MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

Quality Improvement by Using GR&R in a Wood Based Furniture

Industry: A Case Study

Ainun Mardhiah Binti Yusuf, Norba’ayah Binti Reza, Raja Nur Atikah Binti Raja Azam Shah and
Muhammad Syazwan Iman Bin Ahmad

Department of Materials, Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia

Abstract
Wood-based furniture industry is booming in Malaysia thus the ability of a company to be a market standout is more
vital than ever. The failure to do so will immediately put the company in jeopardy. Quality is among the prime
factors that will be considered by the customer, so quality tools must be used by the company to ensure that it is at
the optimum level. A case study was carried out in a wood-based furniture company in Muar by using Gage
Repeatability and Reproducibility (GR&R) method. The study was done by appointing three inspectors that were
responsible to measurer the grooves at the wood panel. The measurement cycle is design such that each operator will
measure 10 distinct wood panels thrice. However, the measuring process was done at three different times
throughout the data. The results of Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility (GR&R) have shown that the
repeatability is bigger that reproducibility. Moreover, the total gage is calculated to be more than 30 %. This figure
indicates that some improvements must be done to improve the process and thus reduce study variation.

Keyword
GR&R, Quality Improvement, Repeatability, Reproducibility, Total Gage

1.Introduction
Ability to compete and perform well is the essence in a very demanding business environment. All associations and
organisations must possess the said factors to thrive in the industry and be lucrative. Wood-based furniture industry
is no exception. The company needs to maintain the quality of their products as to meet the customers’ demand and
allow them to be a market challenger. Hence, quality is a significant element that must be considered by all
organizations. Quality can be defined as fitness for use and it can be described and evaluated in several dimensions.
On the other hand, quality improvement can be described as a reduction of variability in process and products.
Variability is inversely proportional to quality, which means that when the variability drops, the quality will
increase. This paper investigates quality issues at a wood-based furniture industry by implementing the Gage
Repeatability and Reproducibility (GR&R) method.

1
MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

2.Literature Review

2.1. Company Background

Piau Chez Sdn. Bhd. which is located in Muar, Johor has been in the furniture businesses for over 20 years with a
vision to become a world-class producer in the furniture industry. Currently, the organization has effectively
developed into an incorporated manufacturing company which possesses a reliable reputation in fulfilling their
customers’ demand on time. They remain focused and committed to the company’s policies and strategies. Besides,
with a vast reputation for their stylish designs, high quality and fine-finished products, the company had gain high
recognition and trust from both local and foreign customers. The strongest success of the company is the
advancement in the PANEL-based maker with materials from Chipboard (Particleboard) and MDF board. Up to this
date, the company had exported their finished products to numerous countries which include India, Australia, Africa,
Maldives, Philippines and the Middle East countries (Piau Chez Furniture, 2016).

2.2. Quality Improvement

Quality improvement has arisen as a major business strategy in the wood industry due to several reasons, including
(1) increasing customer awareness of quality and strong customer quality performance orientation; (2) product
accountability; (3) increasing cost pressures on raw materials, energy, and labour; (4) increasing competition; and
(5) dramatic improvements in productivity through effective quality, high accuracy, and precise measurements of
the produced parts (Li & Al-Refaie, 2008). To produce wooden parts for furniture with higher quality and to
increase the customer’s satisfaction, the performance and method being used must be satisfactory.

2.3. GR&R

GR&R is a statistical tool which calculates the variation in the measurement system to how much extent that comes
from the measurement tool and the operators calculating the measurement (Bhakhri & Belokar, 2017). The purpose
of this project is to implementing the tool and to determine if a measurement system is sufficient for the dimension
requirements. Other than that, the gage study also proves which part of the measurement system is giving
contribution the most to the instability of the measurements and assists operators execute stability to the system.
There are three types of gage repeatability and reproducibility (GR&R). First is crossed gage R&R study, then
nested gage R&R study and lastly is expanded gage R&R study.

2.3.1. Crossed Gage R&R Study

The most common type of Gage R&R study is a crossed study. This study is the most often used where we are able
to instruct each appraiser or operator to measure each part a fixed number of times. These must be continuous
measurements, which mean that the result is a number on a scale, as opposed to an attribute gage which gives a
Go/No-Go result. Usually, there are 10 parts and 3 operators who each measure part 3 times. According to the Jody
Muelaner, a crossed study is sometimes used for destructive tests in which each physical part can only actually be
measured once, since they are destroyed or changed by the measurement or test.

2
MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

2.3.2. Nested Gage R&R Study

The nested gage R&R study is the form of gage study used in destructive scenarios, wherein each appraiser
measures a different sample of parts but where the parts of each type are assumed to be very similar or homogenous.
Based on Hakeem & Rehman (1998), nested gage R&R study is use when each part is measured by only one
operator. In a simple word, nested gage R&R study must be used if each batch is only measured by a single
operator. In fact, whenever operators measure unique parts, the nested GR&R must be designed.

3.Methodology

The methodology workflow of this project is shown in Figure 1. The project begins with literature review finding
and then, the problem statement and the objectives of the project are identified. Next, the selection of the industry is
made based on the requirement of the project. Afterwards, the preparation is done prior to the data collection at the
selected organization. The data is analysed and the findings will be discussed in the later report of the report.

Start

Literature review

Identification of
problem statement
and objectives

Selection of the
industry

Preparation for the

experimentation

Data collection

Implementation of
the GR&R method

Data analysis

Report writting

End

Figure 1: Methodology Workflow

3
MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

4.Results and Discussions

This study was conducted with three operators, three repetitions and 10 parts by using vernier calliper. The groove
of the wood panel was measured due to its significance in furniture making. The measurement of the groove must be
within the specification limits and must not varied too much. There are three factors that may contribute to the
variation of the measurement which are the part variation (PV), equipment variation (EV), and appraiser variation
(AV). The GR&R will calculates the total variation (TV) based upon these three factors. Hence, by performing the
GR&R study, the source of the problem could be identified and consequently, appropriate actions could be executed.
The experiments were conducted in a same location, environment, and tools, and it was done in random orders. The
data obtained from the experiment are tabulated as in Table 1 below. The raw data will then be inserted into the
Minitab 16 software for further analysis.

Table 1: Measurements of Groove in Wood Panel

Trials Parts Operator Measurement (mm) Trials Parts Operator Measurement (mm)
1 1 Operator 1 14.36 46 6 Operator 2 15.54
2 2 Operator 1 14.88 47 7 Operator 2 15.54
3 3 Operator 1 14.94 48 8 Operator 2 15.41
4 4 Operator 1 15.64 49 9 Operator 2 15.46
5 5 Operator 1 15.32 50 10 Operator 2 15.50
6 6 Operator 1 15.56 51 1 Operator 3 14.68
7 7 Operator 1 15.54 52 2 Operator 3 14.88
8 8 Operator 1 15.56 53 3 Operator 3 14.80
9 9 Operator 1 15.62 54 4 Operator 3 15.54
10 10 Operator 1 15.56 55 5 Operator 3 15.52
11 1 Operator 2 15.08 56 6 Operator 3 15.56
12 2 Operator 2 14.94 57 7 Operator 3 15.54
13 3 Operator 2 14.94 58 8 Operator 3 15.48
14 4 Operator 2 15.66 59 9 Operator 3 15.62
15 5 Operator 2 15.44 60 10 Operator 3 15.58
16 6 Operator 2 15.44 61 1 Operator 1 14.98
17 7 Operator 2 15.58 62 2 Operator 1 14.96
18 8 Operator 2 15.40 63 3 Operator 1 14.94
19 9 Operator 2 15.58 64 4 Operator 1 15.58
20 10 Operator 2 15.52 65 5 Operator 1 15.68
21 1 Operator 3 14.60 66 6 Operator 1 15.48
22 2 Operator 3 14.92 67 7 Operator 1 15.60
23 3 Operator 3 14.98 68 8 Operator 1 15.50
24 4 Operator 3 15.66 69 9 Operator 1 15.52
25 5 Operator 3 15.34 70 10 Operator 1 15.56
26 6 Operator 3 15.52 71 1 Operator 2 15.02
27 7 Operator 3 15.50 72 2 Operator 2 14.70
28 8 Operator 3 15.60 73 3 Operator 2 15.02
29 9 Operator 3 15.54 74 4 Operator 2 15.38
30 10 Operator 3 15.46 75 5 Operator 2 15.58
31 1 Operator 1 14.34 76 6 Operator 2 15.58
32 2 Operator 1 14.70 77 7 Operator 2 15.44
33 3 Operator 1 14.92 78 8 Operator 2 15.46

4
MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

34 4 Operator 1 15.68 79 9 Operator 2 15.62

35 5 Operator 1 15.62 80 10 Operator 2 15.52
36 6 Operator 1 15.58 81 1 Operator 3 14.84
37 7 Operator 1 15.66 82 2 Operator 3 14.88
38 8 Operator 1 15.54 83 3 Operator 3 14.94
39 9 Operator 1 15.54 84 4 Operator 3 15.62
40 10 Operator 1 15.54 85 5 Operator 3 15.64
41 1 Operator 2 14.96 86 6 Operator 3 15.56
42 2 Operator 2 14.88 87 7 Operator 3 15.54
43 3 Operator 2 14.96 88 8 Operator 3 15.48
44 4 Operator 2 15.40 89 9 Operator 3 15.54
45 5 Operator 2 15.64 90 10 Operator 3 15.58

Figure 2 below shows the results obtained from the Minitab software. As shown in figure, the measurements of the
groove were varied, in which the first three parts indicate that the groove were below the mean specification limit of
15.33mm. The highest variation was obtained by operator 1 in the second replicate with a difference of almost
1.00mm. Further, the range of all measurements by these three operators was 1.34mm. This indicates that there also
a problem exist for the measurements of parts 1, 2, and 3. Nevertheless, the rest of the measurements are in
satisfactory value as they fall within the specification limits of ±0.5mm.

Figure 2: Measurements of Groove in Wood Panel

5
MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

Besides, based on Figure 3 below, it was acknowledged that the repeatability gives a total variation’s contribution of
30.06% and a standard deviation of 0.106. On the other hand, the reproducibility resulted in 18.10% with a standard
deviation of 0.064. This value resulted in the total gage of 35.09%. Since the value of repeatability was larger than
the reproducibility, thus it can be concluded that the source of the variations came from the measuring process itself.
Thus, a proper design and well-maintained measuring equipment are ought to be used. However, it is worthy to
provide training to the operators to reduce variation in measurements that may results from human error.

Figure 3: Measurement Variation Report

Figure 4: Measurement Summary Report

6
MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

Additionally, the summary report depicts that the total GR&R percentage is greater than 30%, and thus shows the
data was unacceptable and requires improvement. Supposedly, the total gage must be in a small value as it shows the
variation. Simply put, the total gage is parallel to the study variations. Thus, the authors have suggested some
improvements as listed below to reduce study variations.

i. The usage of vernier calliper with thickness 0.01 is advisable

ii. The clamping of the part or gage, or where it is measured needs to be improved
iii. The groove is not consistent throughout , that leads to variations and error in measurement
iv. We need to change the vernier calliper because the calliper might not be in an optimum condition
v. The inspectors need to be trained in a standardized manner for the application of vernier calliper
vi. The fixture required to supervise the inspector during the measurement process

5.Conclusions
Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility is a method to obtain or to investigate the components variations. This
research has adopted the tool by applying in the wood-based industry to study the product variations. Improvements
that were suggested which respects to the results and specifically were to be used in the wood industry are
suggested. As a conclusion, based on the case study which have been carried out at a selected wood-based furniture
factory, the variations are still high, and some measures should be taken in relation to subject matter. Examples of
improvements ranging from measuring equipment to the operators involved. Thus, in the era of industry revolutions,
quality is an aspect that a company should pay attention to. Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility is an example of
quality tools that can be used in the company to ensure that the quality is always at the highest level possible.

6.References
Bhakri, R. & Belokar, M. (2017). Quality Improvement Using GR&R., International Research Journal of
Engineering and Technology, 4(6), 3028-3023.
Brook, Q. (2010). Lean Six Sigma & Minitab: The Complete Toolbox Guide for All Lean Six Sigma Practitioners,
OPEX Resources Limited Winchester, UK.
Dale, B. G., Van Der Wiele, T. & Van Iwaarden, J. (2007). Managing quality, John Wiley & Sons.
De Mast, J. & Trip, A. (2005). Gauge R&R studies for destructive measurements. Journal of Quality Technology,
37, 40-49.
Desai, T. N. & Shrivastava, R. Six Sigma–a new direction to quality and productivity management. Proceedings of
the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science, 2008. 22-24.
Gejdoš, P. (2015). Continuous Quality Improvement by Statistical Process Control. Procedia Economics and
Finance, 34, 565-572.
George, M. L., Rowlands, D., Price, M. & Maxey, J. (2007). The Lean Six Sigma Pocket Toolbook, New York,
McGraw-Hill.
Hakeem, L. & Rehman, S. (1998). Variable Gauge Repeatability and Reproducibility Study using the Analysis of
Variance Method, Quality Engineering.
Li, C., Ming-Hsien & Abbas Al-Refaie (2008). Improving wooden parts' quality by adopting DMAIC procedure.
Montgomery, D. (2009). Statistical quality control, a modern introduction, 2009. Chichester, West Sussex, UK:
Johm Wiley & sons Google Scholar.
Omachonu, V. K. & Ross, J. E. (2004). Principles of total quality, Crc Press.
Piau Chez Furniture. (2016). About Us [Online]. Available: http://piauchez.com/?page_id=1104 [Accessed 29
November 2018].

7
MKMI 1833 SEM 1 18/19

Sindha, N. & Suthar, K. (2017). Review on Implementation of Six Sigma DMAIC Methodology in Manufacturing
Industries. International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering, 3, 168-171.
Smith, R., Mccrary, S. W. & Callahan, R. N. (2007). Gauge repeatability and reproducibility studies and
measurement system analysis: a multimethod exploration of the state of practice. Journal of Industrial
Technology, 23, 2-12.
Thomas, P. (2003). The Six Sigma Handbook. A Complete Guide for Green Belts, Black Belts, and Managers at All
Levels. Published by: New York McGraw-Hill, c2003, 4-5.
Van Den Bos, A., Kemper, B. & De Waal, V. (2014). A study on how to improve the throughput time of Lean Six
Sigma projects in a construction company. International journal of lean six sigma, 5, 212-226.