Comparative Design of Experiment to pick better Trimming Blade Supplier

T

thm219

#1
Hi all,

I am a newbie here so please bear with me if I am asking the obvious stuffs:eek:.

I am currently interning for a medical device manufacturing firm and I am involved in this project that I do not know where to start.

Basically, we are trying to evaluate film cutting blades from two different suppliers:

Blades from supplier A: we are currently buying from this supplier. We have to change them every one or two week as they either get broken or blunt when there is production everyday (two shifts per day, each shift 12 hours).

Blades from supplier B: Less expensive of the two.

The problem is how do we design an experiment to compare a characteristic that would only show overtime like: sharpness or resistance to crack?

We can actually do a real simulation by putting both blades through a whole week of full force production run and then compare the state of the blades and products eventually. However, that would mean wasting a lot of materials and time.

I could not get the critical info about the blades such as blade sharpness index, just the physical dimensions. Their performance is judged based sole on whether products meet specifications and any other visual observation of the blades like cracks.

I have two major questions:
1) How to compare the sharpness of the two blades when they are brand new/after they are used for several runs?
2) Supposedly initially one blade is sharper than the other, does it mean it would continue to retain its sharpness over a longer time duration?

I am an industrial engineering student in year 2 and have no knowledge and experience in basic DOE yet. Any clue on this?

:thanx::thanx::thanx:
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
B

blargon

#2
Hi thm219 and welcome to the forum,

Well for blade evaluation / optimisation, most of the characteristics or responses would only show over time. The benefit of a DOE would be you could minimise the number of runs.

I think that your film cutting process variables may be optimised with a DOE. Evaluating blades from different suppliers is different - loads of suppliers available and each supplier may offer a basic cheap blade or slightly more expensive blades with treatments to greatly prolong blade lifetime. Such as low-friction or tough-coat surface treatment or solid carbide micrograin.
 

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#3
I have two major questions:
1) How to compare the sharpness of the two blades when they are brand new/after they are used for several runs?
2) Supposedly initially one blade is sharper than the other, does it mean it would continue to retain its sharpness over a longer time duration
1) Do you have any means for measuring sharpness directly? Same for nicks and cracks? If you do, you could measure these directly at specific intervals and predict the time/cycles to failure using measures of the current blades at failure as a baseline.
2) No. The useful life is more dependent on the material properties. You could potentially have a very sharp, yet soft material that wears out quickly, and a less sharp, yet very hard material that wears out slowly.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#4
Miner is correct.
You say this is for a medical device company - depending on what tier you are in and what product perfromance characteristics are effected by the blade, as well as the level of documentation on the blade requirements, you may be restricted in what you can and can't do for validation. Subject to your regulatory reviewer of course.

What I have done in similar cases where it woudl take a long time to get life data and might waste product in the process is to:
  • demonstrate via independent laboratory testing that the material properties of the two blades are equivalent. You'll need more than 1 pair - I typically use a minimum of 3 of each.
  • measure an appropriate number of parts made with several new blades form the current supplier and several from the new supplier - perform a t-test, or a paired t test if there is substantial lot to lot differnces in teh material that effect the 'cutability'.
  • submit the 'equivalency of the change based on the material verification testing and the 'time zero' validation testing.
  • Request to perform 'concurrent' validation over time, shipping any product that meets current product specifications.

there have been cases where the wear is of no interest to the regulatory agency so I dont' request 'concurrent' validation, but do perfrom it any way to safeguard the company.

statistics cannot replace physics...no matter how much we wish it could
 

Steve Prevette

Deming Disciple
Staff member
Super Moderator
#5
A few thoughts:

Take a look at http://www.architectmagazine.com/pr...istory-how-x-acto-built-a-better-knife_o.aspx for some ideas on blade "goodness".

Sometimes sharper is NOT better - may have more of a tendency to slip/cut too easily and cause injuries.

One text to consider is taking a stack of materials that the workers must cut through, take a week-old knife and measure the force to penetrate a certain distance into the stack.
 

David-D

Involved In Discussions
#6
Perhaps you could develope and run a surrogate test to determine relative wear resistance and durability. I'd envision testing them against a bench grinder (perhaps outfitted with a drum of material similar to what you cut) in doing so, you might be able to quickly replicate lots of use very quickly and not consuming actual items. As for how to test if they're still sharp, maybe the method suggested above about force and depth of cutting might work but I'd suggest running several replicates of the test as who knows what the repeatability of such a test is.

David
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S GMP Comparative Information for Canada, US and Europe Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 2
M Requirement to complete an MSA when doing Comparative Tests Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
A Comparative Study - 510(K) IVD (in vitro diagnostic) Device 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 7
J Comparative Standards For Material Other than Steel Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 1
J Measurement Uncertainty Budget for Comparative Dimensional Measurements Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 8
P Salt spray testing - Comparative corrosion data of 302 S26 vs Galvanised carbon steel Manufacturing and Related Processes 6
F Definition Test Hardware - "Comparative References such as Test Hardware" Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 2
M Comparative Test - The right formula for calculating the number of samples needed? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
D Comparative References are usually Visual Standards sometimes called Boundary Samples General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
R DFA & DFM - Examples for Design for assembly and design for manufacturability Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 2
D Using Laboratory Notebooks in R&D and Design and Development ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
D ISO 13485 - 7.3.6 Design and development verification - Do most folks create a separate SOP? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
K Joint approval between OEM and Manufacturer on Design Documents ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
M API 4F/7K/8C Design Package Validation Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
A Design History File - Not ready to share the design drawings or Bill of Material US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
W Need for current design or process control FMEA and Control Plans 2
A What is the difference between Design Process, Process Design and Design Control? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
D Test summary report example for design validation wanted - ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
B Why the Greek god Hephaestus should have done a design FMEA (DFMEA) on his giant robot APQP and PPAP 1
S Documenting Design Verification Test Results (ISO 9001) Design and Development of Products and Processes 1
DuncanGibbons Understanding the applicability of Design of Experiments to the IQ OQ PQ qualification approach Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 0
S Requirement to Conduct New Shelf-life Testing? (re-do testing for design change) EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A Sample Agreement available for Outsourcing Medical Device Design activity? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
DuncanGibbons How is the arrangement between Design and Production organisation envisaged? EASA and JAA Aviation Standards and Requirements 4
L Design & Development of a SERVICE Service Industry Specific Topics 13
C Documentation for items used for Design Verification 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
P Design verification driven by new equipment. How is this different than process validation? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
A AS9102B - 3.6 Design Characteristics and form 3 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
P Design FMEA - Detection Rating criteria ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
U Medical Device Design finalization testing ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S MDR Delay - MDD design Change? (before new MDR DOA) EU Medical Device Regulations 8
J Iterative design and production for custom made products ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
T Design Input detail & specificity ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
J Design file for pre-existing products - Inputs and Outputs ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
D Design Transfer Template capturing Customer Specific Requirements Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
T Design Control Procedures later in the Development Process ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
M Looking for a Presentation on Design for Excellence (DfX) Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
K Old medical devices -> 7.3.7. Design and development validation ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
R Design and Manufacture Guidelines for Surface Mount Technology Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 9
optomist1 Design Exclusion, but now we might have an outsourced Product Design ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Q Relabeler for patent expired product - design control responsibilities? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
B Supplier of design and manufacture process ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
I Does anybody use Detection in medical device Design FMEA? ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 18
A Design process goal for ISO 9001 Manufacturing and Related Processes 23
Z Definitive definition of design? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
A UDI and Design Controls - Labeling change via the Design Control process 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
P Design FMEA for Industrial Machinery FMEA and Control Plans 3
M Design Development MDR Design and Development of Products and Processes 0
L Contracted Manufacture Company wanting to be able to design and manufacture own product. 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 7
C Essential Design Output(s) and Design transfer 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 11

Similar threads

Top Bottom