IPC-TM-650 EN 2022 试验方法--.pdf - 第18页

T a ble 1: Data Entry Form Enter test results in to the table below . T ester Samples 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 T a ble 2: Samples Dispositioned C orrectly Score a ‘‘1’ ’ w here disposition in T able 1 a bove matched th e tru…

100%1 / 824
IPC-TM-650
Page 3 of 6
Number
1.8
Subject
Measurement
Precision
Estimation
for
Binary
Data
Date
01/03
Revision
A
c.
Standard
Practice
for
Conducting
an
Interlaboratory
Study
to
Determine
the
Precision
of
a
Test
Method,
E691
-99,
ASTM,
Philadelphia,
PA
(www.astm.org).
d.
Concepts
for
R&R
Studies,
Larry
B.
Barrentine,
(ISBN
0-87389-108-2),
ASQC
Press,
Milwaukee,
Wl
((www.quali-
typress.asq.org).
e.
Basic
Statistics,
4th
Edition,
Mark
J.
Kiemele,
Stephen
R.
Schmidt,
Ronald
Berdine,
Air
Academy
Press,
1997,
ISBN
1-880156-06-7,
pages
9-71
to
9-77
f.
'Is
100%
Test
100%
Effective,”
W.
Russell,
1998
IPC
EXPO,
San
Jose,
CA
(gives
methods
for
calculating
the
likely
outcomes
on
product
test
for
differing
levels
of
mea¬
surement
precision.)
6.3
Software
Measurement
precision
studies
are
greatly
facilitated
by
use
of
software
to
perform
the
calculations.
Below
are
just
a
few
of
the
many
software
packages
which
can
be
used
for
this
purpose.
Reference
(a)
is
an
Excel
spreadsheet
written
to
perform
the
calculations
in
this
proce¬
dure.
a.
Measurement
Precision
Calculator
For
Binary
Data,
Excel
spreadsheet,
available
at
http://www.ipc.org/html/
testmethods.htm,
free
of
charge.
b.
Statgraphics
Plus,
Manugistics
Corp,
2115
East
Jefferson
Street,
Rockville,
MD,
20852-4999
(
ww
w
.
statg
rap
h
i
c
-
s.com).
c.
SPC
XL,
Air
Academy
Press,
1155
Kelly
Johnson
Blvd,
Colorado
Springs,
CO
80920
(www
.
ai
racad
.
oom)
.
d.
Minitab,
Minitab.
Inc.,
3081
Enterprise
Dr,
State
College,
PA
16801
(www.minitab.com).
e.
Interlaboratory
Data
Analysis
Software
for
E691
,
ASTM,
100
Barr
Harbor
Dr,
West
Conshohocken,
PA
19428
(www.astm.org).
Table 1: Data Entry Form
Enter test results into the table below.
Tester
Samples
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Table 2: Samples Dispositioned Correctly
Score a ‘‘1’’ where disposition in Table 1 above matched the true standard.
Score a ‘‘0’’ where disposition did not match the true standard.
Note these scores for each of the testers in the table below.
Tester
Samples
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total
IPC-TM-650
Page 4 of 6
Number
1.8
Subject
Measurement
Precision
Estimation
for
Binary
Data
Date
01/03
Revision
A
Measurement
Precision
Study
-
Binary
Data
True
Standard
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Calculations
True
Standard
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Table 3: Good Parts That Were Rejected
Score a ‘‘1’’ where good parts were rejected in Table 1 above.
Score a ‘‘0’’ everywhere else.
Note the scores for each tester in the table below.
Tester
Samples
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total
Table 4: Bad Parts That Were Accepted
Score a ‘‘1’’ where bad parts were accepted in Table 1 above.
Score a ‘‘0’’ everywhere else.
Tester
Samples
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total
IPC-TM-650
Page 5 of 6
Number
1.8
Subject
Measurement
Precision
Estimation
for
Binary
Data
Date
01/03
Revision
A
True
Standard
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
True
Standard
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10