let the term be ‘metrics calibration’ to denote the fundamental nature of this requirement. It is further proposed that the term to denote the second type of calibration, that is external third-party calibration, be shortened to ‘metrical’ for ease of use and to further distinguish from the former, that is ‘internal’ technician calibration. The logic put forward in your article that only the second (first case in your article) type of calibration, involving external third-party test-houses, should be termed calibration is surely valid. However, it may be unlikely to dissuade technicians and others from employing the use of the term ‘calibration’ to describe point-of-work screen setting. I can hear ‘metrical’ being said in a variety of accents with a reasonable amount of ease and hope this suggestion at least allows some food for thought. In addition, regarding the distinction between qualifications and certification: is it not the case that a qualification, such as a degree, amounts to something you possess rather than just hold, whereas the opposite may be said to be true of certification? We have a qualification until it is taken off us, yet we have a certification only until it expires; important difference?”

The above points raised by James are valid and can assist in the understanding of the use of the term ‘calibration’. Part of my role is to sign off the CP17 application forms for the renewal and recertification processes and recently I have noticed that there are more omissions on the submissions, especially in ‘Part D – Employer’s Certificate’, where the employer confirms when the person has been employed by them and, significantly, ‘with/without* significant interruption (*delete as applicable)’. The number of forms that are submitted without either the ‘with’ or ‘without’ being deleted is significant. Without this section being completed the form cannot be processed. Another section is ‘Annex C – Level 3 Task Record Sheet’. Here, the boxes that require the certificate holder’s name, PCN number and PCN certificate number are often left blank, again stopping the approval of the application and generating more work for both parties. Can I please ask that forms are double-checked prior to submission to help the process run more smoothly?

Comments by members

This forum post has no comments, be the first to leave a comment.

<< Back