Lean Six Sigma Mentor Guide

Basic Variance Reduction Tools  Basic Statistical Tools  Lean Tools

1

Focus

This guide will use the DMAIC roadmap in discussing Lean Six Sigma tools. 14 questions “Managers need to ask their people” will step you through the DMAIC process The emphasis will be on proper use and common mistakes with Lean Six Sigma tools and completing projects SPC XL from Air Academy Associates will be used in the computer generated graphs

2

14 Questions Managers Need to Ask Their People by Air Academy Associates
1. 2. 3. 4.

5.

6. 7.

8.

9. 10.

11.

12. 13. 14.

Control

Which value stream are you supporting and who is the recipient of the value, i.e., who is the customer? Who is the value stream owner and who are the players or team members? How well does the team work together? Within the value stream, which process or processes have the highest priority for improvement? Show me the data that led to this conclusion. How is the process performed? How does the value flow? What activity is value added and what is non-value added? What are the process performance measures, i.e., how ill we gauge if a process is improving? Why did we choose those? How accurate and precise is the measurement system? Show me the data. What are the customer-driven requirements or specifications for all of the performance measures? Are the process performance measures in control and how capable is the process? Show me the data. What are the improvement goals for the value stream or process performance measures? What kinds of waste and cost of poor quality exist in the value stream or process and what is the financial and/or customer impact? Show me the data. What are all the sources of variability in the value stream or process and which of those do we control? How do we control them and what is our method of documenting and maintaining this control? Show me the data. Are any sources of waste or variability supplier-dependant? If so, what are they, who are the suppliers, and how are we working together to eliminate waste and variability? Show me the data. What are the key input variables that affect the average and standard deviation of the measures of performance? How do you know this? Show me the data. What are the relationships between the measures of performance and the key input variables? Do any of the key input variables interact? How do you know for sure? Show me the data. What settings or values for the key input variables will optimize the measures of performance? How do you know for sure? Show me the data. For the optimal settings of the key input variables, what kind of variability still exists in the performance measures? How do you know? Show me the data. Have we implemented a process flow and control system to sustain the gains and continuously improve the process? Show me the data? How much improvement has the value stream or process shown in the past sic months? How much time and/or money have our efforts saved the company? Show me the data.

Improve

Analyze

Measure

Define

3

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). Cause and Effect (CE) Diagram. Process Capability (Cpk) Scatter Plot. Measurement System Analysis (MSA). Run Chart. Histogram. Pareto Process Flow (PF) Diagram.Tools Listed by DMAIC Roadmap  Define:  Input Process Output Diagram (IPO). Control Chart. Hypothesis Test Design of Experiments (DOE) Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)  Measure:     Analyze:  Improve:  Control:  4 .

Common Concerns to Project Completion  Focus is not achieved early. represented or trained  Prioritization is lacking    Following the DMAIC roadmap is the key. there is a much higher likelihood of success Understanding of the proper use and interpolation of the Lean Six Sigma tools is a must A project timeline helps to move the project along to completion 5 .  IPO Diagram not completed or sufficient  COPQ not completely realized  Champion support lacking  Team not well organized. If this is done.

IPO Diagram  This tool is used to diagram a the key components of a process –  Inputs – sources of variation  Process – a description of the process  Outputs – measures of performance  Using this tools will allow all involved to have a common picture of the process 6 .

Outputs should be measuring the process performance to be: Better. Lower Cost !!!!! 7 . Faster.Input Process Output Diagram Inputs Sources of Variability Measures of Performance Outputs Manpower Machines Materials Methods Measurement Mother-nature Process A blending of Inputs to achieve the desired Output Performance Cost Time Inputs and Outputs should be in units of measure.

i. 8 . If this is the case.. one can consider to narrow the process or consider the overall scope to be a “macro” view. See example on next page. “reducing downtime of pumps” Instead. Later the process can be narrowed by making smaller “input” IPOs cascading into the larger.e. macro version. “Pump operation” might be a better name for the process  Often the process listed is too large in scope.How to Construct an IPO? First Step: “P”  “P” Label the process box  Often this is done in a subjective statement.

Input – Process – Output Diagram Gross Production (MBOEPD) Avails (MBOPD) Oil (MBOPD) Gas (MBOEGPD) Process Oil and Gas Production CPI Corporate Level Lifting Cost ($/bbl) Cash Flow and Net Earnings ($MM/mo) Fuel/Own Use (MBO) Oil Price ($/Bbl) ROCE (%) Economic Capital Expenditure ($MM/mo) OEB ($MM/mo) Depreciation ($MM/mo) Inventory ($MM) Reserves Replacement (%) SH&E Recordable Incidents (# / MM) PMVA (# / MM km) Spills (# / MM bbl) Note: This is an overall. macro view. many of the input factors could be incorporated in their own IPO diagram feeding into the overall IPO shown here 9 .

How to Construct an IPO? Second Step: “O”  “O”. Lower Cost as well as Safely and Environmentally Sound All outputs should list the units of measurement 10 . These are the measures of performance often referred to as:    KPI: Key Performance Indicators CTC: Critical to Customer CTQ: Critical to Quality   These measures should be used to track the process as Better. Faster. list the outputs to the process.

They should be captured on a process scorecard as well 11 . Use goals for the performance measures as arrows on the far right side. A better performance indicator might be % rejects. An up arrow would indicate you want that metric to increase. Measures of quality should be “normalized” if possible. All outputs should be agreed upon by the process improvement team and management support. Instead of # of rejects. help to assess accountability and responsibility. This is important in the area of opportunity changes – if production increases. Example: Production rate (units/day) 1200 Write simply: Production rate (units/day) and off to the right put an up arrow indicating you want that metric to increase. Example: “Quality” does not explain HOW this will be measured. % of rejects normalizes the data. a determination of improvements can be seen % reject depicted data. Stay away from writing these goals on the output line. They should be aligned with key business strategies.Common Concerns in Listing “Outputs”     Units of measure not listed. drive behavior.

morale 12 . Mother Nature. Materials. These are referred to as sources of variation. list the inputs variables of the process. or in conjunction with the 6 M’s. Components of the main Inputs can be added. Machines   Known input categories can used instead of.e.. Measurement. the 6 M’s can be used to form categories:  Manpower. i. Manpower could have branches such as skill. As a memory jogging tool. training. Methods.How to Construct an IPO? Third Step: “I”   “I”.

i.e..  13 . Lesser inputs can be listed on the Cause and Effect Diagram  Try not to be subjective in listing the inputs. merely state “skill level”.Common Concerns in Listing “Inputs” All major inputs to the process should be listed. inadequate skill level.

Some refer to this as SIPOC as shown below Supplier Input Process Output Customer 14 .Cascading IPO  Some process are inputs to a downstream process.

upstream processes will need to be addressed to Improve the final listed process as injecting clean water 15 .IPO Diagram Water Flooding Process Fluid Properties Water Oil Interface Chemical Treatment Recycle Process Produce Oil Collect Fluid Sludge Oil Produce Water Skimmed Oil/Water Chemical Treatment Skimmer Setting Gas Blanket Remove Oil Oil “Free” Water Skimmed Solid/Water Chemical Treating Back Washing Gas Blanket Remove Solid Solid & Oil “Free” Water Clean Water to Wells Maintain Pressure Often one process is the Inlet to another! Chemical Treating Store Water Gas Blanket Inject Clean Water If the project desire is producing clean water for injection.

Poor tech. Not understand procedure Bypass Authority approver Bad attitude Specific goods preference Vendor Eval. Procedures not clearly define Term of Payment Warning letter to supplier Detail sanction for supplier Custom problems Qualified Vendor No stock Partial Delivery (Dpm) Personnel Personnel Procedures Administration Process Cycletime (Day/Req) Material Availability Delivery Process Late time (Day/Req) Procedures User change spec. Vendor qualification Late bid evalaluation Improper PO classification Uncommon goods req. No good communication Late request for quotation Lake of manpower Higher approver reluctant to implement END User No status report Quality Unattractive procedures No standard bid package for services No standard lead time Incomplete flowchart Inspection Procedures Tender Commeettee Approver Unclear Role & Respons.Complex IPO Example Poor IT System Duplication or repetition AI Darajat & Cogen Procurement Process IPO System System Quality (Dpm) Lack of personnel to control doc. No standard lead time Field Proc. process Urgent need / Emergency Lower price Multi place procurement No back up from principal Improper delivery schedule End user Poor handling Unrealistic offer Vendor not profesional Vendor Qualification 16 . eval. Unclear spec.

answering what key inputs effect the performance measures. The charts can be constructed by data in tabulated or raw form This tool can be used to determine root cause by forming multiple Pareto charts on various failure mechanisms – see examples. 17 . Using this tool will help to prioritize what we are to improve in the process.Pareto Charts     Used to separate the vital few from the trivial many. Pareto charts should be constructed on both financial and frequency basis.

567 $24.432 $12.643 Seals Gaskets Electrical Lube Oil Reasons for Pump Failures Seals Gaskets Seals Electrical Seals Lube Oil Seals Electrical Seals Lube Oil Gaskets Seals Gaskets Seals Electrical Lube Oil Seals Electrical Seals Seals Electrical Electrical Seals Raw Form: Lube Oil Lube Oil Electrical Seals Seals Seals Lube Oil Seals Electrical Electrical 18 .975 $37.Data Examples Tabulated form: Reasons for Pump Failures Frequency 45 33 23 12 Cost $34.

Pareto by Cost and Frequency Pareto Chart Reason for Pump Failure Cost: Cost of Failure 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Electrical Seals Failure Type Gaskets Lube Oil Frequency: # Observations Pareto Chart Reasons for Pump Failures 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Seals Gaskets Failure Type Electrical Lube Oil 19 .

Pareto Charts Used to Determine Root Cause Failure Reasons: 50 45 40 35 Pareto Chart Reasons for Pump Failures # Observations 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Seals Gaskets Failure Type Electrical Lube Oil What Causes Main Failure?: # Observations Pareto Chart Reasons for Seal Failures 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Bad Installation Material Failure Reason Operation 20 .

Root Cause One more Pareto shows root cause: Pareto Chart Reasons for Installation Failure 25 20 # Observations 15 10 5 0 Not aligned correctly Not tight enough Failure Reason No oil Work should be done here to effect process improvement 21 .

Common Pareto Concerns      By constructing Pareto charts by both frequency and cost. sometimes the easiest to affect might be the one to improve. one can make the best decision on what to work on first – not necessarily the highest frequency failure. reliability of the data should be of focus. the user should reduce the number of categories on the Pareto chart capturing the very small categories in an “other” category as the last column of data. measures should be put in place to capture data in the future. might be the most costly one Not always should a team work on the highest failure reason. In capturing the data. At that point. If many categories of failure types exist. Team might not have enough data to make Pareto charts. Have pull down menus for people to choose from a list of failure types and then train them on how to distinguish failure types as well. Some have used Access and other data bases to capture this data. 22 .

however this tool is difficult to construct Basic FMEA is easy to construct but does not give a numeric value. This basic tool can point to root cause if performed correctly – see next slide 23 .Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)    Used to help prioritize where to make process improvements Detailed FMEA generates numerical data to point to problematic areas.

• Perform the 5 Whys to help determine root cause for these problems. 24 . etc. • Clarify the list. They can place one of their votes for each item they select (weighing votes should not be used). • This information is used to prioritize where to work first to improve a process. • As a general rule of thumb. and to help identify the most important noise variables on a cause and effect diagram. • Ask the group to combine answers if possible. • Every team member should vote for the most important based on a preset criteria such as frequency of occurrence. data collection items needed. Continue to ask ask “why” does this happen until you can go no further. circle the top 3-5 items. that answer is typically the root cause. ask the author of the answer to clarify further.Basic FMEA – Texas Style Texas Style FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis): This is a short cut version to help determine a prioritized list of problem areas within a process. • Ask all involved the question “What can cause this process to go wrong/ fail/or other?”. • Brainstorm a list of answers to the above question. cost. A good method to determine the number of votes everyone receives is to add the total number of items on the list. Refrain from commenting on the answers from the group! Just document comments on a flip chart. Steps Involved: • Form a team of people closely associated with the process. then divide that number by 3 (N/3 technique). etc. ask if anyone needs more information to understand the answers listed. If so.

Why are the locations getting dirty in the first place? Because the operators cannot keep the stuffing boxes from leaking. Why can’t the operators keep the stuffing boxes from leaking? Because the packing seals are failing too frequently. Why is the polish rod bend? Because the transportation trailer is too short and the polish rods are not properly supported.5 Whys Example CPI EXAMPLE: Finding Root Cause Using the 5 Whys Duri Well Location Clean-Up Project 1. Why is the polish rod wearing out the seals? Because the polish rod is bend. 2. <= Root Cause 25 . 5. 4. 3. Why are the packing seals failing? Because the polish rod is wearing out the seals prematurely.

45 6 9 go see go see 2 2 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 Well Down Motor Failure Well Down 5 2 broken power outage 2 4 go see go see 3 1 30 go see 8 go see PM 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 Pump Stuck Pump Failure No Production 5 3 3 scale corrosion sanded 2 2 4 pres. Risk can be reduced by lowering one or all of these factors. FMEA. These charts can be generated in SPC XL: Quality Tools. test pres. test pres. test 4 4 4 40 test 24 test 48 test PM PM PM 5 3 3 1 1 1 4 4 4 20 12 12 This risk analysis tool can be used to allocate resources to address problem areas. 26 . Occurrence. FMEA looks at the Severity. Product or Process S E V O C C D E T R P N P S P O P D p r p n Failure Mode Failure Effects Causes Controls Actions Plans Stuffing Box Leaking Belts Failure Oil Spill 3 3 3 3 mis-aligned packing bad thrown broken 4 5 2 3 align go see go see go see 4 3 1 1 48 meas. and likelihood and problem will go undetected.Standard FMEA Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA): A procedure used to identify and assess risks associated with Product or process failure modes.

Occurrence and Avoiding Detection. Work on improving those failure reasons Of the highest priority failure reasons. control with Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Brainstorm list of failure reasons with people how have process knowledge. Determine priority based on frequency of failure and cost impact Perform 5 Whys to point to root cause of failure. you need not improve every category: Severity.How to Use the FMEA Data  Standard form:    Look at the Risk Priority Number (RPN) column for high numbers. Work to improve high priority areas 27  Basic Form – Texas Style     . typically only one area will require improvement to reduce the RPN Make a plan to reduce RPN.

Lean symbols help to distinguish between value added and non-value added steps.Process Flow Diagram Use to see HOW your process is performed  Traditional symbols as well as Lean symbols can be used.  28 .

Make changes to the process flow if needed To make the process flow “Lean”. mark the steps as to the type of step – see next page 29 .How to construct a Process Flow        Form a cross-functional team of people with process knowledge Decide the start and stop of the process Agree upon the detail of process steps – micro vs. macro Use Post its and have team members list steps Place steps in proper order Go look at the process to confirm accuracy.

Lean Process Flow LOGICAL PROCESS MAP Line #5 Storage (wait) Transport / Delivery Operation Inspection Delay (wait) Transport Storage Transport Operation Operation Delay Transport Operation Transport Operation Operation Operation Operation Operation Transport Operation Transport Operation 1 2 3 4 5 Push to turntable 6 Delay on turn table 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Pallet to Storage at Transport to Remove Transport to cleaner Cleaner Transport to fill #1 Fill #1 Fill # 2 Fill # 3 Fill Co2 Valve placement Transport to crimper Crimping Transport to gas room Gasing the cans stagng area stagng area turntable area strappng Transport Inspection Transport Operation Transport Operation Operation Operation Operation Transport Operation Inspection Transport Operation Transport Operation Transport Operation 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Transport to weighing Check weigher Transport to turntable Turntable Transport to Twister to twister lay cans down Waterbath Twister to upright cans Turntable Transport to actuator Actuator Inspect actuator Transport to Put cap on Transport to Cleans cans Transport to capping cleaner packing Packing into box Operation Operation Transport Operation 41 42 43 44 Seal box Code box Transport to Put box on pallet pallet 30 .

KKP2 to BPPKA/MIGAS cc PA JKT End Update Report to CSHE. Monthly Oil Spill & Prel. HES CPI / EPT JKT Spill Discovered Investigate No Estimate Volume > 15BBLS Yes Follow Critical Incident Report No To Major River Malaca Straits Yes 2 hrs Report to Corp. cc SHE DRI every 3 days 3 days Submit F 059 (Approved by TM Prod. TM HES DRI) to C HES 5 days Submit F 059 to TM Prod.3 (Incl. HES & HES Duri by phone Report to CPI EPT by phone Report to MIGAS/BPPKA by phone End Submit written report to CSHE. & HES DRI MNGR > 5 BBL VP > 100 BBL File & update Database Update report to EPT JKT Update report to BPPKA/MIGAS End Keep Original File Keep copy file & update Database Review Finalize & send KKP . KKP2 to CPI/EPT cc PA SMTR 48 hrs Fax. cc SHE DRI 24 hrs Prepare KKP 2 Review Finalize Fax. Report to EPT JKT Prepare KKP 3 Route Report to BPPKA/MIGAS End 31 .Traditional Process Flow with Responsibility Columns OIL SPILL REPORT PROCESS FIELD AREA OWNER HES DURI CORP.

change where needed Is there enough detail? If not. add steps or detail to the steps listed Do all on the team agree with the process flow? Does it match the actual process? Make changes where needed.What to do with the Process Flow Diagram      Note non-value added steps and remove as many as possible Look for bottlenecks and problem areas – mark them appropriately Are process steps out of sync. 32 .

Removal of Non-Value Added Steps   Value added steps are those that the customer sees as adding value to the product. Rejects/Defects. Inventory. Overproduction. A good way to determine value added: “Would the customer pay for this step?” Non-value added steps usually fall into these categories:  Motion. Over-processing. Waiting   Remove as many non-value added steps as possible in the process Process flow charting points to non-value added steps 33 . Transportation.

Set in Order.Common Lean Tools to Reduce Non-Value Added Steps  5S  Sort. Standardize and Sustain  Basic Housekeeping Tool  Can reduce clutter and time looking for things  After 5S in completed. Shine. regular audits are needed to assure compliance  A reward system is beneficial to sustain gains  Often. extra tool sets and other expenses might be needed to achieve success – these items should have a cost benefit analysis done to justify purchase  Best practices should be shared 34 .

 Coloring tools to indicate size and shape might help to reduce mistakes in using the wrong items.  Inventory areas can be improved with Visual Controls 35 . etc. could be used.Common Lean Tools to Reduce Non-Value Added Steps. Marking of danger.. Continued  Visual Controls  Working along with 5S will help to improve communication in the workplace and reduce time spent looking for things  Safety issues can also be addressed with Visual Controls. caution. fire equipment.

Branches of the variables can also be added The head of the fish should be the performance variable(s). This would assure capturing most of the sources of variability in the process Variables should be listed as C for constants. These graphs can easily be constructed in the SPC XL software by first filling in the PF/CE/CNX/SOP template (listed under Problem ID Tools).Cause and Effect Diagram         Commonly called a Fishbone diagram Used to capture the sources of variation in the process Should be constructed in a cross-functional team setting Should have at least 20-25 bones on the “fish”. N for noise and X for experimental. 36 . use the SPC XL software to construct the diagram (listed under Problem ID Tools). Then.

create PF/CE/CNX/SOP diagram – see next page 37 . Fill in the template. PF/CE/CNX/SOP Template Here is the blank template CNX Template C N X Measurement Variable 1 Variable 2 Variable 3 Variable 4 Variable 5 Variable 6 Variable 7 Variable 8 Variable 9 Variable 10 Variable 11 Variable 12 C N X Method C N X Machine C N X Manpower C N X Materials C N X Environment You can change the category names if you want. then choose Problem ID Tools.SPC XL Cause and Effect   Located under Problem ID Tools.

SPC XL Cause and Effect Continued   The example shows no labels on the bones since the template was empty. After your graph is constructed you need to fill in the output performance metric Measurement Method Machine Output Manpower Materials Environment 38 .

when economically possible through the use of SOPs M an po we r su re eth od s ate ria ls s ne hi Na re tu Performance Measure (Goal: Better. Lower Cost) 39 . Faster. step 2 and so on M ac m en t ea M M Note Variables to be: C = Constant N = Noise X = Experimental Goal = Change noise variables to constant.Cause and Effect Example Cause and Effect Diagram M r he ot M Bones on the fish could use the 6 M’s or other categories such as step 1.

PU3 Literature that identified parts (X) PM/PdM Program (X) : . Safety Training (X) PM/PdM Training (X) MACHINE Equipment Condition (N) MOTHER NATURE Lightning. Safety Understanding (N) Commitment & Ownership (N) Elect. .Dirt Accumulation. MP2 Optimization & Development (X) Original specifications & Drawing Ensure Compatibility (X) MP2 Optimization & Development (X) Immediate Shipment from Manufacturing Locations (X) Potential Failure Parameter (X) Stock Available from Local Distributors & National Warehouse (X) METHOD MATERIAL MEASUREMENT Areas are circled that indicate where the work will focus. arrows are used To indicate what the team wanted that metric to do.Eliminating the defect (X)  (C) . that identify the potential problem (X) PPE (X) Equip. Rain.Asset data & condition (X).Dust.Cause and Effect Example MAN POWER # of Technicians & Helpers (C) Technicians Skills & Experience (N) Elect.System that alert the potential problems (X). & Animal (N) PM/PdM Tools (X) Equip. . that reduce/prevent the unnecessary downtime (X) Environment (N) .Schedule (X)  (C) .Manufacturer recommendation (X) . .Presence of Moisture. 40 .

it will surface later. for all variables that are. root cause analysis to determine what variables affect the performance measures should be performed. Some mark N to C for variables they plan to make C through the use of SOPs. Remove subjectivity of the variables. 41 . do not write poor condition. The choice is the team’s – but it should be understood and constantly done. at the time of the graph construction. Not one person can know all the variables in the process Decide how the team is to label the variables. the team should mark the CE diagram to indicate the variables they plan to improve. Not all noise variables should be controlled.e. then a cause and effect diagram should be constructed for each. Some IPO diagrams list several performance or outputs.Cause and Effect Concerns        These should be constructed in a team setting. simply write “condition” When brainstorming the list of variables. constant. just get it on the chart. then it might have to have it’s own CE diagram After the CE diagram is completed. do not critique the list. If a variable on the CE diagram has many variables associated with it. i. Some list C for all variables they WANT to hold constant. constant.. If the variable IS important. If the variables for each of the outputs are different. Some choose to mark C. Then.

Histogram     This graph is used to see the distribution of the data and key statistically information such as mean and standard deviation. 42 . many of the common distributions will be shown and conclusions one can make from them. From this information. one should question the reliability of the data used. Using the next slides. See the section on measurement error and MSA. one can gather much insight as to the performance of the process Before constructing a Histogram.

917 3.183 5.8381 KS Test p-value = .067 2.0627 50 Histogram of Average of Four Dice Rolled 40 # Observations 30 20 10 0 1.617 4.2 to 3.467 <= to <= to <= <= to <= to <= <= to <= to <= <= to <= to <= <= to <= to <= 1.783 2.917 3.617 4.483 3.783 2.767 4.333 4.767 4.5 to 1.5112 Std Dev = 0.067 2. 43 .633 2.35 2.2 3.75 Average of 4 Dice Rolled This is an example of a normal distribution plotting the average of four dice rolled. With a normal distribution.333 4.Histogram – Normal Distribution Normal Distribution Mean = 3.35 to 2. one can use the 68/95/99 rule to assess response probability.467 5.183 5.483 3.9 5.633 2.9 to 5.05 4. using the mean and standard deviation.05 to 4.

6 45.9 307.9 176.9 307.8 438. 44 .3 132.3 132.6 89.5 351.6 220.9 176.1 394. To run a Cpk from this data.88 Std Dev = 96.2 263. With an exponential distribution.6 220.0012 Histogram Oil Production on Wells with Stuffing Box Failures in Duri 60 50 # Observations 40 30 20 10 0 2. to <= 45.1 394.Histogram – Exponential Distribution Normal Distribution Mean = 110.5 351. one might want to use the more conservative number of the median instead of the average to access the COPQ. you could transform the data by taking the log of the data or simply place the specifications on this chart and physically count the product not in spec.4 BOPD 569.8 to <= to <= to <= to <= to <= to <= to <= to <= to <= 89.4 to <= 613.2 263.803 KS Test p-value = .

Each of these classes of data has an equal chance of occurring in this process.0 3.Histogram – Uniform Distribution Normal Distribution Mean = 3.6972 KS Test p-value = .0000 90 Histogram of One Die Rolled 80 70 60 # Observations 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.0 to <= 4. 45 .0 Die Number 4.0 1.0 to <= 6.0 to <= 2.0 5.0 to <= 3.0 to <= 1.0 to <= 5.5425 Std Dev = 1.0 2.0 This is an example of a uniform distribution.

Histogram – Bimodal Distribution

This data set on water densities indicates a bimodal distribution. Typically, bimodal indicates two somethings are going on. In this case further investigation points to old and new data. The process Is changing, so old data will have a different distribution than the new data. Knowing this, the team increased sampling to have all new data to make their process decisions based on.
46

Histogram – Parabolic Example
Normal Distribution Mean = 3.1284 Std Dev = 1.7904 KS Test p-value = .0000 50

Histogram of Survey Results on a Scale of 1-5

40

# Observations

30

20

10

0 0.0 to <= 1.0 1.0 to <= 2.0 2.0 to <= 3.0 3.0 to <= 4.0 4.0 to <= 5.0

Survey Response Number

This is an example of a Parabolic Distribution. On controversial topics, survey results often have this type of result. This indicates people have an opinion on one side or the other, very few people are in the middle.
47

Histogram Concerns
 

 

There should be enough data to show how the process is performing. A minimum of 25 data points is adequate. A Histogram should be run on all data sets before statements are made about the process. Reliability of the data should always be in question. If the distribution is not normal, a Cpk analysis will not be reliable to determine accurate dpm and other quality measures A histogram looks at all the data without regard to time. A run chart is needed to look at trends over time. For the most part, accept the software defaults when constructing a chart. Changing the settings, might make the chart misleading.

48

 Very good tool to motivate teams in making process improvements and sustain results  These graphs can be enhanced to show many aspects of process improvements and goals  49 .Run Charts Used to track data over time  Good tool to see how performance variables are responding over time.

See next slide. stretch goals. Many items can be added to this simple chart to help to motivate team members and show people what the process is doing. 50 . and much more information. shot number 21.Basic Run Chart Example #1 Run Chart of Duri Sponsor Statapult Data 170 150 130 Distance in Inches 110 90 70 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Shot Number This example shows Statapult data before and after PF/CE/CNX/SOPs. One can clearly see where the process improved.

80% Y Axis 0. The lines and arrows were drawn in.20% 1.40% Average Scrap = 0.00% 0.40% 1. The red line is the current process mean and the green is the stretch goal.Mar 2003 1.Basic Run Chart Example #2 Run Chart Aerosol Services Company Daily Scrap %. The arrow in the upper right corner shows the direction we want the graph to do.5% 0.60% 0. This is a great graph to post in the operations area of a plant to give all a picture of how the process is performing. Jan .799% Stretch Goal = 0.00% 1/ 2/ 20 03 1/ 9/ 20 03 2/ 6/ 20 03 1/ 16 /2 00 3 1/ 23 /2 00 3 1/ 30 /2 00 3 2/ 20 /2 00 3 3/ 6/ 20 03 3/ 13 /2 00 3 3/ 20 /2 00 3 X Axis This example shows the process over time in tracking scrap %. 2/ 27 /2 00 3 2/ 13 /2 00 3 3/ 27 /2 00 3 51 .20% 0.

220 20000 Reduce FDA # of Jobs (done prior to Six Sigma effort) Mean = $ 34.464 Cost Saving /job = $5. 52 .464 Significant Shift in Mean After Six-Sigma 10000 0 Ja n_ 98 M ar _9 8 O ct _9 8 Ja n_ 99 M ar _9 9 M ay _9 9 Ju l_ 99 Se p_ 99 N ov _9 9 Ja n_ 00 M ar _0 0 M ay _0 0 Ju l_ 00 Se p_ 00 N ov _0 0 Ja n_ 01 M ar _0 1 M ay _0 1 Ju l_ 01 Se p_ 01 N ov _0 1 Ja n_ 02 M ar _0 2 Month Information has been added to this chart. a person can use the software drawing tools to add.852 Total jobs in Period III = 167 Total Cost Saving in Period III After Six Sigma Efforts = $ 977. 2) what was done to the Process. 4) economic results.Run Chart With Added Information Example Run Chart Cost/Job Duri Acid Job 90000 Time Period I 80000 Time Period II Average Cost/jobTime Period II = $ 34.316 Average Cost/job Time Period III = $ 28.284 Time Period III Six Sigma Efforts Begin 70000 60000 Cost/Job $ 50000 40000 30000 Mean = $ 50. From this. Constructing a Run chart will only produce a simple graph of the data. etc. 3) performance goals.316 Mean = $ 28. 1) means Of the process before and after process changes. As in the previous slide.

Placing the “after” line should be at the time SOPs and other action items are in place. before and after Six Sigma is put on the graph by means of a drawn in vertical line. 53 . Avoid using bar graphs as they fill in the area where text can be written detailing improvements. The performance measures should be captured as soon as possible.Run Chart Concerns       Baseline data is not always available. Draw in a trend arrow in the upper right corner so all involved in the process know the direction the graph SHOULD go. This will help sustain gains. Often. Discussion with the process Champion could be best in handling this data. Continue to use the run chart after the project is completed. In short. take a conservative approach to assessing improvements and financial gains. What should be done with outliers as they will shift the means before and after improvements. These graphs should be easy to read.

customer specifications Assure the data is reliable – account for measurement error. operational needs. see MSA Confirm the specifications with the customer. etc. Ask for foundation for the specifications such as economics. If the distribution is not normal. Determine the distribution of the data to be normal by constructing a histogram.Process Capability Chart (Cpk)     This tool is used to track the performance metrics of the process vs. the measures of quality derived from the Cpk graph will not be accurate 54 .

27 Class Then.7 22.31 to <= 19.78 <= 29.4386 Cp = .6 18.07 to 20.8 to <= 24.3 19 19.752 Std Dev = 2.7 28.3159 Sigma Capability = 1.3 35 35.7 55 .82 to 19.29 <= 26.3 23 23.05 <= 25.7 30.03 <= 30.5 LSL = 21.6 20.5 Sigma Level = 1.31 <= 21.6 14.07 <= 20.56 21.3 31 31.Cpk Chart Example Run a Histogram first to confirm a normal distribution Normal Distribution Mean = 24.7 32.7 24.4711 KS Test p-value = .8 24.4721 DPM = 158.5923 30 Histogram 25 20 # Observations 15 10 5 0 17. construct a Cpk chart imputing the customer specifications Mean = 24.7 34.6 16.3 17 17.3 33 33.4711 USL = 28.759 N = 100 Cpk Analysis In spec Out spec left Out spec right LSL USL 13.3 21 21.752 StdDev = 2.78 to 29.56 to 22.03 to <= 22.54 to 27.3 25 25.3 29 29.4164 Cpk = .3 15 15.3 27 27.05 to 25.29 to 26.54 <= 27.7 26.

Sigma level. Sigma capability.Measures of Quality  The Cpk chart will generate these measures of quality:  Cp. Dpm  Cp and Sigma Capability will not be generated with a one sided specification  Other information regarding the process will be shown: mean and standard deviation 56 . Cpk.

 57 .What Happens if the Process Distribution is Not Normal? If the distribution is exponential. impose the specification on the graph and count the percent data outside the specs. The transformed data can be used for a Cpk chart with a newly scaled specification  The user can take the histogram. the data could be transformed by taking the log of the data.

They might be in a position to relax the specifications Reduce the variation in the process. the process is very good and might not need improvement If the Cp and the Cpk are not the same. Ask the customer to reconsider the specifications. This is typically easier to do that reducing process variance. Centering the process performance between the specs involves adjusting the mean of the process. This will get the team a quick win. This is done by PF/CE/CNX/SOPs. 58 . the process is not centered.Interpret Cpk Results of Normally Distributed Data     If the Cpk is 2 or more.

Cpk Concerns    Do not use x bar data for this tool. Stability can be achieved by PF/CE/CNX/SOPs An adequate amount of data is needed to assess accurate capability 59 . Stability can be assessed with control charts. us the raw data used to calculate the x bars. Using x bars will reduce the standard deviation of the distribution and might fausely indicate a capable process. Instead. Work to make the process stable before assessing capability.

07 5.31 5.98 4.33 5.05 5.02 5.16 5.21 5.28 5.7383 DPM = 365. Reduce the process variance – PF/CE/CNX/SOPs 5.43 5.25 LSL = 5 Sigma Level = .19 5.25 5.46 Steps to improve the process: 1.42 5.4 5. A large DPM should alarm the process team In spec Out spec left Out spec right LSL USL 4.1150 Cp = .2305 StdDev = 0.1 5.Cpk Example for Process Improvements Mean = 5.24 5.01 5.22 5.36 5.39 5.04 5.3449 Sigma Capability = 2.27 5. Ask the customer if they can relax the specifications 3.37 5.11 5.17 5. Center the process 2.08 5.3 5.45 5.48 60 .114 N = 149 Cpk Analysis Cp and Cpk not equal indicating the process is not centered.99 5.14 5.2150 Cpk = .34 5.13 5.056434 USL = 5.

Cpk Improvements by Centering the Process Mean = 5.99 5. 5.31 5.04 5.114 to 37.39 5.45 5.17 5.6761 Cp = .01 5.4 5. Dpm were reduced from 365.27 5.21 5.05 5.14 5.11 Sigma Level = 2.11 5.98 4.3 5.16 5.0821 Cpk = .612.07 5.36 5.46 By centering the process.612 N = 149 Cpk Analysis Cp and Cpk is similar indicating a centered process In spec Out spec left Out spec right LSL USL 4.13 5.34 5.25 5.43 5.2305 StdDev = 0.48 61 .19 5. Further improvement could be achieved through variance reduction.6940 DPM = 37.28 5.24 5.02 5.056434 USL = 5.0282 Sigma Capability = 2.08 5.1 5.37 5.22 5.42 5.33 5.345 LSL = 5.

one must ask if that data is reliable.Measurement System Analysis An MSA is used to determine the reliability of the performance data.  62 . Measurement error should be 10% or less  Since many process decisions are based on performance data.

MSA Planning       What are the performance metrics and how are they measured? In an MSA. SOPs and measurement materials should be constant. 70% of the process variance should be represented in the part measured A general rule of thumb. To conduct an MSA looking for differences in operators. measure at least 10 parts twice to meet resolution requirements Assure the parts are marked blindly so the operators are not aware of the part they are measuring 63 . the parts measured. both repeatability and reproducibility are determined. only the operators change.

64 . A first stage. In the example on the next page. there is a huge spread in the data.Set up an MSA  First. there are three processes going on with this data. Upon further investigation. second stage and third stage of treatment. look at a histogram of the performance metrics.

8 9 11 to < 6. the total variance compared to the measurement error might be skewed on the low side. 1 22 to 1 <= .8 = 2.3 = 8 1 t 96 o < .8 = 6 5 to .4 12 7. 7 Class 65 . you can see if the measurement is reliable in each range of data. three separate MSAs should be conducted.1 23 6.6 = 1.5 = 0. 9 14 3. You should have samples representing 70% of the process variance for each of the three data sets to conduce each MSA.8 < 81 .MSA Set Up Continued Normal Distribution Mean = 117. = 4. to 2 < 65 .73 Std Dev = 64. If all the data were put into one large MSA. 5 17 19 to < 4. 4 11 to 2 <= . 5 15 to < = 9.9 KS Test p-value = . by doing this. 19 1 20 to < 0. 1 17 to < 59 . To determine the Measurement error.0001 Histogram 30 25 # Observations 20 15 10 5 0 There are three distributions to this data. 20 6 22 to < 5.3 = .1 = 5. 34 .2 = 5 0.7 to < 50 .

Conduct an MSA  Develop the MSA template with SPC XL MSA Data Template Date: Part Type: USL: LSL: Operator 1 Reference Rep 1 Rep 2 Operator 2 Rep 1 Rep 2 Operator 3 Rep 1 Rep 2 4/22/2003 For Attribute data enter A for Accept and R for Reject Description: Part # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 66 .

use them when building the template  Develop SOPs to conduct the MSA and make sure all involved know and follow them  Do not throw out data  Make sure all data is imputed correctly BEFORE analyzing  67 . place that in the reference column on the template  If specifications are known.If a known standard is available.

repeatability or reproducibility? This will point to process improvements. was the PTOL less than 10%? If the PTOL < 10% but the PTOT > 10%. the measurement is still OK. This point to a capable process and will not suffer from misclassification. if you have only one measurement per part. you cannot use this method.Analyze the Data     The preferred method to analyze the data is ANOVA. is the measurement error (PTOL) 10% or less. ANOVA analysis will generate a part to operator interaction and is less sensitive to outliers. What are the differences? How could the SOPs be changed to have all operators perform best? If customer specifications were used. Repeatability problems point to inadequate SOPs. However. which is highest. 68 . if not. Reproducibility points to some operators performing fine with others are not. First.

9 4.1 4.3 4.9 5.7 Look over the data making sure it is imputed correctly.7 5 5.5 3. the data can be analyzed.9 4.3 4.8 4 4.6 5. After checked.5 3.4 3.6 Part # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Operator 1 Reference Rep 1 Rep 2 5 5.3 3.6 3.4 5.2 3.9 4.3 4.9 5.1 4.9 4 4.3 4.2 4.8 4.9 5.9 5.8 5.9 5.7 4.9 3.8 5.2 3.1 5.2 5.6 3.4 Operator 3 Rep 1 Rep 2 5 5.A completed Template Customer Specifications are listed MSA Data Template Date: Part Type: USL: LSL: 4/22/2003 For Attribute data enter A for Accept and R for Reject Description: 5. No reference was used in this example. Look for decimal placement and such.5 5.7 4.5 Operator 2 Rep 1 Rep 2 5.9 4.2 4 3.6 4.1 4.3 4.6 5 5.9 3.5 4.8 3.3 4. 69 .5 4.4 3.7 5 4.

10% 0.82% 100.10% 0.00% Specs are listed here Both PTOL and PTOT are too high.00044618 0. There is no bias analysis due to lack of a reference or standard in this analysis. 70 .40126196 0.The Results Table Repeatability is the problem MSA ANOVA Method Results Source Total Measurement (Gage) Repeatability Reproducibility Operator Oper * Part Interaction Product (Part-to-Part) Total USL LSL Precision to Tolerance Ratio Precision to Total Ratio Resolution Variance Standard Deviation % Contribution 0.43228453 5.07% 0.021122986 0.021122986 0.17613225 7.5 0.657483482 92.5 3.174861056 7.18% 0.03057639 0. well over 10% error BIAS ANALYSIS Reference Not Available Bias With repeatability the main issue.26788848 5.52839675 0.00044618 0. the overall SOPs should be reviewed.633452413 0.03102257 0.1 0.

71 . 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Part # 6 7 8 9 10 This graph shows the average measurement of each part by each 0perator.Operator by Part Analysis Operator By Part 7 6 5 Measurement 4 Operator 1 Operator 2 Operator 3 3 2 Here you see where operator #1 had a much different readying than operators 2 and 3. The best result of this graph would be three completely overlying lines indicating they all made the same readings on average.

677549554 6.677549554 3.177549554 4. Sigma Product Sigma Product vs Sigma Total A large gap here indicates a large measurement error. Sigma Total Sigma Product LSL USL 2.177549554 5. When there is a gap on the top aspect of the curve.677549554 5.Sigma Total vs.177549554 Measurement With this graph you can see the difference between the Sigma Total and the Sigma Product. The red lines are the spec limits 72 . If the measurement system was good.677549554 4. this graph would have one curve with one line superposed over the other. that illustrates the degree of measurement error.177549554 3.

677549554 6.226.677549554 4.177549554 5. over 46.805 Misclassification Due To Measurement Error Sigma Total LSL Sigma Meas USL Sigma Meas LSL USL 2.677549554 3. 73 .1 % of the product would be misclassified as being in spec.677549554 5.177549554 Measurement This graph takes the distribution of the measurement error and places it over the spec area. This example shows that with the large measurement error.Misclassification dpm Potentially Misclassified = 461.177549554 4.177549554 3.

1 0.35 0.3 0.15 0.2 0.45 0. 74 . indicating Repeatability is the problem This is the variability in the process itself.25 Z Axis 0. This is supposed to be The largest bar.05 0 Part-to-Part Repeatability XAxis Category Reproducibility The repeatability is much higher Than reproducibility.Pareto of Measurement Areas Measurement System Variance Components 0.4 0.

The rule of thumb is to see at least 50% of the measurements outside the control chart limits. 75 .101 Center = 4.65 LCL = 4. the better the measurement process is.X Bar Chart MSA.199 Part Average 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Part Number In this graph the control chart limits are established from +/. The smaller the limits.Xbar Chart 7 6 5 4 3 Operator 1 Operator 2 Operator 3 UCL = 5.3 standard deviations of the measurement error.

7 0.Range Chart MSA. so operators with data near 0 would be the best.784 Center = .4 0.8 0. The lower the range the better.24 LCL = .Range Chart 0. 76 .5 0.3 standard deviations of the overall range.2 0.1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Part Number The Range charts shows the range of measurements for each operator.3 0.9 0.6 Operator 1 Operator 2 Operator 3 UCL = . Part Range 0. The control chart limits are based on +/.

the measurement system is fine. If the error is > 10%. If the measurement error is < 10%. the more accurate the results will be. The better the experimental discipline. the system should be improved. Spend enough planning time as necessary to plan and conduct an MSA.MSA Conclusions   Data should not be used to make process decisions until the measurement error is known. 77 .

78 . so we look pairing of various data sets to see if they are significantly different from one another. The rule of thumb for significance is a p value ≤ 0. both or neither This is a paired test. either in mean. this would indicate less than a 5% chance of falsely stated the data sets are different. standard deviation.05.Hypothesis Testing    This tool is used to determine if a process has changed.

 Collect the data in rows or columns. Before and after Six Sigma. etc.Conduct the Hypothesis Test Change the process. T test will look for differences in the means.  Use SPC XL. F test in the standard deviations  79 . Analysis Tools. T test and/or F test. angle 45◦ and 90◦ . temperature high and low.

and run a T test and/or F test  Group 1 Before 130 133 136 138 134 119 116 110 57 104 113 112 117 110 110 115 124 121 142 144 146 After 121.Sample Data  Statapult Launching Data: Highlight each column or row.5 120 116.5 117 120 118 118.5 119 118.5 122 119 119.5 119 121 116 118 119 121 80 .

T-test and F-test Results The results below represent the p-values from a two sample.05.0 F-test IS significant. Conclusion. Conclusion. Another way of interpreting this result is that you can have (1-pvalue)*100% confidence that the variances are not equal. 2-tailed ttest. t Test Analysis (Mean) P-value = 0. Another way of interpreting this result is that you can have (1-pvalue)*100% confidence that the means are not equal. This means the probability of falsely concluding the alternative hypothesis is the value shown (where the alternate hypothesis is that the variances are NOT equal). This means that the probability of falsely concluding the alternative hypothesis is the value shown (where the alternate hypothesis is that the means are not equal).755 T-test is NOT significant. the P-value > 0.05. the SOPs On launching the Statapult did not affect the mean of the process The results below represent the p-values from a 2 sample F-test. the SOPs on launching the Statapult does affect the standard deviation of the process 81 . F Test Analysis (Std Dev) P-value = 0. the P-value > 0.

not the process means and standard deviations The means and standard deviations should be calculated then cut and pasted into a document along with the hypothesis test results explaining what the team was trying to prove The mean and standard deviation can be obtained by running a summary stats of the data – see next page The results summary might look like the following example 82 .How to Use Hypothesis Test Results in a Project Report     The T-test and F-test results show only significance.

Summary Stats  Here is the data summary before and after PF/CE/CNX/SOPs on launching the statapults Before Count Mean Median Mode Max Min Range Std Dev (Pop) Std Dev (Sample) Variance (Pop) Variance (Sample) Skewness Kurtosis 95% Conf.52 119 110 146 57 89 18.52 120.97 After 18 119.62 2.62 1.62 4.43 129.33 111. Interval for Mean Upper Limit Lower Limit 99% Conf.34 356.06 -1. Interval for Mean Upper Limit Lower Limit 21 120.95 83 .25 374.53 108.26 132.72 119.66 2.91 118.06 -0.87 19.77 -0.08 119 119 122 116 6 1.22 117.

2 The results below represent the p-values from a 2 sample t-test. are different both in Mean and Standard Deviation μ 7100 ? μ 7090 σ 7090 ? σ 7100 If the lots are signifantly different.2075 Machine Setting 5.2668 5.25 5. it could be concluded that machine settings effect fill weight t test = looking for a difference in means Lot Number 7090 7100 Mean 5. increases fill weight Note: To determine optimal settings. Another way of interpreting this result is that you can have (1-pvalue)*100% confidence that the variances are not equal. run at different machine settings. F Test Analysis (Std Dev) P-value = 0.2 The results below represent the p-values from a 2 sample F-test.25 reducing standard deviation Note: To determine optimal settings. This means that the probability of falsely concluding the alternative hypothesis is the value shown (where the alternate hypothesis is that the means are not equal). Increasing machine setting. Another way of interpreting this result is that you can have (1pvalue)*100% confidence that the means are not equal.000088 There is a (1-p value) or 99.Summary of Results Alternative Hypothesis Statement These lots (data sets) of fill weights.9% statistical confedence that there is a difference between lots Conclusion: Changing the machine setting DOES effect the average fill weight means. t Test Analysis (Mean) P-value = 0.004235 There is a (1-p value) or 99.25 5. regression analysis might be needed as well as confirmation of results f test = looking for a difference in standard deviation Lot Number 7090 7100 Standard Deviation 0. regression analysis might be needed as well as confirmation of results 84 .2 to 5. This means the probability of falsely concluding the alternative hypothesis is the value shown (where the alternate hypothesis is that the variances are NOT equal).0644 Machine Setting 5.6% statistical confedence that there is a difference between lots Conclusion: Changing the machine setting DOES effect the average fill weight standard deviations Increasing machine setting from 5.Hypothesis Testing .0364 0.

05. but not enough “after” data is there to see a P-value ≤ 0. test again and see if there is a significant shift. Gather more data. Use the raw data it took to make the Xbars with. This would apply with any form of average listed data.Hypothesis Test Concerns    Sometimes the process did change. The next slide explains how to hypothesis testing with attribute data sets 85 . Do not use Xbar data for this analysis. T-test and F-test is for continuous data only.

 Use SPC XL. Test of Proportions  86 . Change speed.Test of Proportions Used to perform hypothesis testing on attribute data sets. Analysis Tools. monitor failures.  More data is typically needed to make good decisions with this tool  Make a process change and look for process results.

Proportion Sample #1 (p1) Proportion Sample #2 (p2) p-value 0. Unauthorized duplication prohibited by law. then the defects Proportion of defects for each sample is shown. See results next page. But. For a significant shift in the Proportion of defects.25926. The results show the proportion of group 1 is 0. the sample size was doubled With each data set. Inc. The P-value is shown here.05.28721 SPC XL is Copyright (C) 1999 Digital Computations. Most would say there IS A significant difference. the P-value should be ≤ 0. 87 . keeping the proportion the same.05. On the next page.18182. the P-value is not close to ≤ 0.25926 0.18182 0. the Proportion of group #2 is 0. and Air Academy Associates. LLC.Results Test of Proportions User defined parameters Number Defective Group #1 (x1) Size of Sample #1 (n1) Number Defective Group #2 (x2) Size of Sample #2 (n2) Results 14 54 14 77 Measure the defects and the total number in each sample set. All Rights Reserved. type in the sample size first.

Results Continued Test of Proportions User defined parameters Number Defective Group #1 (x1) Size of Sample #1 (n1) Number Defective Group #2 (x2) Size of Sample #2 (n2) Results 42 162 42 231 These are the same proportions as before. The take away is.06528 SPC XL is Copyright (C) 1999 Digital Computations.18182 0. in using attribute data.25926 0. more data is often needed to prove significance. 88 . and Air Academy Associates. the P-value points to a number almost meeting the criteria of being significantly different (P-value ≤ 0. LLC. With the sample size tripled. All Rights Reserved. Inc. Unauthorized duplication prohibited by law.05). The sample size is triple in size. Proportion Sample #1 (p1) Proportion Sample #2 (p2) p-value 0.

3 standard deviations of the process  Centerline: the mean of the process   Control Charts could be used to track output as well as input variables 89 .Control Chart Basics Control Charts are used to determine process stability  Control Charts are run charts with added features:  Upper and Lower Control Chart limits: +/.

range is established by the difference of one point from the last point plotted  For attribute data sets:  P-Chart (plotting proportions of defectives)  C-Chart (plotting counts of defects) 90 .Control Chart Types  For continuous data sets  Xbar R (plotting averages of data sub sets and the range within those subsets)  Xbar S (plotting averages of data sub sets and the standard deviation of those subsets)  IMR (individuals moving range: plotting one data set instead of an average of a subgroup.

52 50.31 47.36 48. such as 4 random samples daily.07 44.25 44.56 52.88 55.08 43.92 56.43 54.68 48.15 49.09 46.17 52.88 46.82 46.95 44.22 41.23 Sample 2 48.94 51.19 50.73 51.81 43.33 50.87 55.56 46.58 Sample 4 46.79 50.71 46.08 59.15 44.49 48.65 55.03 41.03 55.72 43.48 57.99 48.13 50. it is best to sample in sub sets.27 51.72 48.95 56.52 49.15 Sample 3 53.63 51.11 47.53 48.90 42.51 50.60 51.21 45.43 48.40 53.48 56.27 47.93 53.14 54.08 42.51 53.23 53.49 44.64 42.31 48.34 50.13 48.16 48.53 53.95 54.84 44.05 59.Spreadsheets for Data Collection  For continuous data sets.51 47.52 50.07 43.87 43.29 53.86 53. The spreadsheet to capture this might look like this Date 1/1/2003 1/2/2003 1/3/2003 1/4/2003 1/5/2003 1/6/2003 1/7/2003 1/8/2003 1/9/2003 1/10/2003 1/11/2003 1/12/2003 1/13/2003 1/14/2003 1/15/2003 1/16/2003 1/17/2003 1/18/2003 1/19/2003 1/20/2003 1/21/2003 1/22/2003 1/23/2003 1/24/2003 Sample 1 59.91 Xbar 52.39 39.62 46.89 55.13 47.73 48.68 52.54 48.64 47.97 Data can be collected In column or rows. This example shows Columns.21 48.40 54.57 49.90 44.66 40.14 52.29 50.52 48.81 50.16 49.70 49.09 49.62 50.71 56.81 54.42 42.11 40.95 52.07 46.29 46.60 53.63 51.77 47.95 61.06 57.77 41.84 43. 91 .19 42.18 45.88 52.06 50.50 51.70 43.37 56.

68 to 54. the distribution is normal.45 to 52.6 41.99 48.68 54.22 to 50. Does this mean the process is stable? We can only determine that by constructing a control chart looking at the data over time. 92 .91 to 57.14 to 59.76 to 45.14 59.37 to <= <= <= <= <= <= <= <= <= <= 61.31 to 41.91 57. Xbar Data  Here is a histogram using the raw data from the previous example Histogram .37 Class The standard deviation of this process is 5.Histograms by Raw Data vs.54 to 43.4941 15 # Observations 10 5 0 39.76 45.99 to 48.22 50.0168 KS Test p-value = .54 43.45 52.Raw Data 20 Normal Distribution Mean = 49.52 Std Dev = 5.

81 to <= 46.72 to <= 56.29 to <= 48. 93 .19 Note the standard deviation of this distribution is 3.24 Class 51.29 46. it gives a false reading on the process standard deviation. This is the reason NOT to use Xbars with Cpk analysis. The means are the same.24 to <= 53.76 48.76 to <= 51.52 Std Dev = 3.6292 7 6 # Observations 5 4 3 2 1 0 43. but the standard deviation of the Xbar is less.72 53.5 This is much lower than the raw data due to the central limit theorem.5057 KS Test p-value = .XBar Data 9 8 Normal Distribution Mean = 49.Histograms Continued  Here is a histogram of the XBar data – using the averages of the subgroups Histogram .

Construction of the Control Chart

The SPC XL Control Chart Wizard can be used to help determine what control chart to use and build a data collection template. You can cut and paste data from an existing spreadsheet into this template. You will not need to paste in Xbar information, just the raw data. After the data is either in the SPC XL template or on your own spreadsheet, go into control chart menu, choose the chart you want, in the example with the previous spreadsheet, XBar R is the choice, highlight data if using your own spreadsheet, just click if using the SPC XL template and the chart will appear.

94

XBar R Chart

Here is the charts generated on a “stacked” format, one on top of the other
Xbar Chart

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

UCL=55.764 CEN=49.52 LCL=43.276

R Chart

25 20 15 10 5 0

UCL=19.545

CEN=8.565

LCL=0.0

1/ 1/ 20 03 1/ 2/ 20 03 1/ 3/ 20 03 1/ 4/ 20 03 1/ 5/ 20 03 1/ 6/ 20 03 1/ 7/ 20 03 1/ 8/ 20 03 1/ 9/ 20 03 1/ 10 /2 00 3 1/ 11 /2 00 3 1/ 12 /2 00 3 1/ 13 /2 00 3 1/ 14 /2 00 3 1/ 15 /2 00 3 1/ 16 /2 00 3 1/ 17 /2 00 3 1/ 18 /2 00 3 1/ 19 /2 00 3 1/ 20 /2 00 3 1/ 21 /2 00 3 1/ 22 /2 00 3 1/ 23 /2 00 3 1/ 24 /2 00 3

The top chart is the Xbar the bottom one is the range chart
95

XBar Chart
Red points indicate out of control symptoms. To find out what symptom they are, pull down the menu called “Out of Control” located directly above the chart. Choose a symptom and the chart will be reconstructed showing the points in red for only that symptom. Never print out only one symptom and show to others as they will assume only that symptom exists. This feature is for you to look at symptoms one by one.

Xbar Chart 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

UCL=55.764 CEN=49.52 LCL=43.276

Dates for the data points are listed

The goal of the XBar chart would be to have the mean of the process match the target from the customer with no out of control symptoms. Small control chart limits indicate low process variability and better process performance vs. customer specifications. These charts look at BETWEEN group variability.
96

545 CEN=8.Range Chart The range chart is plotting the range of the sample sets.0 1/ 1/ 20 03 1/ 2/ 20 03 1/ 3/ 20 03 1/ 4/ 20 03 1/ 5/ 20 03 1/ 6/ 20 03 1/ 7/ 20 03 1/ 8/ 20 03 1/ 9/ 20 03 1/ 10 /2 00 3 1/ 11 /2 00 3 1/ 12 /2 00 3 1/ 13 /2 00 3 1/ 14 /2 00 3 1/ 15 /2 00 3 1/ 16 /2 00 3 1/ 17 /2 00 3 1/ 18 /2 00 3 1/ 19 /2 00 3 1/ 20 /2 00 3 1/ 21 /2 00 3 1/ 22 /2 00 3 1/ 23 /2 00 3 1/ 24 /2 00 3 Overall. This chart has no RED points indicating the range is stable in this process This graph looks at WITHIN group variability. 97 . a good range chart is one indicating points near zero with small control limits.3 standard deviations of the overall range. A range chart control limits are +/. The closer to zero the points are the less variability in the sample.565 LCL=0. R Chart 25 20 15 10 5 0 UCL=19.

Correlation Study. Scatter Plot Example 98 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful