Today’s Discussions – Lecture # 10

• MSA Supported with Minitab

What is MSA ?
Whenever you measure anything, the variation that you observe can be
segmented into the following components…

Observed Variation

Unit-to-unit (true) Variation Measurement System Error

SPC MSA
Precision Accuracy

Repeatability Reproducibility Stability Bias Linearity

All measurement systems have error. If you don’t know how much of the
variation you observe is contributed by your measurement system, you
cannot make confident decisions.
CONDUCTING MSA
MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS USING
MINITAB
MINITAB offers several commands to help you
determine how much of your process variation
arises from variation in your measurement
system.

 Gage Linearity and Bias examines gage

linearity and accuracy.

 Gage R&R (Crossed) examine measurement

system precision.
MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS (Cont…)
BIAS AND LINEARITY (EXAMPLE):
 A manufacturer wants to know if a thermometer is taking accurate and
consistent readings at five heat settings (202°, 204°, 206°, 208°, and
210°). Six readings are taken at each setting.
 To find out if the thermometer is taking biased measurements, subtract the
individual readings from the reference value. The bias values for
measurements taken at heat setting 202° are calculated in the below
table.
Thermomete Actual BIAS
r reading temperatur
e The temperature readings at
202.7 - 202 = 0.7 the 202° heat setting are
202.5 - 202 = 0.5 positively biased; the
203.2 - 202 = 1.2 thermometer gives readings
203.0 - 202 = 1.0 that are higher than the
203.1 - 202 = 1.1 actual temperature.
203.3 - 202 = 1.3
MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS (Cont…)
BIAS AND LINEARITY (EXAMPLE) (Cont…):
To interpret the linearity of the thermometer data, determine if the bias of
the thermometer changes across the heat settings. If the data do not
form a horizontal line on a scatter plot, linearity is present.

The scatter plot shows that bias changes

as the heat settings increase.
Temperatures for lower heat settings are
higher than the actual temperatures, while
readings for higher heat settings are lower
than the actual temperatures. Because bias
changes over the heat settings, linearity
error is present in this data.
GAGE LINEARITY AND BIAS STUDY
EXAMPLE:
A plant foreman chose five parts that represented the expected range of the measurements.
Each part was measured by layout inspection to determine its reference (master) value. Then,
one operator randomly measured each part twelve times.
Open the worksheet GAGELIN.MTW

Choose Stat  Quality Tools  Gage Study  Gage Linearity and Bias Study
 GAGE LINEARITY AND BIAS STUDY:
EXAMPLE (Cont…)

INTERPRETATION RULE:
 In (Gage Bias) Section; if
“Average” P–Value < 0.05
So, Gage is Bias

 In (Gage Linearity) Section;

if “Slope” P–Value < 0.05,
So Gage is producing
Nonlinear Results
GAUGE REPEATABILITY &
REPRODUCIBILITY (R & R) STUDIES
Gage R&R Study (Crossed)
The percent contribution from
METHOD—Gage R&R Study (Crossed): ANOVA Method
Part-To-Part is larger than
EXAMPLE: Ten parts were selected that represent the expected range of the process
that of Total Gage R&R,
variation. Three operators measured the ten parts, three times per part, in a random
telling you that much of the
order.
variation is due to differences
Open the worksheet GAGEAIAG.MTW
between parts.
Choose Stat > Quality Tools > Gage Study > Gage R&R Study (Crossed).
There are large
differences between
parts, as shown by the
non-level line.
Operator B
the differences between operators are small
measures parts
compared to the differences between parts, but
inconsistently. are significant. Operator C appears to measure
slightly lower than the others.

most of the points in the X-bar and

R chart are outside the control limits,
indicating variation is mainly due to
differences between parts.
MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ACCEPTABILITY
According to the Automobile Industry Action Group
(AIAG), you can determine whether your measurement Here are the Automotive Industry
system is acceptable using the following guidelines. Action Group’s definitions for Gage
acceptance
If the Total Gage R&R contribution in the %Study Var
column (% Tolerance, %Process) is:
 Less than 10%  the measurement system is % Tolerance
or % Contribution System is…
acceptable.
% Study
 Between 10% and 30%  the measurement system Variance
is acceptable depending on the application, the cost
of the measuring device , cost of repair, or other
factors. 10% or less 1% or less Ideal
 Greater than 30%  the measurement system is
unacceptable and should be improved.
 
If you are looking at the %Contribution column, the
corresponding standards are: 10% - 20% 1% - 4% Acceptable
 Less than 1%  the measurement system is
acceptable.
 Between 1% and 9%  the measurement system is
acceptable depending on the application, the cost of 20% - 30% 5% - 9% Marginal
the measuring device, cost of repair, or other factors.
 Greater than 9%  the measurement system is
unacceptable and should be improved.

30% or greater 10% or greater Poor

Gage R&R Study (Crossed)
METHOD—Gage R&R Study (Crossed): ANOVA Method
Two-Way ANOVA Table With Interaction

Source DF SS MS F P
Part 9 88.3619 9.81799 492.291 0.000
Operator 2 3.1673 1.58363 79.406 0.000 Two-Way ANOVA Table Without Interaction
Part * Operator 18 0.3590 0.01994 0.434 0.974
Repeatability 60 2.7589 0.04598 Source DF SS MS F P
Total 89 94.6471 Part 9 88.3619 9.81799 245.614 0.000
Alpha to remove interaction term = 0.25 Operator 2 3.1673 1.58363 39.617 0.000
Repeatability 78 3.1179 0.03997
Gage R&R Total 89 94.6471
%Contribution Between 1% and 9%  the measurement system
Source VarComp (of VarComp) is acceptable depending on the application, the
Total Gage R&R 0.09143 7.76 cost of the measuring device, cost of repair, or
Repeatability 0.03997 3.39 other factors. (AIAG)
Reproducibility 0.05146 4.37
Operator 0.05146 4.37
Part-To-Part 1.08645 92.24 Study Var %Study Var %Tolerance
Total Variation 1.17788 100.00 Source StdDev (SD) (6 * SD) (%SV) (SV/Toler)
Total Gage R&R 0.30237 1.81423 27.86 22.68
Between 10% and 30%  the measurement Repeatability 0.19993 1.19960 18.42 14.99
system is acceptable depending on the Reproducibility 0.22684 1.36103 20.90 17.01
application, the cost of the measuring device , Operator 0.22684 1.36103 20.90 17.01
cost of repair, or other factors Part-To-Part 1.04233 6.25396 96.04 78.17
Total Variation 1.08530 6.51180 100.00 81.40
number of distinct categories is 5
represents an adequate measuring system Number of Distinct Categories = 4
CONCLUSION
Measurement System Variation
 Repeatability and Reproducibility
• If repeatability error is large compared to reproducibility, the reasons may be:

• The instrument needs maintenance;

• The gauge should be redesigned to be more rigid;
• The clamping or location for gauging needs to be improved;
• There is excessive part variation.

• If reproducibility error is large compared to repeatability, then possible

causes could be:

• The appraiser needs to be better trained in how to use and read the gauge
instrument;
• A fixture of some sort may be needed to help the appraiser use the gauge more
consistently.
 “Measurement is the first step that leads to control
and eventually to improvement. If you can’t measure
something accurately, you can’t understand it. If you
can’t understand it, you can’t control it. If you can’t
control it, you can’t improve it.” 

― H. James Harrington

QUESTIONS