We tried and failed
JSW05 said:
Ron's example is a little extreme and assumes information that can't be known in advance, if at all, but it still serves to show that there can indeed be variation in simple attributes measurement tasks. The fact is that your statement, "...there can be no two results because the method of checking will not vary..." is nothing more than conjecture unless you have the data to back it up.
I must concur with the replies so far.
As much as we sometimes find all this stuff a pain, it is a requirement because enough problems have happened in the past that people wrote standards to make us think about preventing and repeating these same problems.
We just did some MSA on simple plug gages in simple old holes. We thought this would be just a huge waste of time. And they failed. We are still working on fixing all the problems we found.
The biggest one was training. It seems that some of our foremen think use of gages is so old hat, that they did not spend much (or any) on hands time with new people.
We also found shop floor lore had replaced the Work Instructions...my favorite person "they" said to do it this way...even though the WI clearly showed the correct way.
But, as is suggested just try it for yourself. Get the data. You may have no problems in which case you can argue to a registrar/customer from a position of strength.
However, can I suggest you do the test for fair. Do not let the person see any other previous test data. Use a veteran, and the most recent qualified hire. Make them do the parts in random order. In the location where they usually do the work. Under the same time pressure as day to day. Make sure some parts are just barely fails. As was suggested, put a burr in a few good parts. Make a few oval...if this can happen in your process. Make some parts oversize (our guys forgot to check the NOGO!)
I guarantee you will be surprised and learn a ton about your process and people.
I used to fight the requirements tooth and nail, now I try to withhold judgement till I learn a little more....I now reailize that every requirement is a problem that has happened tens of thousands of times, and we have been given an opportunity to not repeat that mistake by the ISO/TS/QS folks...