Combat Low Part to Part Variation in GRR

brauenbuehler

Starting to get Involved
#1
Hi All,

I am new to Gauge R&R and am conducting a study on a relatively powerful gauge that has the capability to measure out to 6 decimal places.

Our GRR analysis takes place with 10 parts x 3 inspectors x 3 repetitions. Our acceptance criteria call for 5 distinct categories and a Total Gauge R&R %Study Var of <30%.

The part is a small plastic piece that has been injection molded and the dimensions we are looking for are controlled by the tool steel and very consistent. As such, our GRR says all variation in the study is attributed to the gauge/measurement process (fair since the parts are so consistent), but blows our acceptance criteria out of the water because it is a percentage (often times exceeding a %Study Var of 60%).

My leading questions are: are these acceptance criteria the best to use in this instance? Our tolerance window is only out to 3 decimal places where there is no detectable difference in parts. Do we need to introduce variation to the parts to meet our acceptance criteria or are there any other potential solutions?

Any help is appreciated.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Miner

Forum Moderator
Leader
Admin
#2
How will you be using this gauge? For inspection or for SPC? ndc and %SV should only be used if the gauge will be used for SPC. If it will be used for inspection, use %Tolerance and ignore ndc/%SV.
 

brauenbuehler

Starting to get Involved
#3
Thanks for the quick response!

From my understanding, this gauge will be used only for inspection.

What difference does it make between SPC and Inspection? Is the gauge not evaluated the same way for a final product/feature regardless of how it was controlled to up to that point?

Also, Is %Tolerance the only acceptance criteria that is recommended on a gauge used for inspection, not SPC?
 

Miner

Forum Moderator
Leader
Admin
#4
The study is run identically regardless of the application. However, the metric used to assess the suitability of the device is dependent on the application. Since you intend to use the device to inspect, you want to minimize the probability of rejecting good product or accepting bad product. % Tolerance is the metric that will help you do this. If the device were intended to control the process (i.e., SPC) you would want to ensure that the device was able to "see" part-to-part variation. To accomplish this, the device needs to have a small %SV (or the redundant ndc). NOTE: I recommend using the historical process variation in place of the study variation. It is almost impossible for 10 parts to truly represent the actual process variation.
 

Mikey324

Quite Involved in Discussions
#6
I've noticed that with todays ever improving process performance, its becoming more and more difficult to have an R&R turn out any different than you described above. Seems the point of the game is to reduce part to part variation. So you do that. Your parts are great. Little variation. Everyone is happy, until you need to do an R&R. The circle seems to continue from there. You really need a large quantity of data to try and get the true variation. Even then, there may not be enough.

We had an auditor at one time suggest we buy a gauge that was way over spec'd for what we would ever possibly need. Just to try and get some variation identifiable. What's the point in that? You have a spec of +/-0.5mm. Parts are varied by about +/-.002mm. Cpk is great. Why would you ever need to know if the variation is actually .002075mm??
 

brauenbuehler

Starting to get Involved
#7
^^This is exactly the problem that we are running into. For Operational and Performance Qualification, we are thrilled that our parts are this consistent. For our the SV metric, it's turned into somewhat of a nightmare.
 

Mikey324

Quite Involved in Discussions
#8
The only way we've found to remedy it is as Miner said, using process historical data. Even that seems like it will be problematic in the future.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Burn out - Tips to help combat QC burnout Career and Occupation Discussions 19
Stijloor Inmate-Produced Combat Helmets Found Defective Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 4
B How do you combat boredom in Quality (in Small company)? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 20
A Low RH Effect on Elastomeric + Polyester General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
D Ultra low freezer thermometers, best practices? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
R MSA on set of parts with low variation Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 20
Z REACH compliance for low volume product REACH and RoHS Conversations 1
L Requirements for Cables used for Low-Voltage DC Mains (12-36VDC) IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
D Low risk IVD study in the UK, do I need MHRA approval? UK Medical Device Regulations 1
D Deciding whether or not pre-market clinical investigation is required for low risk device EU Medical Device Regulations 5
R DFMEA/PFMEA mitigation of high severity (9-10) in low volume products IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
Proud Liberal Improving low p-value Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 13
D Importing a general wellness low risk product Other US Medical Device Regulations 3
CPhelan Best metrics for monitoring low volume (<1000) parts per vendors Supply Chain Security Management Systems 1
J ISO 14971 applied to ISO 13485? Low risk class 1 devices ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
Q % Study variation low, % tolerance high - GR&R Interpretation help Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
N Use part of high risk device for establishing low risk device EU Medical Device Regulations 0
R Laminate ESD Mats - Low resistance (RTT) readings Manufacturing and Related Processes 6
J Question on very low NDC number with tolerable GRR ratio's Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 7
A MDSAP benefit for manufacturer of low-risk devices Canada Medical Device Regulations 3
Rincewind Clinical Evaluation of very low risk medical devices EU Medical Device Regulations 3
L Nonconformity's risk is too low, so don't report it? General Auditing Discussions 25
E Applicability of Low Voltage Directive (LVD) for 12V equipment CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 4
M Testing a Low Current (Battery) DC Medical Device Other Medical Device Related Standards 4
M Battery Powered Measurement Equipment and Low Voltage Directive CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 1
G CE Marking - Low Voltage Directive and EMC Directive CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 4
Marc New FDA guidance on low-risk wellness devices US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
J If/how to apply LVD (Low Voltage Directive) in this case CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 6
R Looking for good, low cost APQP Software recommendations APQP and PPAP 2
V For screening a design, can we live with the low/poor predicted R-Sq.? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 3
M Chrysler PSW Sign Off when your product is rated low risk in CQMS IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
S Low Sample Size for Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
M David vs Goliath (Large Suppliers vs Low Volume Purchasers) Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 11
C Hardness Testing - Low Cpk's using Minitab Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 10
Wes Bucey A "Feel Good" story - 3D Printing Creates Low-Cost Prosthetic Fingers Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 0
B Determing Machine Capability in a High Mix, Low Volume Sheet Metal Shop Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
Y How to cut off Extremely High and Low Data Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
S How to Capture Low Volume Process Info? Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 3
M Control Measures for Hazards already deemed Low Risk ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 6
M Need Machining Low Volume Family Control Plan and PFMEA APQP and PPAP 1
C CE Marking for LVD (Low Voltage Directive) Health and Beauty Products CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 5
C Suggestions on Sample Plans for High Volume/Low Cost/Low Risk Components Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
F CE Marked Motors - BS-EN61010 for the Low Voltage Directive CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 1
S FMEA Manual aimed at Low Volume Fabrication Industry FMEA and Control Plans 1
B Understanding why my CpK and PpK are low, and LCL Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 20
N Extent of Product Traceability Required by ISO 13485 (Low Level Class I Devices) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
J CAPA Effectiveness Checks on Low/No Volume Processes Nonconformance and Corrective Action 7
J How to determine a Capability Study for Low-Volume Suppliers Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 3
J Use of PPMs in Low Volume Machine Shop AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
G ISO 17664 Reusable Low Risk Medical Device Cleaning Other Medical Device Related Standards 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom