IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i11p15464-15486d59178.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis on Accuracy of Bias, Linearity and Stability of Measurement System in Ball screw Processes by Simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Fan-Yun Pai

    (Department of Business Administration, National Changhua University of Education, No. 2, Shi-Da Road, Changhua 500, Taiwan
    Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Da-Yeh University, No. 168, University Rd., Dacun, Changhua 51591, Taiwan)

  • Tsu-Ming Yeh

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Da-Yeh University, No. 168, University Rd., Dacun, Changhua 51591, Taiwan)

  • Yung-Hsien Hung

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Da-Yeh University, No. 168, University Rd., Dacun, Changhua 51591, Taiwan)

Abstract

To consistently produce high quality products, a quality management system, such as the ISO9001, 2000 or TS 16949 must be practically implemented. One core instrument of the TS16949 MSA (Measurement System Analysis) is to rank the capability of a measurement system and ensure the quality characteristics of the product would likely be transformed through the whole manufacturing process. It is important to reduce the risk of Type I errors (acceptable goods are misjudged as defective parts) and Type II errors (defective parts are misjudged as good parts). An ideal measuring system would have the statistical characteristic of zero error, but such a system could hardly exist. Hence, to maintain better control of the variance that might occur in the manufacturing process, MSA is necessary for better quality control. Ball screws, which are a key component in precision machines, have significant attributes with respect to positioning and transmitting. Failures of lead accuracy and axial-gap of a ball screw can cause negative and expensive effects in machine positioning accuracy. Consequently, a functional measurement system can incur great savings by detecting Type I and Type II errors. If the measurement system fails with respect to specification of the product, it will likely misjudge Type I and Type II errors. Inspectors normally follow the MSA regulations for accuracy measurement, but the choice of measuring system does not merely depend on some simple indices. In this paper, we examine the stability of a measuring system by using a Monte Carlo simulation to establish bias, linearity variance of the normal distribution, and the probability density function. Further, we forecast the possible area distribution in the real case. After the simulation, the measurement capability will be improved, which helps the user classify the measurement system and establish measurement regulations for better performance and monitoring of the precision of the ball screw.

Suggested Citation

  • Fan-Yun Pai & Tsu-Ming Yeh & Yung-Hsien Hung, 2015. "Analysis on Accuracy of Bias, Linearity and Stability of Measurement System in Ball screw Processes by Simulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-23, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:11:p:15464-15486:d:59178
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/11/15464/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/11/15464/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Estecahandy, M. & Bordes, L. & Collas, S. & Paroissin, C., 2015. "Some acceleration methods for Monte Carlo simulation of rare events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 296-310.
    2. Amigun, Bamikole & Petrie, Daniel & Görgens, Johann, 2011. "Economic risk assessment of advanced process technologies for bioethanol production in South Africa: Monte Carlo analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 3178-3186.
    3. Arnold, Uwe & Yildiz, Özgür, 2015. "Economic risk analysis of decentralized renewable energy infrastructures – A Monte Carlo Simulation approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 227-239.
    4. Gurgur, Cigdem Z. & Jones, Michael, 2010. "Capacity factor prediction and planning in the wind power generation industry," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 2761-2766.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arnold, Uwe & Yildiz, Özgür, 2015. "Economic risk analysis of decentralized renewable energy infrastructures – A Monte Carlo Simulation approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 227-239.
    2. Ioannou, Anastasia & Angus, Andrew & Brennan, Feargal, 2017. "Risk-based methods for sustainable energy system planning: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 602-615.
    3. Rocha, Luiz Célio Souza & Aquila, Giancarlo & Rotela Junior, Paulo & Paiva, Anderson Paulo de & Pamplona, Edson de Oliveira & Balestrassi, Pedro Paulo, 2018. "A stochastic economic viability analysis of residential wind power generation in Brazil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 412-419.
    4. de Oliveira, Lucas Guedes & Aquila, Giancarlo & Balestrassi, Pedro Paulo & de Paiva, Anderson Paulo & de Queiroz, Anderson Rodrigo & de Oliveira Pamplona, Edson & Camatta, Ulisses Pessin, 2020. "Evaluating economic feasibility and maximization of social welfare of photovoltaic projects developed for the Brazilian northeastern coast: An attribute agreement analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. Shahriyar Nasirov & Carlos Silva & Claudio A. Agostini, 2015. "Investors’ Perspectives on Barriers to the Deployment of Renewable Energy Sources in Chile," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, April.
    6. Natália Gava Gastaldo & Graciele Rediske & Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Carmen Brum Rosa & Leandro Michels & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2019. "What is the Profile of the Investor in Household Solar Photovoltaic Energy Systems?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, November.
    7. Robus, Charles L.L. & Gottumukkala, Lalitha Devi & van Rensburg, Eugéne & Görgens, Johann F., 2016. "Feasible process development and techno-economic evaluation of paper sludge to bioethanol conversion: South African paper mills scenario," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 333-345.
    8. d'Amore, Federico & Bezzo, Fabrizio, 2017. "Managing technology performance risk in the strategic design of biomass-based supply chains for energy in the transport sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 563-574.
    9. Sarah Hafner & Olivia James & Aled Jones, 2019. "A Scoping Review of Barriers to Investment in Climate Change Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Aquila, Giancarlo & Coelho, Eden de Oliveira Pinto & Bonatto, Benedito Donizeti & Pamplona, Edson de Oliveira & Nakamura, Wilson Toshiro, 2021. "Perspective of uncertainty and risk from the CVaR-LCOE approach: An analysis of the case of PV microgeneration in Minas Gerais, Brazil," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    11. Gojiya, Anil & Deb, Dipankar & Iyer, Kannan K.R., 2019. "Feasibility study of power generation from agricultural residue in comparison with soil incorporation of residue," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 416-425.
    12. Phoka Caiphus Rathebe & Setlamorago Jackson Mbazima, 2023. "Risk-Based Assessment of 132 kV Electric Distribution Substations and Proximal Residential Areas in the Mangaung Metropolitan Region," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-14, February.
    13. Luigi Dolores & Maria Macchiaroli & Gianluigi De Mare, 2022. "Financial Impacts of the Energy Transition in Housing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-17, April.
    14. Elisangela Domingues Vaz & Regio Marcio Toesca Gimenes & Joao Augusto Rossi Borges & Rafael Todescato Cavalheiro & Andreia Maria Kremer, 2020. "Own Grain Storage Structures: Is It Worth Investing?," Journal of Agricultural Studies, Macrothink Institute, vol. 8(2), pages 42-67, June.
    15. Heino Pesch & Louis Louw, 2023. "Evaluating the Economic Feasibility of Plant Factory Scenarios That Produce Biomass for Biorefining Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-36, January.
    16. Schiochet Pinto, Luane & Pinheiro Neto, Daywes & de Leles Ferreira Filho, Anésio & Domingues, Elder Geraldo, 2020. "An alternative methodology for analyzing the risk and sensitivity of the economic viability for generating electrical energy with biogas from the anaerobic bio-digestion of vinasse," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1401-1410.
    17. Mabel, M. Carolin & Raj, R. Edwin & Fernandez, E., 2011. "Analysis on reliability aspects of wind power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 1210-1216, February.
    18. Jean C. Kouam & Simplice A. Asongu & Bin J. Meh & Robert Nantchouang & Fri L. Asanga & Denis Foretia, 2022. "A Synthetic Indicator of the Quality of Support for Businesses in Burkina-Faso, Cameroon, and Ghana," Working Papers of the African Governance and Development Institute. 22/047, African Governance and Development Institute..
    19. Alizadeh, Reza & Lund, Peter D. & Soltanisehat, Leili, 2020. "Outlook on biofuels in future studies: A systematic literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Aquila, Giancarlo & Nakamura, Wilson Toshiro & Junior, Paulo Rotella & Souza Rocha, Luiz Celio & de Oliveira Pamplona, Edson, 2021. "Perspectives under uncertainties and risk in wind farms investments based on Omega-LCOE approach: An analysis in São Paulo state, Brazil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:11:p:15464-15486:d:59178. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.