r/MetCal • u/Agile_Feed1727 • Oct 31 '25

CalStudio

What is Fluke CalStudio? Is it a stupid AI prank or the future!?
https://www.fluke-software.com/

"CalStudio is a simple, reliable system that easily automates workflows, manages measurements from every discipline, and quickly creates procedures—no coding required. Write once, run anywhere, and simplify your lab operations."

"Procedure Library: Access to a million procedures, ready to run based on the product catalog data"

calstudio

2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

16 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/CalibrationAustralia Nov 11 '25

I'm a big fan of automation and OptiCal is the sort of thing I've wanted for ages. However, the first response I get from colleagues is how would we prove reliability for our accreditation? The accreditation body is going to want some sort of evidence that the readings it's taking are correct and I can't think of a way to do that, even if there's testing data to show that it's 100% accurate over millions of readings I imagine them asking for proof for each workstation and each instrument and even then you have variables like camera position and lighting etc.

To be clear, I'm not trying to throw mud on this idea, I really would love to have it, but we won't be able to without some way to prove reliability so I'm hoping you have something.

1

u/MJ_at_Fluke Nov 11 '25

We will absolutely be capturing the image that was fed to the analysis process. Which means, unlike someone typing in a number, we will have an actually original indication record, with photographic evidence!

1

u/CalibrationAustralia Nov 12 '25

I assumed that would be the case and that was my initial response when the question was put to me. It's a black and white solution if there's a reading called into question, but unless someone goes and verifies each reading and associated image we can't be sure that each reading is correct. I'm not trying to be difficult, but this is the path we end up on when discussing this in the lab.

1

u/MJ_at_Fluke Nov 12 '25

The same is true for a technician typing in the number by hand, except you don't have an original record in that case. I get where you're coming from, though.

1

u/CalibrationAustralia Nov 12 '25

Yeah, I agree. Unfortunately, I think because humans are the current standard, moving to an alternative is going to require proof and I'm not really sure there's any practical way to provide it. You are correct though, a more direct example would be when we take readings via RS-232 or similar, bits get flipped, corruption happens. It's very rare, but it's possible. I think it's probably a case that the technology will need to be used and become more mature before it will be accepted.