Dear experts:
We just doing MSA on our process measurement system , we still in learning .

Attachment is our MSA sample.
We want to know , how to promote our measurement system from this conclusion ? From this conclusion , what shall we do ?

Any suggestion are welcome. Thanks very much.

Best regard.
CALM

I'm not sure what you mean by "...doing MSA on our process measurement system..." but here are some general observations about your attachment (references are to the AIAG MSA manual, 3rd Edition):

The UCLr on the graph on the first sheet doesn't match the one on the third sheet.
All of the gage error is in equipment variation (EV) which indicates that the device isn't suited to the application, or is somehow malfunctioning.
It appears that the gage is capable of discrimination to only two decimal places, the same as the tolerance. Further evidence of lack of adequate discrimination may be seen in the averages chart in the third sheet; there are too many readings inside the control limits (see page 102 in the manual).

Thanks JSW05 :

“Doing MSA in process measure system” means the gauge used on product line.
In attached file , I have revised the graphic , due to a wrong formular , I earn a wrong graphic.
On the other hand , I have made a analysed in attached file , I found the capability of this process was much higher than 1.67 , so ,I just suspected that do we need to change our gage from 0.01 decimal to 0.001 decimal ? Because the change will lead a cost raising.
Hoping your reply.

Thanks JSW05 :

“Doing MSA in process measure system” means the gauge used on product line.
In attached file , I have revised the graphic , due to a wrong formular , I earn a wrong graphic.
On the other hand , I have made a analysed in attached file , I found the capability of this process was much higher than 1.67 , so ,I just suspected that do we need to change our gage from 0.01 decimal to 0.001 decimal ? Because the change will lead a cost raising.
Hoping your reply.
If this gage was used in the capability analysis, how do you know the Cpk (or Ppk) number is accurate? Your GR&R study did what it was supposed to do--it told you you have a problem with discrimination. What you do now is a matter of choice, and your choice should take the potential expense into account.

Thanks for your quickly reply.
Yes, you are right . When we recieve an order , we should consider every elements of cost .Frankly , in this issue ,I just want to know if the process capability is very high, such as ,the tolerance is biger than 0.20mm, but the total variance not more than 0.015mm(use microcaliper),do we need to change the gage from 0.01 to 0.001?
Our products are fasteners,mainly nut and screw.In threading process, the major dia also had a relatively stability (if the first set up is ok ,the process would be less variance).
;)

Thanks for your quickly reply.
Yes, you are right . When we recieve an order , we should consider every elements of cost .Frankly , in this issue ,I just want to know if the process capability is very high, such as ,the tolerance is biger than 0.20mm, but the total variance not more than 0.015mm(use microcaliper),do we need to change the gage from 0.01 to 0.001?
Our products are fasteners,mainly nut and screw.In threading process, the major dia also had a relatively stability (if the first set up is ok ,the process would be less variance).
;)
Only you can answer the question. You know (or have good reason to believe)that your gage isn't sensitive enough to provide reliable GR&R results. Whether or not it's an issue in production is a function of how important the meaurements are. Frankly, I'm not sure why you would bother to measure at all if you're not concerned with the results, and I still wonder how you can have confidence in the stability and capability of the process if the measurement system used to evaluate it is significantly questionable.