Articles by James Fusco

This article identifies process variation points by examining the defined system. It explores solutions to improve physical test systems and provides application guidance that can help ensure every result can be a reliable benchmark and indicator in your process.

When physical test equipment passes calibration, most customers assume that their results are bulletproof. In practice, however, many quality teams are discovering that “in-spec” instruments are no longer enough to defend their data when auditors or customers start asking questions.

In many laboratories, confidence in physical testing is based on the assumption that results are consistent and that, if a method works once, it can be repeated. However, shifts in operator technique, environmental conditions, or instrument calibration can undermine that confidence.