Hi Edward
Just do a "textbook" MSA study. All it will show is that your reproducibility (between operators variability) is statistically indistinguishable from zero, and if your machine is good, it will show that your repeatability (within sample variability) is wonderful. Then you can report to your customer that your measurement system is wonderful, "and here are the numbers to prove it".
You say that the machine "...determines acceptable and rejection...". In this case it sounds like an attribute study so page 131 of the MSA manual onwards (4th edition).
NC
Apologies for momentarily hijacking this thread, but does anyone know where AIAG got their numbers from on page 191, paragraph 2?
"...the expected median is about 0.861 with a standard deviation of approximately 0.439."
Huh???
It's been a while since I last tried this. But the last time I put the numbers in the table (page 190) into a spreadsheet, I failed to get this median and standard deviation no matter how ingenious I was (although that may not be very ingenious!). Are the editorial board of AIAG secret Bayesians with the "expected median" representing a prior probability estimate (ie a random guess)?
Any input welcome.