Defect codes during result recording valuation

[wernervm]

Hi;

I need more info on field “At Lower Tolerance” (PLMKB-CODEGR9U) as used in inspection plan (Defect codes for rejection)?

I’m familiar with field “General” (PLMKB-CODEGRQUAL) which will automatically assign Defect code for a rejected valuation during results recording.

Anyone with a different approach to than online help?

We have a requirement for system to automatically default 1 of 2 defect codes per inspection characteristic, during rejected valuation, e.g.:

Defect code X1 when result is between “Lower spec. lmt” & “LoPlausibility limit”

Defect code X2 when result is below “LoPlausibility limit”

Can anyone assist with more info on this scenario?

Kind regards

[Ayoub_Habchi · Accepted solution]

Hello Werner,

Here is my idea for this requirement :

Try to create a calculated characteristic which will depend on your initial characteristic.

Calculated characteristic can be attributive with will let you control the defect assignment.

In the calculation of second characteristic you take the plaus. values into consideration.

Hope this is clear enough.

Regards,

Ayoub.

[wernervm · Accepted solution]

Hello Ayoub;

Thanks for answering, and apologies for my late reply.

I'm unfamiliar with "calculated characteristics".

Will it be possible for you to share more info on this?

Kind regards

[Ayoub_Habchi · Accepted solution]

Hello Werner,

There is actually a better solution with only one calculated characteristic.

I will be sharing soon after I arrive some am traveling now.

Regards,

Ayoub.

[Ayoub_Habchi · Accepted solution]

Hello Werner,

As promised, here is my new proposal for your requirement (i have deleted my previous reply)

Here is a summary of what you asked :

A quantitative characteristic has a lower tolerance limit (L) and lower plaus. limit (LP). Whe the actual value is between LP and L the system should create defect X1. If actual result is less than LP then X2 defect should be generated.

Solution with calculated characteristic:

First step is to create your main characteristic (Quantitative with mandatory recording). You don't need to put L and LP there because we will be maintaining them in the task list itself.

Then create a second characteristic (calculated). It is similar to the first one except you will maintain these parameters :

- Calculated flag should be on in control indicators

- Defect recording checked

- Lower tolerance limit as 2 and upper limit tolerance as 4 (you will understand why later in the process)

- Maintain upper limit defect code X1 and lower limit defect code X2

- Use Sample procedure checked.

Once you have both characteristics created, you need to create the formula for the second one.

Since actual value can only be in one of the three intervals at a time :

interval 1 : inferior to LP

interval 2 : between LP and L

interval 3 : Superior to L

We will create 3 formulas each one will have a result as follow:

interval 1 ==> 1 (1 will be lower than 2 (inf limit of char2) which will generate X2 defect)

interval 2 ==> 5 (5 will be superior to 4 (sup limit of char2) which will generate X1 defect)

interval 3 ==> 3 (3 is between 2 and 4 so no defect is created)

These formulas will have the following parameters :

-param 1 : actual measured value of first characteristic

-param 2 : Lower specification limit of first characteristic (L)

-param 3 : Lower plaus. limit for first char. (LP)

param2 and param3 will be maintained in task list call of formulas directly.

Now lets create 3 formulas. Formulas are maintained in table TFKT using SE16.

The system is allowing table maintenance for this table using SE16 as per oss note 0000560672

In this table you have two fields, formula key and formula. Maintain the formulas as show below :

FORM1	IF #1<#2 THEN 1 ELSE 0
FORM2	IF #1<=#3 AND #1>=#2 THEN 5 ELSE 0
FORM3	IF #1>#2 THEN 3 ELSE 0

Now go to task list and assign your two characteristics as follow:

char 1 : your main characteristic

char 2 : your calculated characteristic.

Assign sampling procedures to both. Please note that in sampling procedure for calculated characteristic should have a valuation type "Mean Value with tolerance range".

The system then will ask you to maintain formula for calculated characteristic. Enter the following formula:

TFKT:FORM1(C00010,L)+TFKT:FORM2(C00010,L,LP)

+TFKT:FORM3(C00010,L)

As you can see i used two lines because the field is not enough for entire call.

You can see that i am adding the three intervals results and the result will be depending on where the actual value lies.

Please note also that you need to replace L and LP in the formula as per your need.

C00010 represents the mean value of recorded characteristic. the system is using the following notation :

AABBBB

AA is the code representing the information (in our case C0)

BBBB is the id of the characteristic (in this case 0010)

Save your task list and create inspection lot.

When you enter result recording, you only maintain value for first characteristic then close bloth lines, the system will automatically valuate second one and generate defect code as per your requirement.

PS: I have gone through this proposed solution and i actually tested the scenario and it works perfectly.

Let me know if this is clear for you.

Regards,

Ayoub.

[wernervm · Accepted solution]

Hi Ayoub;

Thanks for your help and detailed response to my issue – highly appreciated!

I’m busy implementing your suggestion in our DEV environment but get error “Recursive call of C00160:FORM1 – Message no. RN009” when entering formula for calculated characteristic. (My main charac is assigned to 0160 in task list).

To be honest, your suggestion is a bit confusing to me at the moment since it’s my first time working with calculated characteristics and table TFKT. For now I just want to simulate a test example before analyzing the complete picture.

Based on your example, I want to create a test where L = 10 and LP = 5

I.e;

• Recorded value above 10 --> No defect, everything ok
• Recorded value between 5 and 10 --> X1
• Recorded value below 5 --> X2

Please check my actions completed:

Main characteristic within task list:

Lower spec. lmt = 10 (required field)

Calculated characteristic within task list:

Lower spec. lmt = 10

LoPlausibility limit = 2

UpPlausibility limit = 4

Formula:

TFKT:FORM1(C00160,10)+TFKT:FORM2(C00160,10,5)

+TFKT:FORM3(C00160,10)

Table TFKT:

FORM1  IF #1<#2 THEN 1 ELSE 0

FORM2  IF #1<=#3 AND #1>=#2 THEN 5 ELSE 0

FORM3  IF #1>#2 THEN 3 ELSE 0

Please assist if possible.

Kind regards

Werner

[Ayoub_Habchi · Accepted solution]

Hello Werner,

Please update the formula as below :

TFKT:FORM1(C00160,5)+TFKT:FORM2(C00160,5,10)

+TFKT:FORM3(C00160,10)

FORM1 should have LP and FORM3 should have L (I made a small mistake in my previous reply where i put L in both, sorry)

In addition, as i suggested in my previous reply, calculated characteristic should have lower and upper limits of 2 and 4 (not lower and upper plausi. limits as you mentioned)

Regarding the formula error, please check also if there is no other line in TFKT referencing FORM1 and only these three lines are there.

Please also check that the main characteristic 0160 is not flagged as calculated. Only second characteristic should be calculated.

Let me know what you found.

Regards,

Ayoub.

[wernervm · Accepted solution]

Hi Ayoub;

Thanks again for your reply.

The Recursive error was solved when I changed from LoPlausibility limit & UpPlausibility limit to Lower spec. lmt (2) & Upper Limit (4).

I’ve also changed the formula in TFKT for FORM2 from:

IF #1>=#3 AND #1<#2 THEN 5 ELSE 0

To

IF #1>=#3 AND #1<#2 THEN 4 ELSE 0

Previously, Interval 2 would always get result of “1” from FORM1 and “5” from FORM2 – resulting in score of “6” during results recording and then caused incorrect Defect code.

Changing FORM2 to “…THEN 4 ELSE 0” solved my problem.

The only disadvantage of this solution is that Defect codes (X1 and X2) is reported against calculated characteristic (calc charac contains a theoretic value of either 1,3 or 5), while main charac contains actual measurement.

Thanks for your detailed explanation / solution.

Kind regards

Werner

[Ayoub_Habchi · Accepted solution]

Hi Werner,

Glad to see that finally it works for you.

Regarding the disadvantage you mentioned, i agree and this is basically if we want to avoid multiple characteristics.

The same solution would be possible to implement with 3 calculated characteristics (all holding the actual value but compared to different limits and having each a separate formula.

Regards,

Ayoub.