Professional Documents
Culture Documents
can be mainly affected by the manufacturers of the measuring instrument. These two separate
evaluations of the measuring system and the measurement process are also contained in company
guidelines by calculating the and the values. If they fall below the required limit of 1,33, it is
very likely that the measuring instrument will not be suitable in practice (e.g. in production) when all
the existing influence components are included. This differentiation has proved to be most
reasonable in practice.
Influence Factors
MSA 4
Company
Guidelines
%RE 5% TOL
Uncertainty of a reference
*)
U 5% TOL
Repeatability of a reference
to be small
Cg 1,33
t-Test
Cgk 1,33
t-Test
%LIN 5% TOL
Bias
Linearity
Repeatability on an object
Reproducibility of an object
Uncertainty object
Temperature
Stability
Other
EV (ANOVA)
AV (ANOVA)
Repeat measurements at the
same position
*)
Quality Control Chart
*)
%RE 5% and
Measurement System
Measurement Process
ndc 5
Measuement System
uCAL =
uRE =
Source of Information
RE
2 3
UCAL
2
Calibration Certificate
uEVR = s
uBI =
Gage Display
x - xm
{ }
T1 on 3 masters
uEVO = EV (ANOVA)
uAV = AV (ANOVA)
uOBJ =
uT =
or
a
3
a
3
uSTAB =
uREST
TOL
a
3
Where a is from:
drawings
experience
estimations
trials
similar measuring
processes
long term observations
etc.
MSA 4
Capability
index
%GRR =
EV 2 + AV 2
100%
RF
QMS =
Limit values
partly capable
30 %GRR
not capable
Graphical
evaluation
2 UMS
100%
TOL
QMP =
2 UMP
100%
TOL
ui2
i=1
i = 1, 2, 3, ...
GRR
- UMP
Gage variation
+ UMP
x
TOL
RF = TOL
Remarks:
Resolution
According to company guidelines and VDA Volume 5, the first step is to evaluate whether the
resolution is lower than 5 % of the specification corresponding to the characteristic to be
tested. If the resolution does not meet this requirement, no further inspection will be
conducted because the measuring instrument would not reflect reality sufficiently. However,
even if the 5 % requirement is met, the measuring instrument might always display the same
measured quantity value in repeated measurements. In this case, VDA Volume 5 applies the
standard uncertainty from the resolution of the measuring instrument .
Uncertainty from reference parts
The MSA manual hardly contains anything about this problem. Some company guidelines
indicate that the uncertainty from the reference part (measurement standard, calibrated
working measurement standard, etc.) must be lower than 5 % of the specification. VDA
Volume 5 considers this uncertainty explicitly in calculating the expanded measurement
uncertainty. This is particularly reasonable for the acceptance of measuring systems because
the used working measurement standards often show a high uncertainty. If the measuring
points slightly differ in repeated measurements, the variation becomes higher. However, this
rise is not caused by the measuring instrument. Without considering the uncertainty of the
measurement standard, a higher variation always leads to discussions between the customer
and the manufacturer of the measuring instrument. This can be avoided by evaluating the
uncertainty of the reference part individually.
Repeatability and systematic measurement error
In order to evaluate these uncertainty components, repeated measurements are taken on a
calibrated reference part with a known nominal dimension. Then the measured quantity
values are evaluated.
The MSA manual demands a low variation (i.e. standard deviation). However, how low?
There is not any specific information available. A t test is conducted regarding the systematic
measurement error. If zero lies beyond the calculated confidence interval of 95 %, the
systematic measurement error is too high.
Company guidelines calculate the and values (see above) from the measured quantity
values. If both values exceed 1,33, the measuring system is regarded as capable or the
variation and the systematic measurement error are considered adequate.
VDA Volume 5 determines the respective standard uncertainties and for both
influence components separately. Including the other influence components (resolution and
uncertainty from reference part), the expanded measurement uncertainty of the measuring
system and the capability ratio are calculated (Figure 2). The capability is then
compared to the recommended limit of 15 %. If the ratio meets the requirement, the
capability of the measuring system is established.
Repeatability on test part and reproducibility of operators
In order to evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility, three operators take two repeated
measurements on ten test parts that are evenly spread over the entire specification zone
(other combinations are possible). The resulting measured quantity values are evaluated. The
MSA manual, most of the company guidelines and VDA Volume 5 use the method of ANOVA
(Analysis of Variance) for this purpose and determine the variation components EV
(equipment variation) and AV (appraiser variation). According to the MSA manual and
company guidelines, these components provide the basis for calculating the %GR&R value.
VDA Volume 5 classifies those two components separately as the standard uncertainties
and .
Form deviation of test part
Analogous to the uncertainty from the reference part (measurement standard or working
measurement standard), the form deviation may have a major impact on the uncertainty of
the measurement process. This evaluation is very important. The 1st and the 2nd edition of
the MSA manual recommended measuring each test part in three different places of
measurement in order to evaluate these influences. However, the 3rd and 4th edition do not
refer to this issue anymore. There is a huge effort required, of course. In order to avoid this
effort, the MSA manual and company guidelines propose to take all the repeated
measurements at the same place of measurement. This is often not feasible in practice
(typical example: automated measurement processes). VDA Volume 5 evaluates the form
deviation based on the standard uncertainty component , which may be determined by
means of several different calculation methods.
Temperature
Neither the MSA manual nor company guidelines deal with the subject of uncertainty from
temperature to the full extent. Both, manual and guidelines, assume a constant temperature
of the test part, measuring system and the environment. VDA Volume 5 evaluates the
influences from temperature by means of the standard uncertainty . The document
offers several calculation methods.
Stability
The evaluation of a measuring system or measurement process at a certain time forms the
basis for the decision whether its capability can be established or not. However, the question
is if this condition of the measuring system or the measurement process stays the same for
the entire period of application. Does the measuring system or the measurement process
remain capable or does it change significantly? In order to monitor its condition, repeated
measurements shall be taken on a calibrated reference part at regular intervals. The results
are documented in a quality control chart. If the new results violate the specified action
limits, the capability of the measuring system or measurement process must be re-evaluated.
This procedure is recommended in the same way by all documents.
Expanded measurement uncertainty and capability ratio
Only VDA Volume 5 uses these statistical values. Both, the expanded measurement
uncertainty of the measurement process and the capability ratio , are calculated
from all standard uncertainty components that were determined before (Figure 2). A
measurement process requires a capability ratio lower than 30 %. If the capability ratio
meets this requirement, the capability of the measurement process is established.
A.I.A.G. Chrysler Corp., Ford Motor Co., General Motors Corp.: Measurement Systems
Analysis, Reference Manual, 4th edition, Michigan, USA, 2010
DIN ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007: International vocabulary of metrology (VIM). Beuth Verlag,
Berlin, 2010
ISO/WD 22514-7: Capability and performance Part 7: Capability of Measurement
Processes. Geneva, 2008
VDA Volume 5 Capability of Measurement Processes. 2nd edition, VDA, Berlin 2010
ISO/TS 16949:2009-06 Vornorm: Qualittsmanagementsysteme - Besondere Anforderungen
bei Anwendungen von ISO 9001:2008 fr die Serien- und Ersatzteil-Produktion in der
Automobilindustrie. Beuth Verlag, Berlin, 2009
ISO/IEC Guide 98-3 (2008): Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement
(GUM:1995). International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2008
Neukirch, C.; Dietrich, E.: Measuring System and Measurement Process Are Two Different
Things. QZ 4 (2011) 56, S. 16-20
Dietrich, E.: MSA Whats new? QZ 1 (2011) 56, S. 39-41
Author
Dr.-Ing. Edgar Dietrich, born in 1951, author of numerous specialist books about statistics and test
procedures. CEO of the Q-DAS GmbH, Weinheim, since 1990.