Thank you very much for this resource, just had a look through and put in some of my reference data and have a few questions/observations.
Within the EMP method which is one of your references, one of the first steps of the analysis is to check for consistency or stability. On your spreadsheet your method is to plot the average range of each operator, if you plot just the average range you run the risk of missing signals of inconsistency due to the individual ranges from each operator. Its true that the control chart is conservative for this type of analysis but you surely want to pick up any signals if there so that you can nail down the process once and for all.
In the file attached which is an example from EMP III, you can see that Operator 2 does indeed have an observation which violates the control limits. In this instance, with the benefit of an ANOMR analysis it was found that the violation was a one off and not systematic but I don't see how you could have reached this conclusion with the tools on your spreadsheet.
For some reason, I couldn't get the Reproducibility to plot but if it did I wonder if it would have shown that Operators A, C and D were detectibly different as shown by an ANOME chart? If the Reproducibility Chart only plots averages you cannot assess for patterns of non parallelism, another signal which is important to detect.
In real life for this example this led to an action to improve the consistency of the measurement and ended with the measurement process being a First Class Monitor with an Intraclass of 0.867 in contrast to the computed Discrimination Ratio of 2 on the worksheet. Even without improvement it's still a second class monitor.
I attach your sheet with the EMP example data inputted into your Reproducibility worksheet, I also attach a Full Basic EMP Study which agrees with Dr. Wheeler's original example from page 94 of the latest edition of EMP III.
I would be interested in your thoughts, thanks once again for this resource.