几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD/CAM/CMM » SPC质量控制
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-05, 09:06 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 esting method

testing method
hi all,
i'm working doe project on leak test and tranfer the product to factory. we facing high leak failure due to design issue. meanwhile waiting for new design change , the management want to increase the spec so that we have alot of passes. my question is as follows:-
is there any statistical method that i can use instead of increase the spec.
i want to test the product using original spec vs increase spec. is that method can tell us something?
balan.g
find a job or post a job opening
before condemning management for "changing the spec", do you understand the details of why the spec was set where it was? obviously, changing the spec just to arbitrarily inflate the passing results will undermind the entire purpose of measuring the value. however, if the current spec limit has no emperical basis, then perhaps they are simply adjusting the limits to remove unnecassry part rejection (alpha rejection). here is an example:
i am a pencil manufacturer, and i need to make pencils that are 8 inches in length. one of my final inpsection items is to measure the overall length of the product. however, i defined the length to be 8.000 +/- 0.001" . this implies that i need a piece of measurming equipment that has at least 0.0001" precision. that means i need to use a coordinate measurement machine (cmm) to measure the length of a pencil. doesn't this seem like overkill? perhaps, it makes more sense to define the length to be 8.0 +/- 0.1". this will allow me to use a digital caliper to measure the value. furthermore, there is no real benefit to have a pencil that is guarenteed to be 8.000" when a pencil that is 8.1" will function just as well.
i don't know the specifics of your scenario, however, is it possible that they are simply redefining the length of the pencil to something more realistic? do the current test limits guarentees that functionality of the end product is met?
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
【转帖】in dd 2.603,the odcharmapperaddbigfontwithindex method is yang686526 DirectDWG 0 2009-05-06 03:45 PM
【转帖】best method yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 06:39 PM
【转帖】asme美国机械工程师标准目录2 huangyhg American standards 5 2009-04-26 02:38 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 07:07 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多