CN117329967A - MSA evaluation method for industrial production line - Google Patents
MSA evaluation method for industrial production line Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN117329967A CN117329967A CN202311206523.7A CN202311206523A CN117329967A CN 117329967 A CN117329967 A CN 117329967A CN 202311206523 A CN202311206523 A CN 202311206523A CN 117329967 A CN117329967 A CN 117329967A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- equipment
- evaluating
- measurement
- msa
- grr
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 19
- 238000009776 industrial production Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 13
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 51
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 36
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 22
- 238000012854 evaluation process Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 18
- APCLRHPWFCQIMG-UHFFFAOYSA-N 4-(5,6-dimethoxy-1-benzothiophen-2-yl)-4-oxobutanoic acid Chemical compound C1=C(OC)C(OC)=CC2=C1SC(C(=O)CCC(O)=O)=C2 APCLRHPWFCQIMG-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims abstract description 17
- 101150092365 MSA2 gene Proteins 0.000 claims abstract description 17
- 101100240989 Schizosaccharomyces pombe (strain 972 / ATCC 24843) nrd1 gene Proteins 0.000 claims abstract description 17
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 17
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 16
- 108010057081 Merozoite Surface Protein 1 Proteins 0.000 claims abstract description 11
- 208000020997 susceptibility to multiple system atrophy 1 Diseases 0.000 claims abstract description 11
- 230000006866 deterioration Effects 0.000 claims description 10
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 claims description 3
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 description 5
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 description 4
- 238000010998 test method Methods 0.000 description 3
- 239000011324 bead Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000006872 improvement Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000007547 defect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000006185 dispersion Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000008676 import Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000000007 visual effect Effects 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G01—MEASURING; TESTING
- G01B—MEASURING LENGTH, THICKNESS OR SIMILAR LINEAR DIMENSIONS; MEASURING ANGLES; MEASURING AREAS; MEASURING IRREGULARITIES OF SURFACES OR CONTOURS
- G01B11/00—Measuring arrangements characterised by the use of optical techniques
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
- Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
- Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
- Y02P90/30—Computing systems specially adapted for manufacturing
Landscapes
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention relates to an MSA evaluation method for an industrial production line, which comprises the following steps: the resolution of the detection equipment is evaluated, the mean value, standard deviation and range of all measured values xn are obtained, cg and Cgk values are further obtained and compared with preset standard values, and the MSA1 evaluation process is completed; based on the number k of operators, the measurement times r of equipment and the number n of measured parts, evaluating the part variation PV of a measurement system, the equipment variation EV, and evaluating the human deviation AV and/or the repeatability and reproducibility GRR of the equipment, and evaluating the coincidence of the% GRR based on a preset value, so as to complete the MSA2 or MSA3 evaluation process; and obtaining a final evaluation index based on the MSA1 evaluation process and finishing the MSA2 or MSA3 evaluation process. Compared with the prior art, the method solves the problem of rapid analysis of the capacity of the measuring system of the automatic measuring equipment for measuring points in a large quantity, can rapidly analyze the measuring system in a large quantity, and greatly improves the process capacity of the evaluating equipment.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of industrial detection, in particular to an MSA evaluation method for an industrial production line.
Background
MSA measurement system analysis and measurement device capabilities are a central component of process evaluation. The demonstration of measuring system capacity is a prerequisite for determining machine capacity and process capacity.
The degree of automation of modern factories is higher and higher, more and more equipment with high reliability are needed, and the measurement system capacity analysis, namely the requirement of mass production of products, is higher and higher, and the traditional mass analysis tools such as Minitab and the like, due to the huge size and complex operation, have the problem that a large amount of labor time and cost are required for factories with more automation equipment.
Disclosure of Invention
The invention aims to overcome the defects of the prior art and provide the MSA evaluation method for the industrial production line, which can rapidly analyze a measurement system in batches and greatly improve the process capability of evaluation equipment.
The aim of the invention can be achieved by the following technical scheme:
the invention provides an MSA evaluation method for an industrial production line, which comprises the following steps:
s1: evaluating the resolution of the detection device such that the resolution T/RE of the detection device is <5%, where T is the tolerance and RE is the resolution of the measurement device;
s2: detecting parts to be detected on an industrial production line by using detection equipment meeting resolution, obtaining the mean value, standard deviation and range of all measured values, further obtaining Cg and Cgk values, and comparing the Cg and Cgk values with preset standard values to complete an MSA1 evaluation process;
s3: based on the number k of operators, the measurement times r of equipment and the number n of measured parts, evaluating the part variation PV of a measurement system, the equipment variation EV, and evaluating the human deviation AV and/or the repeatability and reproducibility GRR of the equipment, and evaluating the coincidence of the% GRR based on a preset value, so as to complete the MSA2 or MSA3 evaluation process;
s4: and obtaining a final evaluation index based on the MSA1 evaluation process and finishing the MSA2 or MSA3 evaluation process.
Further, in S1, the detection device is a laser radar (an electronic detection instrument on a production line, such as a laser radar, visual detection, a weld bead detection device, etc.).
Further, in S2, the normal of measurement is selected, the measurement is repeated for each measurement point a plurality of times, the measurement value of normal distribution and the tolerance T containing the characteristic are selected, the program traverses all the measurement values one by one, and then the Mean, standard deviation Std and Range of all the measurement values are calculated.
Further, in S2, the acquisition mode of each parameter is:
Mean：
Std：
Range：x＝xmax-xmin；
Cg＝(0.2*T)/(4*sigma)，Cgk＝(0.1*T–Bi)/(3*sg)。
further, in S2, the preset standard of Cg and Cgk values is 1.33 or more.
Further, in S3, when the industrial production line is a non-fully automated production line, an evaluation process is employed, wherein the MSA2 process is performed taking into account the analysis of operator errors;
the number of measured parts n is required to satisfy k x r x n greater than or equal to 30 in value based on the number of operators k, the number of measurements of the apparatus r, and the number of measured parts n.
Further, in S3, the part deterioration PV, the equipment deterioration EV, and the evaluation person deviation AV, the repeatability of the equipment, and the acquisition method of the repeatability GRR are:
further, in S3, when%grr < = 20% in the MSA2 process, it is indicated that the lot of parts to be inspected is acceptable.
Further, in S3, when the industrial line is an automated line, the MSA3 evaluation process is directly performed, wherein analysis of operator errors is ignored.
Further, in S3, the part deterioration PV, the equipment deterioration EV, the repeatability and reproducibility GRR of the equipment are evaluated, and the compliance of% GRR is to be evaluated, calculated using the following formula:
when% GRR < = 20% in MSA3 process, the part lot to be inspected is qualified.
Compared with the prior art, the invention has the following technical advantages:
1. the invention solves the problem of rapid analysis of the measurement system capacity of a large number of measurement points of automatic measurement equipment, can rapidly analyze the measurement system in batches, and greatly improves the process capacity of the evaluation equipment.
2. The invention can conveniently and quickly import the measurement data without manually inputting the data, and only needs to easily adjust and input a plurality of columns of information, so that a software interface is concise and can be operated according to the steps;
3. compared with 10000 data which need about one week for analysis by a mass analysis tool such as Minitab, the method and the device only need about 2 minutes for calculation by a software tool, thereby greatly saving time cost.
Drawings
FIG. 1 is a flow chart corresponding to the method of the present invention.
Detailed Description
The invention will now be described in detail with reference to the drawings and specific examples. Features such as a part model, a material name, a connection structure, a control method, an algorithm and the like which are not explicitly described in the technical scheme are all regarded as common technical features disclosed in the prior art.
The solution includes a measurement system analyzing MSA1 and MSA2 and MSA3.
MSA1 is used to determine whether the measurement device is suitable for the intended purpose. As a basis for decision making, the position and dispersion of the measured values within the tolerance are analyzed. This can be done by calculating the characteristic values of the process capability Cg value and Cgk value. The detection device is a laser radar (electronic detection instrument on production line, such as laser radar, vision detection, weld bead detection device, etc.).
The technical scheme flow of the MSA1 of the invention is as follows:
step 1: the resolution of the measuring device is evaluated. If T/RE <5%, then the measurement device is suitable.
Step 2: selecting a measured value of the normal distribution and a tolerance T containing the characteristic;
step 3: analyzing the process capability of MSA1, repeatedly measuring 50 times for each measuring point of a part fixed on a fixture, traversing all measuring values one by a program, and calculating the mean value, standard deviation and range of all measuring values; the following calculation formula was used:
mean formula is
Std formula is
Range formula is x=xmax-xmin
Then the evaluation calculates Cg and Cgk values, cg= (0.2 x t)/(4 x sigma),
Cgk＝(0.1*T–Bi)/(3*sg)，
step 4: as a result of the evaluation, typically in the automotive industry, the minimum requirement of Cg and Cgk is > =1.33. The software tool defaults to > =1.33, however, these requirements can be freely defined in the software tool.
If Cgk value <1.33, it is possible that the correct value of the xm value (reference value) is not correctly determined. The correct xm value should be checked and adjusted if necessary.
If the Cg value is <1.33, no adequate improvement can be achieved by adjustment, since the repeated standard deviation of the measurement process is too large.
After the calculation is completed, the software generates a process capability analysis map containing all the features.
Step 5: and (5) deriving a report according to the requirement.
MSA2/MSA3 enables analysis of the measurement process based on its scattering behavior on a serial part measurement basis. MSA2 is used primarily to determine the operator's impact on the measurement system. The measuring device must exclude as much as possible the influence of the operator on the measurement. If there is an operator influence in the measuring device, this influence has to be investigated. Whereas MSA3 has no operator influence, the measurement process is fully automated. MSA2 and MSA3 should be performed after MSA1 has proven applicability.
The technical scheme flow of the MSA2 is as follows:
step 1: the number of operators is determined (k > =2), 10 measured parts are selected and numbered (n > =5), these objects are distributed as far as possible within the tolerance, the number of measurements of the device (r > =2). The product k x r x n must be greater than or equal to 30: k×r×n > =30.
Step 2: the process capability of MSA2 is analyzed, the part deterioration PV, the equipment deterioration EV, the human deviation AV and the repeatability and reproducibility GRR of the equipment are evaluated, and the compliance of% GRR is evaluated, calculated using the following formula:
step 3: the basis for evaluating the analysis of the measuring system and the capabilities of the measuring system is the currently defined limit value:
% GRR < = 20% measurement procedure (as test procedure) capability
% GRR >20% measurement procedure (as test procedure) does not possess (is unsuitable)
Software defaults to% GRR < = 20%, however, these requirements can be freely defined in the software.
The reference value of% GRR is the tolerance of the measured characteristic. If the capability is not achieved, the reason is not necessarily due to the measuring device. For example, the reason may also be the nature of the part itself. This should be excluded.
Step 4: after the calculation is completed, a process capability analysis chart containing all the characteristics is generated through matched tool software, and a report can be derived according to the requirement.
The technical scheme flow of the MSA3 of the invention is as follows:
step 1: selecting measurement data of parts, arranging the measurement data according to serial numbers, generally measuring 3 times for each part, wherein the minimum number of the measurement data is 10, the product k is r and n > =30 is more than or equal to 30, the measurement data can be divided by 3, and if the measurement data can not be divided by 3, the software prompts to increase the data;
step 2: the process capability of MSA3 is analyzed, the part deterioration PV, the equipment deterioration EV, the human deviation AV and the repeatability and reproducibility GRR of the equipment are evaluated, and the compliance of% GRR is evaluated, calculated using the following formula:
step 3: the basis for evaluating the analysis of the measuring system and the capabilities of the measuring system is the currently defined limit value:
% GRR < = 20% measurement process (as test process) capability;
% GRR >20% measurement procedure (as test procedure) does not possess (is unsuitable);
software defaults to% GRR < = 20%, however, these requirements can be freely defined in the software.
The reference value of% GRR is the tolerance of the measured characteristic. If the capability is not achieved, the reason is not necessarily due to the measuring device. For example, the reason may also be the nature of the part itself. This should be excluded.
Step 4: after the calculation is completed, the tool software of the invention can generate a process capability analysis graph containing all the characteristics, and a report can be derived according to the requirement.
The previous description of the embodiments is provided to facilitate a person of ordinary skill in the art in order to make and use the present invention. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various modifications can be readily made to these embodiments and the generic principles described herein may be applied to other embodiments without the use of the inventive faculty. Therefore, the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and those skilled in the art, based on the present disclosure, should make improvements and modifications without departing from the scope of the present invention.
Claims (10)
1. An MSA evaluation method for an industrial production line, comprising the steps of:
s1: evaluating the resolution of the detection device such that the resolution T/RE of the detection device is <5%, where T is the tolerance and RE is the resolution of the measurement device;
s2: detecting parts to be detected on an industrial production line by using detection equipment meeting resolution, obtaining the mean value, standard deviation and range of all measured values xn, further obtaining Cg and Cgk values, and comparing the Cg and Cgk values with preset standard values to complete an MSA1 evaluation process;
s3: based on the number k of operators, the measurement times r of equipment and the number n of measured parts, evaluating the part variation PV of a measurement system, the equipment variation EV, and evaluating the human deviation AV and/or the repeatability and reproducibility GRR of the equipment, and evaluating the coincidence of the% GRR based on a preset value, so as to complete the MSA2 or MSA3 evaluation process;
s4: and obtaining a final evaluation index based on the MSA1 evaluation process and finishing the MSA2 or MSA3 evaluation process.
2. The MSA evaluating method for an industrial line according to claim 1, wherein in S1, the detecting device is a lidar.
3. The MSA evaluating method for an industrial line according to claim 1, wherein in S2, the measurement is repeated for each measurement point a plurality of times, a normal distribution of the measurement values xn and a tolerance T containing characteristics are selected, the program traverses all the measurement values xn one by one, and then the Mean, standard deviation Std, and Range of all the measurement values are calculated.
4. A method for evaluating MSA for an industrial production line according to claim 3, wherein in S2, the parameters are obtained by:
Mean：
Std：
Range：x＝xmax-xmin；
Cg＝(0.2*T)/(4*sigma)，Cgk＝0.1*T–Bi)/(3*sg)。
5. the method for evaluating MSA of industrial production line according to claim 4, wherein the preset standard of Cg and Cgk values in S2 is 1.33 or more.
6. The MSA evaluation method for an industrial line according to claim 1, wherein in S3, when the industrial line is a non-fully automated line, an evaluation process is employed, wherein the MSA2 evaluation process is performed taking into account an analysis of operator errors;
wherein, based on the number k of operators, the measurement times r of the equipment and the number n of the measurement parts, the number k x r x n is required to be greater than or equal to 30 in value.
7. The MSA evaluating method for industrial production line according to claim 6, wherein in S3, in the MSA2 evaluating process, the parts become worse PV, the equipment become worse EV, the evaluator become worse AV, the repeatability of the equipment and the acquisition mode of the repeatability GRR are:
8. the method for evaluating MSA on an industrial line according to claim 7, wherein in S3, when%grr < = 20% in the MSA2 evaluation process, it is indicated that the lot of the parts to be tested is acceptable.
9. The MSA evaluation method for an industrial line according to claim 1, wherein in S3, when the industrial line is an automated line, the MSA3 evaluation process is directly performed, wherein the analysis of operator errors is omitted.
10. The MSA evaluation method for an industrial line according to claim 2, wherein in S3, the part deterioration PV, the equipment deterioration EV of the measurement system is evaluated, the repeatability and reproducibility GRR of the equipment is evaluated, and the compliance of% GRR is to be evaluated, calculated using the following formula:
when% GRR < = 20% in MSA3 process, the part lot to be inspected is qualified.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202311206523.7A CN117329967A (en) | 2023-09-19 | 2023-09-19 | MSA evaluation method for industrial production line |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202311206523.7A CN117329967A (en) | 2023-09-19 | 2023-09-19 | MSA evaluation method for industrial production line |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN117329967A true CN117329967A (en) | 2024-01-02 |
Family
ID=89274705
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202311206523.7A Pending CN117329967A (en) | 2023-09-19 | 2023-09-19 | MSA evaluation method for industrial production line |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN117329967A (en) |
-
2023
- 2023-09-19 CN CN202311206523.7A patent/CN117329967A/en active Pending
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| JP4838125B2 (en) | GUI and program for process quality display | |
| US20020070469A1 (en) | Method and apparatus for optimizing a rubber manufacturing process | |
| KR102224682B1 (en) | A method of monitoring the functional status of the system for a computed tomography inspection of a workpiece | |
| CN113532341B (en) | Method and device for determining a measurement strategy for measuring a measurement object and program | |
| CN114034335A (en) | Temperature and humidity parameter stable state identification method for environmental test equipment | |
| CN117329967A (en) | MSA evaluation method for industrial production line | |
| CN115855165B (en) | Multi-dimensional precision point inspection method and system for thermal power equipment | |
| US10592840B2 (en) | Method for “real time” in-line quality audit of a digital ophthalmic lens manufacturing process | |
| CN101592692B (en) | Evaluation method of measuring machines | |
| CN116008301A (en) | Method for detecting welding quality of vehicle body plate | |
| CN110057330B (en) | Line width measuring method and line width measuring system | |
| Choudhary | A study in measurement | |
| Dietrich | Capability of measurement processes based on ISO/FDIS 22514-7 and VDA 5 | |
| Dukendjiev et al. | Evaluation the performance of stationary coordinate-measuring systems with MSA methodology | |
| CN111157938A (en) | Method and system for evaluating metering process capacity of automatic verification system | |
| Ren | The Application of Gage R&R Analysis in s Six Sigma Case of Improving and Optimizing an Automotive Die Casting Product’s Measurement System | |
| US20220382247A1 (en) | Estimation method and estimation system | |
| CN114660068B (en) | High-precision defect limit judging method | |
| Franceschini et al. | On-line diagnostic tools for CMM performance | |
| JP3981911B2 (en) | Manufacturing process monitoring method | |
| JP6973277B2 (en) | Core inspection device, core inspection system, and core inspection method | |
| CN118052542B (en) | Continuous detection system of silica gel structure production equipment | |
| Radev | On the accuracy and credibility of estimates of object parameters | |
| JPH04169849A (en) | Threshold setting method for discriminating data | |
| Amariei et al. | STUDY ON THE CAPABILITY OF THE BRAKE PAD BREAK TEST PROCESS. |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination |