STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL

RUN TESTS PROCESS CAPABILITY OC CURVE

Run Tests

An additional test for randomness

Even if all

points are within the control limits the process may not be random process

Any sort of pattern in the data would suggest a non-random

SAA

Nonrandom Patterns in Control Charts

Trend

Cycle

SAA

UCL

Bias
LCL
UCL

Mean shift
LCL

UCL

Too much dispersion

LCL
SAA

Counting Runs
Counting Above/Below Median

7
B A A B A B B B A A B

Counting Ups/Down

8
U U D U D U D U U D
SAA

Run Tests Procedures

Ensure that process are in statistical control based on the control charts Compute for the expected run values: E(r)med = 2 + 1 E(r)u/d =
21 3

Make a run tests of products and make measurements of deviations from process specifications or median or mean

Compute for the standard deviation of the run: med= ( 1)/4 U/D= (16 29)/90

Count number of observed runs from the graph, grouping similar consecutive patters as one

Compute for z

SAA

ILLUSTRATION:
Twenty sample means have been taken from a process. The means are shown in the following table. Use median and up/down run tests with z = 2 to determine if assignable causes of variation are present. Assume the median is 11
.
SAA

Given:

N = 20 z=2 Median = 11
Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Mean 10.0 10.4 10.2 11.5 10.8 11.6 11.1 11.2 10.6 10.9 10.7 11.3 10.8 11.8 11.2 11.6 11.2 10.6 10.7 11.9 A/B B B B A B A A A B B B A B A A A A B B A
12 11.5

Mean

11
10.5 10 9.5 0 5 10 15 20 25

Median
Mean

Observed Run

med

= 10

SAA

Ups and Downs

Sample 1 2 3 4 5 Mean 10.0 10.4 10.2 11.5 10.8
D U D U D U D U D U D U D U D D U U D
9.5 11.5 12.0

U/D

Ups/Downs Chart

6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

11.6
11.1 11.2 10.6 10.9 10.7 11.3 10.8 11.8 11.2 11.6 11.2 10.6 10.7 11.9

M e a n

11.0

10.5

10.0

Mean
0 5 10 15 20 25

Sample

Observed Run

U/D

= 17

SAA

Computation of Expected Run (Er)

Er E(r)med = 2 + 1

Or 10

20 + 2

1=

11

E(r)u/d =

21 3

2(20) 1 3

13

17

SAA

Chance Variability Computation

med= ( 1)/4 = (20 1)/4

U/D= (16 29)/90

= (16(20) 29)/90

SAA

Computation
Ztest =

Ztest

Non Randomness is present

SAA

Decision Point
Run Tests Computed Value Zmed ZU/D -0.46 2.22 < > ZDesired Findings 2 2 Random Not Random

SAA

When a Process Exhibits Possible Nonrandom Variation?

Managers should have response plans in place to investigate the cause. If it appears to be a false alarm, resume the process but monitor it for a while to confirm this. If an assignable cause can be found, it needs to be addressed. If it is a good result (e.g., an observation below the lower control limit of a p-chart, a c-chart, or a range chart would indicate unusually good quality). It may be possible to change the process to achieve similar results on an ongoing basis. The more typical case is that there is a problem that needs to be corrected. Operators can be trained to handle simple problems, while teams may be needed to handle more complex problems. Problem solving often requires the use of various tool to find the root cause of the problem. Once the cause has been found, changes can be made to reduce the chance of recurrence
SAA

Common Terms For Variability Of Process

Tolerances or specifications

Range of acceptable values established by engineering design or customer requirements

Process variability

Natural variability in a process

Process capability

Process variability relative to specification

SAA

Capability Analysis
Lower Specification Upper Specification

A. Process variability matches specifications

Lower Specification Upper Specification

B. Process variability Lower Upper well within specifications Specification Specification

C. Process variability SAA exceeds specifications

Lower specification limit

Upper specification limit

(a) Acceptance sampling (Some bad units accepted) (b) Statistical process control (Keep the process in control) (c) Cpk >1 (Design a process that is in control)

Process mean, m

SAA

Actions In Case Of Tightness

redesign the process so that it can achieve the

desired output use an alternative process that can achieve the desired output retain the current process but attempt to eliminate unacceptable output using 100 percent inspection; and, examine the specifications to see whether they are necessary or could be relaxed without adversely affecting customer satisfaction
SAA

Process Capability
The natural variation of a process should be small enough to produce products that meet the standards required A process in statistical control does not necessarily meet the design specifications Process capability is a measure of the relationship between the natural variation of the process and the design SAA specifications

Process Capability Ratio Cp

Upper Specification - Lower Specification Cp = 6s
A capable process must have a Cp of at least 1.0
Does not look at how well the process is centered in the specification range

Often a target value of Cp = 1.33 is used to allow for off-center processes

SAA Six Sigma quality requires a Cp = 2.0

Process Capability Ratio

Insurance claims process
Process mean x = 210.0 minutes Process standard deviation s = .516 minutes Design specification = 210 3 minutes Upper Specification - Lower Specification Cp = 6s

SAA

Process Capability Ratio

Insurance claims process
Process mean x = 210.0 minutes Process standard deviation s = .516 minutes Design specification = 210 3 minutes Upper Specification - Lower Specification Cp = 6s 213 - 207 = = 1.938 6(.516)
SAA

Process Capability Ratio

Insurance claims process
Process mean x = 210.0 minutes Process standard deviation s = .516 minutes Design specification = 210 3 minutes Upper Specification - Lower Specification Cp = 6s 213 - 207 = = 1.938 6(.516)

Process is capable

SAA

ILLUSTRATION

SAA

ILLUSTRATION
Standard Deviation (mm) 0.13 0.08 0.16 Machine Capability (sd x 6) 0.78 0.78 0.48 0.48 0.96 0.96

Cp (c/U-L) 1.03 1.03 1.67 1.67 0.83 0.83

SAA

Bs Cp of 1.67 > 1.33

3 Sigma and 6 Sigma Quality

Lower specification
1350 ppm 1.7 ppm

Upper specification
1350 ppm 1.7 ppm

Process mean +/- 3 Sigma +/- 6 Sigma

SAA

Cpk

SAA

Upper Lower Cpk = minimum of Specification - x , x - Specification Limit Limit 3s 3s

A capable process must have a Cpk of at least 1.0

A capable process is not necessarily in the center of the specification, but it falls within the specification limit at both extremes SAA

New Cutting Machine

New process mean x = .250 inches Process standard deviation s = .0005 inches Upper Specification Limit = .251 inches Lower Specification Limit = .249 inches

SAA

New Cutting Machine

New process mean x = .250 inches Process standard deviation s = .0005 inches Upper Specification Limit = .251 inches Lower Specification Limit = .249 inches
(.251) - .250 Cpk = minimum of , (3).0005

SAA

New Cutting Machine

New process mean x = .250 inches Process standard deviation s = .0005 inches Upper Specification Limit = .251 inches Lower Specification Limit = .249 inches
(.251) - .250 .250 - (.249) Cpk = minimum of , (3).0005 (3).0005 Both calculations result in .001 Cpk = = 0.67 .0015

New machine is NOT capable

SAA

Cpk = negative number Cpk = zero

Cpk = between 0 and 1 Cpk = 1 Cpk > 1
SAA

Limitations of Capability Indexes

SAA

ILLUSTRATION
A process has a mean of 9.20 grams and a standard deviation of .30 gram. The lower specification limit is 7.50 grams and the upper specification limit is 10.50 grams. Compute Cpk

Cpk =

10.509.20 (upper specs.) 3(.30) 9.207.50 = (lower specs.) 3(.30)

SAA

COMPUTATION

Cpk

1.44

SAA

IMPROVING PROCESS CAPABILITY

Simplify
Standardize

Mistake-proof
Upgrade equipment

Automate
SAA

Acceptance Sampling
Form of quality testing used for incoming materials or finished goods
Take samples at random from a lot (shipment) of items Inspect each of the items in the sample Decide whether to reject the whole lot based on the inspection results

Only screens lots; does not drive quality improvement efforts

SAA

Operating Characteristic Curve

Shows how well a sampling plan discriminates between good and bad lots (shipments) Shows the relationship between the probability of accepting a lot and its quality level
SAA

100 75 50 25

Keep whole shipment

P(Accept Whole Shipment)

Return whole shipment

Cut-Off
| | | | | | | |

| 0 | | 0 10 20

30 40

50 60

70 80

90 100
SAA

% Defective in Lot

AQL and LTPD

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)
Poorest level of quality we are willing to accept

Lot Tolerance Percent Defective (LTPD)

Quality level we consider bad Consumer (buyer) does not want to accept lots with more defects than LTPD SAA

Producers and Consumers Risks

Producer's risk ()
Probability of rejecting a good lot Probability of rejecting a lot when the fraction defective is at or above the AQL

Consumer's risk (b)

Probability of accepting a bad lot Probability of accepting a lot when SAA fraction defective is below the LTPD

100 95 75

= 0.05 producers risk for AQL

Probability of Acceptance 50
25 10 b = 0.10 0 | 0

| 1

| 2

| 3

| 4

| 5

| 6

| 7

| 8

Percent defective
SAA Bad lots

Consumers risk for LTPD

AQL Good lots Indifference zone

LTPD

n = 50, c = 1

n = 100, c = 2

SAA

A shipment of 2,000 portable battery units for microcomputers is about to be inspected by a Malaysian importer. The Korean manufacturer and the importer have set up a sampling plan in which the risk is limited to 5% at an acceptable quality level (AQL) of 2% defective, and the risk is set to 10% at Lot Tolerance Percent Defective (LTPD) = 7% defective. We want to construct the OC curve for the plan of n = 120 sample size and an acceptance level of c 3 defectives. Both firms want to know if this plan will satisfy their quality and risk requirements. Use range values of 1 to 8 percent as defectives.

SAA

Given:

N = 2,000 n = 120 p =1...8%

= 5% @ AQL of 2% defective = 10% @ LTPD of 7% c3

Where: n = number of items sampled (called trials) p = probability that an x (defect) will occur on any one trial P(x) = probability of exactly x results in n trials

SAA

Mean of Probability of Selected Values Poisson Acceptance of % Defective =np P(A) 0.01 1.2 0.966 0.02 2.4 0.779 0.03 3.6 0.515 0.04 4.8 0.294 0.05 6.0 0.151 0.06 7.2 0.072 0.07 8.4 0.032 0.08 9.6 0.014

1- at AQL = .221>.05

level at LTPD < .10

New calculation is necessary with larger sample size if the is to be lowered

SAA

1.200 8.4% Defective

AQL = .221

1.000

0.800

0.600

Bad Lots

0.400

Good Lots

0.200

0 2 4 6 8 10

SAA

12

o P f r o A b c a c b e i p l t i a t n y c e

1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40

= 0.22 PR for AQL

B L A O D T S
> 8.4%D

GOOD LOTS 2.4% D

INDIFFERENCE

= .03 CR for LTPD

0.20 0.00
0 2

10

12

Percent Defective

Average Outgoing Quality

1. If a sampling defectives plan replaces all

2. If we know the incoming percent defective for the lot, we can compute the average outgoing quality (AOQ) in percent defective
The maximum AOQ is the highest percent defective or the lowest average quality and is called the average SAA outgoing quality limit (AOQL)

Average Outgoing Quality

AOQ = (Pd)(Pa)(N - n) N

where
Pd = true percent defective of the lot Pa = probability of accepting the lot N = number of items in the lot n = number of items in the sample
SAA

AOQ Illustration 2
Construct the AOQ curve for this situation: N= 500. n = 10. c =1. Let values of p vary from .05 to .40 in steps of .05. The probabilities of acceptance. Pa can be read from the binomial Table

AOQ =
where

(Pa)x p)

p = true percent defective of the lot = .03 Pa = probability of accepting the lot = from binomial table N = number of items in the lot = 500 n = number of items in the sample = 10

Table of Illustration 2
p 0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 pac AOQ 0 (P x Pac) 0.914 0.046 0.736 0.074 0.544 0.082 0.376 0.075 0.244 0.061 0.149 0.045 0.086 0.030 0.046 0.019

SAA

0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06

AOQ

0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
SAA

The deliveries is 92.8%,(100-8.2)% good at 8.2 AOQL.

SAA