Is There Any Governing Body that Certifies Labs?

Excuse me but for any of your measurement results to be at all credible you will have to be much more specific than you've posted here. We do not know what kind of light you are testing (visible, ionizing, thermal, coherent, etc.), what energy levels will you be testing, for what industry will you be testing, what kind of photometric data you will be collecting (reflectivity, luminance, image quality) or even which corner of this planet you happen to reside. If you offer us some more information, then somebody here might be able to give you relevant information.

Try these websites for certification standards.

http://www.iesna.org/

http://www.cie.co.at/index.php?i_ca_id=234

In addition to the guidance from redfred, is this testing for your own use? Or, will you be providing this service to others? Are these others (perhaps in other countries or disciplines) constrained by the guidelines you will use in your lab?

I hope you are not offended, but you should have your tests performed by a credible, certified independent testing facility until you have gained at least enough knowledge to sound intelligent on the subject of testing. Your present lack of knowledge will be telegraphed to your clients as soon as you try to explain how the tests are preformed, etc. etc.

Maybe you can "look over the shoulder" of the test tech and "pick his brain" for knowledge.

Good luck.

I certified my steel chemistry and metallurgical and mechanical testing labs to A2LA

http://www.a2la.org/

Milo

All other replies are very rightly guiding replies.

Beyond that you should clarify, from which country you are and where you are setting up the lab. You have not even put your country identity in your profile.

Each country has different accredidation authorities.

Name of the authority can be told only after we know your location.

Where are you setting up the lab. Where will you be getting your primary standards from.Where will your traceability to national /international standards come from. The CIE is the body which handles standards relating to light.

NATA for one.

There is a body in the UK called NPL .. The National Physical Laboratory. very precise measurements are done there including photo-metrics. They will be able to tell you where is the certified authority in the part of the world you need, and who you should contact.

I dbouts are cleared, all of youre comments are helpful. Thanks all of you

In the US it is best for such a lab to have NIST traceability, and to make the measurements in compliance with the appropriate ISO standards and methods. If ISO is mum on the subject (which is rare) then you would look for ANSI or CIE standards. If there are no ANSI standards check the old MIL-SPEC standards (these may not be 'official', but they are often helpful). If you are outside the US, ISO is still the ultimate source, and you will probably have a national standards body as well. You need to have detailed written procedures for each type of test, that includes internal and external calibration procedures, intervals, sources, tolerances, etc. You should also have an overall quality system, documented procedures for material handling and storage, training, record keeping, lab maintenance, training, etc. A good place to start is ISO Guide 25 - General requirements for the competence of calibration and testing laboratories. You could check out the link below for a catalog of ISO standards that may relate to your line of work. Once you have written all these documents, and you are up and running, you can look into accreditation by a local body. But ultimately, whether you go for accreditation or not, the documentation and traceability are the key. As in science, reproducibility of the measurements is critical, and without documented procedures this is not possible. Best of luck to you.

www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=41641

Let me clarify little bit more.

The OP is wishing to get certification (or accreditation) to the lab, and not the instruments he is using.

Thus, though NIST or NPL or NMi traceability is needed for all the instruments, that is not the complete thing.

Once the instruments being used are NIST/ NPL/ **** whatever traceable, still you need to get accreditation from some other Accreditation authority under UKAS in UK or NABL in India or RVA in Netherlands etc, under ISO 17025 ... accreditation of laboratories.

This accreditation itself is a separate procedure, where you have to have a system of quality of the laboratory and also have to budget the uncertainty figure or BMC figures for the whole calibration process.

The body accrediting the lab is different for each country and is under the umbrella of international agreements.

Besides all the non-governemntal organizations that cerify labs, there are also a variety of governmental agency certifications that can be reuired for labs to conduct work in specific fields or for specific government agencies. In the US, these can range from local county agenies to the Federal government. However, most certifications from the government are for contractors providing government services or those in critical service industries where public health is a concern (USEPA, or State ELAP).

Further to a private mail from Shoeb, I share the following.

There are some essential steps in moving forward to having a certified/endorsed laboratory.

When I established a NATA lab is Aus, we first spent a few years in a "partnership" with a laboratory, using their personel and expertise to extend our knowledge base in the field. It's not just about having the lab, but also knowing what the information means in relation to your designs and product in order to improve the outcome when necessary.

Usually such labs will provide a 2 tiered price scale. A basic fee for performance of a "non-endorsed" test, that maybe conducted by a junior staff member in training, with no signatory review and other frills removed OR a standard fee for the endorsed tests (With relevant traceability, reports and evidence) that are used for evidence of your product performance.

Once you have that proficiency, then you can look at "make versus buy" as to whether it is beneficial to own and maintain a lab. The overhead costs for a lab include SIGNIFICANT fees for maintenance and re-calibration of your standards and reference items.

With experience, you will be able to determine the precission and accuracy required and begin to specify the performance of the lab hardware and the standards that you buy to support your needs.

Expect that your power supplies will cost as much as your goniometer and expect to pay 25% of the capital cost of the lab per year in re-calibration expenses.

On the brighter side, these costs scare away many from establishing labs and there are many (Like yourself right now) that feel the need for such services. Your national certification body will probably welcome a properly run and managed lab that will service the needs of others and this can become a significant income stream.

Remember though, Proficiency, traceability and capability count for nothing without utmost integrity. The lab needs to be totally independant from influence and be prepared to stand its ground against efforts to taint its reputation.

Or at least the certification organization will appreciate the fees derived from the certification process.

This is largely correct, however, costs of re-calibration can be reduced if you have a sphere and use your primary standards only for making working standards which you use daily. My SANAS (Part of ILAC) accredited Photometry lab re-calibrated lamps after every 100hrs of use hence the need for working standards. Greg

There's another point the originator needs to consider.

More important than the equipment in the lab and the building itself is having suitable technically qualified and competant staff. Most certifying authorities would not contemplate a photometrics lab that didn't have at least one person with a degree in applied science (specifically photonics or some strongly related optics field) and some years of experience in this type of application.

Obtaining the right resources must include the recruitment of capable staff.

These types of labs involve more than just having the right equipment and following the vendor's operations manuals. It requires a comprehensive understanding of the physics involved, the potential sources of error and the implications of the results.

I hope that our comments have provided a foundation for the originator to proceed to the next step and it would be a shame if we failed to mention this significant point.

When they identify suitable persons for these technical roles, they will then have local sources of advice on how to proceed.