E41.36.110.

R /B
Approval of measurement facility capability / ________________________________________

Standard
Specific inspection facility ________________________________________

Status Enforceable

TRANSLATION ADVISORY NOTICE: This document has been translated from French. In the event of any
dispute, only the French version is referred to as the reference text and is binding on the parties

Object Define the capability approval procedure for any specific inspection facility,
whatever its characteristics, used for dimensional measurement.
It applies to all specific inspection facilities defined above, for example inspection
fixtures, specific automatic inspection machines, inspection stations built into
machine tools, etc.
It is possible to apply this procedure for checking of a specific characteristic of an
all-purpose measurement facility, according to predetermined instructions, after
conventional geometric acceptance testing of the facility.
By analogy, application of this standard can be extended to inspection facilities for other
measurable variables.

Scope Renault Group

Issued by 66140 - Profession and Upstream Process department

Confidentiality Not confidential

Approved by Function Signature Application Date

Patrice Duhaut Leader of the UET Innovation & 06/2011

transverse expertise

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 1 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

History of versions

Version Up date Object of main modifications Author

A 09/2010 Creation Slawomir Indyk
B 06/2011 Deletion of the xls given file. Slawomir Indyk
Annex 2, § 2.2.2 : Deletion of the drawing: " Graph of risk of error
of judgement R for CMC of 2.3 and 4"

Supersedes E41.36.110.R /A of 09/2010

Availability Inside Renault, on the Intranet: http://gdxpegi.ava.tcr.renault.fr

Outside Renault, on the Internet: www.cnomo.com
E-mail : norminfo.moyens@renault.com

Documents cited Regulations :

International :
European :
French :
CNOMO :
Renault :
Other internal doc :
Other external doc :

Coding ICS : 03.100.50 ; 03.120.30 ; 17.020

Class E41

Key words capabilite, aptitude, statistique, cmc, mesure, controle dimensionnel, capability, ability,
measurement, statistics, dimensional check

Language English

(1) Have participated in writing the document

Site Department Name Site Department Name
CTR 66140 Goncalves T

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 2 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

Contents
Page
1 General ...................................................................................................................................... 3

2 Definitions ................................................................................................................................. 4

3 Acceptance of facility geometry - Methodology .................................................................... 5

3.1 Precautions................................................................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Repeatability of calibration measurements on the inspection facility......................................................... 5
3.3 Repeatability of measurement of a part on the inspection facility.............................................................. 5
3.4 Measuring several parts on the inspection facility...................................................................................... 5
3.5 Metrology measurement of parts................................................................................................................ 6
4 Calculation of inspection machine capability coefficient (CMC) ......................................... 7
4.1 Notation ...................................................................................................................................................... 7
4.2 Calculating average values ........................................................................................................................ 7
4.3 Calculation of variances ............................................................................................................................. 8
4.4 Calculation of average precision error ....................................................................................................... 8
4.5 Calculation of inspection facility global uncertainty .................................................................................... 8
4.6 Calculation of inspection facility capability coefficient................................................................................ 8
5 Machine capability approval....................................................................................................9

6 Simplified acceptance .............................................................................................................. 9

7 List of reference documents....................................................................................................9

Annex 1: Analysis of causes of uncertainty ...................................................................................... 10

Annex 2: Methodological supplement ................................................................................................ 15

Annex 3: Example of CMC calculation ............................................................................................... 21

1 General
A specific inspection facility, whether manual or automatic, is a facility only able to check the
characteristics for which it has been designed (e.g.: multidimension check).
The purpose of capability approval is to:
 Provide a practical check that the equipment and the process are able to carry out the
operation for which they have been designed (functional aptitude),
 Check that the degree of uncertainty in measurement is compatible with the tolerances for the
parts to be inspected (accuracy of measurement).
This type of check makes it possible to evaluate both uncertainties due to manufacture and those due to
design.
It is also used to check that the utilisation and calibration instructions are of operational standard.
Le The principal consists in measuring one or several parts first using metrological means and then using
the specific inspection facility, and then comparing the results.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 3 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

2 Definitions
Calibration master (for specific inspection facility)
Measurement made on a part with dimensions generally close to those of parts to be checked and
with faults in form and temporal stability of dimensions compatible with the degree of precision
required, this being better than of the facility as s whole.

Average accuracy error

J = systematic component, average error for a measuring instrument in the measurement range
studied.

Repeatability
Dispersion of measurement results for a part, repeated in identical conditions and without
recalibration, over a short period:
ƒ Repeatability of calibration master measurements is equal to ± Ie where :
 le = 2 se
 and "se" is the experimental standard deviation over several calibration measurements
taken on the measurement facility.
ƒ Repeatability of measurements for a parts equal to ± Ir where :
 Ir = 2 sr
 and "sr" is the experimental standard deviation over several measurements of a part taken
on the measurement facility.

Overall uncertainty for inspection facility

lg = Overall uncertainty in measurements made on the inspection facility, calculated from the values
read.

Uncertainty of metrology measurements

lmetro = Uncertainty of metrology measurements.

Tolerance bracket
lT = TB= upper and lower limits of tolerance on the characteristics checked on the facility.

Inspection machine capability coefficient

The inspection machine capability coefficient (CMC) is the relationship which characterizes the ability
of the inspection machine to measure a given characteristic with the required degree of precision.
A coefficient takes account of all of the errors in measurement due to the measuring method, the
design of facility, to its manufacture, to the part to be measured (faults in for, deformations) and to the
calibration master.

IT
CMC =
2 Ig

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 4 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

3 Acceptance of facility geometry - Methodology

3.1 Precautions
The finalised inspection facility is to be installed under the normal utilisation conditions specified by the
instructions for utilizations at stations.

3.2 Repeatability of calibration measurements on the inspection facility

ƒ Calibration measurement must have been carried out less than six months ago. Its theoretical
value and degree of uncertainty of measurement are known.
ƒ Calibrate the inspection facility using the calibration master provided for this purpose and following
the instructions in the operating manual.
ƒ Measure the calibration 5 times on the inspection facility being tested, without altering calibration.
ƒ Remove the calibration master from the facility after each measurement.

Measurements are made on the inspection facility in strict accordance with the instruction in the
instruction manual for the inspection facility.
 Calculate the experimental calibration standard deviation (se) on the inspection facility.
Repeatability of measurements on the inspection facility is equal to ± Ie where le = 2 se.
If le is greater than the value specified in paragraph 5, the inspection facility must be reviewed.
Note: If the nature of the clause checked does not require a calibration master, take se = 0.

3.3 Repeatability of measurement of a part on the inspection facility

ƒ Take a typical series production part,
ƒ Measure this part at least 5 times on the inspection facility, removing the part after each
measurement and without recalibrating.
ƒ Calculate the standard deviation (sr) over the 5 measurements.
ƒ Repeatability of measurements on the measurement facility is equal ± Ir where Ir = 2 sr.

If Ir is greater than the value specified in paragraph 5, the inspection facility must be reviewed before
carrying on with the acceptance procedure.
This check makes it possible to avoid complete acceptance if the inspection facility has a serious fault.
If no serious fault is encountered, go to the next operation.

3.4 Measuring several parts on the inspection facility

Selecting sample parts:
Chose a minimum of 5 parts, representative of series production, and with characteristics as well
distributed over a tolerance bracket greater than 0,6 lT (TB) as is possible.
At least parts must fall within the tolerance bracket.
To gain better knowledge of the inspection facility, it is useful to take a second sample. The values for all
of the parts must be close the operating range. The values are to be obtained by supplementary
machining if required.
Measure the parts on the inspection facility by circular permutation until each part has been measured
5 times, without recalibrating and over a short period of time.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 5 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

3.5 Metrology measurement of parts

Give the conventional true value, obtained in metrology, with the corresponding degree of uncertainty of
measurement. In order to reduce the uncertainty in repeatability of the measuring instrument, it is
recommended to take as the conventionally true value the average of n measurements made on the
same part.
In this case, the metrology uncertainty of repeatability is divided by n.

Precautions:
The uncertainty for metrology measurement must be equal to or less than half of the theoretical degree of
uncertainty of measurement on the inspection facility
It is possible that geometrical faults in machining origins or deformation of a part may introduce e degree
of dispersion of measurement making it possible to fulfil the condition described above

Two cases must then be considered:

a) Inspection facility for a characteristic of machining instruction (non functional dimension)
The metrology measurement must be made under the same conditions as on the specific
inspection facility, i.e. using:
 the same supports,
 the same measurement points,
 and in so far is possible, the same clamping apparatus.
If the uncertainty of metrology measurement is greater than lT/16 (due to defects of form in
machining origins or a deformable part, etc.) proceed as follows:
1. bring the measurement facility to be checked to the metrology measurement facility,
2. check that the inspection facility support points are similar to those for the machining
facility,
3. as reference, take the part support points on the facility to be checked,
4. measure the part installed on this inspection facility.
If is not possible to bring the inspection fixture to the metrology measurement facility or to use
the same clamping as on the inspection facility, the part must be measured free standing, on
condition that a check is made to ensure that deformation due to clamping is constant pr
negligible.
If metrology measurement cannot be made with a sufficient degree of precision, the case must
be studied in collaboration with the central Metrology Department.
b) Inspection facility for a functional characteristic
The purpose of this type of facility is to check compliance of functional dimensions of parts in
relation to their design drawings.
Metrology measurements are then made on the part free standing, unless particular
requirements for measurement are specified by Design departments. The existing machining
origins are not used as measurement references
Remark: Certain characteristics in machining instructions are also functional. In such cases,
part must be measured free standing.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 6 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

4 Calculation of inspection machine capability coefficient (CMC)

An example of calculation is given in appendix 3.

4.1 Notation
p = number of parts
i = part index (from 1 to p)
m = number of measurement on a part or on calibration master on the inspection facility
j = measurement index (from 1 to m)
x = value obtained in metrology
y = value obtained on inspection facility
xi = conventional true value for part no i, measured in metrology
yij = value measured on inspection facility, on part no. i, during measurement no. j
J = average precision error for inspection facility
V = variance
s = experimental standard deviation = V
l = measurement uncertainty
Indices affecting these 3 variables:
a = amplification
l = linearity
r = repeatability
g = global
e = calibration master
metro = metrology
lT = tolerance bracket (TB) for the characteristic to be checked.

4.2 Calculating average values

1 p
x=
p
∑ i = 1 xi = average of measurement on all parts in metrology

1 m
yi =
m
∑ j = 1 yij = average of m measurements on part No I on inspection facility

1 p
y=
p
∑ i = 1 yi = average of all measurement on all parts on inspection facility

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 7 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

4.3 Calculation of variances

Principle of calculation
The results of the (n) of the measurements (z) are considered as having the same distribution law.
Estimation of variance V (z) is given by the formula:
1 n
V(z) = ∑ (zi - z)2
n - 1 i =1

Practical calculation: it is preferable to use the equivalent formula:

1  2 1
2
 ∑ i = 1 z i -  ∑ i = 1 z i  
n n
V(z) =
n - 1  n  

Calculation of overall variance of inspection facility

Vg = variance of (yij - xi).
To simplify the notation, we write:
p m
dij = y ij - x i et : ∑ = ∑ i = 1 ∑ j =1

∑ dij2 - pm ( ∑ dij )
1  1 2
Vg =
pm - 1  


Calculation of calibration master variance on inspection facility

Ve = variance of (yei)'s, values of the calibration master measured on the inspection facility

1  1 m 2
Ve =  ∑ mj = 1 y ej 2 -  ∑ j = 1 y ej  
m - 1  m  

4.4 Calculation of average precision error

J= y - x

4.5 Calculation of inspection facility global uncertainty

This is equal to ± Ig where:

ig = J +2 Vg + Ve

4.6 Calculation of inspection facility capability coefficient

IT
CMC =
2 Ig

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 8 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B

5 Machine capability approval

Unless otherwise specified in the specifications, the facility shall be accepted if the conditions of the table
below are fulfilled (see details of calculations in paragraph 4).
Table 1

IT > 16 µm and Q > 5 ≤ 16 µm and Q ≤ 5

Facility resolution ≤ IT/20 ≤ IT/10
± Ie ≤ ± IT/20 ≤ ± IT/10
± Ir ≤ ± IT/8 ≤ ± IT/4
± Imetro ≤ ± IT/16 ≤ ± IT/8
± Ig ≤ ± IT/8 ≤ ± IT/4
CMC ≥ 4 ≥ 2
Q: basic tolerance quality index.

Remarks: The indicated resolution is only necessary for calculation of CMC.

The limit values for Ig comply with standard ISO 14253-1.
If these conditions are nor fulfilled, it is recommended to analyse the possible causes
using the detailed calculations and the graphic representation provided in annex 1.

6 Simplified acceptance
This procedure only applies in cases where it is impossible to apply the acceptance procedure
described in the paragraph above. (For example, if typical parts are missing on delivery on inspection
facility)
The procedure makes it possible to refuse a facility which fails to comply, but acceptance can only be
pronounced after the full acceptance procedure.
The method is identical to that for complete acceptance, but here only on part is measured (instead of
the minimum 5).
This part is measured in metrology, then 5 times on the inspection facility without modifying the
calibration, and lifting the part after each measurement.

7 List of reference documents

NOTE : For undated documents, the latest version shall apply
ISO 14253-1 : Geometrical product specification (GPS). Inspection by measurement of workpieces
and measuring equipments. Part 1 : decision rules for proving conformance or non-
conformance with specifications

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 9 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 1 Normative

Annex 1: Analysis of causes of uncertainty

The graphs and calculations described, in this annex are optional. They allow you to analyse the various
causes of uncertainty and to arrive at a "diagnosis" of them.
For example, it is possible to discern a predominant fault. If there is no predominant fault, results must be
interpreted with caution.

1 Calculation of regression curve

(See graphs, paragraph 4 of annex)
y = ax + b is the equation for the curve showing regression of y in relation to x, calculated for all points
(xi, yij).
Remark: the curve passes through the point x, y .
To simplify writing, we can use the following form of notation:

∑ = ∑ pi = 1
where n = m . p (Number of xi, yij points)
n ∑ xi . yi - ∑ xi . ∑ yi
a=
n ∑ x i2 - (∑ xi )
2

b = y - a.x
To determine whether this curve is significantly different from the y = x curve, it is possible to apply the
following statistical test:
1 2
The quantity: F = t + t a 2 
2 y 
Follows a Snédécor law with 2 and (p - 2) degrees of freedom (see table, paragraph 3 of annex) where:
p ( y - x )2
t y2 =
Vl

(a - 1)2 ∑ pi = 1 ( xi - x )2
t a2 =
Vl
(for Vl calculation see paragraph 2.2 of annex).
In Snédécor table (see paragraph 3 of annex), read the value for Flimit for γ1 = 2.
γ2 = p - 2 and p = 0.05 :
 Si F ≤ Flimit the regression curve is not significantly different from y = x.
 Si F > Flimit the regression curve is significantly different from y = x.
To determine whether this is due to the slope of the curve or to precision error, use the Student-Ficher
test: t a and t y according to a Student-Ficher law with (p - 2) degrees of freedom.

In the Student-Ficher table (see paragraph 3 of annex), read the value of t for γ = p - 2 and P = 0.05.
 If t a > t is read in the table, the difference is due to the slope of the curve (amplification error).
 If t y > t is read in the table, the difference arises from precision error.

If one of the 2 tests is significant, it is possible to correct, by modifying:

 Either the gain for amplification error,
 Or the calibration curve for precision error.
Re-measure the parts on the inspection machine and re-calculate the CMC. If not, these two components
are considered to be random and included in the overall uncertainty.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 10 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 1 Normative

2 Calculation of variances

2.1 Calculation of variance due to repeatability error (Vr)

Vr = common repeatability variance
(
Suppose that: eij = yij - yi )
1  m 2
p 2 1  m  
Vr =
p (m - 1)
∑  ∑
i =1  j =1
e ij -  ∑
m  j =1
e ij
 
 
The uncertainty due to repeatability is equal to ± Ir where:
Ir = 2 Vr

2.2 Calculation of variance due to linearity error (Vl)

Vl = variance of: ei = yi = ( axi + b)

1  1 2
V l = p - 2 ∑ i = 1 ei - p  ∑ i = 1 ei 
p
2 p

 

Uncertainty due to linearity error is equal to ± Il where:

2.3 Calculation of variance due amplication error (Va)

Va = variance of : (axi + b) - (xi + J) = (a = 1)2 . variance of xi

2
(a −1) .  P 2.. − .. 1 ..( P )2 
Va =
p ∑I+1 XI ∑I=1 xi 
P
 

Uncertainty due to amplification error is equal to ± Ia where:

2.4 Remark
The relationship of one of these three variances to overall variance Vg gives an order of magnitude for the
percentage of variability explained by the variance chosen. However, this relationship is only an indication
as the sum of (Vr + Vl + Va) is not exactly equal to Vg, the third variance not being totally independent of
the first two. The aim of the calculation of these variances is simply to give an orientation for diagnosis.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 11 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 1 Normative

3 Distribution tables

γ1= 2
γ2
P =005 DISTRIBUTION TABLE FOR F
1 199.5 (Snédécor Variable)
2 19.5
3 9.55 Value for F with probability P being exceeded
4 6.94
5 5.79 (F = S12 / S 22 )
6 5.14
7 4.74
8 4.46
9 4.26
10 4.10
11 3.98
12 3.88
13 3.80
14 3.74
15 3.68
16 3.63
17 3.59
18 3.55
19 3.52
20 3.49

P 0.05
γ
1 12.706
2 4.303 DISTRIBUTION TABLE FOR t
3 3.182 (Student law)
4 2.776
5 2.571 Values for t with probability P of being exceeded for absolute
6 2.447 valued'être dépassée en valeur absolue
7 2.365
8 2.306
9 2.262
10 2.228
11 2.201
12 2.179
13 2.160
14 2.145
15 2.131
16 2.120
17 2.110
18 2.101
19 2.093
20 2.086
Figure 1

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 12 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 1 Normative

4 Graphic representation of main causes of errors

x
INSPECTION INSPECTION
FACILITY FACILITY
y x
y
x

x
J x
x
x
x
x x
x

x x

METROLOGY METROLOGY

PRECISION ERROR
AMPLIFICATION ERROR

INSPECTION INSPECTION
+
FACILITY FACILITY + +
y y +
+
+ +
+ + +
+
+ +
+
+ +
+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +
+ + +
+ + +
+ + +
+ x x
+
METROLOGY + METROLOGY

LINEARITY ERROR REPEATABILITY ERROR

Figure 2

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 13 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 1 Normative

INSPECTION
FACILITY

J
+
x
=
y
b
x+ E
=a L IN
Y N
IO
E SS
GR
RE

x
=
y
y
yij
REPEATABILITY
yi J

LINEARITY

AMPLIFICATION

PRECISION

x1 x1 x METROLOGY

Uncertainty of measurement = yij – xi

= [yij –yi] + [yi – (axi + b)] + [(axi + b) – (xi + J)] + (xi + J) – xi]
REPEATABILITY LINEARITY AMPLIFICATION AVEARGE PRECISION

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 14 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 2 Informative

Annex 2: Methodological supplement

This annex gives:

 Additional methodological data for certain aspects of application,
 Evaluation of risk of error of judgement for an inspection facility during measurement.

1. Methodological supplement for approval of capability of specific

inspection facility capability
The (non-exhaustive) list of points given below may be completed to deal with other particular cases
encountered, by various departments concerned during application of the standard.

1.1 Choice or representative characteristics

Which dimensions to use to calculate CMC?
All of the characteristics checked must be covered by a CMC calculation. In practice, a decision may be
taken not to calculate the CMC for every characteristic, subject to an agreement between the designer,
the plant where the facility will be used and the department responsible for acceptance; however, the
CMC must be calculated for all the characteristics subject to production facility capability measurement,
and for all functional dimensions.

1.2 Parts samples

When it is not possible to obtain parts distributed over more than 0,6 TB (IT):
The parts must have an optimum distribution of their characteristics over a bracket 0.6 TB: a parts
sample aiming at this optimum objective is necessary in order to evaluate errors of accuracy, linearity
and amplification across the entire operating range of the inspection facility.
Ideally range should extend beyond the TB.
For practical reasons, this type of sample is not always possible at first reception of the facility; in this
case it is possible to refuse the facility if the CMC is outside of tolerances for a single part or for parts
extending avec less than 0.6 TB, but final acceptance can only be given for series production parts with
adequate dispersion.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 15 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 2 Informative

2. Evaluation of risk of error of judgement due to use of an inspection

facility
The process described below makes it possible to evaluate the risk of making an erroneous judgement
due to the use of an inspection facility of known capability for the value to be measured.

2.1 Principle of evaluation

The capability of an inspection facility, as specified by this standard defines uncertainty of measurement
as the sum of the average precision error and the uncertainty due to errors of linearity, amplification and
repeatability of the facility.
This uncertainty of measurement brought, on both sides, to the value to be measured, represents the
bracket in which the true value of a measurement is situated.
Thus, for any measurement of characteristics aiming to compare a measured value Yi to a specified limit
Ls, it is possible to estimate a risk error of judgement which is relative to the probable part of true values
which would not correspond to the judgement of the value measured.
This part is determined in relation to the absolute error between the value read Yi and the specified limit
Ls with the degree of uncertainty Ig.

2.2 Interpretation of CMC

2.2.1 Evaluation of risk applied to a measurement value

IT
The CMC characterizes uncertainty by: Ig =
2 × CMC
From which the relationship determining the risk of error of judgement.
Yi − Ls Yi − Ls
= × 2 × CMC = K × 2 × CMC
Ig IT

Yi − Ls
where K =
IT
Thus to evaluate the risk of error of judgment R applying to a value from a facility, we calculate for each
K, the normal density of probability of risk, which can be determined from the table below.
This table, which characterizes the function of distribution of the reduced normal variable, determines the
probability P from the expression 4 x K x CMC, which allows us to evaluate the risk R from the statement
R = 1 - P.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 16 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 2 Informative

Table 1: Table determining P as a function of (4 x K x CMC)

4xKxCMC 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
0.0 0.5000 0.5040 0.5080 0.5120 0.5160 0.5199 0.52.39 0.5279 0.5319 0.5359
0.1 0.5395 0.5438 0.5478 0.5517 0.5557 0.5596 0.5636 0.5675 0.5714 0.5753
0.2 0.5793 0.5832 0.5871 0.5910 0.5948 0.5987 0.6026 0.6064 0.6103 0.6141
0.3 0.6179 0.6217 0.6255 0.6293 0.6331 0.6368 0.6406 0.6443 0.6480 0.6517
0.4 0.6554 0.6591 0.6628 0.6664 0.6700 0.6736 0.6772 0.6808 0.6844 0.6879
0.5 0.6915 0.6950 0.6985 0.7019 0.7054 0.7088 0.7123 0.7157 0.7190 0.7224
0.6 0.7257 0.7291 0.7324 0.7357 0.7389 0.7422 0.7454 0.7486 0.7517 0.7549
0.7 0.7580 0.7611 0.7642 0.7673 0.7704 0.7734 0.7764 0.7794 0.7923 0.7852
0.9 0.7881 0.7910 0.7939 0.7967 0.7995 0.8023 0.8051 0.8078 0.8106 0.8133
0.9 0.8159 0.8186 0.8212 0.8238 0.8264 0.8289 0.8315 0.8340 0.8365 0.8389
1.0 0.8413 0.8438 0.8461 0.8455 0.8508 0.8531 0.8554 0.8577 0.8599 0.8621
1.1 0.8643 0.8665 0.8686 0.8708 0.8729 0.8749 0.8770 0.8790 0.8810 0.8830
1.2 0.8849 0.8869 0.8888 0.8907 0.8925 0.8944 0.8962 0.8980 0.8997 0.9015
1.3 0.9032 0.9046 0.9066 0.9082 0.9099 0.9115 0.9131 0.9147 0.9162 0.9177
1.4 0.9192 0.9207 0.9222 0.9236 0.9251 0.9265 0.9279 0.9292 0.9306 0.9319
1.5 0.9332 0.9345 0.9357 0.9370 0.9382 0.9394 0.9406 0.9418 0.9429 0.9441
1.6 0.9452 0.9463 0.9474 0.9484 0.9495 0.9505 0.6515 0.9525 0.9535 0.9545
1.7 0.9554 0.9564 0.9573 0.9582 0.9591 0.9599 0.9608 0.9616 0.9625 0.9633
1.8 0.9641 0.9649 0.9656 0.9664 0.9671 0.9678 0.9686 0.9693 0.9699 0.9706
1.9 0.9713 0.9719 0.9726 0.9732 0.9738 0.9744 0.9750 0.9756 0.9761 0.9767
2.0 0.9772 0.9798 0.9783 0.9788 0.9793 0.9798 0.9803 0.9808 0.9812 0.9817
2.1 0.9821 0.9826 0.9830 0.9834 0.9838 0.9842 0.9846 0.9850 0.9854 0.9857
2.2 0.9861 0.9864 0.9668 0.9871 0.9875 0.9878 0.9881 0.9884 0.9887 0.9890
2.3 0.9863 0.9896 0.9898 0.9901 0.9904 0.9906 0.9909 0.9911 0.9913 0.9916
2.4 0.9918 0.9920 0.9922 0.9925 0.9927 0.9929 0.9931 0.9932 0.9934 0.9936
2.5 0.9938 0.9940 0.9941 0.9943 0.9945 0.9946 0.9948 0.9949 0.9951 0.9952
2.6 0.9953 0.9955 0.9956 0.9957 0.9959 0.9960 0.9961 0.9962 0.9963 0.9964
2.7 0.9965 0.9966 0.9967 0.9968 0.9969 0.9970 0.9971 0.9972 0.9973 0.9974
2.8 0.9974 0.9975 0.9976 0.9977 0.9977 0.9978 0.9979 0.9979 0.9980 0.9981
2.9 0.9981 0.9982 0.9982 0.9983 0.9984 0.9984 0.9985 0.9985 0.9986 0.9986
3.0 0.9987 0.9987 0.9987 0.9988 0.9988 0.9989 0.9989 0.9989 0.9990 0.9990
3.1 0.9303 0.9306 0.9310 0.9313 0.9316 0.9318 0.9321 0.9324 0.9326 0.9329
3.2 0.9331 0.9334 0.9336 0.9338 0.9340 0.9342 0.9344 0.9346 0.9348 0.9350
3.3 0.9352 0.9353 0.9355 0.9357 0.9358 0.9360 0.9361 0.9362 0.9364 0.9365
3.4 0.9366 0.9368 0.9369 0.9370 0.9371 0.9372 0.9373 0.9374 0.9375 0.9376
3.5 0.9377 0.9378 0.9378 0.9379 0.9380 0.9381 0.9381 0.9382 0.9383 0.9383
3.6 0.9384 0.9385 0.9385 0.9386 0.9386 0.9387 0.9387 0.9388 0.9388 0.9389
3.7 0.9389 0.9390 0.9400 0.9404 0.9408 0.9412 0.9415 0.9418 0.9422 0.9425
3.8 0.9428 0.9431 0.9433 0.9436 0.9438 0.9441 0.9443 0.9446 0.9448 0.9450
3.9 0.9452 0.9454 0.9456 0.9458 0.9459 0.9461 0.9463 0.9464 0.9466 0.9467
NOTE 1 : For example: notation 0.9303, equals 0.99903 (Revue de statistiques Appliquées, Tables
statistiques, CERESTA)

Example of calculation of risk or error of judgment

 Characteristic to be checked: 10 ± 0.05 mm
 CMC of facility : 3.5
 Value measured : 10.04 mm
a) Risk of error of judgement brought to upper limit
10,04 − 10,05
K= = 0,1
0,1
and 4 x K x CMC = 1.4
→ P = 0.9192
→ R = 1 - P = 0.08 i.e. 8 %
This value therefore has an 8 % risk of being greater than 10.05 mm, i.e. not acceptable.
Nota: In the case of a CMC of 4, this risk will be 5 %,

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 17 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 2 Informative

b) Risk of error of judgement brought to lower limit

9,95 − 10,04
K= = 0,9
0,1
and 4 x K x CMC =12.6
→P~1
→R~0
This value therefore has a 0 % risk being less than 9.95 mm, i.e. not acceptable.

2.2.2 Evolution of judgement risk

Iit can be seen that:
 The lower the CMC, the higher the risk of error of judgement,
 The more the measurement value tends towards the specified limit, (K → 0), the more the error
tends towards 50 %,

2.2.3 Characterizing the range of measurement for a given risk

Applying a principle identical to that for paragraph 2.2.1, it is possible to determine the range of
measurements for which the risk of error of judgement is greater than a specified risk.
This range is characterized by two limits which are determined in relation to K, corresponding to the
specified risk.
Thus, for a specified risk Rs, we first calculate the probability Ps from the equation
Ps = 1 - Rs,
When Ps is known, we can determine the result corresponding to the expression 4 x K x CMC, from the
table of fractiles for the reduced normal law given below
Using the result, and knowing the CMC for the facility, it then remains to calculate the relationship K
which characterizes the range of measurement corresponding to the specified risk.

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 18 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 2 Informative

Table 2: table for determination of (4 x K x CMC) as a function of Ps

Ps 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.010 -
0.00 ∞ 3.0902 2.8782 2.7478 2.6521 2.5758 2.5121 2.4573 2.4089 2.3656 2.3263 0.99
0.01 2.3263 2.2904 2.2571 2.2262 2.1973 2.1701 2.1444 2.1201 2.0969 2.0749 2.0537 0.98
0.02 2.0537 2.0335 2.0141 1.9954 1.9774 1.9600 1.9431 1.9268 1.9110 1.8957 1.8808 0.97
0.03 1.8808 1.8663 1.8522 1.8384 1.8250 1.8119 1.7991 1.7866 1.7744 1.7624 1.7507 0.96
0.04 1.7507 1.7392 1.7279 1.7169 1.7060 1.6954 1.6849 1.6747 1.6646 1.6546 1.6449 0.95
0.05 1.6449 1.6352 1.6258 1.6164 1.6072 1.5982 1.5893 1.5805 1.5718 1.5632 1.5548 0.94
0.06 1.5548 1.5464 1.5382 1.5301 1.5220 1.5141 1.5063 1.4985 1.4909 1.4833 1.4758 0.93
0.07 1.4758 1.4684 1.4611 1.4538 1.4466 1.4395 1.4325 1.4255 1.4187 1.4118 1.4051 0.92
0.08 1.4051 1.3984 1.3917 1.3852 1.3787 1.3722 1.3658 1.3595 1.3532 1.3469 1.3408 0.91
0.09 1.3408 1.3346 1.3285 1.3225 1.3165 1.3106 1.3047 1.2988 1.2930 1.2873 1.2816 0.90
0.10 1.2816 1.2759 1.2702 1.2646 1.2591 1.2536 1.2481 1.2426 1.2372 1.2319 1.2265 0.89
0.11 1.2265 1.2212 1.2160 1.2107 1.2055 1.2004 1.1952 1.1901 1.1850 1.1800 1.1750 0.88
0.12 1.1750 1.1700 1.1650 1.1601 1.1552 1.1503 1.1455 1.1407 1.1359 1.1311 1.1264 0.87
0.13 1.1264 1.1217 1.1170 1.1123 1.1077 1.1031 1.0985 1.0939 1.0893 1.0848 1.0803 0.86
0.14 1.0803 1.0758 1.0714 1.0669 1.0625 1.0581 1.0537 1.0494 1.0450 1.0407 1.0364 0.85
0.15 1.0364 1.0322 1.0279 1.0237 1.0194 1.0152 1.0110 1.0069 1.0027 0.9986 0.9945 0.84
0.16 0.9945 0.9904 0.9863 0.9822 0.9782 0.9741 0.9701 0.9661 0.9621 0.9581 0.9542 0.83
0.17 0.9542 0.9502 0.9463 0.9424 0.9385 0.9346 0.9307 0.9269 0.9230 0.9192 0.9154 0.82
0.18 0.9154 0.9116 0.9078 0.9040 0.9002 0.8965 0.8927 0.8890 0.8853 0.8816 0.8779 0.81
0.19 0.8779 0.8742 0.8705 0.8669 0.8633 0.8596 0.8560 0.8524 0.8488 0.8452 0.8416 0.80
0.20 0.8416 0.8381 0.8345 0.8310 0.8274 0.8239 0.8204 0.8169 0.8134 0.8099 0.8064 0.79
0.21 0.8064 0.8030 0.7995 0.7961 0.7926 0.7892 0.7858 0.7824 0.7790 0.7756 0.7722 0.78
0.22 0.7722 0.7688 0.7655 0.7621 0.7588 0.7554 0.7521 0.7488 0.7454. 0.7421 0.7388 0.77
0.23 0.7388 0.7356 0.7323 0.7290 0.7257 0.7225 0.7192 0.7160 0.7128 0.7095 0.7063 0.76
0.24 0.7063 0.7031 0.6999 0.6967 0.6935 0.6903 0.6871 0.6840 0.6808 0.6776 0.6745 0.75
0.25 0.6745 0.6713 0.6682 0.6651 0.6620 0.6588 0.6557 0.6526 0.6495 0.6464 0.6433 0.74
0.26 0.6433 0.6403 0.6372 0.6341 0.6311 0.6280 0.6250 0.6219 0.6189 0.6158 0.6128 0.73
0.27 0.6128 0.6098 0.6068 0.6038 0.6008 0.5978 0.5948 .05918 0.5888 0.5858 0.5828 0.72
0.28 0.5828 0.5799 0.5769 0.5740 0.5710 0.5681 0.5651 0.5622 0.5592 0.5563 0.5534 0.71
0.29 0.5534 0.5505 0.5476 0.5446 0.5417 0.5388 0.5359 0.5330 0.5302 0.5273 0.5244 0.70
0.30 0.5244 0.5215 0.5187 0.5158 0.5129 0.5101 0.5072 0.5044 0.5015 0.4987 0.4959 0.69
0.31 0.4959 0.4930 0.4902 0.4874 0.4845 0.4817 0.4789 0.4761 0.4733 0.4705 0.4677 0.68
0.32 0.4677 0.4649 0.4621 0.4593 0.4565 0.4538 0.4510 0.4482 0.4454 0.4427 0.4399 0.67
0.33 0.4399 0.4372 0.4344 0.4316 0.4289 0.4261 0.4234 0.4207 0.4179 0.4152 0.4125 0.66
0.34 0.4125 0.4097 0.4070 0.4043 0.4016 0.3989 0.3961 0.3934 0.3907 0.3880 0.3853 0.65
0.35 0.3853 0.3826 0.3799 0.3772 0.3745 0.3719 0.3792 0.3665 0.3638 0.3611 0.3585 0.64
0.36 0.3585 0.3558 0.3531 0.3505 0.3478 0.3451 0.3425 0.3398 0.3372 0.3345 0.3319 0.63
0.37 0.3319 0.3292 0.3266 0.3239 0.3213 0.3186 0.3160 0.3134 0.3107 0.3081 0.3055 0.62
0.38 0.3055 0.3029 0.3002 0.2976 0.2950 0.2924 0.2898 0.2871 0.2845 0.2819 0.2793 0.61
0.39 0.2793 0.2767 0.2741 0.2715 0.2689 0.2663 0.2637 0.2611 0.2585 0.2559 0.2533 0.60
0.40 1.2533 0.2508 0.2482 0.2456 0.2430. 0.2404 0.2378 0.2353 0.2327 0.2301 0.2275 0.59
0.41 0.2275 0.2250 0.2224 0.2198 0.2173 0.2147 0.2121 0.2096 0.2070 0.2045 0.2019 0.58
0.42 0.2019 0.1993 0.1968 0.1942 0.1917 0.1891 0.1866 0.1840 0.1815 0.1789 0.1764 0.57
0.43 0.1764 0.1738 0.1713 0.1687 0.1662 0.1637 1.1611 0.1586 0.1560 0.1535 0.1510 0.56
0.44 1.1510 0.1484 0.1459 0.1434 0.1408 0.1383 0.1358 0.1332 0.1307 0.1282 0.1257 0.55
0.45 0.1257 0.1231 0.1206 0.1181 0.1156 0.1130 0.1105 0.1080 0.1055 0.1030 0.1004 054
0.46 0.1004 0.0979 0.0954 0.0929 0.0904 0.0878 0.0853 0.0828 0.0803 0.0778 0.0753 0.53
0.47 0.0753 0.0728 0.0702 0.0677 0.0652 0.0627 0.0602 0.0577 0.0552 0.0527 0.0502 0.52
0.48 0.0502 0.0476 0.0451 0.0426 0.0401 0.0376 0.0351 0.0326 0.0301 0.0276 0.0251 0.51
0.49 0.0251 0.0226 0.0201 0.0175 0.0150 0.0125 0.0100 0.0075 0.0050 0.0025 0.0000 0.50
- 0.010 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.04 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.000 Ps
Revue de Statistiques Appliquées, Tables statistiques, CERESTA,

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 19 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 2 Informative

Example of determination of measurement range

 Checked characteristic : 10 ± 0.05 mm
 CMC of facility : 3.5
 Specified risk : 5 %

Calculation of K
Ps = 1 - Rs = 0.95 (i.e. 95 %)
→ 4 x K x CMC = 1.64
→ K = 0.12
Yi − L s
K= = 0.12 → Yi − L s = 0.012 where IT = 0.1
IT
Thus the limits of the measurement range brought to a low limit and having a risk level greater than
5% are:
9.938 mm and 9.962 mm

And the limits for the measurement range with a risk greater than 5 % brought to the upper limit are:
10.038 mm and 10.062 mm

Graphic representation of range of measurement with risk factor

greater than specified limits by 5 %

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 20 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 3 Informative

Annex 3: Example of CMC calculation

Nominal dimension : 10 Max. : 10.0250 Min. : 9.9750

For reasons of accuracy and if possible, express measurement as errors with respect to the nominal dimension,
and in the smallest unit, as well as the l'IT (TB)
IT : 50 (TB) Used unit: Micrometer
PRELIMINARY STEPS :
REPEATABILITY OF CALIBRATION ON FACILITY
Measurement N° 1 2 3 4 5
Value yej 2 1 2 1 1
Average
ye =
∑ yej = 1.4000
5
Repeatability variance 1 2
Ve =
4
∑ ( y ej - y e) = 0.3000

Uncertainty
Ie = 2 V e = 1.0954

DECISION (1) Ie > IT/20 (2) Facility to be reviewed

IT/20 (2) 2.5000 Ie ≤ IT/20 (2) Acceptable
REPEATABILITY OF MEASUREMT OF A PART ON THE FACILITY
Measurement N° 1 2 3 4 5
Value yj 50 49 48 50 49
Measurement N° 6 7 8 9 10
Value yj 48 50 47 49 50

Average
∑ yj = 49.000
y=
m
1 2
Repeatability variance Vr =
(m - 1)
∑ (y j - y) = 1.1111

Ir = 2 Vr
Uncertainty = 2.1082
m : number of measurement and
5 ≤ m ≤ 10
DECISION (1) Ir > IT/8 (2) Facility to be reviewed
IT/8 (3) IT = TB 6.2500 Ir ≤ IT/8 (2) Acceptable

(1) strike out as appropriate (3) IT/8 for IT (TB) ≥ 16 µm

(2) IT/20 for IT (TB) ≥ 16 µm IT/4 for IT (TB) <16 µm
IT/10 for IT(TB) <16 µm j Measurement index

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 21 / 22

 E41.36.110.R /B Annex 3 Informative

PARTS 1 TO 5 MEASURED ON FACILITY

Measurement N° Part N° 1 Part N° 2 Part N° 3 Part N° 4 Part N° 5
y1J y2J y3J y4J y5J
1 yi1 -10 0 20 -5 2
2 yi2 -11 1 22 -3 3
3 yi3 -9 2 20 -2 4
4 yi4 -8 0 18 -3 2
5 yi5 -10 1 21 -3 5
METROLOGY VALUE : (METROLOGY MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY : Imetro = 2)
xi -13 2 19 -1 2
di1 = yi1 - xi 3 -2 1 -4 0
di2 = yi2 - xi 2 -1 3 -2 1
di3 = yi3 - xi 4 0 1 -1 2
di4 = yi4 - xi 5 -2 -1 -2 0
di5 = yi5 - xi 3 -1 2 -2 3

Average of difference averages: J=

∑ ∑ dij = 0.4800
pm

∑ ∑ (dij - J)2
Difference overall variance: Vg = = 5.2600
pm - 1

Difference overall calibration master

sg = V g = 2.2935
deviation

Repeatability variance on calibration

Ve = 0.3000
master

Repeatability standard deviation on

calibration master se = V e = 0.5477

Measurement uncertainty Ig = J + 2 Vg + Ve = 5.1959

CAPABILITY OF INSPECTION FACILITY : CMC = IT/2 Ig = 4.8115

RESULT (1) i = Measurement N° index

CMC cdc : ≥ 4 j = part N° index
CMC < CMC cdc CMC > CMC cdc p = Number of parts
NON ACCEPTABLE m = Number of measurement
UNACCEPTABLE
(1) Unless otherwise specified: IT ≤ 16 µm when Q ≤ 5 CMC ≥ 2
IT > 16 µm and Q > 5 CMC ≥ 4

© RENAULT 2011 Origin : PEGI - Renault Page : 22 / 22