Long R&R Studies Explained: Key Concepts
Translated by
ScribdTranslationsLong R&R Studies Explained: Key Concepts
Translated by
ScribdTranslationsQUESTIONS
1. Briefly describe what long R&R studies consist of and when they are conducted.
I recommend using it.
The repeatability and reproducibility (R&R) studies: They aim to analyze the variation.
between the measurement method and the different people who can perform these measurements.
That is to say, it will aim to reduce the variability of the measurement of a process by means of the
study of the possible reasons for variability in the same, with this we will achieve
greater measurement accuracy in the process, reducing both time and expense
money.
Long R&R study: Allows for the separate evaluation of repeatability and reproducibility.
repeatability and reproducibility are components of precision. The repeatability of a
measuring instrument refers to the precision or variability of its measurements when it
they obtain several measurements of the same object under similar conditions (same operator);
while reproducibility is the accuracy or variability of the measurements of the same
object
but under variable conditions (different operators).
Precision: It is the variation or error that repeated measurements of the system present.
measurement of the same measuring. It consists of repeatability and reproducibility.
Repeatability: Variation or error of successive measurements on the same object with a
instrument under the same conditions (one operator).
Reproducibility: Variability or error of measurements on the same object with a
instrument under changing conditions (different operators).
Long R&R study: It allows for the separate evaluation of repeatability and reproducibility.
2. Analyze the following equation and explain it in your own words:
In R&R studies, the total variability is experimentally evaluated as to which part of it...
what is observed in the data is attributable to measurement error, which allows quantifying whether this error
it is much or little compared to the variability of the product and with the tolerances of the
quality characteristic that is measured.
The sources of variability that can be evaluated in a long repeatability study and
reproducibility is:
Variability of the product, the instrument, and the operators.
Sean:
I. σ2 total total observed variability.
II. σ2 is the variance attributable to the product (parts or pieces).
III. σ2 reflects the variability or error of the measurement instrument.
IV. σ2 operates the variability or error due to operators.
For the following we have to:
² = ² + ² + ²
Where:
2 = 2 2 = ²
Therefore, the error or variability of the measurements due to repeatability and reproducibility
is obtained with:
2 & = 2 + ²
3. What are VE, VO, and EM, and why is the corresponding one multiplied for calculation?
standard deviation by 5?15 0 by 6?
VE: Expanded variation of the team (Repeatability)
VO: Expanded variation of the operator (Reproducibility)
EM: Variation combines or the expanded measurement error (Reproducibility and reproducibility)
It is due to the properties of the normal distribution, in which the interval μ± 2.575σ (sigma)
covers 99% of the area under a normal curve, as in the case of measurement errors μ= 0,
entonces ± 2.575σ(sigma)tiene una amplitud de 5.15σ(sigma).Así, de acuerdo con la nota
at the bottom of the page, this expanded error is VE = 5.156 σ ˆrepeat = k1R = 4.56×0.736 = 3.356
4. What do %VE, %VO, and the indices P/T and EM/VarTot measure? How is it
do they interpret?
%VE, %VO and the P/T and EM/VarTot indices = Measure the analysis in % of tolerances
It is important to note that some authors suggest that VE = 6 σ ˆrepeti, which achieves
a coverage of 99.73%. Therefore, in the software, it is usually possible to choose whether the expansion.
it is given with the factor 5.15 or if done with 6.
I. P /T ≤ 10%, excellent measurement process
II. 10% < P/T ≤ 20%, good
III. 20% < P/T ≤ 30%, marginal (almost unacceptable)
IV. P/T ≥ 30%, unacceptable and must be corrected
(EM/VarTot)× 100= (σ ˆR&R/ σ ˆtotal)× 100 =(0.72/2.22) × 100 = 32.43.
Generally, this percentage is considered large, since EM/VarTot = 32.43% > 30%.
Then, according to this criterion, the measurement system is unacceptable.
for process control purposes.
5. In the event that the results of an R&R study reflect a lot of error
measurement, what can be done and why?
In case an R&R study reflects a lot of error, it is necessary to determine which of the two
variables represent the greatest errors if it is reproducibility then it means
that something is not right with the way the operators measure, so a piece of advice
it would be to provide training or some other learning method for the operators, in case
If it is repeatability, then it means that something is not right with the process or
measurement instrument, so a proposal would be some calibration or change of
Instrumentation to carry out the measurements, in case both are used, they must be adjusted.
both this to have a process that falls within the acceptance range.
6. In terms of the number of different categories, what resolution or
What sensitivity should a measuring instrument have?
An additional aspect that is not considered in figure 11.2 is sensitivity or resolution.
of the team, which refers to the ability of the measuring instrument to discriminate between
similar parts, it is recommended that it be capable of reporting at least 10 values
spaced across the range of variation of the parts it aims to measure (Kane,
1989).
7. There is a variable with a specification of 120±3. A study is conducted.
R&R is obtainedσR&R=0.5 Is the measurement system adequate?
Arguments
It is not acceptable since according to our acceptance criteria it exceeds 30%
P/T and therefore it must be corrected.
& 0.5
Specification 6
Standard Deviation
2.575
Measurement Error
P/T 42.92%
References
I. Johnson, L., and S. P. Bailey (2012), 'Implementing an Expanded Gage R&R Study.'
ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement, Anaheim, Ca.
[Link] Measurement Systems Analysis, Reference Manual, 3rd
ed.(2003). Automotive Industry Action Group, Southfield, Mich.
III. Dolezal, K. K., R. K. Burdick and N. J. Birch (1998). “Analysis of a Two-Factor R&R
Study with Fixed Operators."Journal of Quality Technology, Vol 30, p163.
IV. Zuo, Y., (2009) "Effect of Sample Size on Variance Component Estimates in Gage R"
& R Studies.” Minitab Technical White Paper.