Critique Required on GR&R (Gage R&R) Training Presentation

S

swarbur4

#1
Hi Everyone,

After a quick investigation both internally and with our suppliers it has come to my attention that very few people actually understand the results of a gR&R study and what to do with the results so I have made a training presentation which is aimed at quality engineers who are responsible for supplier quality improvements. Its main aim is for them to understand why, what and how to perform a GR&R and how to interprete the results (not just looking at the AIAG % and not understanding it) I would like them to make informed decisions on the suppliers measurement systems and what needs to be done if anything to improve any measurement systems.

So could any of you statistical experts and GR&R experts please

1. - check the presentation for any errors in assumptions, explanations etc.
2. - Check the 2 excel files attached for any errors.
3. - Make suggestions for improvement.

Anyone is free to use this presentation if they want.

Thanks in advance

Simon
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#2
Re: Critique Required on GR&R Training Presentation

Well I cannot criticize the content too much since I see that you have been doing your research here at the Cove and have incorporated the contents of many of my posts. Good work.

I do have a few non-technical comments regarding the material:

  1. You should decide whether you will use Wheeler's approach or the AIAG method and focus on that method. If you try to cover both, you will probably overwhelm the people that you are trying to train.
  2. You are packing a tremendous amount of detail onto each slide. I would spread it out over more slides so that each slide is easy to comprehend. Also, try to use short bullet statement (verb object) whenever possible. This will make each slide easier to follow and understand.
 
B

brahmaiah

#3
Re: Critique Required on GR&R Training Presentation

Hi Everyone,

After a quick investigation both internally and with our suppliers it has come to my attention that very few people actually understand the results of a gR&R study and what to do with the results so I have made a training presentation which is aimed at quality engineers who are responsible for supplier quality improvements. Its main aim is for them to understand why, what and how to perform a GR&R and how to interprete the results (not just looking at the AIAG % and not understanding it) I would like them to make informed decisions on the suppliers measurement systems and what needs to be done if anything to improve any measurement systems.

So could any of you statistical experts and GR&R experts please

1. - check the presentation for any errors in assumptions, explanations etc.
2. - Check the 2 excel files attached for any errors.
3. - Make suggestions for improvement.

Anyone is free to use this presentation if they want.

Thanks in advance

Simon
I appreciate your open minded approach.I am studying your presentation and will be back with my review notes.
Thank you,
V.J.Brahmaiah
 
B

brahmaiah

#4
Re: Critique Required on GR&R Training Presentation

Hi Everyone,

After a quick investigation both internally and with our suppliers it has come to my attention that very few people actually understand the results of a gR&R study and what to do with the results so I have made a training presentation which is aimed at quality engineers who are responsible for supplier quality improvements. Its main aim is for them to understand why, what and how to perform a GR&R and how to interprete the results (not just looking at the AIAG % and not understanding it) I would like them to make informed decisions on the suppliers measurement systems and what needs to be done if anything to improve any measurement systems.

So could any of you statistical experts and GR&R experts please

1. - check the presentation for any errors in assumptions, explanations etc.
2. - Check the 2 excel files attached for any errors.
3. - Make suggestions for improvement.

Anyone is free to use this presentation if they want.

Thanks in advance

Simon
Your training presentation is superb!!.Exept one spelling error where the word 'further' is spelt as 'futher' I could not find any mistake.
Thank you again for a splendid work.
V.J.Brahmaiah
 
J

JaneB

#5
Interesting - I learned some stuff (I'm definitely not a statistical expert nor GR&R!

Minor improvement suggestion only - you use a lot of centred text. This is very hard for the human eye to read, particularly when it is long and there are several lines of it. (ie, not just a few words). This paragraph is centred. I'm repeating the lines so that it will illustrate the point. Minor improvement suggestion only - you use a lot of centred text. This is very hard for the human eye to read, particularly when it is long and there are several lines of it. (ie, not just a few words). This paragraph is centred. I'm repeating the lines so that it will illustrate the point. Minor improvement suggestion only - you use a lot of centred text. This is very hard for the human eye to read, particularly when it is long and there are several lines of it. (ie, not just a few words). This paragraph is centred. I'm repeating the lines so that it will illustrate the point.​

Minor improvement suggestion only - you use a lot of centred text. This is very hard for the human eye to read, particularly when it is long and there are several lines of it. (ie, not just a few words). This paragraph is centred. I'm repeating the lines so that it will illustrate the point. Minor improvement suggestion only - you use a lot of centred text. This is very hard for the human eye to read, particularly when it is long and there are several lines of it. (ie, not just a few words). This paragraph is centred. I'm repeating the lines so that it will illustrate the point. Minor improvement suggestion only - you use a lot of centred text. This is very hard for the human eye to read, particularly when it is long and there are several lines of it. (ie, not just a few words). This paragraph is centred. I'm repeating the lines so that it will illustrate the point.

I'd strongly consider using left align text instead - it's much, much more readable for the human eye.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#6
Hi Everyone,

After a quick investigation both internally and with our suppliers it has come to my attention that very few people actually understand the results of a gR&R study and what to do with the results so I have made a training presentation which is aimed at quality engineers who are responsible for supplier quality improvements. Its main aim is for them to understand why, what and how to perform a GR&R and how to interprete the results (not just looking at the AIAG % and not understanding it) I would like them to make informed decisions on the suppliers measurement systems and what needs to be done if anything to improve any measurement systems.

So could any of you statistical experts and GR&R experts please

1. - check the presentation for any errors in assumptions, explanations etc.
2. - Check the 2 excel files attached for any errors.
3. - Make suggestions for improvement.

Anyone is free to use this presentation if they want.

Thanks in advance

Simon
Thanks for sharing this. :agree1: I think it'll be very useful for a lot of people here.
Below are a few observations that might help to improve it. The text in bold is quoted from your slides.

Slide 4: Since you cannot address something that cannot be measured precisely or the when the measurement precision is unknown, you must start with an assessment of the measurement system.
This is a bit vague; if something cannot be measured precisely, it cannot be measured precisely, and GR&R won't help.

Slide8: A measurement error is not a "mistake". Variability is an inherent part of things being measured and of the measurement process.
Measurement error can be a mistake on the part of an operator.

Slide 12: Repeatability – variation of the gage when used by one operator in a brief interval.
The "brief interval" bit is irrelevant. It should be assumed that repeatability problems in the study will be projected out to the actual process as time passes.

Slide 15: The study must be conducted in the same area, environment, fixtures and conditions that will be used in production.
"Must" is a bit strong; you're describing the ideal conditions, and those conditions aren't always feasible.

Slide 23: There are 2 main methods to calculate Gage R&R are Average & Range and the other is ANOVA. The difference is that ANOVA analyse any interactions between the repeatability and reproducibility.
Grammar issues. It would be better stated as, "The two primary methods of GR&R analysis are Average and Range and ANOVA. The latter is used to analyse interactions between repeatability and reproducibility."

Slide 50 (Common Mistakes): (8) Using the result of 1 Gage R&R study on 1 characteristic to read across to other parts or characteristics that use the same or same type of gage.
It's considered acceptable practice to apply the results of a study to other parts with characteristics that are similar in size and geometric configuration.

(9) Conducting the study in Lab conditions and not at the station where the measurements are actually taken in production.
See my comment regarding slide 15 above.

(10) Not understanding and doing nothing with the results.
These are two separate categories. Not understanding the results is certainly bad, and what one does with the results is dependent on the information provided by the results. Sometimes the results indicate that the suitability of the measurement system has been confirmed, in which case doing nothing might be the proper strategy.

(11) Not repeating the Gage R&R study on a minimum 12 month basis.
Repeating a gage study shouldn't be necessary unless there have been changes that would make it sensible, such as new operators or a significant change in the operating environment. If you've confirmed that the measurement system is appropriate to the task, repeating it won't help anything.

Slide 53: Studies of measurement variation are a waste of time unless you use that information to reduce process variation, increase process control and assure product confirmation.
As suggested above, sometimes simple confirmation of the efficacy of the measurement system is enough. It shouldn't be considered a waste of time if the results aren't used to reduce variation or increase process control, both of which might already be acceptable.
 

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#7
Slide 15: The study must be conducted in the same area, environment, fixtures and conditions that will be used in production.
"Must" is a bit strong; you're describing the ideal conditions, and those conditions aren't always feasible.

Slide 50 (Common Mistakes):
(9) Conducting the study in Lab conditions and not at the station where the measurements are actually taken in production.
See my comment regarding slide 15 above.
I agree there needs to be some latitude, but too many people deliberately create ideal conditions such as in a laboratory using highly trained personnel simply to achieve an acceptable MSA result. If the same gage were used in the actual environment of use by the people that would normally use it, the results would be quite different.

Changing "must" to "should" with some explanation of the intent would help.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#8
I agree there needs to be some latitude, but too many people deliberately create ideal conditions such as in a laboratory using highly trained personnel simply to achieve an acceptable MSA result. If the same gage were used in the actual environment of use by the people that would normally use it, the results would be quite different.

Changing "must" to "should" with some explanation of the intent would help.
Note that the slides in question say nothing about operators; they indicate (strongly) that the operating environment must be that used in production. This happens rarely, and rarely enough that even "should" may be too much. I think "if possible" would probably be best.
 

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
#9
(11) Not repeating the Gage R&R study on a minimum 12 month basis.
Repeating a gage study shouldn't be necessary unless there have been changes that would make it sensible, such as new operators or a significant change in the operating environment. If you've confirmed that the measurement system is appropriate to the task, repeating it won't help anything.
Absolutely! I can not emphasize enough that there is NO TIME FUNCTION in gage R&R. If it was done correctly the first time (incorporating a sufficient cross-section of operators that may be using it from inexperienced to very experienced), there is no reason to ever repeat it.

Gage R&R determines if the gage is the right one for the job. Calibration determines if it is still measuring correctly.

If you change the gage system, then it may need to be redone - but at the time of the change to ensure the improvement was effective - not months later.
 

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
#10
On a non-technical note, I would say the gratuitous use of color, color gradients, underlining and serif fonts in the text boxes also makes it more difficult to read.

You may be better off with a general background color - unless you want to white to keep people awake when it is projected....:D

Some may disagree, but that is my opinion.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Food Safety Manual for ISO 22000:2005 - Please critique Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 2
S Incident Investigation Procedure for Critique Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
S Critique of an IMS (Integrated Management Systems) Manual Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 1
B Document Control Procedure - Please Critique Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
B Document Control Procedure - Critique Wanted Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
Q Process Maps: Sales, different products, more boxes - Critique my map? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
W Please review and critique our new Document Control Procedure ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
6 ISO 9001 Audit Findings Sept 2011 - Critique and Comments ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
C Quality Awareness Presentation Needs Critique Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 20
P Please critique my Organization Structure Chart ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
A Development Project Template - Please Review and Critique Design and Development of Products and Processes 3
C Document Change Request Flowchart - Please critique Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 32
QMMike Please critique this procedure.... Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
I Looking for IT job but no experience!/CV critique please Career and Occupation Discussions 4
D CAPA (Corrective Preventive Action) Form for critique ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
E Please Critique my Root Cause Corrective Action Form training Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 4
J Resume Critique - Please review my resume Career and Occupation Discussions 5
J Can I get someone to help critique this manual? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 19
J Critique of Process Flow Diagram Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 7
9 ECR (Engineering Change Request) process - Please critique / review Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 10
Anerol C Please critique my ISO 9000 Champion Chart/Owner Chart ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
J Material Handling Plan as Described in v5.5 of the PSO Document - Please critique Customer and Company Specific Requirements 3
Anerol C Please Review and Critique my Metal Fabrication Industry Quality Manual ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
S Please Critique my Quality Manual - Media/Administration company. ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
Anerol C Please critique my plant turtle maps.... Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 22
Anerol C Please Critique my process map - Metal-Mechanic Industry Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 4
S Design and Development Activities Flow - Please Critique Design and Development of Products and Processes 3
M Control Of Documents - Document Control System Design Critique Wanted - TS16949 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 12
apestate Micrometer Calibration Procedure - Please critique General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 20
T EMS Objectives, Targets and Programme(s) - I have put together a list for critique Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 10
M Contract Review Process Turtle Diagram - Please Review and Critique Contract Review Process 18
C My Product Realization Map - Please Critique ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
M Internal Document Request Process - Please Critique ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
C Product Realization Map attached - Please Critique ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
C Please Critique my process map - Fiberglass business Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 11
Gman2 Please Critique My ISO 9001 Internal Process Audit Plan Process Audits and Layered Process Audits 39
B Seeking Critique: How Does Our Process Map Look? Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 5
B Quality Policy - A Critique Request ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 23
K ISO 9001 Quality Policy Content Critique and Extended Discussion ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 37
C Please Critique Our Quality Plan Process Map! Feedback Appreciated! Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 16
O AIAG VDA DFMEA Template Required FMEA and Control Plans 2
B PMA Supplement Required? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 3
F UDI-PI required on packaging (MDR) EU Medical Device Regulations 2
S Required tests for Surgical gown US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
R Is a FAIR required on parts that we design? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
I IQOQ or just initial calibration required? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
B NIOSH Approval for Surgical N95 Respirators - Required testing US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
A Is calibration of test weight required General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
A 8.6 Release of products and services, 8.3 Design and development - evidence required ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
D Deciding whether or not pre-market clinical investigation is required for low risk device EU Medical Device Regulations 5

Similar threads

Top Bottom