How to Interpret Caliper GR&R (Gage R&R) Graphical Result

P

Periannan

#1
Dear Guys,

Kindly need your help on interpret the graphical result of GR&R. Base on the attached file, what I can observed is

1. The study was done base on part tolerance instead of total variation. Believe there is a reason behind such the customer would like to see whether the process control is able to meet the part tolerance and suitability of gage for product acceptance to the specification. As a end result the study show pretty fine
2. The GR&R value that calculate in total variation is seem to be over than 30%. By right the study should fail. Seems the interest is in different view, somehow it is accepted.
3. The impact will be seeing in NDC, the value will be lower than 5 due to GR&R value is over than 30% (calculate in TV) – Correct me if my understanding is wrong
4. R Chart by operator – I can’t really explain about the graph as no idea on it. As far as I know the point should not fall out side the control limit. Believe you guys can help me to understand the purpose of this graph.
5. X Bar Chart By operator – it seems most of the point is fall outside the control limits, this show the variation is due to difference between part instead of measuring system. However fixing operator misnan and zurin can show much more good result.
6. Data by part number – show the variation between parts, the white dot show the different value (range) is seeing for each trial. We also can conclude the part problem as question why a certain part shows different reading for most of the trial (range). Correct me if my understanding is wrong
7. Data By operator – Show the operator variation in term of reproducibility. A straight line a cross the appraisal shows the good reproducibility.
8. Operator part interaction – indicating the significant interaction between each Part and Operator. I can’t really understand as what the graphs try to deliver in stead of interaction. It is related to reproducibility?


Periannan :notme:
 

Attachments

Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#2
Re: How to Interpret GR&R graphical result

Dear Guys,

Kindly need your help on interpret the graphical result of GR&R. Base on the attached file, what I can observed is
You only included the graphical portion of the analysis, so some of this response is based on my experience versus your actual data. It also assumes that the parts selected adequately represent the actual process variation. If they do not, the study was not valid for assessing gage suitability for process control, and my comments are irrelevant.

The first chart to evaluate on MSA graphs is the RANGE chart. There should be a minimum of 5 possible range values below the upper control limit. Your graph shows 1. This means that this gage has inadequate resolution. When a gage has inadequate resolution, the rest of the MSA is invalid. You must address the resolution, then repeat the study.

Having said that, I will try to answer the other questions in light of the resolution issue to clarify these issues.

1. The study was done base on part tolerance instead of total variation. Believe there is a reason behind such the customer would like to see whether the process control is able to meet the part tolerance and suitability of gage for product acceptance to the specification. As a end result the study show pretty fine
Decide in advance for what purpose the gage is to be used, part inspection to tolerance, or process control? A gage may be acceptable for use in inspection, but not acceptable for use in process control. P/T Ratio is used to assess part inspection. %GRR and ndc are used to assess process control.

2. The GR&R value that calculate in total variation is seem to be over than 30%. By right the study should fail. Seems the interest is in different view, somehow it is accepted.
If P/T Ratio (%Tol) was less than 30%, the gage could be used for inspection, even though %TV is greater than 30%. See response to question 1.

3. The impact will be seeing in NDC, the value will be lower than 5 due to GR&R value is over than 30% (calculate in TV) – Correct me if my understanding is wrong
If the gage is used for process control, you are correct. These measures have been negatively influenced by the poor resolution.

4. R Chart by operator – I can’t really explain about the graph as no idea on it. As far as I know the point should not fall out side the control limit. Believe you guys can help me to understand the purpose of this graph.
The gage resolution is so poor that any range other than zero falls outside the limit.

5. X Bar Chart By operator – it seems most of the point is fall outside the control limits, this show the variation is due to difference between part instead of measuring system. However fixing operator misnan and zurin can show much more good result.
The criteria for evaluating this chart is that more than 50% of the points should be out of control limits. On this chart, out is good.

6. Data by part number – show the variation between parts, the white dot show the different value (range) is seeing for each trial. We also can conclude the part problem as question why a certain part shows different reading for most of the trial (range). Correct me if my understanding is wrong
You want to see a tight pattern of dots around each part. You want to be able to see the difference between parts.

7. Data By operator – Show the operator variation in term of reproducibility. A straight line a cross the appraisal shows the good reproducibility.
Correct.

8. Operator part interaction – indicating the significant interaction between each Part and Operator. I can’t really understand as what the graphs try to deliver in stead of interaction. It is related to reproducibility?
Ideally, these lines should fall on top of each other. This implies that different operators had problems measuring parts 2, 3, 6 & 9. However, the poor resolution is the probable cause of this.
 
P

Periannan

#3
Dear Miner ,

Thanks for the explanation, attached is the data, result in Excel and Mini tab (graph and session result). for you information.

Regarding R chart Bar, appreciate you explain more

a. it is a must to have minimum 5 possible range that show below the control limit. let say most of the point above the control limit or only 2 range was represented, it mean the study is invalid.

b. Appreciate you can explain more as why you say " resolution is so poor that any range other than zero fall outside the limit"

c. What can be done to correct the resolution, mesurement method or changing the gage.

d. What does it mean if the dot patten is not tight. is it we can conclude it is due to variation that create by operator for each trial

e. Regarding the operator * part interaction, what will be the judgment if the p value shows 0.00

Periannan
 

Attachments

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#4
Regarding R chart Bar, appreciate you explain more

a. it is a must to have minimum 5 possible range that show below the control limit. let say most of the point above the control limit or only 2 range was represented, it mean the study is invalid.
That is correct.

b. Appreciate you can explain more as why you say " resolution is so poor that any range other than zero fall outside the limit"
Your gage is only reading to 0.01. The UCL is 0.00944. you can only have ranges of 0, 0.01, 0.02, ... Therefore any range other than zero is out of control. If your gage read to 0.005, you could have 0, 0.005, 0.010. This gives you two ranges within control limits. Still not good enough. A resolution of 0.001, gives 0, 0.001, 0.002, 0.003 ... This provides 10 possible ranges within control limits, which is good.

c. What can be done to correct the resolution, mesurement method or changing the gage.
Your gage should be capable of a resolution of 0.001. In your data, your gage only reads out to 0.01 unless your operators are rounding off the third decimal. If they are rounding off, just repeat your study using all decimal places. If your calipers only display two decimals, try using a micrometer.

d. What does it mean if the dot patten is not tight. is it we can conclude it is due to variation that create by operator for each trial
The dots are a combination of both repeatability and reproducibility. This chart is most useful for spotting individual parts that have a much higher measurement error. Maybe there was something wrong with a particular part that resulted in more variation such as a burr.

e. Regarding the operator * part interaction, what will be the judgment if the p value shows 0.00
This tells you that certain operators had trouble measuring specific parts. For example, if one operator measures a shaft diameter by averaging the min/max diameters while another measures the maximum diameter only, variations in the shaft roundness will have a greater impact on the second operator. This would show up in the interaction.


After reviewing your data, your gage is perfectly acceptable for measuring parts to tolerance for inspection (P/T Ratio = 7.07%). It is not suitable for use in measuring parts for SPC or for capability studies (%GRR = 59.92%, ndc = 1).
 
Last edited:
A

Atul Khandekar

#5
Look at selection of parts. Your max part measures 52.56, min is 52.52: that's a range of 0.04 against part tolerance of 0.6 ?
 

Miner

Forum Moderator
Staff member
Admin
#6
Look at selection of parts. Your max part measures 52.56, min is 52.52: that's a range of 0.04 against part tolerance of 0.6 ?
You are 100% correct. That is why I prefaced my first response with the following comment.

It also assumes that the parts selected adequately represent the actual process variation. If they do not, the study was not valid for assessing gage suitability for process control, and my comments are irrelevant.
Too many people overlook that very important requirement or deliberately select parts from the specification limits. That is okay if you are only using P/T Ratio as your indicator, but %GRR and ndc require parts that represent the actual process variation.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Sravan Manchikanti How to interpret '8.3 Control of nonconforming product' for SaMD device while implementing ISO 13485 & MDSAP ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
V How to interpret AQL sampling tables AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 5
Q How do you interpret this dimension in my drawing Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
Q IATF 16949 Cl. 4.4.1.2 - Product Safety - How to interpret IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
B How to interpret Grindometer Gage R&R Results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
L How to interpret the average R bar Value shown in the R Chart Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
N How to interpret the definition of clinical and preclinical trials? Other US Medical Device Regulations 3
K How to interpret Clause 7.6 for a service company? Service Industry Specific Topics 11
G Guidance Document to interpret IEC 60601-1 EU Medical Device Regulations 2
P How to interpret statement like 'Maintain a Procedure' Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 1
S How to interpret a Linear Regression in Minitab? Using Minitab Software 3
Q How to read and interpret an SIPOC (Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customers) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
M Transport Vehicle Thermal Regulation - How would you interpret this requirement? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
A How to interpret Minitab Results? What is difference in Cpk and Ppk values? Using Minitab Software 2
C How to interpret Measurement Uncertainty (MU) Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 5
T Please help me interpret my GR&R results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
T Gage Bias and Linearity - How to interpret the Minitab results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
F Gage R&R - How to interpret results? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 5
W MDR Reporting - How to interpret requirements for MDR Other US Medical Device Regulations 14
T SPC Data - Autocorrelation - How do I interpret this result? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 17
S Could someone tell me what are the results of a Gage R&R & how to interpret it? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
D How to interpret TS Clause 7.5.1.4 Preventive and Predictive Maintenance? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 8
J How do you audit or interpret 'Where Appropriate' in ISO 9001 Clauses such as 7.4.2 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
D How do we interpret the following XmR Trend Chart data? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 3
D How to interpret np chart data - Monitoring 6 medical records Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 6
Q Looking for Case Studies for How to interpret the requirements of ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
0 How to interpret s and x bar control charts Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 5
C CUSUM Chart - Can some one throw some light on use and how to interpret? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 8
Peter Fraser "Anither language" - I'll Interpret your 'Jargon' Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 1
K Gage R&R - How do I interpret the %PV & %TV results? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 9
N How should I interpret Voice of the Customer QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 1
S "Level of Control" over Suppliers - How do you Interpret and Accomplish Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 1
O Mitutoyo Digital Caliper to PC USB question General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
C Micrometer and Vernier Caliper simple calibration process General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 8
DietCokeofEvil What is the general consensus on Caliper tolerances? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
G How to compute or estimate a micrometer or caliper flatness using optical flat General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
G Procedure Creation specifically for dimensional (caliper, micrometer, dti) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
G Uncertainty Budget Examples for Caliper, Micrometer and Dial Gauge Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 3
G Caliper or Micrometer's Dimensional Flatness General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 5
G Manual Procedure with Uncertainty Budgeting for either a Caliper or Micrometer General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 6
Q Using Caliper A to verify Caliper B - Verification of Calibration ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
T GR&R Data from Caliper Measurements APQP and PPAP 3
N Digital vs Dial Caliper Comparison Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 17
L Caliper Calibration Standards - One for CNC and one for Sheet Metal? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 9
E Caliper Calibration on a Shoestring Calibration and Metrology Software and Hardware 11
C Uncertainty measurements for a 6 inch caliper Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 11
P Strange Gage R&R results for a Caliper (Tolerance Method) Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
B Please review my Vernier Caliper Gauge R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 8
Q Engineering purchased a new Caliper - 7.6 - Initial Calibration Required? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 6
F What are the Advantages of a Digital Caliper Compared with a Dial Caliper? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 8

Similar threads

Top Bottom