The Elsmar Cove Forum and Site Map The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page

Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > SPC Monitoring and Statistical Analysis Techniques


The Elsmar Cove Forum SideBar!
Monitor the Forum
Monitor New Forum Posts
New Threads Feeds
RSS FeedRSS Feed
Sponsor Link










$ Contributor Forum Access
Courtesy Quick Links

Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:


Howard's International Quality Services

Atul's Symphony Technologies

Dave Scott's Scott Quality Solutions

Praxiom Research Group


NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest Portal

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology

ASQ - American Society for Quality


All the Important Standards and Related Web Sites in the World
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  #1  
Old 17th November 2000, 06:11 AM
VojkoKrizman
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Question Debalancing machine - is SPC needed?

Debalancing machine is consisted from two parts:1 measurement instrument and debalancing part. ALL parts (rotors for DC motors) are measured (100% inspection). If balance is more than prespecified target (eg. > 40 gmm) then parts go through balancing operation that lowers the debalance below target (measured again). Parts, that go to the next operation, than comes from two distributions (supposed nonnormal):1. good parts from initial measurement and 2. balanced parts. How to measure the Ppk (I understand that Cpk can not be computed). Is it necessary to compute Ppk, since it seems all parts are good but parts from the first distribution can be near the target (but below!)

------------------
Vojko Krizman
SLOVENIA
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 17th November 2000, 05:51 PM
Laura M's Avatar
Laura M Laura M is offline
Courtesy Access

Registration Date: Aug 1999
Location: Rochester, NY US
 
Posts: 759
Thanks Given to Others: 3
Thanked 17 Times in 15 Posts
Karma Power: 70
Karma: 656
Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.
Send a message via AIM to Laura M Send a message via Skype™ to Laura M
My initial thoughts are you have 2 separate calculations to do, because you essentially have 2 different populations. You would want to know how capable the rework process is.

Also wanted to mention that my Great grandparents were born in Slovenia!

Laura
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 20th November 2000, 05:32 AM
VojkoKrizman
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Debalancing operation cannot be omitted.The result of this operation are parts that come from two distributions and we have 100% inspection. My main question is: If we have 100% inspection and all parts are good, do we have to compute Ppk, especially if all parts are good (but from distribution it comes out we have some fraction of nonconform parts!?)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 22nd November 2000, 10:51 AM
Laura M's Avatar
Laura M Laura M is offline
Courtesy Access

Registration Date: Aug 1999
Location: Rochester, NY US
 
Posts: 759
Thanks Given to Others: 3
Thanked 17 Times in 15 Posts
Karma Power: 70
Karma: 656
Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.Laura M is appreciated, and has over 500 Karma points.
Send a message via AIM to Laura M Send a message via Skype™ to Laura M
100% inspection is often the alternative if you do not meet process capability requirements. If you have a bimodal distribution due to 2 processes rolled in to one data set, then it is possible that each process is separatly capable, but when you combine them the standard deviation increases and the capabiiity index would indicate parts out of spec. Without knowing more about the prcocess, that's probably as much as I should say so I don't mislead you.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 22nd November 2000, 11:58 AM
Rick Goodson's Avatar
Rick Goodson Rick Goodson is offline
Inactive Registered Visitor

Registration Date: Aug 2000
Location: Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
 
Posts: 229
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Karma Power: 42
Karma: 20
Rick Goodson has less than 100 Karma points so far.
I agree with the advise Laura has given but wanted to add a thought. If the two separate processes are capable, why combine them and then and force yourself into a 100% inspection operation that may not be necessary? If you run both populations across the same secondary operation you could consider a 'short run' SPC technique such as a 'Nominal' or a 'Target' chart. Once again, as Laura stated, I would need to know more about the process before we could definitively say short run is the best option. If you want to investigate short run further try the International Quality Institute, http://www.i-q-i.com/index.htm or Dr Don Wheeler's website http://www.spcpress.com/
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10th January 2001, 10:49 AM
Mark M
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
The Hat

Adding to the Balancing Process Characterization Issue ...

How are you going about calculating the process capability for a polar oriented process (imbalance amount and angle) when the usual capability calculation assume a linear measurement? Of course, the polar coordinates can be converted, but you still have two dimensions instead of one.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > SPC Monitoring and Statistical Analysis Techniques

Bookmarks


Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Is SPC a requirement of AS9100? Small Machine Shop and Assembly Cindrakay AS9100 Aerospace Standard and Requirements 8 19th September 2009 08:25 PM
What type of SQC or SPC Techniques can be implemented in Machine Shops viren SPC Monitoring and Statistical Analysis Techniques 8 17th April 2009 07:58 AM
Old machine (Mitutoyo Qualimate DL-500) for SPC - Is it Worth the effort? qualitymoron Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4 30th January 2008 01:30 PM
Machine Capability Studies: How many parts needed? Dawn SPC Monitoring and Statistical Analysis Techniques 11 21st March 2001 02:17 PM
SPC from Each Cavity? Small Plastic Parts using Injection Molding Machine Marcin SPC Monitoring and Statistical Analysis Techniques 5 10th April 2000 12:16 PM



The time now is 01:10 AM. All times are GMT -4.
The time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.



   

All Y'All Come Back Now, Y' Hear?

Made With A Mac! FreeBSD OS Powered by Apache!
Using php4 Forums provided and maintained by Marc Smith Database by MySQL

FAIR USE and CORRECTNESS NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe herein constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. In addition, I do not guarantee the correctness of the content. The risk of using content from the Elsmar Cove web site and forums remains with the user/visitor.

Responsibility Statement: Each person is responsible for anything they post in the Elsmar Cove forum. Neither I, Marc Timothy Smith, nor any of the forum Moderators, are responsible for the content of posts people make. Liability for post content resides with the poster as does interpretation and/or acceptance and/or use of advice by the reader.

Complaints: If you have a complaint with a post in a forum discussion thread, including Content in general, fighting, flaming, copyright infringement, defamation and/or 'slander', please use the 'Report This Post Report This Post Button button which appears at the top of every post in every thread.

Site courtesy of:
Marc Timothy Smith - Cayman Business Systems, 8466 Lesourdsville-West Chester Road, West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929 - USA
(513) 341-6272

To contact me, click the Google Voice link below, enter Your Name and Your Phone Number and Google will ring your phone and connect you for free!

The Elsmar Cove Web Site is *CopyFree*
no new posts