Can an ISO 6789:2003 report still be used, and how should it be read?

First confirm the edition and the tool's identity

ISO 6789:2003 combined tool requirements and calibration procedures in one standard, without a Part 1/Part 2 division. The two 2017 parts replaced it, so the document should explicitly state “ISO 6789:2003” rather than “conforms to the current ISO 6789.” If only the standard number appears, ask the supplier to clarify the year.

Whether the edition is acceptable depends on your purchasing specification, customer agreement, or specified standard. A clearly stated year is a starting point for reviewing the document, not a guarantee that its contents are correct. The 2003 edition requires a serial number or identification number on tools supplied with a calibration certificate. Match the number on the tool to the report to confirm that the data concern the tool in hand.

Check measurement points and readings against the 2003 rules

Do not apply the 2017 reading counts directly to an earlier report. For example, fixed-adjustment tools in Type II, Classes B and E, require 5 measurements at the nominal or set value under the 2003 edition. Five recorded readings do not, by themselves, indicate that measurements are missing.

The general measurement sequence is 20 %, approximately 60 %, and 100 % of the tool's maximum torque. Type II, Classes B and E, are instead measured at the nominal or set value. If the tool has no scale mark at 20 %, use the scale mark immediately below it. For each operating direction, all Type I classes and Type II, Classes A, D, and G, require 5 consecutive readings at each point; Type II, Classes C and F, require 10 consecutive readings at each point.

Check the individual readings and deviations as well. The 2003 edition requires all readings to be recorded, with every reading within the tolerance for that tool class. Looking only at the mean is not enough to establish this.

The absence of W and W′ reflects an edition difference

The 2003 edition already includes an uncertainty requirement for the calibration device: no more than ±1 % of the indicated value, calculated in accordance with the GUM using a coverage factor of k = 2. This value concerns the calibration device; it cannot simply be treated as the uncertainty of the tool being calibrated.

That edition does not require the calculation of the later Part 2 quantities W and W′ for each tool. Their absence alone is therefore not evidence of nonconformance with the 2003 edition. If your intended use requires traceable results and uncertainty for individual tools, check what the document actually provides and agree on the calibration work needed.