Regarding the calibration of pressure gauges
Thread Content
Safety regulations require that pressure gauges be calibrated every six months: they need to be removed, sent for calibration, and then brought back. Let’s discuss the necessity of doing this, as well as its advantages and disadvantages. I believe that in a system consisting of multiple pressure gauges operating in intermittent mode, it is possible to gradually increase the pressure in the system when no production is taking place, and to observe the changes in pressure across each gauge. If the pressure values of all the gauges rise in a similar manner, and the pressure changes when releasing air are also similar, then there is nothing wrong with those pressure gauges. If a certain change does not match the others, either it does not change or it does not return to zero, then there is a problem with it and it needs to be replaced. Remove all pressure gauges, and a small amount of gas from the sealing system will leak out. The threads may get damaged during removal, and leaks may occur when reinstalling them. During calibration, oil is sometimes used for testing; if oil gets in and causes contamination, it can ruin the pressure gauge. Is such a one-size-fits-all approach not counterproductive to some extent? Is it possible to handle each situation individually?
Pressure gauges are **measuring instruments subject to mandatory calibration, and must undergo periodic inspections as required.
It’s not just a quick glance like you said; one also needs to consider the accuracy of the watch.
Our company’s metrology engineers are capable of carrying out the task of calibrating pressure gauges; they are more professional than the operators from the safety supervision agency
Can the appraisal conducted by your organization replace the one carried out by the Work Safety Supervision Bureau?
It’s not just a matter of ability; qualifications also play a role. It is said that having the ability without the necessary qualifications doesn’t count. Just like in design institutes, does it matter if you claim to have the capability but lack the necessary design qualifications?
**For things that are mandatory, you don’t have to carry them out, but there will be consequences……
That’s the rule: if something goes wrong because testing isn’t carried out, or if it’s detected during testing, responsibility will be pursued.
It depends on the type of table; if it’s a Class C table, it may not be necessary, but tables of Class C or higher have strict time requirements!
In the end, it’s still a matter of regulations and responsibilities; there is no real scientific impact on whether something is safe or not
The current response from companies is to prepare a batch of items that have been inspected and are ready as substitutes for those that need to be inspected. Cyclic replacement. Competent enterprises can obtain the qualifications for conducting their own inspections~~