Robert Butler


  • @michaelcyger great response….. though I’m way behind on the praise! 1 week, 5 days ago

  • If you can use excel faster…do that and then copy into their Minitab worksheet.

    1 week, 5 days ago

  • @rbutler brings up excellent points.

    See if you can quickly change your measurement system to a variable/continuous data system and confirm it’s performing with an MSA. You’ll solve your problem well and faster and learn more about the process if you are able. 1 month ago

  • @rbutler Robert, as usual, a concise simple to understand explanation LOL. I always learn so much from your posts…at least the parts that I understand. Hope all is well. 2 months, 3 weeks ago

  • @shar6580 Double check the correctness of your assumptions. The only assumption for normality is in the residuals. There is no normality assumption for the raw data. Save your efforts of all those transformations. 2 months, 3 weeks ago

  • Are you doing an MSA for the variation or the mean of the material you tested? 3 months, 1 week ago

  • I would do it.  If they have something like a green belt–you’ll learn more. 4 months, 4 weeks ago

  • observation is a fantastic tool. 5 months ago

  • Thanks @chebetz

    Interesting article.  It’s kind of “wonky” but they seem to be making a mountain out of a mole hill if I have the expression correctly.  Basically, just because one picks the “correct” side of the stat test with the appropriate p-value, there is uncertainty which is why things should always be proven “in the field” or else one w…[Read more]

  • @rbutler – a function of the computer generation.  If they had grown up with a slide rule, they would understand.  ;-) 7 months, 4 weeks ago

  • @Marc68 – I’m going to take exception to @cseider and @poetengineer in their guidance on this issue.  When determining calibration frequency there are two items to evaluate – the bias and precision.  While an MSA can help, it also introduces issues related to the human element, but that is not what calibration is about.  Calibration is about th…[Read more]

  • @ahamumtaz – You should go back and research the definitions of Cp, Cpk and Sigma that were provided to you.  You should find some verbiage that states something like: Cp is “potential” capability, whereas Cpk is “actual” or “observed” capability.  The difference being the location of the distribution in relation to the target and upper/lower b…[Read more]

  • @derekkoz – as the learned @rbutler identifies, once you limit the number of decimal places you are going to use, you have created a discrete measure.  The key is whether the number of decimals is sufficient to provide the resolution needed to answer the question being investigated.  Now, don’t get me wrong, there are certainly absolute discrete m…[Read more]

  • @geozor – A good approach would be to do a root cause analysis, identifying the several contributors to the issue (a fishbone diagram would be a good approach).  Categorize the several contributors as to their likely impact.  Then select the one that is the greatest contributor and go after improving it so that it either no longer is a c…[Read more]

  • Sure you could.

    Just look at your data–if it’s reported/recorded to the nearest 5 or 10 or 100…then you won’t have the precision potentially to use as continuous.

    Don’t forget to do an MSA! 8 months ago

  • Check this website. or google…but lots of advice out there.

    Basically, find a project with measurable results, a manageable size, identify team members with a project champion and find an impactful goal and start there. 8 months ago

  • Look at the total ppm defective.  Translate between Cpk and sigma level…for that one side of the curve. 8 months ago

  • Please use data for your FMEA ratings.

    Also, many pieces of equipment have recommended calibration frequencies that would be HARD to ignore.  However, have you considered use of SPC for monitoring the measurement systems.  This is a great tool to signal when calibrations are needed. 8 months, 1 week ago

  • Load More