www.dfss.nl

Design for Six Sigma

  • Categories
    • Books
    • Case
    • DfSS
    • Download
    • Events
    • News
    • Software
    • Training
  • About Design for Six Sigma
    • Define
    • Identify
    • Design
    • Optimize
    • Verify
    • Monitor
  • Powered by CQM
  • Contact
  • LOGIN

I’ve done an R&R study. Now what?

  • News

R&R (repeatability & reproducibility) studies are performed in order to get information about the performance of a measurement system, in terms of the variation you will see if you measure a product over and over again. This variation can have a single source, such as a short-term variation, or multiple sources, such as short-term, long-term and variation due to different operators.

Products are often a factor, too. But since an R&R study is a study of measurement, variation knowledge of the product effect is not our primary concern here. Different products are only included because we tend to want to check whether the measurement variation is different from product to product (i.e. study interactions between products and any other factor in the model), which is why the products used should vary widely.

For the moment, let’s assume that measurement variation does not depend on product characteristics. In order to characterise measurement variation we could, as an experiment, use a random product (measurement vehicle) and measure that product over and over again. The variation (standard deviation or variance) we see between those measurements is the main objective of our study. The next step is to compare the standard deviation(s) with, for example, the tolerance width (W) and calculate R&R=6s/W*100% — the so-called Gage R&R, or acceptation level.

A well-known criterion for this Gage R&R is: ‘accept’ if R&R<10%. This means that the variation in the measurement is small compared to the variation that is allowed in the products. But what if we find a value >10%, or worse still >>10%?

One solution often used is to develop or buy a new measurement system, one that will have a Gage R&R <10%. There is, however, a second option that is often overlooked: do more measurements and take the average of those measurements as the output of the measurement system.

A simple example: Let’s first take this very simple situation. Assume that measurement variation is not a function of the product measured. So the R&R study is simply to “measure a random product over and over again (say, n times)”. If S is the standard deviation of these measurements, and W the tolerance width, then G(1)=6*S/W is the estimate of the Gage R&R if we use a single measurement as our measurement tool output.

However, if we decide to use an average of m measurements on the same product as our measurement tool output, the Gage R&R would improve to G(m)=6*S/(W*√m). For m=9 this would mean an improvement of 1-1/√9 or 67%! The proof is given by a basic theorem in statistics, which states that the variance of the mean of m independent observations is σ2/m, with σ2 the variance of a single observation.

A more complex example. Very often we see that the measurement error of a measurement system is determined by the one doing the measuring. A statistical model that describes the output for a single given product is:

I’ve done an RR study Now what - CQM1

With μ the general mean of the measurement, αi ~N(0,σα2) the contribution of operator i to the measurement, and εij~N(0, σ2) the random noise present at the jth measurement of operator i.

A standard Gage R&R estimates the variance components, and assumes that we will use a single measurement by taking a random subject and asking him/her to measure our product just once. The standard deviation of that single measurement is then equal to √(σα2+ σ2) and the Gage R&R can be calculated if the tolerance width W is known. If the Gage R&R is sufficient, then… happy days! But if it isn’t, we could suggest defining a measurement system output as the average of the observations taken from I operators over J repeats per operator. It can be shown that the standard deviation of that new (averaged) measurement value is equal to:

I’ve done an RR study Now what - CQM2

Which can be made as small as one likes simply by increasing I and J. By doing this, the Gage R&R can be improved to a value that is sufficiently small; and a variety of options are often possible. In which case is it smart to choose the cheapest option available.

Conclusion. Gage R&Rs are often carried out assuming that a measurement system can only deliver its standard (single) measurement result. By making use of (smart) replications, and then taking the average of those results, the standard error of this average result can be decreased, improving the Gage R&R. So if the cost of doing replications is acceptable, there is now no need to buy or develop a new measurement system.

12 November, 2015 Ruud van Lieshout

Post navigation

DoCE for an optimal high voltage tube → ← Risks on product failures and tolerance intervals: what can you expect?

Related Posts

Comparison of measurement systems

Introduction of the comparison problem In DfSS and six sigma, the gage R&R study is a commonly known investigation of a measurement system. It studies how different the outcomes are […]

Mastering the reliability of complex systems

Many companies that develop complex systems, such as cars, luggage handling systems, robot arms, or lighting systems, are faced with: increasing complexity: the number of failure modes evolve with complexity, […]

Usage of Bayesian Methods in Reliability engineering

There are many situations where product developers have solid prior information on particular aspects of reliability modelling based on physics of failure or previous experience with the same failure mechanism. […]

More factors than observations: what can we do?

In the age of internet of things, connected systems and smart phone apps, the size of data sets is increasing enormously. The size of a dataset can typically be split […]

Recent Posts

Comparison of measurement systems

Comparison of measurement systems

Introduction of the comparison problem In DfSS and six sigma, the gage R&R study is a commonly known investigation of a measurement system. It studies how different the outcomes are […]

More Info

Mastering the reliability of complex systems

Many companies that develop complex systems, such as cars, luggage handling systems, robot arms, or lighting systems, are faced with: increasing complexity: the number of failure modes evolve [...]

More Info
Usage of Bayesian Methods in Reliability engineering

Usage of Bayesian Methods in Reliability engineering

There are many situations where product developers have solid prior information on particular aspects of reliability modelling based on physics of failure or previous experience with the same [...]

More Info
More factors than observations: what can we do?

More factors than observations: what can we do?

In the age of internet of things, connected systems and smart phone apps, the size of data sets is increasing enormously. The size of a dataset can typically be split […]

More Info

Archives

  • February 2017
  • June 2016
  • January 2016
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • June 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011

Design for Six Sigma

* Process improvement strategies such as Six Sigma help to understand and tackle bottlenecks in the production phase in a structured manner. However, about 75% of production problems can be traced back to bad choices in the design phase. To guarantee high quality faster and with lower costs, it is therefore necessary to focus on statistical dispersion (variance reduction) starting at product development. By embedding the desired quality during the design process – Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) – we realize a cheaper process and shorter time to market! *

Define

This phase is about a clear project definition and getting support and approval for execution.

Identify

The main objective for this phase is to describe in more detail who the target customers are and what exactly makes them happy.

Design

This phase results in a high level design , the ‘product architecture’, for the selected concept.

Optimize

The objective of the optimize phase is to generate a detailed product design.

Verify

This phase focuses on the preparation for mass production and realizing the market introduction.

Monitor

In this phase, user, customer and stakeholder satisfaction will be verified.

Powered by WordPress | theme SG Window