Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of** with DuckDuckGo Especially for content not in the forum
Such as files in the Cove "Members" Directory

Gage R&R Study on Load Cells - Large chemical blending tanks

Dan M

Involved In Discussions
Hi, Because we have scales and load cells listed in our Production Control Plan, we must complete a gage study on each of these devices. We are in the chemicals industry and manufacture products in large blending tanks that sit on load cells to measure the weight.

An equipment vendor (scale manufacturer) recently visited and demonstrated a new load cell automatic calibration device that gets bolted to the legs of the blending tank and uses calibrated hydraulic pistons to apply downward force to each load cell. They claim this calibration method is ISO 17025 and A2LA approved and that the device + the software they use can complete a gage R&R in 20 minutes.

I'm QM manager and not in metrology, so I have just a very basic knowledge of MSA - enough to know that we must perform gage studies on the different families of measurement devices. Does it seems possible that a calibration device + software will complete a gage R&R that can pass an IATF 16949 audit? I thought a gage R&R study required at least 2 operators, 10 different samples, and repeated measurements of each of those samples. (I might be a bit off on the exact method, but I know that it takes multiple operators and samples). Thoughts?


Forum Moderator
Staff member
The need for multiple operators depends on whether operators can have an influence on the measurement device. For example, automated test equipment will not usually be affected by an operator unless there is manual loading that can affect the results. On the other hand automated test equipment may have multiple stations, which would affect reproducibility. These multiple stations would be treated the same as for multiple operators.

Regarding the claims of your vendor, we would need specifics on how this was done. Theoretically, this is possible, but that does not mean they have actually done it effectively.
Top Bottom