Variable data measurement systems analysis: advances in gage bias and linearity referencing and acceptability | International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering (IJMQE)

Open Access

This article has an erratum: [https://doi.org/10.1051/ijmqe/2021013]

Table 4

Example 3 results (FAC-1, 4 systems).

system ▾	Bias average (nm) (Bav %)*	Confidence^** interval (nm) [UCL; LCL]	Tstat⁑ {Eq. (25)}	Bav accepted by statzero? {condn. (25)}	(Δ_Uovrlp) {Eq. (28)}	Bav accepted by statzero proxy? {criterion (29)}
A	–0.47 (0.09%)	0.12; −1.05	1.70	Yes
B	–0.73 (0.15%)	–0.16; −1.31	2.75	No	100%	Yes
C	–4.33 (0.86%)	–3.48; −5.19	10.9	No	31%	Yes
D	–4.47 (0.89%)	–3.61; −5.33	11.1	No	23%	No

*Bav % as percentage of the consensus reference value 502 nm.

**Calculated by equation (26).

⁋Gage resolution ρ = 0.5 nm.

§Gage calibration uncertainty tolerance Ug = 1.0 nm.

⁑Tcrit(α/2, m ̶ 1) = 2.14 (α = 0.05, m = 15).

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.