Alternatives to GR&R (Gage R&R) - Only 4 sample parts and one operator

[Kalpol92]

Bev you have hit the nail on the head!!!

With some of the testing we do in R&D a GR&R will be possible but not always. As i say i am writing a procedure which will hopefully give the design guys a number of different routes which they can follow to provide evidence that the method precision is acceptable.
Regarding the risk assessments i only see these coming into play with destructive low sample number situations. If you have any advice/ideas on this i would love to hear them.

Its nice to see the medical device guys being well represented!!!

Thanks again Guys.

 

[Palt88]

I'm coming back to this thread.

I would just like to know if with one operator the basic rule of "operators x parts x repetitions >60" is still applicable?

As there is only 1 operator, so no reproducibilty, it is necessary that this single operator makes 60 measurement also? or it is possible to reduce?


I have found a link in the minitab support for the execution of a gage R&R with a single operator, but to be honest it does not help anymore...
(broken link removed)

 

[Bev D]

this rule is actually an urban myth, it has no statistical or scientific basis.

If you feel you must follow the AIAG guidelines, then 1 operator, 10 parts, 3 readings per part is sufficient to assess basic repeatability.

If you want more statistical accuracy to your assessment, 1 operator, 30 parts, 2 readings per part will be sufficient to assess repeatability.