Is a GR&R necessary for Weighing Scale?

sinned

Registered Visitor
#1
If I consider the operator of a weighing scale has no effect on the measurement result, then the need for GR&R study will essentially reduces into one of repeatability study.

If I consider the operator putting the part onto the scale vary between different people, then the GR&R is needed to see if there is any operator effect.

Which one above make more sense ?

b.rgds - sinned
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Ron Rompen

Trusted Information Resource
#2
Re: GR&R necessary for Weighing Scale?

Just to be devils advocate here, how have you determined that the operator has no effect on the measurement result? I have used that arguement (long ago) with a CMM holding parts on a fixture, and it was explained to me that the operator CAN have an effect on the results - is the part/sample properly loaded and centered, did ALL the sample get placed on the scale, did the operator remember to properly zero the scale, enter the tare weight, etc etc etc?
 

howste

Thaumaturge
Super Moderator
#3
Re: GR&R necessary for Weighing Scale?

I believe that the operator can have an effect on the measurement results. If you do the R&R it will tell you if the operator has an effect or not.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#4
Ron and Howste are correct. the only way to answer the question concerning the operators' effect is to do the test. It's a very easy test to do as well so there is really no need to debate. debates only result in opinions, the test results in facts.
 

sinned

Registered Visitor
#5
Thanks for all of your contribution.

For sure, I know that doing a GR&R does no harm and that the result can answer the question whether the measurement system is adequate or not.

Nevertheless, it is exactly what bother me that many engineers jump to "just do a GR&R" with no thought of what measurement system they are really working with. That this become a no-brainer answer without defining and understanding the variables of the measuring system at all.

For example, i saw a measurement which has only one authorized operator in the whole plant. But for the sake of making up the three persons and three set of data, they just got someone who will not involve in the measurement (probably for the rest of their life) to take part in the GR&R.

We have weighing scale that are linked to computer and not requiring any manual "zeroing" when doing measurement (this was an attempt to avoid missing zeroing); and the effect of placing sample on different parts of the scale surface been studied to be insignificant. And sadly this all efforts will not be recognized.
 

Ron Rompen

Trusted Information Resource
#6
You appear to have done the majority of the work already in validating your measurement system - but (looking at it from a customer or auditor point of view) you have no data or other evidence to support your contention.

In some cases (particularly in automotive) you eventually have to bow to the weight of the standard, and do what they ask even if it doesnt always make sense (at the time).


Thanks for all of your contribution.

For sure, I know that doing a GR&R does no harm and that the result can answer the question whether the measurement system is adequate or not.

Nevertheless, it is exactly what bother me that many engineers jump to "just do a GR&R" with no thought of what measurement system they are really working with. That this become a no-brainer answer without defining and understanding the variables of the measuring system at all.

For example, i saw a measurement which has only one authorized operator in the whole plant. But for the sake of making up the three persons and three set of data, they just got someone who will not involve in the measurement (probably for the rest of their life) to take part in the GR&R.

We have weighing scale that are linked to computer and not requiring any manual "zeroing" when doing measurement (this was an attempt to avoid missing zeroing); and the effect of placing sample on different parts of the scale surface been studied to be insignificant. And sadly this all efforts will not be recognized.
 

ncwalker

Trusted Information Resource
#7
Nevertheless, it is exactly what bother me that many engineers jump to "just do a GR&R" with no thought of what measurement system they are really working with. That this become a no-brainer answer without defining and understanding the variables of the measuring system at all.
The engineers are not wrong and you are not wrong. They are right in that you need to do a GR&R. You are right in that you don't "just" do one. You need to give it some thought so that it is conducted properly.

Let's talk about no-brainer answers.... I hear ya. When you are in the business of doing something and know it real well, you develop a sense that things are no-brainers. I have a lot of expertise in an industry that is considered a "black art" and there are lots of guys with experience that say they do things because "that's the way it's done, it's a no brainer." And yet, often I conduct an experiment and prove them wrong. So be careful with these type of statements. At first glance, a scale may SEEM like a no brainer. And I'm not looking at your scale, it's resolution, etc. I know my bathroom scale is pretty good at weighing me and my family. I'm less sure it's good for weighing my cat because my cats weight is small compared to the operating range of the scale. So I am more inclined to say "It's a no brainer" on a person, but I'm not willing to say it's effective on cats without testing it. Now, if this was the umpteenth scale you were calibrating and you have 20 studies in hand where it passes EASILY against the fluctuation and tolerance of your new situation, THAT's a no brainer. But if it's not, it MAY not be (I say with only knowing it IS a scale. Point is - be careful).

For example, i saw a measurement which has only one authorized operator in the whole plant. But for the sake of making up the three persons and three set of data, they just got someone who will not involve in the measurement (probably for the rest of their life) to take part in the GR&R.
This statement tells me there's a lack of knowledge of what GR&R is and why it is needed in your facility. Also, probably a lack of how to conduct the studies.

And as the guy above me (who's name I can't remember because I'm in the edit window and don't know how to find it, sorry) said - sometimes it is easier to just comply with the silly automotive requirement (they are there) than fight it. Not a bad path, as long as it isn't compromising actual quality.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#8
... the only way to answer the question concerning the operators' effect is to do the test. <snip> debates only result in opinions, the test results in facts.
...Nevertheless, it is exactly what bother me that many engineers jump to "just do a GR&R" with no thought of what measurement system they are really working with. That this become a no-brainer answer without defining and understanding the variables of the measuring system at all....
Understanding is a good thing. Thought is a good thing. Using a brain is a good thing. But without data, it is thought, theory and debate.

"Just do a GRR" can come from a lack of thinking, true.
It can also come from a desire for data to make a well founded and defensible conclusion.

You think that there is no influence by operator.
That is an opinion...albeit a well informed and likely correct opinion.
Get the data...then it won't be an opinion anymore...that's what I'm reading up above...

To quote others: In God we Trust...all others must provide data.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
K ISO 13485 clause 8.5.2 'Any necessary CA shall be taken without undue delay' ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
Z Is IQ necessary for laser marking validation? EU Medical Device Regulations 3
E How do you determine if hipot is necessary for a cable product? Manufacturing and Related Processes 8
T HF testing / Summative evaluation for MDDS class I necessary? Human Factors and Ergonomics in Engineering 2
V 3 PQ lots mentioned as requirement in PPAP. Is this necessary? APQP and PPAP 2
G Best Practices for IT auditing - Is a session-id necessary for a complete audit trail? IEC 27001 - Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) 0
B Is it necessary to conduct product audit of entire product which is manufactured in the company as per IATF IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
R Clinical Trial to sell in the EU - Necessary or Not? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
K GDPR - Is it really necessary for the DPO(s) to be knowledgeable to Data Privacy Law? IEC 27001 - Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) 3
D How to ensure independence and authority necessary to perform QM tasks ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
bobdoering "nds" or Number of Discriminate Samples - the Necessary Tool to Work With "ndc"! Imported Legacy Blogs 0
S Is an index necessary for DMR or DHF? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 6
H Change of a medical device sterilization dose - New 510(k) necessary? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
B Time necessary for all Risk Management activities ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 2
M Risk Identification and Risk Assessment for any Process - Is it necessary? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 22
P Necessary Compliance Documentation for RoHS and REACH REACH and RoHS Conversations 5
C Change Order necessary to document FMEA Updates? FMEA and Control Plans 1
J Is a Laboratory Scope Necessary if... IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 15
B Procedures necessary for things such as the floor cleaner or weigh scale ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
V Certified Internal auditor is necessary? ISO 9001 requirement? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 4
T Is it necessary to Audit our CARs and SCARs? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
M Biocompatibility - why are animal studies necessary? Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 11
N Is Notified Body approval necessary for small changes to IVD IFU? CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 7
G Plant Relocation - Is it necessary to perform FAI? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 13
A Is IEC 80601-2-60 necessary for Dental Laser? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
F Necessary trainings for FAR 145 certification Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Standards and Requirements 3
H 510k Submission - Is Risk Management necessary? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
M Is Notification of the Test Laboratory always necessary for Supplier Changes? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 12
S Certificate Suspension Necessary in case of No Production? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
A Cosmetic Spec - Convincing Management Visual Inspection Standard is Necessary Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
GStough Is A Re-Audit Necessary after Disaster Recovery? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
N Internal Audit of the Training System - Corrective Action Necessary? Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 16
x-files Necessary or Unnecessary Redundancy in Procedures ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
P Is it necessary to show Model Number on the Labeling (meter box, label and manual)? Other US Medical Device Regulations 3
M Retroactive Training Records Necessary? ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
T Necessary test documents for Class II Medical Device Hardware and Firmware ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
somashekar How to Determine the Necessary Employee Competence ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
M IEC 60601-1 testing for device with its own 2V battery power supply necessary? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
J Documents necessary for registration of a Medical Device EU Medical Device Regulations 2
P Is it necessary to perform Root Cause Analysis for each failed part? Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 16
L Approved Parts Listing- ISO 13485- Is an approved parts listing necessary? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
M Is it necessary to record all nonconforming products? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 12
P Is it necessary to consider ISO 22002-1 for the implementation of ISO 22000 Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 3
M ISO 10993 - Repeat tests necessary if colour changes slightly? Other Medical Device Related Standards 11
Q Is an actual document for Roles and Responsibilities necessary? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
K RC14001:2008 - Audit of Internal Audit: Is this necessary? ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 16
G When are Flow Charts necessary or required? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
R Associated Documents List within a Procedure - What is necessary? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
T Document Control: It's necessary to have the approved date for docs? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
K Internal Audits - Necessary before Stage 1 Audit? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 42

Similar threads

Top Bottom