Bias & Linearity Study and the Uncertainty of Standards

G

gaspiston

#1
I have a question about bias and linearity studies which I hope you guys can help me with.

I recently performed a Bias and Linearity studies on a tool. We are measuring a film thickness on a substrate. The NIST traceable standard used for the Bias study is 45A +/- 4A (A=Angstroms).

When I performed the study the tool is measuring on average 42.2A. Which gives me a bias of -2.8A. According to the statistics (t-test) -2.8A is significantly different than zero at 95% confidence level. My question is as follows:

1) If the NIST traceble substrate that I am measuring to perform the Bias study is 45A +/- 4A (41A to 49A). Is it fair to say that I do not have a bias problem? Because bias is much small than the uncertainty of the traceable standard.
2) There a way to mathematically insert the uncertainty of the standard into the calculations?

One of the methods that we use to see if there is a significant difference between the measured values and the known value is to compare the zero to the upper and lower confidence interval of the bias. If zero is between the two values and you can conclude that the bias is not significant.

Results:
refer value = 45A +/-4
measurments (n)=30
df=29
tcrit=2.04523
average=42.20
stdev=.23
sterr=.04
Avg Bias=-2.79633
t=66.62243
lower 95% Conf Int of Bias = -2.88
upper 95% Conf Int of Bias = -2.71

Would it be statistical valid to add the uncertainty of the standard to upper and lower conf intervals?
lower 95% Conf Int of Bias = -2.88+4=1.12
upper 95% Conf Int of Bias = -2.71-4=-6.71

Your Expert Advice is greatly appriciated.

Thanks,
GP
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#4
Have you ever sent the standard out to a calibration service that has given a more precise statement of the actual value?
 
G

gaspiston

#5
No, not possible. What I am trying to figure out is:

How to account for the uncertainty of the calibration standard in your bias and linerity calculations?

All calibration standards are stated as the value +/- the uncertainty. Being that the case how do you perform a bias and linerity study? If your tools measures the calibration standard within the uncertainty of the standard technically speaking there will be bias. It is our policy no to adjust a tool if the measurements are within the uncertainty of the standard.

Example:
Standard 1:
45A +/- 4A (41A-49A). My tool measure the standard at 42.2A. Bias = -2.78 which is significantly different than zero.
Standard 2:
1023A +/- 3A. (1020A-1026A). My tool measure the standard 1022.53A. Bias = -.475 which is significantly different than zero.

So is there a mathematical way to include the uncertainty into the bias calculations? I want to aviod an argument with an auditor that does not understand metrology and looks at the results of the required bias analysis and mistakenly thinks that there is a problem.

See the attached screen shots of our Bias Analysis. One is of the Bias study using the value stated 45A the other is using the average of the measured values. Same data just different reference points.

Another approach that I am thinking about is to have the speadsheet use the average measured value if it is within the uncertainty of the standard.

-GP
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:
D

debyang

#6
A valid reference value for bias analysis should have better resolution or more precise than the analyzed measurement system has, thus any value within the confident interval can be used as reference.

Your study case for reference value 45 has poorer precision(1.96xσ=4) than the study result (EV=0.23) and that makes the bias study invalid.

Trying to obtain more accountable reference value is essential to do this bias study, however, the EV=0.23 value must be examined if too big or not before proceeding the bias t test.
 

JuneFoo

Starting to get Involved
#7
I would like to know - do I need to conduct bias & Linearity for a measurement tape, which used to measure length of a part, the tolerance is ? 4?
 

dgriffith

Quite Involved in Discussions
#8
At the risk of resurrecting the dead, I'd like to chime in.
....2) There a way to mathematically insert the uncertainty of the standard into the calculations?
Yes, but not with the app you used. You could do it in addition to, using the stats from the app.
Would it be statistical valid to add the uncertainty of the standard to upper and lower conf intervals?
lower 95% Conf Int of Bias = -2.88+4=1.12
upper 95% Conf Int of Bias = -2.71-4=-6.71
No, they cannot be combined in that way in this case. They are uncorrelated, so the standard artifact uncertainty (a probability distribution) and your 30 sample measurement statistics must be combined statistically.

Your Expert Advice is greatly appriciated.

Thanks,
GP
Well, not sure about that. I definitely need to know more about MSA.
However, not knowing anything at all about your instrument's specifications (an optical comparator or such, considering the dimensions involved), a very superficial uncertainty analysis gives me the following; I assumed k=2 @95% for the artifact:
Reference Value: 45 A ?4 A
Computed Mean Value(n=30): 42.204 A
Computed Mean Dev: -2.796 A ?3.946 A with 95% Conf.

The sample mean was within the expanded uncertainty of the standard to begin with, so the evidence could suggest that your instrument is ok on that alone. The uncertainty analysis suggests your instrument's true value could be as low as 38.25 and as high as 46.15, not including other much-needed instrument parameters, with 95% conf.
 
Last edited:
A

Alexandre Bonatto

#9
I believe that (in the future revisions of the manual) they should change the bias (and linearity) study in order to include the standard value uncertainty: in many situations even the best standard value one can generate still has an uncertainty that should not be neglected. Then, the study would be very similar to a standard hypothesis test to compare two distributions (one for the standard value, another for the measurements with the measurement system under evaluation).
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
I Interpretation of MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) Linearity and Bias Study Results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
T Bias & Linearity Study - How to calculate the P value for the Average Bias Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 8
C Linearity and Bias Study Compliance Requirements Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 9
L Gage Linearity and Bias Study Analysis - Minitab help needed Using Minitab Software 4
L Recommend a 3rd Party Certifier for Master Value in Linearity & Bias Study General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 0
B In a Linearity Study covering the operating range is it necessary to do Bias Study? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
A Linearity and Bias Study - Bias Study fails - Seeking advice Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
A Do we need to perform Stability, Linearity & Bias study for Attribute data? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
A Is minitab 'AIAG compliant' to perform GR&R, linearity and bias study? Using Minitab Software 4
A Acceptance p-value for linearity and bias analysis in minitab results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 0
M How calculate P value for Linearity and Bias using Excel Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 8
E Company-wide MSA - Measurement Equipment Bias, Linearity & Stability Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
M Are Bias, Stability, and Linearity studies required by TS 16949 7.6.1? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
E Gage Linearity and Bias Questions Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 5
A Bias Linearity Stability MSA Excel File with Formula Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
T Gage Bias and Linearity - How to interpret the Minitab results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
S MSA 4th Edition formats in Excel wanted - GR&R, Bias, Stability and Linearity Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 8
M Linearity, BIAS & Stability - How many studies do I need to do for a device? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
S Stability, Bias and Linearity samples - Measurement Systems Analysis Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 5
M When to use Linearity and Bias - appropriate for paper tensile strength? Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 6
S If I do Linearity and Bias Studies, are Stability Studies Required? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 5
P Linearity & Bias Acceptable Percentage Guideline - Digimatic micrometer General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
D MSA - Can Regular Calibration Replace Bias, Linearity and Stability Studies? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
D Stability, Linearity vs. Bias - Do we need to compute them all? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
A Interpretation of output for Minitab - P value & %linearity or % bias Using Minitab Software 1
M Laser Mike Insturment - MSA - Which (Bias, Linearity, Stability, R&R) are applicable? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
H MSA Excel .xls worksheet that includes GR&R (Gage R&R), Bias, Linearity, etc. Excel .xls Spreadsheet Templates and Tools 15
D Gauge R & R and stability, linearity and bias Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
Courier MSA Tools - Excel templates for doing the Linearity & Bias, & Stability Studies Excel .xls Spreadsheet Templates and Tools 13
G Bias & Linearity Calculations and T Value Formula in the AIAG's MSA Manual Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
A Error in MSA Manual - Discrimination - Bias Linearity Worksheet Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
B Scales - Gage R&R, Bias, Linearity, Stability Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
Z Linearity of Bias in MSA - Why is it important? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
R Acceptance Criteria for Linearity and Bias Studies - Engine Valves Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
S 4.11.4 MSA is R&R Enough? Linearity, bias, stability necessary as well? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
J Gage R&R Software which provides Bias and Linearity Information Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 1
T Bias and Linearity with Slip Gauge: Low R-Squared Value Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
F Meeting the AIAG's MSA Manual Gage R&R Bias, Linearity, Stability requirements Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 18
F Element 4.11.4 - Meeting the MSA requirements of bias, linearity, stability QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 1
A Bias Linearity and Stablility vs. Wide Tolerances vs. Process Capability Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
D Gage R&R - Acceptance Criteria for Linearity, Bias, and Stability Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
M MSA Manual 3rd Edition - R&R, Linearity, Bias, Stability - Small Company Many Gages Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 11
L Measurement System Analysis (MSA) - Bias, Linearity and Stability Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 23
G Can Measurement Machine Bias be part of Uncertainty? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
A Hypothesis test for Bias, not for GRR. WHY ?? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
Wes Bucey A rant against gender bias wherever it appears Career and Occupation Discussions 4
J Bias formula in MSA 4th Edition vs 3rd Edition Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
0 The Uncertainty of an Estimate of the Bias ISO 5725-1 - Help Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 8
E Bias and Type 1 Study Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
G Conducting a Bias Study for a CMM with no Traceable Master or Reference value Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4

Similar threads

Top Bottom