iSixSigmaIsHiringaMarketingManager!

AComparisonofMeasurementSystemAnalysisMetrics:
Part2of2
NickFinstrom, JeremyStrief, TarekHaddad, EricMaassand KarenHulting 0

Theprecisionofameasurementsystemiscommonlyassessedusingagagerepeatabilityandreproducibility(GR&R)study.Part1ofthisarticlediscussed
metricsusedinmeasurementsystemanalysis.Here,Part2comparescommonlyusedGR&Rmetricswithprobabilitiesofmisclassification.

ComparisonofGR&RMetricswithProbabilityofMisclassificationUsingNumeric
Simulation
Asimulationstudywasundertakentoquantifytherelationshipbetweenguardbanding,percenttolerance(alsoknownastheprecisiontotolerance[P/T]ratio),
andtheprobabilityofmisclassificationallinthepresenceofvaryingdistributionsforbothpartvaluesandgageerror.Aresponsesurfacedesignedexperiment
wasutilizedtogenerateabalancedsetoffactorlevelcombinations.Thefollowingfourfactorswereusedtosummarizetheimportantcharacteristicsofthegage
andpartdistributions:

1.Truevaluecapabilityindex,Ppk.Thisfactordescribesvarianceofthetruevaluepopulationwithrespecttospecificationlimits,includingthecenteringofthe
truevaluemean,,withinthespecificationlimits.

iSixSigma CreateaniSixSigmaAccount
WhereCPL=thedifferenceofthecenterlineandtheLSL(lowerspecificationlimit)andCPU=thedifferenceoftheUSL(upperspecificationlimit)andthe Login

centerline:
www.iSixSigma.com
iSixSigmaJobShop
iSixSigmaMarketplace

2.Theratio

WherePpisdescribedbyequation(9b).Thisfactordescribesthecenterednessofthetruevaluepopulationwithinthespecificationlimits.

3.Theratio

Thisfactordescribesgagevariancewithrespecttotruevaluevariance.Thisiseffectivelytheinverseofpercentprocess[seeequation(4)inPart1]
dividedby100percent.

4.Guardbandcounttakenask,wherek(11),isthenumberofgagestandarddeviations(g)takenwithineachspecificationlimittoestablishguardbanded
specifications.

Assumingnormaldistributionsforgagevarianceandtruevaluepopulations,eachofthesefourfactorscanbeusedtoestablishprobabilitydensityfunctionsfor
gagevariabilityandtruevaluepopulationwithrespecttospecificationlimits,butwithouthavingabsolutevaluesofgagevarianceandtruevaluepopulation.
(Note:Inreality,thereisnosuchthingasatruevaluesinceGR&Ronlyseekstounderstandtheprecisionofthemeasurementsversussomemeasurement
space[eitherthetoleranceortheobservedspreadofthepartswhichalsoincludesthegagevariation].Referencestoatruevalueimplythataccuracywas
studiedbutthatisnotincludedinthisarticle.)

Theseprobabilityfunctionscanbeusedtocalculatepercenttoleranceandprobabilityofmisclassification.Thefourfactorscanbecombinedtoestablisha
spaceoftypicalgagevariance,truevaluepopulationvarianceandguardbanding,whicharethenusedtomappercenttoleranceandprobabilityof
misclassificationoverthevariouscombinationsofthesefactors.Oncethesetwogagemetricsaremappedovercombinationsofthesefactors,relationships
betweenthetwometricscanbeestablishedoverthesamespace.Ifa1sidedspecificationequationisnotavailable,however,thesameprobabilitydistribution
functionscanbeestablishedandthesamemappingisstillpossible.

Thesefourfactorsarenotindependentfromoneanother,andwhencombinedtomapandcomparegagemetricstheywillnotformanorthogonalcomparison
grid,wheregridlinesareperpendiculartointersection.However,comparisonbetweengagemetricsoverrangesofeachfactorprovidesameanstodraw
generalconclusionsabouttheeffectivenessofeachmetricinvariouscircumstanceswithouthavingabsolutemeasuredvalues.Thelackoforthogonalitymust
betakenintoaccountwhenmakingthiscomparison,butitdoesnotprecludeobtainingsomeusefulinformationasaresultofthestudy.

Percenttoleranceandprobabilityofmisclassificationcanbemodeledovercombinationsofthefourfactorsusingresponsesurfaceanalysis,inwhichmodels
canberepresentedusingcontourplotsofthefittedsurfaces.Thetypeofresponsesurfacedesignofexperiment(DOE)chosenforstudyisacentralcomposite

design(CCD).1Inthistypeofdesign,factorialcombinationsoffactorsalongwithcenterpointsandaxialpointsareusedtostructurestudyinputs.The
resultingdatacanbeusedtofitmodelsinvolvingprimaryfactors,theirinteractionsandsecondorderpolynomialterms.Theratiodefinedin(10)canvaryover
multipleordersofmagnitudeforthissimulationtheinputwasconvertedtoanaturallogscalethatforcedarangeovermultipleordersofmagnitudetobeinput
onalinearscale.Experimentalresultscanbeusedtoestimatemultifactorregressionequations,whichcanthenbeusedtonumericallypredictresponsesover
thedesignspace.

Thedesignspaceischosentorepresenttypicalrangesofequations(8),(9),(10)and(11),whileavoidingconditionswherecombinationsof(10)and(11)
wouldsatisfy(7),therebyresultinginnullvaluesforprobabilityofmisclassification.Thevaluesofaxialpointsareselectedas1.1timeslargerthantheextentof
primaryfactorialpointsawayfromthecenterpointforsimilarreasons.Theloweraxialpointfor(11)issettozerotoavoidanegativevalue.Thevaluesofthe
factorialpoints,centerpointsandaxialpointsforthethreeremaininginputstothedesignareshowninTable1.

Table1:DOEInputsforResponseSurfaceMappingPercentToleranceandProbabilityofMisclassification

Factor Center FactorialLower,Upper AxialLower,Upper

Ppk/Pp 1.0 0.5,1.0 0.45

Ppk 1.0 0.5,1.5 0.45,1.55

1.5 0,3 0.15,3.15

Guardbandk 1.0 0,2 0,2.1

iSixSigma CreateaniSixSigmaAccount Login
Givenavalueforeachofthefourfactorsandknownspecificationlimits,thevaluesofprocessmean,gagevarianceandprocessvariancecanbecalculated.
www.iSixSigma.com
Fromhere,percenttoleranceandprobabilityofmisclassificationcanbeestimated.AnLSLofzeroandUSLof100wereusedtonumericallysimulateprobability
iSixSigmaJobShop
distributionfunctionsforgagevarianceandtruevaluepopulationbasedoncombinationsofequations(8a),(9a)andthenaturallogof(10).Theseprobability
iSixSigmaMarketplace
distributionfunctionswereusedtocalculatepercenttoleranceaccordingtoequation(5)andtoestimatetheprobabilityofmisclassifyingabadunitasgoodand
agoodunitasbadforeachcombinationofthefourfactorsintheCCDDOE.Alloutputswerefoundtovaryovermorethan2ordersofmagnitudeand,asa
result,theoutputswereanalyzedusinganaturallogscaletosimplifyanalysis.(Populationsimulation,probabilityofmisclassificationestimationandCCDDOE
analysisweredonewithMinitabv16.)

TheDOEanalysisofvariance(ANOVA)tableprovidesinformationregardingsignificanttermsandlackoffitforeachoftheoutputsstudied.Significantterms

aretakenashavingapvaluelessthan0.05.1ThepredictedR2ischosentodeterminelackoffitandusefulnessofthemodeltopredictresults.PredictedR2
capturesthepercentageofaresponsevariationexplainedbyrelationshipswithinputsusingpredictedmodeloutputversusobservedoutputtoquantifylackof
fit.Thesecondorderpolynomialtermfor(9a)wasfoundtobesignificanttotheprobabilityofgoodobservedbadandpercenttolerance.Theinfluenceof(9a)on
percenttoleranceisduetononorthogonalityofinputfactors.Basedonobservationofinsignificantfirstordertermsandinteractiontermsfor(9a),theDOEinput
factorswerereducedandinteractiontermsincluding(9a)wereremoved.Thefirstorderandsecondordertermassociatedwith(9a)wereleftinsubsequent
analysisduetothesignificanceofthesecondorderterminthemodelforprobabilityofgoodobservedbad.Goodnessofmodelfitandfactorsignificancefor
eachofthethreemeasurementsystemanalysismetricsusingthereducedmodeltermsareshowninTable2.

Table2:GoodnessofModelFitandFactorSignificance

BadObservedasGood GoodObservedasBad PercentageTolerance

R%predicted 97.4 98.44 99.99

pvalues

Constant 0.166 0.001 0

Ppk 0.68 0.008 0

Ppk/Pp 1 1 1

0.005 0 0

GuardBandk 0 0.068 0.024

Ppk*Ppk 0 0 0
 Ppk/Pk*Ppk/Pk 0.057 0.002 0

0.67 0 0.01
*

GuardBandk*GuardBandk 0.188 0.491 0.01

0.007 0 1
Ppk*

Ppk*GuardBandk 0 0 1

0.028 0.109 1
*GuardBandk

ResponsesurfacecontourplotsfortheP/TratioandtheprobabilityofbadmisclassifiedasgoodareoverlaidinFigure4overthestudiedrangeof
andPpk.Twooverlaidcontourplotsaredrawnforguardbandk=0and2respectively.BothplotshaveafixedvaluePpkPp=1.

Figure4:PlotofP/TRatioandProbabilityofBadMisclassifiedasGood(ClicktoEnlarge)

Thebandsdefinedbytheadjacentcontourlinesindicatesensitivityofeachoutputtotheinputfactorsoneachaxis.Theprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadas

goodshowsthemostsensitivitytoPpkandisrelativelyinsensitiveto .TheoppositeistrueforP/Tratio.Thistrendholdstrueforbothplotsattwo
iSixSigma CreateaniSixSigmaAccount
differentguardbandvalues.Thissensitivityanalysisestablishesthattheprobabilityofmisclassificationismoredependentontheprobabilitythatavalueisbad Login

orgood,asopposedtotheprobabilitythatthemeasuredvalueisdifferentfromthetruevalue.CurvatureisshownintheP/Tratioresponse,whichindicates
www.iSixSigma.com
iSixSigmaJobShop
sensitivitytoPpkand thiscurvatureisduetononorthogonallyoftheinputfactors.Accordingtoequation(5),theP/Tratioisnotdependenton
iSixSigmaMarketplace
processstandarddeviationandisonlydependentonprocessmeanforonesidedspecifications.Inthismodel,however,gagestandarddeviationis
establishedbasedonaratiowithprocessstandarddeviation,andprocessstandarddeviationisaninputtothefactorsoneachplotaxis.

TheinfluenceofguardbandingoneachofthetwooutputsisestablishedbycomparingthetwoplotsinFigure4.P/Tratiodoesnotchangeasafunctionof
guardbanding,whichisexpectedaccordingtoequation(5).Theprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodchangessuchthattheprobabilityisreducedforlower
valuesofprocesscapability.Guardbandinghasmoreinfluenceontheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodwhentheprobabilityisgreaterthan1in
1,000,000forvaluesequaltoorlessthanthislevel,guardbandinghasasmallerinfluenceonreducingtheprobabilityofmisclassification(i.e.,atahigher
processcapability).

Thedifferenceinsensitivityofeachoutputovertheplotrangeatbothvaluesofguardbandingillustratesfourconditionsforgageprecision,asdefinedbyP/T
ratio,andprobabilityofmisclassification.Theyare:

Condition1: >2.0,Ppk>1.3

P/Tratioiswithintypicalacceptancelimitsandtheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodisrelativelysmall.

Condition2: <2.0,Ppk>1.3

P/Tratioislargerthantypicalacceptancelimitshowever,theprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodisrelativelysmall.

Condition3: <2.0,Ppk<1.3

P/Tratioislargerthantypicalacceptancelimitsandtheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodisrelativelylarge.

Condition4: >2.0,Ppk<1.3

P/Tratioiswithintypicalacceptancelimitsandtheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodisrelativelylarge.
Forconditions1and3,theP/Tratioandprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodagreeintheirassessmentofgagesuitabilityfordecisionmaking.Incondition
1,thegageisgenerallyconsideredsuitable.Incondition3thegageisgenerallyconsideredillsuitedfordecisionmaking.Forconditions2and4,theP/Tratio
andprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadandgooddisagreeintheirassessmentofgagesuitabilityfordecisionmaking.Incondition2,thegageisconsidered
imprecisehowever,theunderlyingtruevaluepopulationissufficientlyfarawayfromspecificationvaluesastominimizetheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadas
good.Thisconditionmayavoidriskoffalseacceptancebymisclassifyingnonconformingvaluesasgood,butadditionalcostmayresideintheprobabilityof
misclassifyinggoodasbad.Incondition4,thegageisconsideredprecise,buttheunderlyingtruevaluepopulationiscloseenoughtospecificationvaluessuch
thattheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadvaluesasgoodremainshigh.Herethegagemaybepreciseenoughtodifferentiatevalueswithinthespecification
tolerance,butthemagnitudeofmeasurementerrorisstilllargeenoughtowarrantsignificantriskinusingthemeasurementsystemtosortvalues,wherethesort
conditionisbasedonspecificationlimits.

Guardbandingreducestheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgood,therebyincreasingthesuitabilityofameasurementsystemformakingeffectivedecisions
atlowervaluesofprocesscapability.TheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodisnotreducedtozeroovertheentirerangeofPpkshown.Evenforguard
bandingat2g,theprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgoodcanremainrelativelyhighatlowprocesscapability.

Guardbandinghasbeenshowntoincreasetheprobabilityofmisclassifyinggoodasbad.ThisisillustratedinFigure5inwhichresponsesurfacecontourplots

fortheprobabilityofgoodmisclassifiedasbadareoverlaidwiththesamecontoursshowninFigure4.Plotrangesof andPpkarethesameasin
Figure4.Twooverlaidcontourplotsaredrawnforguardbandk=0and2,respectively.BothplotshaveafixedvaluePpkPp=1.

Figure5:OverlaidContourPlotofP/TRatio,ProbabilityofBadMisclassifiedasGoodandProbability
ofGoodMisclassifiedasBad(ClicktoEnlarge)

iSixSigma CreateaniSixSigmaAccount Login

www.iSixSigma.com

AsinFigure4,thebandsdefinedbytheadjacentcontourlinesindicatesensitivityofeachoutputtotheinputfactorsoneachaxis.Theprobabilityof
iSixSigmaJobShop

iSixSigmaMarketplace
misclassifyinggoodasbadisnearlyequallysensitivetoPpkand probabilityofmisclassifyinggoodasbadincreasesasPpkor
decrease.TheinfluenceofguardbandingontheprobabilityofmisclassifyinggoodasbadisseenbycomparingthetwoplotsinFigure5.Whennoguard

bandingisapplied,theprobabilityofmisclassifyinggoodasbadislessthan1percentovertherangeofPpkand ,whereP/Tandtheprobabilityof
misclassifyingbadasgoodwouldbeconsideredgenerallyacceptable.Whenguardbandingisapplied,theprobabilityofmisclassifyinggoodasbadisfoundto

increaseatlowervaluesofPpkand .ForextremelylowvaluesofPpkand shownintheplot,guardbandingisshowntosatisfythe

conditiondefinedbyequation(7)theresultindicatesthatallvalueswouldbeclassifiedasbad.Comparingthetwoprobabilitiesofmisclassificationillustrates
thatasguardbandingisapplied,theprobabilityofbadmisclassifiedasgoodwilldecrease,buttheprobabilityofgoodmisclassifiedasbadwillincrease.This

tradeoffismostprevalentatlowvaluesofPpkand .

Thefourconditionspreviouslyestablishedcanbesummarizedtoincludeinformationontheprobabilityofmisclassifyinggoodasbad.

Ppk<1.3 Ppk>1.3

Condition4 Condition1
>2.0
TheP/Tratioiswithintypicalacceptance TheP/Tratioiswithintypicalacceptance
limits limits.
Theprobabilitiesofmisclassificationare Theprobabilitiesofmisclassificationare
relativelylarge. relativelysmall.

Condition3 Condition2
<2.0
TheP/Tratioislargerthanthetypical30 TheP/Tratioislargerthanthetypical30
percentacceptancelimits. percentacceptancelimits.
Theprobabilitiesofmisclassificationare Theprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadasgood
relativelylarge. isrelativelysmallandtheprobabilityof
 misclassifyinggoodasbadisrelatively
large.

Forconditions1and3,theP/Tratioandprobabilitiesofmisclassificationagreeintheirassessmentofgagesuitabilityfordecisionmaking.Basedonthis
analysis,agageissuitedfordecisionmakingincondition1.Forcondition2,theimprecisionofthegagedoesnotjeopardizetheriskoffalseacceptance.A
significantriskoffalsereject(i.e.,excessscrap),however,mayexist,andthegagessuitabilityfordecisionmakingisconditionalbasedonthecircumstances
surroundingthemeasurement.Forcondition4,thegagesprecisionmaynoteffectivelyeliminatetheriskofmisclassifyinggoodvaluesasbadorbadvaluesas
goodthegagemaynotbeconsideredsuitableforapplicationsofsortingvalueswithinapopulationwherethesortingconditionisbasedonspecificationlimits.

NonnormalDistributions
TheaforementionedDOEsimulationapproachandresultsarebasedonnormaldistributionassumptionsforunderlyingtruevaluepopulationsandgageerror.
Althoughgageerrortypicallyfollowsanormaldistribution,underlyingtruevaluepopulationsmaynotbe.TypicalGR&Rresultsshouldberelativelyinsensitive
tononnormaldatasets,wheretheprobabilityofmisclassificationwillbesensitive.

Lognormaltruevaluepopulationsandanytruevaluepopulationwithsignificantskewwillnothavesymmetricprobabilitydensityfunctionsaboutthedistribution
arithmeticmean.Asaresult,theseDOEsimulationscannotbegeneralizedbasedontheexactsamefactorsresultsneedtobebasedonabsolutedistribution
positionrelativetospecificationvalues.Initialattemptstorepeatthistrialusingnonnormaldistributionssuggestgeneralagreementwiththeseresults,except
thattheresultsaredependentontheabsolutepositionofthepopulationwithinthespecificationlimits.

Conclusions
ComparisonofGR&Rmetrics,namelyP/Tratio,withtheprobabilitiesofmisclassificationrevealsthatprecisemeasurementsystemsmaystillgenerateresults
withsignificantprobabilitiesofmisclassification.ADOEstudyusingnumericsimulationrevealedthatthemostsignificantriskofmisclassifyingmeasuredvalues
existswhenagageisconsideredprecisewithrespecttospecificationtolerance,butthepopulationofvaluesbeingmeasuredresidesnearoroutsideof
specificationtolerance.WheretruevaluepopulationisdefinedbyaPpkcapabilitymetriclessthan0.75,agagemaybeclassifiedassuitablewithaP/Tratio
lessthan10percent,whileprobabilitiesofmisclassifyinggoodvaluesasbadorbadvaluesasgoodmaybegreaterthan1in10,000.

Guardbandinginfluencesprobabilitiesofmisclassification,andcanbeusedtoreducetheprobabilityofmisclassifyingbadvaluesasgoodatthecostof
increasingtheprobabilityofmisclassifyinggoodvaluesasbad.Guardbandinghasthemostinfluenceonprobabilityofmisclassificationforimprecise

measurementsystemsandwhenapopulationofvaluesbeingmeasuredhaslowcapabilityindex.2

References
1.Montgomery,D.C.,andG.C.Runger.GageCapabilityandDesignedExperimentsPartII:ExperimentalDesignMEthodsandVarianceComponent
Estimation.QualityEngineering6(1993b):289305.
2.Taylor,Wayne.GenericSOPStatisticalMethodsforMeasurementSystemVariation,AppendixBGageR&RStudy.WayneTaylorEngerprises,Inc.,n.d
iSixSigma CreateaniSixSigmaAccount Login
IfYouLovedThisArticle,YouMightAlsoLove
www.iSixSigma.com
1.TurningJudgmentCallsintoReliableDatawithGageR&R
iSixSigmaJobShop
2.TrustingtheData:GageR&RinTransactionalProjects
iSixSigmaMarketplace
3.ASimpleWaytoTestDataWithoutDoingaGageR&R
4.MakingSenseofAttributeGageR&RCalculations

Tags:GageR&R,MSA

NEWJOB WespathBenefitsandInvestments ProcessQualityAssuranceAnalyst