Why must the two result states remain separate?
The February 2010 Fluke Manual MET/CAL guide shows separate as-found and as-left results when a calibration issue is corrected. Its status fields also distinguish incoming and outgoing conditions. This dated software example supports preserving the two evidence states, not a universal calibration procedure or interval.
Commissioning Docs is independent and is not affiliated with Fluke. The worksheet below is our documentation aid. The calibration provider and project technical owner determine the actual method, evaluation and treatment of any affected tests.
Sources: Fluke: Manual MET/CAL Datasheet Edition Users Manual, February 2010, printed pages 24 and 38
What should the instrument history link to?
Start with the exact instrument serial number, function, range and calibration event. A passing outgoing result for one function does not establish the incoming condition of every function. Preserve original certificates and any adjustment or repair record without changing their labels.
| Field | Record | Review |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Serial, function, range and event | Match the instrument actually used |
| Incoming result | As-found values and provider disposition | Preserve exceptions and missing data |
| Intervention | Adjustment or repair record | Keep distinct from a measurement |
| Outgoing result | As-left values and provider disposition | Do not overwrite incoming results |
| Earlier use | Linked tests, dates and measurement functions | Identify possible affected records |
| Impact decision | Technical reviewer, basis and action | Keep uncertainty or retest requirements explicit |
Can an outgoing pass erase a previous concern?
Illustrative example. A fictional instrument certificate records an as-found value of 10.3 units and an as-left value of 10.0 units at one calibration point after adjustment. The provider reports an incoming exception and an acceptable outgoing result under its stated evaluation. Those invented values do not define a project tolerance.
Earlier commissioning record T-A used that instrument before the adjustment. The document controller links T-A to the certificate and requests a technical impact review. They do not replace T-A's reading with 10.0, declare it failed solely from the incoming exception, or conclude that the later pass validates the earlier test.
How should the earlier-use review be closed?
The reviewer needs the actual measurement functions, conditions, calibration evidence and project acceptance basis. A check at one calibration point does not supply a reliable correction for every earlier reading. Record the reviewer's disposition, any further evidence or retest, and the affected record revisions.
Keep original and later evidence together with their dates and status. The commissioning professional approves test dispositions. Engineering sign-off is performed only by the registered engineer on the job. This register neither certifies instruments nor prescribes energized testing.
Common questions
What else should the bid team know?
Does an as-left pass prove earlier results were correct?
No. Earlier use requires a review of the relevant incoming condition and measurement basis.
Should the as-found value be replaced after adjustment?
No. Preserve the incoming result and record the outgoing result separately.
Can one calibration point correct every earlier reading?
Do not assume that. Obtain the responsible technical reviewer's documented assessment.