How Can the Check Standard Influence Measurement Process Capability

Authors

  • Jakub Palenčár Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava
  • Miroslav Dovica Technical University of Košice
  • Rudolf Palenčár Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava
  • Martin Halaj Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava
  • Anna Kováčiková Slovak Metrological Ispectorate
  • Ľubomír Šooš Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v26i2.1719

Keywords:

measurement process, capability index, measurement uncertainty, check standard, probability distribution

Abstract

Purpose: The main objective of the paper is an analysis of the behaviour of capability indices under different conditions. It is assumed that the metrological properties of a check standard are correct, however, the uncertainty of the check standard affects the evaluation of the measurement process capability. The paper analyses individual cases of the influence of the check standard bias and its influence on the measurement process capability.

Methodology/Approach: Statistical analysis of both the measurement process and the check standard is provided at the beginning. Development and analysis of possible cases, when the bias of a check standard affects the calculated capability index of a measurement process follows.

Findings: The paper confirmed the theoretical assumption that a bias of a check standard can affect the calculated capability index of a measurement process, thus shifting the judgment on the measurement process capability.

Research Limitation/Implication: The paper is based on the theoretical assumptions of the measurement process capability as well as on the analysis of the possible behaviour of a respective check standard.

Originality/Value of paper: The paper clarifies that several particular and specifically selected cases of bias of a check standard may affect the resulting capability index negatively/positively, which may lead to inaccurate decisions on measurement process capability. This is confirmed by simulations of a biased check standard, clearly visualizing the shifts in capability indices.

Author Biographies

  • Jakub Palenčár, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Assoc. Prof.

    Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

    Bratislava, Slovakia

  • Miroslav Dovica, Technical University of Košice

    Full Prof.

    Technical University of Košice

    Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

    Košice, Slovakia

  • Rudolf Palenčár, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Full Prof.

    Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

    Bratislava, Slovakia

  • Martin Halaj, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Assoc. Prof.

    Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

    Bratislava, Slovakia

  • Anna Kováčiková, Slovak Metrological Ispectorate

    Ph.D. Student

    Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

    Bratislava, Slovakia

  • Ľubomír Šooš, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Full Prof.

    Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

    Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

    Bratislava, Slovakia

References

Baral, A.K. and Anis, M.Z., 2015. Assessment of Cpm in the presence of measurement errors. Journal of Statistical Theory and Applications, [e-journal] 14(1), pp.13-27. DOI: 10.2991/jsta.2015.14.1.2.

Bordignon, S. and Scagliarini, M., 2002. Statistical analysis of process capability indices with measurement errors. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, [e-journal] 18(4), pp.321-332. DOI: 10.1002/qre.464.

Grau, D., 2013. Testing capability indices for one-sided processes with measurement errors. Int. J. Metrol. Qual. Eng., [e-journal] 4(2), pp.71-80. DOI: 10.1051/ijmqe/2013049.

Haq, A., Brown, J., Moltchanova, E. and Al-Omari, A.I., 2015. Effect of measurement error on exponentially weighted moving average control charts under ranked set sampling schemes, Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, [e-journal] 85(6), pp.1224-1246. DOI: 10.1080/00949655.2013.873040.

JCGM (Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology), 2008. JCGM 100:2008: Evaluation of Measurement Data - Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM). Paris: JCGM, BIPM.

JCGM (Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology), 2011. JCGM 102:2011: Evaluation of Measurement Data, Supplement 2 to the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) – Extension to any number of output quantities. Paris. JCGM, BIPM.

Kotz, S. and Johnson, N.L., 1993. Process capability indices. Springer Science Business Media.

Kotz, S., Pearn, W.L. and Johnson, N.L., 1993. Some process capability indices are more reliable than one might think. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series C: Applied Statistics, [e-journal] 42(1), pp.55-62.

Kureková, E., 2017. Measurement Process Capability – Trends and Approaches Measurement Science Review, 1(1), pp.43-46.

Maleki, M.R., Amiri, A. and Castagliola, P., 2017. Measurement errors in statistical process monitoring.: A literature review. Computers & Industrial Engineering, [e-journal] 103, pp.316-329. DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2016.10.026.

Montgomery, D., 2004. Introduction to Statistical Quality Control. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

NIST/SEMATECH, 2012. e-Handbook of Statistical Methods. [e-book] NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology. Available through: < http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pri/section3/pri33a.htm > [Accessed 23 July 2022].

Palencar, J., 2017. Measurement process monitoring using the capability indices. PhD. STU in Bratislava.

Palenčár, J., Palenčár, R., Ďuriš, S. and Pavlásek, P., 2018. Correction of the capability index computation based on the uncertainty of the check standard in measurement process. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1065(7), pp.072012.

Pearn, W.L. and Kotz, S., 2006. Encyclopedia and Handbook of Process Capability Indices. Singapore: World Scientific Co. Pte. Ltd.

Pearn, W.L. and Liao, M.Y., 2006. One-sided process capability assessment in the presence of measurement errors. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, [e-journal] 22(7), pp.771-785. DOI: 10.1002/qre.727.

Relyea, D.B., 2011. The Practical Application of the Process Capability Study. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.

Santos, G., Sá, J.C., Félix, M. J., Barreto, L, Carvalho, F., Doiro, M., Zgodavová, K. and Stefanović., M., 2021. New Needed Quality Management Skills for Quality Managers 4.0. Sustainability, [e-journal] 13(11), pp.6149. DOI: 10.3390/su13116149.

Downloads

Published

2022-07-31

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

How Can the Check Standard Influence Measurement Process Capability. (2022). Quality Innovation Prosperity, 26(2), 88-100. https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v26i2.1719