
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums 
The New Elsmar Cove Forums 
The New Elsmar Cove Forums
Measurement, Test and Calibration stability vs GRR

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!  next newest topic  next oldest topic 
Author  Topic: stability vs GRR 
hemant Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 
posted 05 November 2000 08:40 PM
in the survillance audit auditor has raised the issue that stability of the gage to be done first and then only R&R. as per me this is hen & egg situation. if R&R is not less than 10% how stability can be exibited? [This message has been edited by hemant (edited 06 November 2000).] IP: Logged 
Atul Khandekar Forum Contributor Posts: 21 
posted 06 November 2000 03:58 AM
One has to determine the inherent "Statistical Stability or Control" of the measurement process over a period of time. The methodology used for this is the same as that for conducting an SPC study. ie. 1. Determine Sample size and frequency 2. Plot control charts 3. Analyse / separate "common cause" and "special cause" variation 4. Look for outofcontrol and trend signals An outofcontrol Range chart indicates unstable repeatability (too much variation) and an outofcontrol Xbar chart may mean that the instrument is due for calibration (bias). A measurement process must be statistically under control (no special cause variations) for it to be used effectively to control the manufacturing process it measures. If there are no outofcontrol signals, Standard Deviation can be estimated and compared with process standard deviation to determine suitability of the measurement process for the application. Once the statistical stability is established, R&R study is then conducted to 'quantify various errors' in the measurement system. Based on these (r&r percentages), one can determine the suitability of the measurement system for a particular measurement application. Quoting from MSA manual "...Without databased knowledge of the state of control of a measurement process, figures of 'repeatability' , 'reproducibility', etc. are only descriptions of data obtained during the (r&r) study. They may have no meaning for future performance. Assessing the repeatability, reproducibility etc. of a measurement system for which the state of stability is unknown may cause more harm than good..."  Atul IP: Logged 
hemant Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 
posted 06 November 2000 07:58 PM
on reflecting further to my original post, i have gone through the MSAMEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS (MSA) book ifeel that STABILITY: When considering the subject of stability in connection with measurement system, it becomes extremely important to differentiate between what is generally referred to as measurement system stability  a ) The amount of total variation in the systemâs bias over time on a given part or master part : Known as "Stability over Time" and statistical stability, the more general term which is applied to not only stability ,but to repeatability, bias, process in general., etc. Statistical properties of measurement systems : The measurement system must be in statistical control. This means that variation in the measurement system is due to common causes only and not due to special causes. This can be referred to as statistical stability.  (page5, chapter ö1 , section2 ) Quality of measurement data Bias and Variance. specifically, the procedures assess the following statistical properties; Repeatability, reproducibility, bias, stability, and linearity. Collectively, the procedures are sometimes referred to as ãgage R&Rä procedures.  (page15,chapter15,section1) If yes  how Analysis of results graphical analysis
the averages of the multiple readings by each appraiser on each part are plotted with the reference value or overall part average as the index. This plot can assist in determining : linearity (if the reference value is used )  (page52, chapter 2section4 ) CONCLUSION GAGE R&R study is an apt exercise for statistical stability and if used, as said above all statistical properties are revealed. Like stability, linearity, repeatability & reproducibility. GRR should be done first and GRR values should be brought below 10% . This can be achieved by understanding the graphical representation and taking appropriate steps. By doing so we are achieving the "Statistical stability". Without data öbased knowledge of the state of control of a measuring process, R&R figures are only descriptions of the data obtained during study. They have no meaning for future performance. Assessing the repeatability ,reproducibility, etc, of a measurement system for which the state of stability is unknown may cause more harm than good. When talking of measurement system statistical stability, the length of time a system is stable is often a major point of discussion. However by means of TIME STABILITY, the length of time a system is stable can be found by using xbar rbar control chart. This time stability is to be done after statistical stability in other words called gage R&R. Incase if time stability is performed prior to gage R&R the bias readings will not be exact as readings are contaminated with repeatability and, reproducibility errors. Above all, any manufacturing process is supposed to be statistically stable if CP & CPK are controlled as they are representing spread & bias (centrality. ).The normal practice to control SPREAD first then to CPK the bias or centering OPN. Similarly, we have to look at measurement system. First control repeatability and reproducibility errors of SPREAD by doing gage R&R STUDY and then go to TIME STABILITY to know the extent of DRIFT OR BIAS the CPK. invite views on this
IP: Logged 
Lyndon unregistered 
posted 07 November 2000 09:37 AM
i do not agree that gage r&r ensures statistical stability....in my opinion,stability studies have to be done simultaneously with r&r studies,so that special causes occuring in between 2 r&r studies can be noticed.if such a stability study is not carried out simultaneously,then any special cause occuring wil not be noticed,which can give u a lower value of %r&r inthe second study,thus masking the improvement u have made in reducing the variation. e.g i have done msa studies where by cleaning a comtor gage(forchecking bore diameter),i have got better %r&r,in reality what i have done is improved stabiliy by reducing a special cause(that of dust,dirt etc),and not improved either the gage repeatibilty or the appraiser reproducibility but i agree with hemant that..a time stability has to be ALSO carried out later once u have got 10%r&f.....but i repeat my point that stability studies should be carried out simultanouesly with any r&r studies,in order to be aware of the occurence of any special cause IP: Logged 
Al Dyer Forum Wizard Posts: 622 
posted 07 November 2000 06:31 PM
This may sound simplistic but isn't stability the statistical monitoring (XR) of ongoing bias and acting upon the resulting spikes and trends? Help ASD... IP: Logged 
All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)  next newest topic  next oldest topic 
Hop to: 
Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!