Cause & Effect Diagram for a Measurement Process

Properties of Measurement Processes

• Repeated measurements will disagree

• Means of repeated measurements will disagree
• Measurements made at different times, or by different operators,
or on different instruments will disagree
• The measured value and the true value will disagree

Waste due to poor quality test data

• Rejection of “good” material

• Acceptance of “bad” material
• Adjusting the process when not needed
• Failure to adjust when needed
• Loss of “goodwill” between production and test people
 The High Cost of Poor Quality Measurements

• Materials, lost time, wasted effort

• Lower capacity and productivity
• Higher manufacturing costs
• Lower outgoing quality levels
• Late delivery
• Unhappy customers
• Loss of customers??

In any program of control we must start with observed data.

Of what value is the theory of control, i.e. SQC, if the
observed data going into it is bad?
Dr. Walter A. Shewhart
1931
 Gage Capability
Gage Capability is a method to determine how much of your observed process
variation is due to measurement system variation.
A Gage Capability Study will break down the total variation into two
categories, part-to-part variation and measurement system variation.
Measurement system variation is then partitioned into its two
components – Repeatability and Reproducibility

Overall Variation

Part-to-Part Variation Measurement Variation

Repeatability Reproducibility
(Variation due to gage) (Variation due to operators)

Operator-by-Part
Operator
1 – available from the ANOVA method only.
Interaction1
 Repeatability and Reproducibility

Repeatability

• The variation obtained when one operator uses the same gage for obtaining
replicate measurements of the identical characteristics on the same parts
• Obtained under a limited set of operating conditions (see below)

Reproducibility

• The variation in the average of measurements made by different operators

using the same gage when measuring identical characteristics of the same parts
• Obtained under a broader set of operating conditions (see below)

Conditions Repeatability Reproducibility

Operator Same Different
Gage Same Same
Day or Time-Frame Same Same or different
Calibration Interval Same Same or different
Environmental Same Same or different
Conditions
 Gage R&R (GR&R) Basics
• Select the gage and test characteristic to be evaluated
• Select 10 parts for the study
• Select 3 operators for the study
• Each operator tests all 10 parts and records the measurements
• Each operator repeats this step a second time
• Each operator repeats this step a third time
• Operators do not have access to his/her previous results or the results of others
• Tests are done in random order
• Data (90 data points) entered into the computer (Recommended to use Minitab)
• Tolerance (USL minus LSL) entered into computer
• Software prints out information, including:
- GR&R % of Tolerance
- GR&R % of Study Variation
- Other statistical measures and graphs
• General requirements:
- GR&R % of Tolerance not more than 25% for key dimensions
- GR&R % of Tolerance not more than 35% for non-key dimensions

GR&R % of Tolerance = the percentage of allowable tolerance occupied by test

variation (repeatability and reproducibility) alone.
 Comparison of Various GR&R % of Tolerance

LSL USL

GR&R = 25%

GR&R = 30%

GR&R = 40%

GR&R = 50%

GR&R = 100%
 The Impact of GR&R on Specification Limits

Assume:
• An in-control, unbiased measurement process
• GR&R % of Tolerance = 20%

Lower Upper
Say you test a Spec Spec
part and get a Limit Limit
result right here.

The test result indicates “in-spec”.

 The Impact of GR&R on Specification Limits
Assume:
• An in-control, unbiased measurement process
• GR&R % of Tolerance = 20%

Lower Upper
Because of test Spec Spec
variability however, Limit Limit

you know that the

“true” value might be
higher or lower than
the measured value.

Because the GR&R is 20%,

you know that the “true”
value may lie anywhere in a The problem is, where do you place
region this wide. this interval, with respect to your
measured value?
 The Impact of GR&R on Specification Limits
Assume:
• An in-control, unbiased measurement process
• GR&R % of Tolerance = 20%

Lower Upper
Spec Spec
Limit Limit

Do you place it here?

Or do you place it here?
Do you place it here?

Which is correct?
 The Impact of GR&R on Specification Limits

Assume:
• An in-control, unbiased measurement process
• GR&R % of Tolerance = 20%
Lower Upper
Spec Spec
Limit Limit
You can see that there is a
distinct probability,
however small, that an
additional test result will
indicate “out-of-spec”.
X

You treat this question as follows:

Consider your current test result to be your best estimate of where the mean of this
interval lies, and center the interval on the test result.

Let’s generalize this issue with an example that uses three different parts.
 Wrap-up: The Impact of GR&R on Specification Limits

Three different
parts: 1, 2, & 3

Each part is represented

by a distribution
representing known
measurement variability,
rather than an interval.

For judging conformance to spec, the GR&R will not be a factor for parts 1 & 3.
As in the previous example, the test result for sample #2 presents a distinct probability that the
part may actually be out-of-specification, even though the test result is within spec.
Whenever a single test result falls directly on a spec limit, there is a 50:50 chance that the part
may be in-spec or out-of-spec. This is true regardless of how “good” the GR&R is.

For these reasons, it is always best for the process

average to be at or near the target value.
 Determining the “Tolerance”

Case 1 - Bilateral Specs:

Upper Spec Limit (USL) and Lower Spec Limit (LSL) available

Tolerance = USL minus LSL

Case 2A - Unilateral Specs, Target = 0; Have USL:

Tolerance = USL minus Zero

Case 2B - Unilateral Specs, Have USL or LSL but not both:

Tolerance = 2 * X – Spec Limit

where, = absolute value, X = process average

Note: Minitab software uses this method, starting with Release 14.2

Case 3 – No Specs, but have production data:

Tolerance = 6 * process standard deviation
Results in a GR&R % of Process Capability
 Procedure for a GR&R Study
1. Select the measuring equipment to be studied.
2. Select three people for the study. Engineers and/or QA Technicians can be
utilized to do preliminary studies to determine if gages, fixtures, and training are
required to meet measurement requirements. Operators that will be doing the
testing in production must be used for the final Gage R&R.
3. IMPORTANT: Prepare a stepwise procedure to be used for the study. Illustrate
the procedure with photos or sketches if necessary to make it clear how to
properly perform the testing. If this testing, or the gage, is new to them, it would
be advisable to conduct training, then allow them to practice using the gage and
procedure so that they can develop their technique and familiarity with the
method. Failure to do so may result in an unacceptable %GR&R.
4. Select 10 parts to be measured. 1, 2, 3 Number the parts 1 to 10.
5. Allow each operator to measure each part in random order.
6. Repeat step 5 a second time. Note: the operator should not have access to
previous results.
7. Repeat step 5 a third time. Note: the operator should not have access to previous
results.
8. Analyze the data using Minitab or similar software.
 Procedure for a GR&R Study (Continued)
Note 1: All 10 parts need not have the same part number if the target values are the
same, or very similar in value.
Note 2: When selecting parts for a GR&R where multiple part numbers are available,
select the part number with the dimension that will be the most difficult to measure
accurately and precisely. Select the part number with the longest length because this will
generally be the most difficult one to measure.
Note 3: When possible, select the parts that represent the actual variation of the process.
Ideally, you would like the standard deviation of these 10 parts to be the same as the
standard deviation of the process. Failure to select parts that represent the actual
process variation will result in Gage R&R % of Study Variation values that may be of
little use, with only the GR&R % of Tolerance value being useful.
 Two Types of GR&R

XBar & R Method and ANOVA Method

The calculations used in the XBar and R method are simpler, however the ANOVA method is
preferred because 1) it uses standard deviation rather than Range statistics and is more
accurate, and 2) provides the statistical significance level for operator-part interaction.

If the software offers both methods, use the ANOVA method.

The method used should provide an Xbar chart and a Range chart.
The R chart shows the difference between the largest and smallest measurement for each
part for each operator. Because the points are arranged by operator, you can see how
consistent each operator is.
Ideally, you would like to see that the average Range is about the same for each operator,
and that no points exceed the upper control limit.

The Xbar chart shows the average for each part by each operator. Because the points are
arranged by operator, you can see how each operator’s averages compare.

Unlike a conventional control chart, you want the gage study Xbar chart to show many points
exceeding the control limits.
If no points exceed the Xbar control limits, it means that the test method cannot distinguish
between different parts.

The more out-of-control Xbar points, the better.

 Software Example – Minitab Analysis
Sam ple Ope rator Inche s
1 John 56.635
2 John 56.628
3 John 56.632
4 John 56.631 This is how you arrange the data for Minitab.
5 John 56.636
6 John 56.629
7
8
John
John
56.631
56.634
Use one column for sample number, one for operator
9
10
John
John
56.631
56.634
number or name, and one for the data values.
1 John 56.639
2 John 56.626
3 John 56.631 For 10 samples, 3 operators and 3 replicates,
4 John 56.630
5 John 56.631 you should have 90 data points.
6 John 56.628
7 John 56.628
8 John 56.635 Choose the ANOVA method for your analysis.
9 John 56.632
10 John 56.632
1
2
John
John
56.637
56.630
Choose six standard deviations for the Study
3
4
John
John
56.632
56.632
Variation. Previous versions of Minitab used 5.15
5
6
John
John
56.632
56.629
standard deviations. 6 standard deviations
7
8
John
John
56.630
56.635
however is more in line with conventional estimates
9
10
John
John
56.632
56.634
of capability.
1 Mary 56.638
2 Mary 56.630
. . .
. . . Input the tolerance. Examples:
. . .
3 Fred 56.633 If specs are +/- 0.031”, the tolerance is 0.062”
4 Fred 56.630
5
6
Fred
Fred
56.636
56.629
If specs are –0.005”. +0.025”, tolerance is 0.030”
7
8
Fred
Fred
56.630
56.637
If specs are 0.08” max and a target of 0” is assumed,
9 Fred 56.632 tolerance is 0.08”.
10 Fred 56.635
Gage R&R Study - ANOVA Method

Two-Way ANOVA Table With Interaction Values <0.05 indicate

Source DF SS MS F P statistically significant
Sample 9 0.0006014 0.0000668 42.3174 0.000 differences. Here you
Operator 2 0.0000347 0.0000173 10.9844 0.001 can see a bias
Sample * Operator 18 0.0000284 0.0000016 0.5263 0.934 between operators, but
Repeatability 60 0.0001800 0.0000030 no significant sample *
Total 89 0.0008445 operator interaction.

Two-Way ANOVA Table Without Interaction

This table will have
Source DF SS MS F P slightly different values
Sample 9 0.0006014 0.0000668 25.0066 0.000 than the one above due
Operator 2 0.0000347 0.0000173 6.4910 0.002 to the way ANOVA
Repeatability 78 0.0002084 0.0000027 handles the interaction.
Total 89 0.0008445
Gage R&R
%Contribution
Source VarComp (of VarComp)
Total Gage R&R 0.0000032 30.72 This table shows the relative contribution
Repeatability 0.0000027 25.97 of each component of variation.
Reproducibility 0.0000005 4.75
Operator 0.0000005 4.75
Part-To-Part 0.0000071 69.28
Total Variation 0.0000103 100.00
Study Var %Study Var %Tolerance
Source StdDev (SD) (6 * SD) (%SV) (SV/Toler)
Total Gage R&R 0.0017780 0.0106678 55.43 26.67 This value (26.67% of
Repeatability 0.0016346 0.0098079 50.96 24.52 Tolerance) is the GR&R
Reproducibility 0.0006993 0.0041961 21.80 10.49 for this study. This is the
Operator 0.0006993 0.0041961 21.80 10.49 value to report.
Part-To-Part 0.0026697 0.0160184 83.23 40.05
Total Variation 0.0032076 0.0192456 100.00 48.11

This value (55.43% of Study Variation) is high only because the 10 parts represented only a small portion of allowable tolerances.
AS39583D Skirt Blank
GR&R for Length, Length
Part # 12345
Reported by: John Smith
Gage name: #5432 Mitutoyo 60" Calipers Tolerance: AS39583D 56.612 +0.030/-0.015"
Date of study: 6/10/2004 Misc: Operators: A. Anderson, B. Black, C. Cooper

1 Components of Variation 4 Inches by Sample

80 % Contribution 56.640
% Study Var
Percent

% Tolerance 56.635
40
56.630

0
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part 1 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Sample
2 R Chart by Operator
5
1 2 3 Inches by Operator
UCL=0.006950 56.640
Sample Range

0.0050 56.635
_
0.0025 R=0.0027 56.630

0.0000 LCL=0
1 2 3
Operator
3 Xbar Chart by Operator
1 2 3 6 Operator * Sample Interaction
Operator
56.636 56.636
Sample Mean

1
UCL=56.63505
Average

2
_
_ 3
X=56.63229 56.632
56.632

LCL=56.62953 56.628
56.628 1 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Sample
Notes:
1 There are three components of variation - Repeatability, Reproducibility, & Part-To-Part.
Each are shown as: % Contribution (orange), % of Study (green) & % of Tolerance (blue).
Note that the contribution for repeatability is higher than that for reproducibility.
Note that the % of Study is larger than % of Tolerance. This is because the parts selected
for the study were not as variable as allowed by the part specifications.
2 Operator 3 had higher variability than operators 1 and 2. The Range chart has to be in-control
for valid GR&R estimates.
3 Several out-of-control points on the Xbar chart indicates that the measurement process can
distinguish between different parts. The goal is to have many points beyond limits. Had there
been more variability in the ten parts, more would have plotted beyond the control limits.
4 This chart shows the variability in the sample averages and the individual values.
5 This chart shows the variability in the operator averages and individual values. It appears that
Operator 3 is biased high. To verify, consult the ANOVA table.
6 This chart shows the Operator-Part interaction. You will have to look at the ANOVA table
to determine if an operator is measuring a particular part differently than the others.

Minitab will also show the “Number of Distinct Categories”. This is the number of distinct
categories of parts that the measurement process is currently able to distinguish. The
lower the %GR&R, the higher this number will be. Ideally you should have 5 or more
distinct categories. This example had only 2 distinct categories, but only because the
variability of the 10 parts was small when compared to the allowable specifications.

If the GR&R % of Tolerance is acceptable and GR&R % of Study Variation is too high, it
means that your parts are too uniform to use the % of Study Variation as a reliable
measure of gage capability.
 Example #2 (GR&R = 12.3% of Tolerance)

GR&R for Tank Height Gage

Reported by : S M
G age name: Tank H eight G age Tolerance: +/- 0.250"
D ate of study : 8/5/2004 M isc:

Components of Variation Measurement by Part Number

100 % Contribution
% Study Var 46.05
Percent

% Tolerance
46.00
50
45.95

0
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Part Number
R Chart by Operator
Don Martha Sean Measurement by Operator
UCL=0.02135
0.02 46.05
Sample Range

46.00
0.01 _
R=0.00653 45.95

0.00 LCL=0
Don Martha Sean
Operator
Xbar Chart by Operator
Don Martha Sean Operator * Part Number Interaction
46.05 46.05
Operator
Sample Mean

Don
Average

Martha
_
_ 46.00
46.00 UCL=46.0018 Sean
X=45.9895
LCL=45.9772
45.95
45.95

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Part Number
 Example #3 (One Distinct Category, GR&R = 114% of Tolerance)
GR&R for Hole PN 57689

G age name: 6" C alipers

D ate of study : 9/3/2004

Components of Variation Diameter by Part

% Co nt ribution
100 % St udy Va r 0.425
% To le ra nce
Percent

50 0.420

0 0.415
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Part
R Chart by Operator
1 2 3 Diameter by Operator
UCL=0.004683 0.425
Sample Range

0.004

0.420
0.002 _
R=0.001433
0.415
0.000 LCL=0
1 2 3
Operator
Xbar Chart by Operator
1 2 3 Operator * Part Interaction
UCL=0.42611
O pe ra tor
_
_ 0.424
Sample Mean

0.424 X=0.42342
1

Average
2
3
LCL=0.42072 0.420
0.420

0.416
0.416 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Part

Two-Way ANOVA Table With Interaction Handling Interaction

Source
Part
DF
9
SS
0.0000602
MS
0.0000067
F
1.76363
P
0.146
If the ANOVA table shows a statistically
Operator 2 0.0000390 0.0000195 5.13831 0.017 significant interaction, it may or may not be
Part * Operator 18 0.0000683 0.0000038 2.03348 0.041
Repeatability 30 0.0000560 0.0000019 real. If you cannot get it to repeat, conclude
Total 59 0.0002236 that it is probably not a true interaction.
 In-Class Gage R&R Demonstration

Parts to be tested: Golf Tees Specs: 0.440 +/- 0.020”

Gage to be used: 6-inch Calipers
Software: Minitab (ANOVA Method)

Perform the GR&R, add the data to Minitab and review results.
 What do I do if the GR&R fails to meet requirements?
• Eliminate obvious causes:
- Poor repeatability for one or two operators – training
- Poor reproducibility among one or more operators – investigate for cause
- Significant interaction – investigate; if not confirmed as real and/or repeatable,
disregard
• Poor repeatability for all operators – inadequate training is possible, but check
for excessive within-part variability

(If %GR&R is poor due to within part variability, don’t blame the gage or the
operators – the fault is with the process).

• Use the Advanced GR&R Procedure (on the CD) to troubleshoot other aspects
of the measurement system, as appropriate:
 Gage Run chart
 Accuracy (bias from the true value)
 Statistical differences between operators (mean and/or variation)
 Stability of the measurement process over time
 Linearity (mean and/or variation)
Questions?

Comments?