MSA - Gage R&R Study Analysis - SAMPLE - Case Study

Z

ZeeTX

#11
JSW05 said:
You need to tell us what the assumptions are if the question is hypothetical. Where did the case study come from?
What assumptions you want to know..?

This is a "Class Case Study" given to students taking up a 'Quality Program'.
The parts (2x2 Inch - Foam) were provided to students for measuring with a 1/16 Inch ruler. The Tolerance (2.000-2.250 Inch) provided in this case, I assume it to be arbitarirly provided by the professor since I cannot verify it..!

But I like to know 2 situations:
1. If the Tol. is actual specification (Specified Tol.) of the manufcactured part (2x2 Inch Foam)?
2. If the Tol. is hypothetical assigned by the Prof. for the students to do the Gage R&R study?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#12
ZeeTX said:
What assumptions you want to know..?

When you present a hypothetical situation, "assumptions" are information assumed to be true that's needed to understand the situation and properly evaluate the question. In this case, you should have just given us the question/situation as it was presented to you.

ZeeTX said:
But I like to know 2 situations:
1. If the Tol. is actual specification (Specified Tol.) of the manufcactured part (2x2 Inch Foam)?
2. If the Tol. is hypothetical assigned by the Prof. for the students to do the Gage R&R study?

I'm not sure it's important; it seems that for purposes of the case study you're probably supposed to accept the tolerance as appropriate, or maybe not-- maybe you'll get extra credit for questioning it:cool: .
 
Z

ZeeTX

#13
JSW05 said:
[/color]
When you present a hypothetical situation, "assumptions" are information assumed to be true that's needed to understand the situation and properly evaluate the question. In this case, you should have just given us the question/situation as it was presented to you.
OK here are the exact Questions that I have with me which I posted in the first post only. But I will repeat it again without my conclusion or assumptions.. :)
==================================================================
Q1. Referring to the above GRR Study; What would one should change to Improve the Measurement System..?

Q2. If GRR Study is to be repeated; What would one do differently..?


Assumption/Information - All operators measured all the parts (5 parts in this case) Individually but in a group with same ruler (Each part measured 3 times - 3 Trials).
==================================================================
I assumed that since all the operators measured all the parts but since every reading was eaxctly the same as each other (Taking ruler accuracy into account, the way the part was measured); all these things influenced each others measurement observation including the measured values..!!

So the Answer to the Q2 would be:

* Use a more accurate or resolution sensitive instrument Eg. Vernier Caliper, which has a resolution 10% of the Tol.(0.250) i.e., 0.0250 would give a better Repeatability(Equipment Variation) results.... I'm confused here or am I right..?

* The (5)parts should have been measured by all the (3)operators individually rather than in group to avoid the influence factor and get better Reproducability(Appraiser Variation).


Are the above two conclusions correct? Anything more could be added to it?

Answer for the Q1. As you Quoted earlier -

* It appears that the device lacks the requisite sensitivity; the tolerance spread is .250 and the resolution of the device is (apparently) .0625. In order to be kosher, the device should be sensitive to 1/10 of the tolerance spread (.025 in this case). If you were to use calipers instead of a scale you would undoubtedly see more of the variation you're looking for.

Anything else, that can be added for Q1 answer..?
==================================================================

Sorry about all these question but I am not able to draw any more conclusions on -

How the Measurement system can be improved.. :confused:
What could be done differently if the Gage R&R is repeated.. :confused:


:thanx:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#14
You've told us nothing about the protocol for the test, other than the operators were in "a group." If that's all the information you were given, then the answers you have now should suffice. Let us know how it turns out.
 
Z

ZeeTX

#15
JSW05 said:
You've told us nothing about the protocol for the test, other than the operators were in "a group." If that's all the information you were given, then the answers you have now should suffice. Let us know how it turns out.
I'm sorry, I didn't get you. What protocol (Information) are you talking about..?
Please explain.. :rolleyes:

EDIT:
The other Info. I have is:

- That the part (Foam) is always measured at a Pre-determined/pre-marked area on the foam (i.e., about the centre of the part; characteristic measured is length/side of the foam).

- First all the 5 parts are measured by Operator 1 once (Trial 1 of 1st operator) and then the second operator measures all 5 parts once (Trial 1 of 2nd Operator) and then the third operator measures all 5 parts once (Trial 1 of 3rd Operator). The same pattern is followed for the 3 Trails by 3 Operators.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#16
ZeeTX said:
I'm sorry, I didn't get you. What protocol (Information) are you talking about..?
Please explain.. :rolleyes:

EDIT:
The other Info. I have is that the part (Foam) is always measured at a Pre-determined/pre-marked area on the foam (i.e., about the centre of the part; characteristic measured is length/side of the foam)
ZeeTX, we don't seem to be headed in any particular direction here.:truce: Maybe that's my fault. As far as "protocol" is concerned, I was referring to a formal plan for testing or experimentation; a protocol describes how testing is to be conducted and the associated controls. I'm not sure it matters at this point, though. I think your original questions have been answered, but if not, please ask again after reading through the thread.
 
Z

ZeeTX

#17
JSW05 said:
ZeeTX, we don't seem to be headed in any particular direction here.:truce: Maybe that's my fault. As far as "protocol" is concerned, I was referring to a formal plan for testing or experimentation; a protocol describes how testing is to be conducted and the associated controls. I'm not sure it matters at this point, though. I think your original questions have been answered, but if not, please ask again after reading through the thread.
No, Not at all. Its been a pleasure going through the discussion of this case study. Though I am still not that satisfied that there aren't any more conclusions that could be drawn from the GRR Info. I have.. :bonk:

Anyway, I'll go through the thread once again and see if I have anything more that needs more clarification and let you know by tomorrow.

Once again thank you very much JSW05, for bearing and being with me.. :agree1:

:thanx:
 
Z

ZeeTX

#18
Has anyone else any difference of opinion or drawn further conclusion(s) for the 2Qs. from the above Case Study..?
Rob Nix said:
What is the risk if the parts are a tiny bit out?

What is the likelihood that they would be way out of spec?

It seems to me that you are putting far more effort into this project than you have to. Why not just make some attribute (go / no go) gage up, and chart nothing. Your scale (ruler) discriminates to 1/16", and your spec is 1/4" which is 1 to 4. So it is practically a go/no go check anyway.

This also seems a prime candidate for some error-proofing device.
Can the part(foam) be measured by a Go/no-go guage check..? If yes, how accurate the measured value might be..?

How the Measurement system can be improved..?
What could be done differently if the Gage R&R is repeated..?
 
A

Atul Khandekar

#19
Interesting...I'll take a shot at this.
(You probably already know this, but) Some suggestions are:

1. Develop a standard method for measuring the parts. Train all operators to use this method. Ensure that they understand and follow the method correctly.
2. If possible, develop some kind of a holding fixture for the piece of foam, so as to reduce the 'handling' effect.
3. Ensure that the parts taken for the study truly cover the spec range.
4. If possible, get a ruler with graduations finer than 1/16".
5. If not, ask the operators to record the readings by 'estimating' between graduations.
6. Do a 'blind' study so operators do not know each other's readings or their own previous reading for the part.
7. Randomize the sequence of the parts being measured.

Does this help?
 
D

Dr. Electron

#20
Jim Wynne said:
The device is a scale (ruler); why does this surprise you?

Of course it's possible, given the device and the object being measured, and assuming reasonably competent operators.

It appears that the device lacks the requisite sensitivity; the tolerance spread is .250 and the resolution of the device is (apparently) .0625. In order to be kosher, the device should be sensitive to 1/10 of the tolerance spread (.025 in this case). If you were to use calipers instead of a scale you would undoubtedly see more of the variation you're looking for.

See the answer to #1.


Hi Jim...I was wondering where you got the 1/10 of tolerance # from. Is it a published standard? or is it something just commonly used?

Thanks!!
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
D Do I need part variation while doing Destructive Variable Gage R&R MSA study Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 19
G Ford - Type 1 Gage Study MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) acceptable? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
Miner Intro to MSA of Continuous Data – Part 7: R&R using Wheeler’s Honest Gage Study Imported Legacy Blogs 17
B MSA (Gage R&R) vs. Capability Cpk Study - Helium Leak Check Station Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
Ron Rompen Need help with MSA/Gage R&R - Seeking Minitab template file/sample GR&R study Using Minitab Software 7
J How to do attribute data GR&R (Gage R&R)? Do a Kappa study or follow the MSA book? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
A GR&R (Gage R&R) - MSA - Section 6 Attribute Gage Study - Short Method Requirements Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
J AIAG's MSA Manual 3rd Edition Attribute Gage Study - Calculating the UCI and LCI Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 10
Y NDC (Number of Distinct Categories) - Long Gage R&R Study in MSA 3rd Edition Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 76
S MSA for attribute relation gage Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
B How to perform a MSA - GRR (Gage R&R) A&R/ANOVA Vs GUM/VDA Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
B Gage R&R MSA - Variation, Tolerance, Variance by different methods IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 23
P MSA on an in-line automatic X-ray thickness measuring gage Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
B Gage R&R Criteria on page 78 MSA Reference Manual Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 10
C Gage R&R/MSA for PPAP - Our product has no variance Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 9
G MSA Gage R&R and Attribute Forms Attached Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
D How to do MSA on a Laser Mike, Rules, and Pressure Gage? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
M Attribute Gage MSA - What is the width of the gray area of ​​doubt? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 5
optomist1 MSA Gage R&R - Destructive Test with One Sided Specification and One Operator Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
R MSA - GRR (Gage R&R) Requirement for CMM Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 21
2 MSA when neither Nested nor Crossed Gage R&R is Applicable Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
M Runout Gage R&R - MSA on Roundness Tester - Minitab Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 9
B Gage R&R/MSA for In Process Measurement System in a Turning Machine Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
bobdoering Dr. Wheeler is back with his thoughts on MSA and Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
T When is GRR (Gage R&R) required? AIAG MSA Manual Version 4 Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 19
R MSA gage R&R (GR&R) for Destructive Test (Non-Replicable Data) Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
E Gage Run Chart Analysis - Page 105 MSA manual 3th edition Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
Marc MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) and Gage R&R Spreadsheets Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 0
A Acceptable Criteria for Variable Gage R&R according to the MSA Manual 3rd Edition Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
Z How to handle MSA's (Gage R&R) for different parts? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
P MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) Gage R&R with 10 Operators Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
A MSA and Gage R&R for Measuring Microscope Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 5
T Are MSA?s (Measurement System Analysis) Process or Gage Based? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 20
M Output of Nested MSA Gage R&R - Is this possible? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
P AIAG SPC Manual (ver.1) Interpretations related to Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 8
Y Destructive Gage R&R Spreadsheet - Old MSA formula (5.15s) vs New formula (6s) Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
Q Internal Testing and Calibration Laboratories - MSA, Gage R&R and Control Plans IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
R MSA Attribute gage repeatability and reproducibility IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
R "Gauge (Gage) R&R Studies per MSA Manual" - Customer Audit Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 13
A Significance of X chart in AIAG MSA sheet for Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 9
Z Determining how many measurement devices need gage R&R? MSA Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 13
H MSA Excel .xls worksheet that includes GR&R (Gage R&R), Bias, Linearity, etc. Excel .xls Spreadsheet Templates and Tools 15
D MSA and Number of operators - BSI auditor: 3 operators must be used for Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 10
D When is MSA (Measurement System Analysis) appropriate on a custom built gage? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
R MSA and Gage Tracking Software that complies with MSA 3rd Edition Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 6
G Gage R&R for every gauge? Or is it only every type of gauge? MSA 3rd Edition Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 13
G Tolerance vs Total Variation in Gage R&R report - MSA 3rd edition pg. 116 Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 14
K MSA 3rd Attribute GR&R (Gage R&R), no operators - Air decay test systems Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
S MSA (Attribute Gage R&R) on our process monitoring points Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
T TS 16949 - AIAG's MSA Manual - Thread Inspection Gage - Attribute Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom