You are on page 1of 20

GAGE REPEATABILITY &

REPRODUCIBILITY
(Gage R & R) STUDY AND PROCESS
IMPROVEMENT IN QUALITY
INSPECTION
PRESENTED BY:-
RAKESH C
MFT/15/54
CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION
– Methods of Gage Analysis
– Basic Data Types
– Why Attribute Gage R&R?
2. ATTRIBUTE GAGE R & R STUDY
– EFFICENCY TABLE
– VARIANCE TABLE
3. FACTORS TO CONSIDER
4. PROBLEMS FOUND
5. PROPOSED SOLUTION
6. REFERENCE
INTRODUCTION
The conclusions drawn from the statistical
methods depend on the accuracy of data. If the
measuring instrument and the measurement
method are not capable of making accurate and
repeatable measurements, the data can have
significant measurement error.
What is Gage R & R?
The measurement system analysis is commonly
known as Gage Repeatability and
Reproducibility (Gage R&R) study. The purpose
of measurement system analysis or Gage R&R
study is to determine the part of variation in the
data resulting from the variation in the
measurement system
Automotive Industry Action Group, Measurement System Analysis, www.aiag.org.
Repeatability & Reproducibility
Repeatability of a measuring instrument refers to how
well the instrument is repeatedly able to measure the
same characteristic under the same condition.

Reproducibility is the variation due to different operators


using the same measuring instrument at different time
periods, and different environmental
conditions.
Automotive Industry Action Group, Measurement System Analysis, www.aiag.org.
Methods of Gage Analysis

"Practical Attribute and Variable Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA): A Guide for Conducting Gage R&R Studies and Test Method
Validations", Author: Mark Allen Durivage, Publisher-ASQ Quality Press, 2015.
Attribute vs. Continuous
Attribute Data:
• –Categorical, named only, arbitrary scales
• –Also known as Discrete Data

Continuous Data:
• –Allows for infinitely finer sub-divisions
• –Also known as Variables Data
MSA_Reference_Manual_4th_Edition, June 2010Chrysler Group LLC, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Corporation.
Basic Data Types
• Nominal:
– Literally, “name”
– Represents categories
• Ordinal:
–Ordered or ranked data
– Not scaled
• Interval:
–Measured / scaled data: Each position equidistant
– 0 can be relevant (temperature)
• Ratio:
– Numbers compared as multiples of one another
MSA_Reference_Manual_4th_Edition, June 2010Chrysler Group LLC, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Corporation.
Why Attribute Gage R&R?
• To understand:
– How likely quality checker will agree with himself /
herself: WITHIN / Repeatability
• – How likely all quality checkers will agree with each
other: BETWEEN / Reproducibility
• Understanding R&R allows you to:
– Predict probability (%) of agreement / disagreement
– Implement training to improve that probability
Purpose of the Attribute
Gage R & R Analysis in Trouser Inspection
• To determine if Quality Inspection system can
distinguish between a good & bad part.
• To determine Accuracy & Precision:
– Accuracy: Absence of bias, or agreeing with the standard.
– Precision: Ability of different checkers to reach the same
conclusion several times.
Attribute Gage R&R Study
• 6 Checkers (6 - Lines)
• 20 defective pieces
• 2 trials
Types of Defects
1. PANEL UP & DOWN Expert’s verdict
2. LOOP SLANT • Line quality in charge
3. W/B SHAPE OUT – 10 years of experience.

4. SS PUCKERING • Trouser quality in charge


– 20+ years of experience.
5. BOTTOM PINCHING
6. W/B PUCKERING
7. BK RISE BEND
8. BK PKT HIGH LOW
9. BK PKT PINCHING
10. BUTTON MISS/PLACEMENT
EFFICENCY TABLE:
Efficency table.xlsx
VARIANCE TABLE:
Variance Table.xlsx
Factors to consider
• Checkers were changed while taking data for
variance table.
• All checkers have more than 4 months of
experience.
• Every checker is consistent in their checking
process.
• SOP\SOP each line.docx
• SOP\sop diagram.docx
Outcome of Efficiency and Variance table
• Probability of missing a defective piece.
• Frequency of missing a defective piece.
• Efficiency of the checker.
• Agreement between themselves.
• Agreement between all the lines.
• Process of checking.
Problems Found
• No complete check on alteration pieces.
• Concentration is mainly on defective part which is
occurring frequently.
• Too many pieces increases speed and decreases
concentration.
• Trimming decreases the production of inspection
(Hourly production=70pieces/hour)
Proposed Solution
 Standardizing SOP :
 Same checking process in all the lines.
 When a checker is on leave or not in the floor for some time,
work does not have to stand still. By referring to the SOP
someone else can take over and do it correctly the first time.
 To decrease errors rate/improve quality.
 To communicate effectiveness (to provide garments that
consistently fulfill buyers requirements).
 To eliminate unnecessary checking on altered piece.
 Eliminate trimming in checking points.
Reference
• Landis, J.R. and Koch, G. G. (1977) "The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data" in
Biometrics. Vol. 33, pp. 159-174.

• "Practical Attribute and Variable Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA): A Guide for Conducting Gage R&R
Studies and Test Method Validations", Author: Mark Allen Durivage, Publisher-ASQ Quality Press, 2015.

• MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS ANALYSIS, Reference Manual Fourth Edition, June 2010Chrysler Group LLC, Ford
Motor Company, General Motors Corporation.

• http://asq.org/pub/sixsigma/past/vol2_issue4/windsor.html

• Automotive Industry Action Group, Measurement System Analysis, www.aiag.org.

• https://www.spcforexcel.com/knowledge/measurement-systems-analysis/attribute-gage-rr-studies-part-2

You might also like