<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The research study aims to evaluate the precision of the measurement system using Gauge R&amp;R. An experimental research design adopting a positivist empirical approach with deductive strategy was followed to assess the effectiveness of Crossed Gauge R&amp;R technique for validating a measurement system using destructive testing. Crossed Gauge R&amp;R technique in Minitab was found to be highly effective in quantifying different components of measurement variation relative to process variation. Clue generation from the Crossed Gauge R&amp;R study combined with manufacturing and measurement process know-how helped in identifying and eliminating the root causes for measurement variation. Overall Crossed Gauge R&amp;R proved successful in validating the burst strength test equipment. However, it should be noted that manufacturing and test equipment played an equally important part in developing and executing the gauge R&amp;R study and accurately analysing the results. So, Crossed Gauge R&amp;R should be used as an aid rather than the solution for measurement system validation.</p></abstract>

The research study aims to evaluate the precision of the measurement system using Gauge R&R. An experimental research design adopting a positivist empirical approach with deductive strategy was followed to assess the effectiveness of Crossed Gauge R&R technique for validating a measurement system using destructive testing. Crossed Gauge R&R technique in Minitab was found to be highly effective in quantifying different components of measurement variation relative to process variation. Clue generation from the Crossed Gauge R&R study combined with manufacturing and measurement process know-how helped in identifying and eliminating the root causes for measurement variation. Overall Crossed Gauge R&R proved successful in validating the burst strength test equipment. However, it should be noted that manufacturing and test equipment played an equally important part in developing and executing the gauge R&R study and accurately analysing the results. So, Crossed Gauge R&R should be used as an aid rather than the solution for measurement system validation.

Validating a destructive measurement system using Gauge R&amp;R — a case study

Engineering Management in Production and Services

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Validating a destructive measurement system using Gauge R&R — a case study

{"article-title":"Validating a destructive measurement system using Gauge R&R \u2014 a case study"}

The research study aims to evaluate the precision of the measurement system using Gauge R&R. An experimental research design adopting a positivist empirical...

SOURCE	STDDEV (SD)	STUDY VAR (6 × SD)	%STUDY VAR (%SV)	%TOLERANCE (SV/TOLER)
Total Gage R&R	0.28774	1.7265	2.88	8.63
Repeatability	0.28774	1.7265	2.88	8.63
Reproducibility	0.00000	0.0000	0.00	0.00
Operator	0.00000	0.0000	0.00	0.00
Part-To-Part	9.97911	59.8746	99.96	299.37
Total Variation	9.98326	59.8995	100.00	299.50

TERM	EFFECT	COEF	SE COEF	T-VALUE	P-VALUE	VIF
Constant		15.2750	0.0736	207.55	0.000
Housing	25.5500	12.7750	0.0736	173.58	0.000	5.00
Energy	-1.2500	-0.6250	0.0368	-16.98	0.000	1.00
Working Pressure	-0.5000	-0.2500	0.0368	-6.79	0.007	1.00
Standstill Delay	5.2500	2.6250	0.0368	71.33	0.000	1.00
Amplitude	1.8750	0.9375	0.0368	25.48	0.000	1.00
Housing*Energy	6.7000	3.3500	0.0368	91.04	0.000	1.00
Housing*Working Pressure	-4.6000	-2.3000	0.0368	-62.50	0.000	1.00
Housing*Standsti ll Delay	10.9000	5.4500	0.0368	148.10	0.000	1.00
Housing*Amplitude	5.7250	2.8625	0.0368	77.79	0.000	1.00
Cover*Amplitude	-9.7250	-4.8625	0.0368	-132.14	0.000	1.00
Energy*Standsti ll Delay	-3.6750	-1.8375	0.0368	-49.93	0.000	1.00
HousingCoverWorking Pressure	5.3000	2.6500	0.0368	72.01	0.000	1.00
HousingCoverAmplitude	6.7250	3.3625	0.0368	91.37	0.000	1.00
HousingEnergyStandsti ll Delay	0.3250	0.1625	0.0368	4.42	0.022	1.00
CoverEnergyStandsti ll Delay	-21.2750	-10.6375	0.0823	-129.28	0.000	5.00
HousingCoverEnergy*Standsti ll Delay	-1.3750	-0.6875	0.0823	-8.36	0.004	1.00

Validating a destructive measurement system using Gauge R&R — a case study

Published Online: Dec 18, 2019

Page range: 34 - 42

Received: Jul 05, 2019

Accepted: Nov 05, 2019

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/emj-2019-0031

© 2019 Mithun Sharma, Sanjeev P. Sahni, Shilpi Sharma, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Fig.1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Gauge Evaluation Results from Crossed Gauge R&R Analysis

j.emj-2019-0031.tab.0001.w2aab3b7b2b1b6b1ab1b3c12Aa

Minitab results from DoE Model Summary