|
|
 |

4th March 2004, 12:05 PM
|
|
Getting Involved (6 to 9 Posts)
Registration Date: Aug 2003
Location: Colorado, USA
|
|
Posts: 6
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Karma Power: 26
|
|
Significant digits when reporting measurements
What is the accepted practice when reporting dimensional results with regard to significant digits and rounding?
For example, if a feature is toleranced as 5.00 +/- 0.25, should we report to 3 places (measurement is 5.252 = out of spec) or do we round down to 2 places and report 5.25 = in spec?
I'm new to quality, so trying to grasp the basics. Thanks.
|

4th March 2004, 02:21 PM
|
 |
Dogs rule
Registration Date: Jul 2002
Location: Madison, WI
Age: 56
|
|
Posts: 980
Thanks Given to Others: 15
Thanked 23 Times in 16 Posts
Karma Power: 69
|
|
Welcome to the Cove
Our normal "practice" is to report one digit further than the callout. We don't have that documented internally but I seem to remember seeing it as a "should" somewhere (I require it for any documentation I may be sending to our customer). You may be, momentarily, "fooling" the customer (and yourself) but if you take variability into account, you could end up shipping product which will cause a "no build" or loss of functionality.
Good luck!!
Bill
__________________
There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face. - Ben Williams
|

4th March 2004, 02:58 PM
|
 |
Quality Manager
Registration Date: Sep 2003
Location: Illinois
|
|
Posts: 7,534
Thanks Given to Others: 182
Thanked 1,127 Times in 762 Posts
Karma Power: 397
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bill Ryan
Welcome to the Cove
Our normal "practice" is to report one digit further than the callout. We don't have that documented internally but I seem to remember seeing it as a "should" somewhere (I require it for any documentation I may be sending to our customer). You may be, momentarily, "fooling" the customer (and yourself) but if you take variability into account, you could end up shipping product which will cause a "no build" or loss of functionality.
Good luck!!
Bill
|
When I was in the high tech aerospace/medical machining business, we made it a policy to cover this issue in Contract Review with the customer before we ever cut metal.
As an aside, we always discussed the form, fit, and function aspects of a component we made for customers (everything custom to customer's design.)
We found it helpful to request tolerances as either
(+0.000 / -0.xxx) or (+0.xxx / -0.000),
instead of (+/-0.yyy),
depending on the mating part. We had a nice little set of toys to illustrate our point (male mating parts with dimension at maximum material condition and female mating parts the opposite.)
Sometimes the customer's design engineers would have an epiphany and modify ALL their drawings to show tolerances in our suggested method.
__________________
"Few minds wear out; more rust out"
Inscribed over the entrance of Louis Pasteur School, Chicago
Christian Nestell Bovee (1820-1904) in Thoughts, Feelings and Fancies, 1857
|

4th March 2004, 03:09 PM
|
 |
Registration Date: Sep 1999
Location: Oklahoma
Age: 67
|
|
Posts: 1,437
Thanks Given to Others: 1
Thanked 29 Times in 17 Posts
Karma Power: 90
|
|
Normally you use an instrument that has a discrimination of ten times the tolerance or as Bill stated "one more place than the callout", which means you report the result to 3 places. Based on this I would say no you cannot round down.
__________________
Sam Goody
|

22nd March 2004, 10:57 AM
|
 |
$ Contributor
Registration Date: Sep 2000
Location: Lilburn, GA, USA
Age: 60
|
|
Posts: 401
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
Karma Power: 63
|
|
The standard that applies is ...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by vforge
What is the accepted practice when reporting dimensional results with regard to significant digits and rounding?
|
Practices vary, of course, and should conform to your customer's requirements. However, the applicable standard is:
ASTM E 29, Using Significant Digits in Test Data to Determine Conformance With Specifications.
Thist can be purchased (paper or electronic) from ASTM ( www.astm.org).
According to the footnotes, this standard was first published in 1940 and reaffirmed in 1999.
__________________
Graeme C. Payne
ASQ Sr. Member; CQE; CCT
"Does it matter if the measurement result is wrong?
If it does, then calibrate the instrument.
If it doesn't matter, they why are you making the measurement?"
(P. G. Stein, 2000)
|
Lower Navigation Bar
|
|
|
|
Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate Thread Content |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Settings
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|