So, just for giggles - what would happen if you ran this study to evaluate it as a % of Tolerance instead of standard Study Variation for the variable feature that you are measuring - what does the R&R come out to be in that case?
It will be even better. the range of actual measurements is less than the tolerance zone (UNLESS there is significant measurement variation at the outer limits of the sepc range...this would be an interaction of the measurement system with the process)
The reason the reproducibility is so small (negative forced to zero?) is that the standard deviation for the differences in operators is very small while the measuremetn system std dev is very large. it's a simple math problem of squaring subtracting then taking a square root. try it by HAND instead of by minitab.
However, one thing you cannot see at all with the traditional method of gage R&R plotting is that operator 2 has extremely good r
epeatability, on the order of 19 distinct categories! I always recommend plotting the repeated measurements on a scatter diagram with a 45 degree line on it. thsi shows you a LOT more than the standard graphs and it can be done in one graph instead of 4...