SBS - The best value in QMS software

EMP (Evaluating the Measurement Process) Studies for Bias Effect

R

Raquel

#1
I need some help cause I am really a begginer :eek: and have some issues trying to understand what the limits on the Bias Effect Charts means on the Evaluating the Measurement Process. I am using as reference Wheeler and Lyday Literature...

I know that they are calculated taken into account the test /retest errors and the grand average of the measurements so what means to have a chart were the limits are very tight and all the data is out of them?

Does this mean the instrument I am using to test it is not adecquate?

Thanks in advance for any help regarding this.
:thanx:
 

Attachments

Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#2
Re: EMP Studies for Bias Effect

... some issues trying to understand what the limits on the Bias Effect Charts means on the Evaluating the Measurement Process. I am using as reference Wheeler and Lyday Literature...

I know that they are calculated taken into account the test /retest errors and the grand average of the measurements so what means to have a chart were the limits are very tight and all the data is out of them?
The limits are calculated using the variation between the two test - retest measurements. The points that you have plotted are the averages for the different fixtures. A guage or system that has very little measurement error for test - retest will give very tight limits. If the different guages - or in your case fixtures - are biased from one another (they have different center points) and that difference is larger than the measurement error, the plotted averages for each fixture will be outside the limits. This means that the fixtures are different from each other.
Does this mean the instrument I am using to test it is not adecquate?
without understanding the characteristic and it's specification limit it is not possible to understand if the bias is large enough to matter; we can only know that it is statistically larger than the repeatability measurement error...what are the spec limits? are you using the instrument for SPC or acceptance testing? what is the instrument and what is the fixture?
 
R

Raquel

#3
Thanks for your prompt answer Bev D...

REgarding your questions...

What are the spec limits? are you using the instrument for SPC or acceptance testing? what is the instrument and what is the fixture?
Well in this case the characteristic we are meausring is the Minimun Insertion Loss for a Passband Filter, the specification we have already in place for this part is 5.99 dB Maximun and depending on the measurement we got we pass or failed the PN for shipment so it is an acceptance testing.

The fixture is what we use to test the part in the machine. It is a PCB that permit us to simulate the electrical behavior of the filter. We measured the part using a Network Analyzer, however since the PCBs has not an ideal performance we need to compare the differences between PCBs and connectors to check if some connector or PCB has damaged and we used the EMP to check if the Fixtures are statistically different.

Thank you:thanx:
 

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#4
Bev D gave you a good explanation that I will expound upon. The test tells you that there is definitely a statistical difference between the fixtures. You must then decide whether this difference is of practical importance to you.

Factors that you should weigh when making this decision include:

  • Importance of the characteristic measured,
  • Cost of shipping bad product,
  • Cost of rejecting good product,
  • Problems arising when manufacturing discovers that product rejected by one fixture will pass when tested on another fixture, such as loss of credibility of test, using the fixture that will give the desired results, etc.
 
R

Raquel

#5
Thanks for your Answer Miner. This is what exactly is giving us a headache cause we have used this tool for several and almost none of the fixtures looks similar and as you mentioned some parts passed in one but fail in another so I have been using it just for reference but used to do some other test and try to used the fixtures that gave me values near to the gold standard values.

However the question for my mate is about my criteria to decide what fixture I must use? I mean for her they must use the ones that gave better yield, but I used to use the ones that gave me poor yield which ensures that the customer will receive actually passing parts not marginal ones...this is because they already lost the reference for a specific PN.

I prefer a Happy Customer than a Happy Manager :)

What do you think?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hershal

Metrologist-Auditor
Staff member
Super Moderator
#6
A side question as a bandpass filter is in discussion, what frequency range is the filter for? What connectors are used? What cables are used and how long are they? What power level is generated by the source?

Those all may affect insertion loss to a different degree.

This ia a bit early to mention, but depending on the frequency the rho and gamma of both source and the pc board you are using may be a contributing factor in the decision also.
 
R

Raquel

#7
Thanks Hershal...

But, in order to try to avoid part of the problem we perform a calibration that is suppose compensates cables lenghts, power level source and some other loss that are out of the fixture... we have an "ideal" system.

So ideally when we measured a part what we are seen is the connectors and traces of the PCB summed to the loss of the DUT by itself.

In this case we have a RLL 201 MHz used for GSM and EDGE, but this same problem is seen at higher frequencies...2 GHz...
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
B EMP (Environmental Management Program) for an Office Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 8
S GR&R by MSA Rules vs. Wheeler & Lyday's EMP Method Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 8
Marc EMP device to shape and punch holes through steel World News 2
Tagin Evaluating nonconformances for escalation using Bayesian methods? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
R Evaluating the need for preventive action Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 3
M Informational US FDA – FDA provides updates on the agency’s continued commitment to evaluating postmarket safety of Essure device Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
S Evaluating the possibilities of using qmswrapper or greenlightguru Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
C Evaluating GRR Scores %Tol vs %TV Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 9
Q Evaluating Effectiveness of a Preventive Action after Closure Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 7
J Potential Customers Asking for EIRs / 483s when evaluating a CRO for future work US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
P FDA - Evaluating Substantial Equivalence in Premarket Notifications 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
M Quality Control Procedure and Procedure for Evaluating Sub Contractor Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
M Evaluating Vendor (Supplier) Products using SQC Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 6
K Evaluating different Startup Options in EU and MDD ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
S Trading Company - Evaluating Supplier Performance and Approved Supplier List ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
J The 510(k) Program: Evaluating Substantial Equivalence in Premarket Notifications 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
E Evaluating Lean Knowledge: Lean Philosophy Course for Production Engineering Students Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 1
A Evaluating an Integrated Management System - Dissertation Topic ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
optomist1 Evaluating Capability Indices with Minitab Using Minitab Software 7
C Trend Analysis - Evaluating Quality of Pricing - ANVOA or Std Dev? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 25
W Re-Evaluating Corrective Actions - Recurrence of a Customer Complaint Nonconformance and Corrective Action 7
D Good source for Checking and Evaluating Control Plans needed FMEA and Control Plans 4
J Evaluating a Regression Model Using the Constant Variance Assumption Six Sigma 8
Wes Bucey "Downsizing" ramifications - Evaluating and Interpreting the News World News 0
A Methods of evaluating compliance to ISO 14001 ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 6
M Evaluating my QMS (Quality Management System) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
G 100% Sort Verification - Statistical Method for Evaluating Suspect Material Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 19
J Evaluating and Reporting the Results of Layered Process Audits Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 9
G Evaluating Software for GMP Criticality? Software Quality Assurance 3
M Evaluating adverse effect on device tested with out of tolerance instrument General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
Q Evaluating Internal Audit Results Internal Auditing 24
P Rockwell, Brinell, Vickers Conversion - Evaluating Aluminum 6061-T6 and 6063-T6 General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 11
U Evaluating the aspects... All judgement based or is there a more objective way? Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 1
D Evaluating competence on training for new ISO 13485 standard for employees ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
Q "Service" Vendor (Supplier) Evaluation - How are you evaluating suppliers? Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 5
N Evaluating Process Stability - Unstable Processes - Cpk/Ppk? Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 6
Z Seeking GM standard GM9684P - Procedure for evaluating parting lines Customer and Company Specific Requirements 2
S Metrics for Evaluating Design process Design and Development of Products and Processes 2
C Evaluating software that measures Ppk, Cmk, Cpk, PPI, etc. Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 4
H Good starting point for a new QC Manager? Evaluating Existing Procedures Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 21
Gman2 Evaluating training, needed for office personnel? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 18
G Evaluating Processes - Cycle Time Concepts - Three Levels for any process Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
C Evaluating the Effectiveness of Internal Audit Process Internal Auditing 16
Marc Evaluating 5.3 c - Quality Policy - Framework General Auditing Discussions 1
T Evaluating Customer Satisfaction ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
B Risk Anlysis for Evaluating then Voiding or Not Issuing CPAR's Nonconformance and Corrective Action 1
M ISO 9001:2000 - Evaluating Training Effectiveness and Why ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
C Can anyone suggest a means of evaluating a suppliers performance? Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 4
Raffy Evaluation Form - Re-evaluating suppliers for their performance Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 8
G Evaluating Training Effectiveness - 6.2.2 Competence, Awareness and Training ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 55

Similar threads

Top Bottom