Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums! This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

 The New Elsmar Cove Forums The New Elsmar Cove Forums   Measurement, Test and Calibration   Acceptance Criteria for Linearity, Bias, and Stability    profile | register | preferences | faq | search
 Author Topic:   Acceptance Criteria for Linearity, Bias, and Stability dewieForum Contributor Posts: 44From:BKKRegistered: Sep 1999 posted 20 January 2000 03:42 AM                Can somebody help? I'm so wondered the acceptance criteria for Linearity, Bias and Stability. For Gage R&R it is clearly stated that %R&R<30 is unacceptable.IP: Logged Jerry EldredForum Wizard Posts: 136From:Registered: Dec 1999 posted 21 January 2000 09:46 AM                I could nothing other than refer to the QS9000 MSA manual. This may be better addressed by QS9000 gurus. I'm not sure who the best to pass this on to would be.------------------IP: Logged dewieForum Contributor Posts: 44From:BKKRegistered: Sep 1999 posted 31 January 2000 10:12 PM                I might miss some parts in the manual. I find nothing say about those criteria.Can you please point me?IP: Logged Marc SmithCheech Wizard Posts: 4119From:West Chester, OH, USARegistered: posted 01 February 2000 03:04 AM                The book doesn't specify (maybe it does and I forget where...) because every situation is different - you have to use judgement. However, I would think that uncertainty (all these factors combined) should take no more than 10 to 15% of the spread.The point is this: You measure a part at an inspection point. How accurate is your measurement result in reality? If you buy a measurement device, it will come with a stated measurement uncertainty - example: Accurate to +/- 0.001 inch. This is 'assumed' to be across the range of the instrument (it's bias will not exceed +/- 0.001 at any point on its range). Bias at any point is a source of error.If you take all the biases (say you have 100 devisions on the instrument scale and you calibrate [check] it at 10 points), the measurements at those points are indicators of the instrument's linearity - plot them and you can see its linearity. If you have large biases but compensate for them, large bias may not be a problem at all. The key is to understand that the bias exists, to measure it and to compensate for it.Stability is essentially the same. If every time you send a measurement device to calibration and it comes back without change you're in good shape. However let's say it starts coming back and needs adjustment. That is now a source of possible error for the uncertainty budget.Stability is also a function of other possible factors such as temperature. If the local environment is not temperature stable and the measurement device is temperature sensitive - another possible source of error arises. This is where the control chart comes into play as the MSA book describes on page 41.The bottom line is that the intent is to ensure you identify and compensate for possible measurement error(s). I have a plate and I measure the thickness. The upper 'tolerance' limit on the drawing is 1.21mm. I measure it and find it to be 1.20. The question is.... Is the part really in spec or is the 'slop' of the measurement system enough that it is possible that the 'true' value is 1.22 (above the spec). Say you know the bias at that point is +0.1 - what does that tell us about the measurement we are taking? we know right there that the device says 1.20 but with the bias at that point the measurement is really 1.20 (observed measurement) + 0.1 (bias at that point) = 1.21 (the spect limit). Add other possible error sources such as the instrument uncertainty, and you can see we could measure and find it in tolerance when it actually is out of tolerance when all the measurement uncertainty is considered.Does this help or have I confused the issue?[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 01 February 2000).]IP: Logged Marc SmithCheech Wizard Posts: 4119From:West Chester, OH, USARegistered: posted 01 February 2000 03:26 AM                Also see https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000142.html IP: Logged
 All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA) next newest topic | next oldest topic Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic Hop to: Select a Forum or Archive List of Forums: Category: General Quality Topics --------------------Measurement, Test and CalibrationStatistical Techniques and 6 SigmaDocumentationNonconformance and Corrective Action SystemsContinuous ImprovementBenchmarkingTPM - Total Productive MaintenanceBaldrige National Quality AwardTQM - Total Quality ManagementMiscellaneous Quality TopicsBook ReviewsQuality Assurance SoftwareOccupations in Quality Assurance Category: National & International Standards --------------------ISO 9001/4:2000ISO 9000:1994ISO 14001 And Other Environmental SpecsGeneral ISO TopicsBS8800 & OHSAS 18001FDA and Medical DevicesAS 9100TL 9000 Category: Auditing and Registrars --------------------AuditingRegistrars and Registration Category: Automotive Related --------------------TS 16949QS-9000Tooling and Equipment SuppliersForo en Espa–olAPQP and PPAPFMEA and Control PlansEmbedded Devices and Control SoftwareVDA Volumes Including 6.1 Category: Guide Buyers Forums --------------------Guide Pre-Purchase QuestionsGuide Post-Purchase Questions Category: Software Quality Assurance --------------------Linux InfoTickit Scheme ForumSoftware Quality AssuranceInternet History Category: Odds and Ends --------------------Used - Buy and SellForums - How Do They Work? Suggestions!Company Advertisements - Free Offers, etc. List of Archives: PoliticsJokes