"Historical std deviation" (Standard Deviation) in Gage R&R study

B

Berg.Jlle

#1
Hi.

I have two questions and I'd like any help. :confused:

1) What is the difference in use or not of "Historical standard deviation" in a Gage R&R study, since the %SV and %Tolerance are not affected by this value ?

2) I have a measuring instrument that I wish to make an analysis of this measurement system MSA (Gage R&R study + Gage Linearity and Bias Study) to verify its performance.
This instrument is inserted into the production line and does the measurement of 4 types (A,B,C,D) of parts with the following specification limits:

Type A > LSL: 1,5; USL: 2.5
Type B > LSL: 2.5; USL: 3.5
Type C > LSL: 3.5; USL: 4.5
Type D > LSL: 4.5; USL: 5.5

I will collect samples of typical production for each of 4 types (A,B,C,D).
My question is if I should do a single study with data from all 4 types together considering a single specification limit (LSL:1.5 and USL:5.5) or if I should do a study separately for each type ?

:thanx:
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#2
1) What is the difference in use or not of "Historical standard deviation" in a Gage R&R study, since the %SV and %Tolerance are not affected by this value ?
Entering the historical standard deviation will provide another metric called the %PV or %Process Variation. The %PV should be used instead of the %SV as it is based (presumably) on many more parts than was used in the R&R study. The historical standard deviation is typically obtained from a capability study or based on SPC data.

2) I have a measuring instrument that I wish to make an analysis of this measurement system MSA (Gage R&R study + Gage Linearity and Bias Study) to verify its performance.
This instrument is inserted into the production line and does the measurement of 4 types (A,B,C,D) of parts with the following specification limits:

Type A > LSL: 1,5; USL: 2.5
Type B > LSL: 2.5; USL: 3.5
Type C > LSL: 3.5; USL: 4.5
Type D > LSL: 4.5; USL: 5.5

I will collect samples of typical production for each of 4 types (A,B,C,D).
My question is if I should do a single study with data from all 4 types together considering a single specification limit (LSL:1.5 and USL:5.5) or if I should do a study separately for each type ?
Are these similar types of measurements? For example, they are all lengths of the same type, with different nominal dimensions? If they are, you may be able to treat them as part families, and perform R&R studies as I describe in my linked blog.

Linearity and bias studies are typically performed using Master parts that have been measured using a more precise measuring device. If you can do that, you can use the results of all four parts.
 
B

Berg.Jlle

#3
Hi Miner.

First thank you for your patience. :applause:


1) There is only one measurement device used for all four product types (A,B,C,D).
2) All measurements are voltage measurements [V] and they are measured in the same point of the circuit. The value is read on a digital display.
3) Spec for product types:

A: Target = 2.00 V
LSL = 1.50 V
USL = 2.50 V

B: Target = 3.00 V
LSL = 2.50 V
USL = 3.50 V

C: Target = 4.00 V
LSL = 3.50 V
USL = 4.50 V

D: Target = 5.00 V
LSL = 4.50 V
USL = 5.50 V

4) I intend to take a sample of 10 parts of each product type (A,B,C,D) with a total of 240 measurements (10 parts X 3 operators X 2 measurements each operator X 4 product types).
5) I wish to use the gauge for SPC. I don't know the process variation (std dev) of each product type yet.

Suppose the process variation (std dev) are: A (0.12), B (0.10), C (0.11) and D (0.13). Could I make a single Gage R&R study considering as "historical standard deviation" 0.10 (smallest std dev) using all 240 measurements ?


Miner, sorry if I wrong understanding. :eek:

Best regards.
 

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#4
No. Since you do not actually have a historical standard deviation, stay with the %SV using the part variation.
 
B

Berg.Jlle

#5
No. Since you do not actually have a historical standard deviation, stay with the %SV using the part variation.
Miner,

What is still not clear to me is whether I should do a Gage R&R study for each of the product types (4 studies X 60 measurements) or can I consider the four product types as a single family and do a single Gage R&R study (240 measurements) ?

Is it correct to conclude as follows ? :cfingers:

1) If I have the following conditions satisfied for the four product types (A,B,C,D), then I can consider the four product types as a single family and do a single Gage R&R study.

- Same gauges.
- Same product characteristics.
- Same process tolerances or variation depending on use of gauge.

2) If some of the conditions listed above are not met or if I'm not sure of all them, I must consider the four product types (A,B,C,D) as four families and do four Gage R&R studies separately.


:thanx:
 
B

Berg.Jlle

#6
Miner,

What is still not clear to me is whether I should do a Gage R&R study for each of the product types (4 studies X 60 measurements) or can I consider the four product types as a single family and do a single Gage R&R study (240 measurements) ?

Is it correct to conclude as follows ? :cfingers:

1) If I have the following conditions satisfied for the four product types (A,B,C,D), then I can consider the four product types as a single family and do a single Gage R&R study.

- Same gauges.
- Same product characteristics.
- Same process tolerances or variation depending on use of gauge.

2) If some of the conditions listed above are not met or if I'm not sure of all them, I must consider the four product types (A,B,C,D) as four families and do four Gage R&R studies separately.


:thanx:

Please, other participants are also welcome!
 
A

Atul Khandekar

#7
What is still not clear to me is whether I should do a Gage R&R study for each of the product types (4 studies X 60 measurements) or can I consider the four product types as a single family and do a single Gage R&R study (240 measurements) ?
Separate study for each product type. Clubbing all types (nominals) into one single study would artificially inflate the Part Variation.


1) If I have the following conditions satisfied for the four product types (A,B,C,D), then I can consider the four product types as a single family and do a single Gage R&R study.

- Same gauges.
- Same product characteristics.
- Same process tolerances or variation depending on use of gauge.
Yes.

2) If some of the conditions listed above are not met or if I'm not sure of all them, I must consider the four product types (A,B,C,D) as four families and do four Gage R&R studies separately.
Yes.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Informational US FDA – Historical Information about Device Emergency Use Authorizations Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
R Need Help on Analysis: How to know potential causality model from historical data Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 5
B Historical Standard Deviation or Select Parts for MSA Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
Ronen E Online resource for USA cities historical weather observations Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 2
K Historical Data to establish Control Limits Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
G Ongoing Cpk and Global/Historical Data Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 7
Marc Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 2
D Reliability of an Attribute Inspection based on Historical Data Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 8
E Predicting Machined Components Capability based on Historical Data of Similar Parts Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 1
M Manufacturer's handling of Distributor's Historical Complaint Records US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
T Historical Backround of LPA (Layered Process Audit) Process Audits and Layered Process Audits 7
T Six Sigma Register - Historical Body of Evidence Six Sigma 2
B PFMEA Focus - Use of historical data to generate an Occurrence Number FMEA and Control Plans 4
F Documenting Historical Preventive Action at a Daycare Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 20
P Use of Historical Quality Data to determine Sample Size Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
M Coming up with a predictor equation for a test using historical data Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 1
Hershal DVD and historical movies..... Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 5
P Definition Dock-to-Stock Process based on Historical Quality Performance of a Part and Supplier Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 8
S Why historical data & benchmark data is important in APQP planning phase APQP and PPAP 6
G Question on Historical Background on ISO 10012 General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
C SPC: How to set up control limits on SPC chart based on historical data? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 7
Marc Google Earth in 4D with Historical 'Overlay' Maps After Work and Weekend Discussion Topics 0
T Root Cause Analysis emergency - Historical problems return to plague us! Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 6
M Determination of Product Shelf Life - New Product - No historical data Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 10
J Finished Goods Testing - Using historical test data to prove finished goods OK Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
D How do you structure your QA (QMS) Manual? A Historical Discussion Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 51
A Information about PPM since giving up AQL - Historical description of requirements AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 12
D J-STD-006 clarification Manufacturing and Related Processes 10
C MIL STD vs ASTM General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
D ANSI/ASQC Z1.9 VS MIL-STD-1916 for Continuous Sampling Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 2
P What ASTM std is EC 93/42 MDD EQUIVALENT TO CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 1
Marc MIL-STD-810H - 31 January 2019 Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 0
G 3 Operator Std. Dev. and uncertainty calculation Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 2
K MIL-STD-2000 Certification Requirements Manufacturing and Related Processes 9
G Mil-Std-130N, can calibration be a nationally traceable standard? Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 0
V Revised ISO std vs ISO13485:2003 - Help Please!!! ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
V Is MHLW Std No.169 - 2004 being Revised in Nov 2014? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 5
M Help interpreting MIL-STD-105E Single Sampling Plans Tables Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
A MIL STD 105 D or ISO 2859-2? Receiving Metal Sheets Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 6
D I need the advice/opinion from a J-STD expert Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
A Inspection Plans - How to choose AQL (MIL STD 105E) Excel .xls Spreadsheet Templates and Tools 1
J Mil Std 810 G test 516 vs IEC 60068-2-27 - Classic Waveform Shock Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 1
S Calibration conducted to 3 steps only of the std instead of complete 5 steps General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
V IEC 62304 Requirements Analysis and IEEE Std 830-1998 IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 3
A JEDEC Std to use as reference for a package of size of 29x29mm with 0.8mm ball pitch Design and Development of Products and Processes 6
C Medical Device Tracking Sampling Plan using MIL-STD-105E Other US Medical Device Regulations 4
alonFAI Fungus Testing per MIL-STD-810F Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 6
M IEC 60601-2-24 Ed 2.0 (Infusion Pumps Particular Std.) - Redlines IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
E Post Machining Casting Defects with MIL-STD-2175 Requirements - Responsibility Manufacturing and Related Processes 9
M Common Reasons for Out Of Tolerance condition of DC Calibrator or any reference std General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1

Similar threads

Top Bottom