ch05 PDF

Chapter 5
Methods and Philosophy of Statistical Process Control
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After completing this chapter you should be able to:
1. Understand chance and assignable causes of variability in a process
2. Explain the statistical basis of the Shewhart control chart, including choice of sample size,
control limits, and sampling interval
3. Explain the rational subgroup concept
4. Understand the basic tools of SPC; the histogram or stem-and-leaf plot, the check sheet, the
Pareto chart, the cause-and-effect diagram, the defect concentration diagram, the scatter
diagram, and the control chart
5. Explain phase I and phase II use of control charts
6. Explain how average run length is used as a performance measure for a control chart
7. Explain how sensitizing rules and pattern recognition are used in conjunction with control charts
IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS

Action Limits Out-of-control process
Assignable causes of variation Out-of-control-action plan (OCAP)
Average run length (ARL) Pareto chart
Average time to signal Patterns on control charts
Cause-and-effect diagram Phase I and phase II applications
Chance causes of variation Rational subgroups
Check sheet Sample size for control charts
Control chart Sampling frequency for control charts
Control limits Scatter diagram
Defect concentration diagram Sensitizing rules for control charts
Designed experiments Shewhart control charts
Factorial experiment Statistical control of a process
Flow charts and operations process charts, and Statistical process control (SPC)
value stream mapping
In-control process Three-sigma control limits
Magnificent seven Warning limits
5-2 CHAPTER 5 METHODS AND PHILOSOPHY OF STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL
EXERCISES
5.1.
What are chance and assignable causes of variability? What part do they play in the operation and
interpretation of a Shewhart control chart?
“Chance” or “common” causes of variability represent the inherent, natural variability of a process - its
background noise. Variation resulting from “assignable” or “special” causes represents generally large,
unsatisfactory disturbances to the usual process performance. Assignable cause variation can usually be
traced, perhaps to a change in material, equipment, or operator method.
A Shewhart control chart can be used to monitor a process and to identify occurrences of assignable
causes. There is a high probability that an assignable cause has occurred when a plot point is outside
the chart's control limits. By promptly identifying these occurrences and acting to permanently remove
their causes from the process, we can reduce process variability in the long run.
5.2.
Discuss the relationship between a control chart and statistical hypothesis testing.
The control chart is mathematically equivalent to a series of statistical hypothesis tests. If a plot point is
within control limits, say for the average x , the null hypothesis that the mean is some value is not
rejected. However, if the plot point is outside the control limits, then the hypothesis that the process
mean is at some level is rejected. A control chart shows, graphically, the results of many sequential
hypothesis tests.
NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR FROM THE AUTHOR (D.C. Montgomery):

There has been some debate as to whether a control chart is really equivalent to hypothesis testing.
Deming (see Out of the Crisis, MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Cambridge, MA, pp. 369)
writes that:
“Some books teach that use of a control chart is test of hypothesis: the process is in control, or
it is not. Such errors may derail self-study”.
Deming also warns against using statistical theory to study control chart behavior (false-alarm
probability, OC-curves, average run lengths, and normal curve probabilities. Wheeler (see “Shewhart’s
Charts: Myths, Facts, and Competitors”, ASQC Quality Congress Transactions (1992), Milwaukee, WI, pp.
533–538) also shares some of these concerns:
“While one may mathematically model the control chart, and while such a model may be useful
in comparing different statistical procedures on a theoretical basis, these models do not justify
CHAPTER 5 METHODS AND PHILOSOPHY OF STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL 5-3
any procedure in practice, and their exact probabilities, risks, and power curves do not actually
apply in practice.”
On the other hand, Shewhart, the inventor of the control chart, did not share these views in total. From
Shewhart (Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control (1939), U.S. Department of
Agriculture Graduate School, Washington DC, p. 40, 46):
“As a background for the development of the operation of statistical control, the formal
mathematical theory of testing a statistical hypothesis is of outstanding importance, but
it would seem that we must continually keep in mind the fundamental difference
between the formal theory of testing a statistical hypothesis and the empirical theory of
testing a hypothesis employed in the operation of statistical control. In the latter, one
must also test the hypothesis that the sample of data was obtained under conditions
that may be considered random. …
The mathematical theory of distribution characterizing the formal and mathematical
concept of a state of statistical control constitutes an unlimited storehouse of helpful
suggestions from which practical criteria of control must be chosen, and the general
theory of testing statistical hypotheses must serve as a background to guide the choice
of methods of making a running quality report that will give the maximum service as
time goes on.”
Thus Shewhart does not discount the role of hypothesis testing and other aspects of statistical theory.
However, as we have noted in the text, the purposes of the control chart are more general than those of
hypothesis tests. The real value of a control chart is monitoring stability over time. Also, from
Shewhart’s 1939 book, (p. 36):
“The control limits as most often used in my own work have been set so that after a state of
statistical control has been reached, one will look for assignable causes when they are not
present not more than approximately three times in 1000 samples, when the distribution of the
statistic used in the criterion is normal.”
Clearly, Shewhart understood the value of statistical theory in assessing control chart performance.
My view is that the proper application of statistical theory to control charts can provide useful
information about how the charts will perform. This, in turn, will guide decisions about what methods
to use in practice. If you are going to apply a control chart procedure to a process with unknown
characteristics, it is prudent to know how it will work in a more idealized setting. In general, before
recommending a procedure for use in practice, it should be demonstrated that there is some underlying
model for which it performs well. The study by Champ and Woodall (1987), cited in the text, that shows
the ARL performance of various sensitizing rules for control charts is a good example. This is the basis of
the recommendation against the routine use of these rules to enhance the ability of the Shewhart chart
to detect small process shifts.
5.3.
Discuss type I and type II errors relative to the control chart. What practical implication in terms of
process operation do these two types of errors have?
Relative to the control chart, the type I error represents the probability of concluding the process is out
of control when it isn't, meaning a plot point is outside the control limits when in fact the process is still
in control. In process operation, high frequencies of false alarms could lead could to excessive
investigation costs, unnecessary process adjustment (and increased variability), and lack of credibility for
SPC methods.
The type II error represents the probability of concluding the process is in control, when actually it is
not; this results from a plot point within the control limits even though the process mean has shifted out
of control. The effect on process operations of failing to detect an out-of-control shift would be an
increase in non-conforming product and associated costs.
5.4.
What is meant by a process that is in a state of statistical control?
The statement that a process is in a state of statistical control means that assignable or special causes of
variation have been removed; characteristic parameters like the mean, standard deviation, and
probability distribution are constant; and process behavior is predictable. One implication is that any
improvement in process capability (i.e., in terms of non-conforming product) will require a change in
material, equipment, method, etc.
5.5.
If a process is in a state of statistical control, does it necessarily follow that all or nearly all of the units of
product produced will be within the specification limits?
No. The fact that a process operates in a state of statistical control does not mean that nearly all
product meets specifications. It simply means that process behavior (mean and variation) is statistically
predictable. We may very well predict that, say, 50% of the product will not meet specification limits!
Capability is the term, which refers to the ability to meet product specifications, and a process must be
in control in order to calculate capability.
5.6.
Discuss the logic underlying the use of three-sigma limits on Shewhart control charts. How will the chart
respond if narrower limits are chosen? How will it respond if wider limits are chosen?
The logic behind the use of 3-sigma limits on Shewhart control charts is that they give good results in
practice. Narrower limits will result in more investigations for assignable causes, and perhaps more
false alarms. Wider limits will result in fewer investigations, but perhaps fewer process shifts will be
promptly identified. Sometimes probability limits are used - particularly when the underlying
distribution of the plotted statistic is known. If the underlying distribution is unknown, care should be
exercised in selecting the width of the control limits. Historically, however, 3-sigma limits have been
very successful in practice.
5.7.
What are warning limits on a control chart? How can they be used?
Warning limits on control charts are limits that are inside the control limits. When warning limits are
used, control limits are referred to as action limits. Warning limits, say at 2-sigma, can be used to
increase chart sensitivity and to signal process changes more quickly than the 3-sigma action limits. The
Western Electric rule, which addresses this type of shift is to consider a process to be out of control if 2
of 3 plot points are between 2 sigma and 3 sigma of the chart centerline.
5.8.
Discuss the rational subgroup concept. What part does it play in control chart analysis?
The concept of a rational subgroup is used to maximize the chance for detecting variation between
subgroups. Subgroup samples can be structured to identify process shifts. If it is expected that a
process will shift and stay at the new level until a corrective action, then sampling consecutive (or
nearly) units maximizes the variability between subgroups and minimizes the variability within a
subgroup. This maximizes the probability of detecting a shift.
5.9.
When taking samples or subgroups from a process, do you want assignable causes occurring within the
subgroups or between them? Fully explain your answer.
I would want assignable causes to occur between subgroups and would prefer to select samples as close
to consecutive as possible. In most SPC applications, process changes will not be self-correcting, but will
require action to return the process to its usual performance level. The probability of detecting a
change (and therefore initiating a corrective action) will be maximized by taking observations in a
sample as close together as possible.
5.10.
A molding process uses a five-cavity mold for a part used in an automotive assembly. The wall thickness
of the part is the critical quality characteristic. It has been suggested to use x and R charts to monitor
this process, and to use as the subgroup or sample all five parts that result from a single “shot” of the
machine. What do you think of this sampling strategy? What impact does it have on the ability of the
charts to detect assignable causes?
This sampling strategy will very likely underestimate the size of the true process variability. Similar raw
materials and operating conditions will tend to make any five-piece sample alike, while variability
caused by changes in batches or equipment may remain undetected. An out-of-control signal on the R
chart will be interpreted to be the result of differences between cavities. Because true process
variability will be underestimated, there will likely be more false alarms on the x chart than there
should be.
5.11.
A manufacturing process produces 500 parts per hour. A sample part is selected about every half hour,
and after five parts are obtained, the average of these five measurements is plotted on an x control
chart.
(a) Is this an appropriate sampling scheme if the assignable cause in the process results in an
instantaneous upward shift in the mean that is of very short duration?
No.
(b) If your answer is no, propose an alternative procedure.
The problem is that the process may shift to an out-of-control state and back to an in-control state in
less than one-half hour. Each subgroup should be a random sample of all parts produced in the last 2½
hours.
5.12.
Consider the sampling scheme proposed in Exercise 5.11. Is this scheme appropriate if the assignable
cause results in a slow, prolonged upward drift in the mean? If your answer is no, propose an
alternative procedure.
No. The problem is that with a slow, prolonged trend upwards, the sample average will tend to be the
value of the 3rd sample --- the highs and lows will average out. Assume that the trend must last 2½
hours in order for a shift of detectable size to occur. Then a better sampling scheme would be to simply
select 5 consecutive parts every 2½ hours.
5.13.
If the time order of production has not been recorded in a set of data from a process, is it possible to
detect the presence of assignable causes?
No. If time order of the data is not preserved, it will be impossible to separate the presence of
assignable causes from underlying process variability.
5.14.
What information is provided by the operating characteristic curve of a control chart?
An operating characteristic curve for a control chart illustrates the tradeoffs between sample size n and
the process shift that is to be detected. Generally, larger sample sizes are needed to increase the
probability of detecting small changes to the process. If a large shift is to be detected, then smaller
sample sizes can be used.
5.15.
How do the costs of sampling, the costs of producing an excessive number of defective units, and the
costs of searching for assignable causes impact on the choice of parameters of a control chart?
The costs of sampling, excessive defective units, and searches for assignable causes impact selection of
the control chart parameters of sample size n, sampling frequency h, and control limit width. The larger
n and h, the larger will be the cost of sampling. This sampling cost must be weighed against the cost of
producing non-conforming product.
5.16.
Is the average run length performance of a control chart a more meaningful measure of performance
than the type I and type II error probabilities? What information does ARL convey that the statistical
error probabilities do not?
Type I and II error probabilities contain information on statistical performance; an ARL results from their
selection. ARL is more meaningful in the sense of the operations information that is conveyed and could
be considered a measure of the process performance of the sampling plan.
5.17.
Consider the control chart shown here. Does the pattern appear random?
Evidence of runs, trends or cycles? NO. There are no runs of 5 points or cycles. So, we can say that the
plot point pattern appears to be random.
5.18.
Evidence of runs, trends or cycles? YES, there is one "low - high - low - high" pattern (Samples 13 – 17),
which might be part of a cycle. So, we can say that the pattern does not appear random.
5.19.
Evidence of runs, trends or cycles? YES, there is a "low - high - low - high - low" wave (all samples),
which might be a cycle. So, we can say that the pattern does not appear random.
5.20.
Consider the control chart shown in Exercise 5.17. Would the use of warning limits reveal any potential
out-of-control conditions?
Three points exceed the 2-sigma warning limits - points #3, 11, and 20.
5.21.
Apply the Western Electric rules to the control chart in Exercise 5.17. Are any of the criteria for declaring
the process out of control satisfied?
Check:
 Any point outside the 3-sigma control limits? NO.
 2 of 3 beyond 2 sigma of centerline? NO.
 4 of 5 at 1 sigma or beyond of centerline? YES. Points #17, 18, 19, and 20 are outside the lower
1-sigma area.
 8 consecutive points on one side of centerline? NO.
A one out-of-control criterion is satisfied.
5.22.
Sketch warning limits on the control chart in Exercise 5.19. Do these limits indicate any potential out-of-
control conditions?
Four points exceed the 2-sigma warning limits - points #6, 12, 16, and 18.
5.23.
Apply the Western Electric rules to the control chart presented in Exercise 5.19. Would these rules result
in any out-of-control signals?
Check:
 Any point outside the 3-sigma control limits? NO. (Point #12 is within the lower 3-sigma control
limit.)
 2 of 3 beyond 2 sigma of centerline? YES, points #16, 17, and 18.
 4 of 5 at 1 sigma or beyond of centerline? YES, points #5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.
 8 consecutive points on one side of centerline? NO.
Two out-of-control criteria are satisfied.
5.24.
Consider the time-varying process behavior shown below and on the next page. Match each of these
several patterns of process performance to the corresponding and R charts shown in figures (a) to (e)
below.
The pattern in Figure (a) matches the control chart in Figure (2).
5.24. continued
The pattern in Figure (b) matches the control chart in Figure (4).
The pattern in Figure (c) matches the control chart in Figure (5).
5.24. continued
The pattern in Figure (d) matches the control chart in Figure (1).
The pattern in Figure (e) matches the control chart in Figure (3).
5.25.
You consistently arrive at your office about one-half hour later than you would like. Develop a cause-
and-effect diagram that identifies and outlines the possible causes of this event.
Many possible solutions.
MTB > Stat > Quality Tools > Cause-and-Effect
Cause-and-Effect Diagram
Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Late Arrival

Activ ities Driv e
F ind badge, key s

F ix breakfast "Turtle"
F ix lunch
E at breakfast
Route
Read paper
Dress
S how er A ccident
G et up lat
Arriv e late to
office
C offee
C hildren/H omew ork
G as
P ut out pet
C arpool
C hildren/S chool
E rrands
Stops Family
5.26.
A car has gone out of control during a snowstorm and struck a tree. Construct a cause-and-effect
diagram that identifies and outlines the possible causes of the accident.
Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Car Accident

Weather Driv er
A sleep
S now ing
Drunk
P oor v isibility M isjudgment
Windy Talking on cell phone
Texting w hile driv ing

Below freezing
Distracted
Out-of-Contr
ol Car
Strik es Tree
S teering
Icy /S now -cov ered
S uspension
BLocked
Brakes
S tate of repair
Tires
Road Car
5.27.
Laboratory glassware shipped from the manufacturer to your plant via an overnight package service has
arrived damaged. Develop a cause-and-effect diagram that identifies and outlines the possible causes of
this event.
Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Damaged Glassware

Manufacturere Glassware Deliv ery Serv ice
Handling Handling
C rushed
Dropped S trength flaw a
Dropped
C arelessly packed Broken at start

S ev ere transport
v ibration
Glassware
Damaged
C rushed Weak box
Dropped N ot enough padding
Internal Handling Glassware Pack aging

5.28.
Construct a cause-and-effect diagram that identifies the possible causes of consistently bad coffee from
a large-capacity office coffee pot.
Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Coffee-Making Process

Measurement Machine Personnel
Worn-out
C offee drinkers
A mount of w ater
C leanliness
E spresso drinkers
Brew temperature
A mount of beans
Insufficient training
Brew method
Consistently
Bad Coffee
Water source
C offee beans
C offee roast Water temperature A ge of brew
C offee grind
Ty pe of filter
Material Env ironment Method

5.29.
Develop a flowchart for the process that you follow every morning from the time you awake until you
arrive at your workplace (or school). Identify the value-added and non-value-added activities.
Many possible solutions, beginning and end of process are shown below. Yellow is non-value-added
activity; green is value-added activity.
5.31.
The magnificent seven can be used in our personal lives. Develop a check sheet to record “defects” you
have in your personal life (such as overeating, being rude, not meeting commitments, missing class,
etc.). Use the check sheet to keep a record of these “defects” for one month. Use a Pareto chart to
analyze these data. What are the underlying causes of these “defects”?
Example of a check sheet to collect data on personal opportunities for improvement. Many possible
solutions, including defect categories and counts.
Day
Defect 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 … 31 TOTAL
Overeating 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 … 1 6
Being Rude 10 11 9 9 7 10 11 … 9 76
Not meeting commitments 4 2 2 2 1 0 1 … 7 19
Missing class 4 6 3 2 7 9 4 … 2 37
Etc.
TOTAL 18 21 15 13 16 19 17 19 138
MTB > Stat > Quality Tools > Pareto Chart
Pareto Chart of 5-31Defect

140 100
120
80
100
Percent
TOTAL
80 60
60 40
40
20
20
0 0
5-31Defect s ts er
de as
Ru cl en O
th
in
g
in
g itm
m
Be iss m
M co
g
tin
ee
tm
No
TOTAL 76 37 19 6
Percent 55.1 26.8 13.8 4.3
Cum % 55.1 81.9 95.7 100.0
To reduce total count of defects, “Being Rude” represents the greatest opportunity to make an
improvement. The next step would be to determine the causes of “Being Rude” and to work on
eliminating those causes.
5.32.
A process is normally distributed and in control, with known mean and variance, and the usual three-
sigma limits are used on the x control chart, so that the probability of a single point plotting outside the
control limits when the process is in control is 0.0027. Suppose that this chart is being used in phase I
and the averages from a set of m samples or subgroups from this process are plotted on this chart. What
is the probability that at least one of the averages will plot outside the control limits when m = 5?
Repeat these calculations for the cases where m = 10, m = 20, m = 30, and m = 50. Discuss the results
that you have obtained.
m  5; 1  Pr{at least 1 out-of-control}  Pr{1 of 5 beyond}  Pr{2 of 5 beyond}   Pr{5 of 5 beyond}

 5
 1  Pr{0 of 5 beyond}  1    (0.0027)0 (1  0.0027)5  1  0.9866  0.0134
0
MTB > Calc > Probability Distributions > Binomial
Cumulative Distribution Function

Binomial with n = 5 and p = 0.0027
x P( X <= x )
0 0.986573
 10 
m  10; 1  1  Pr{0 of 10 beyond}  1    (0.0027)0 (1  0.0027)10  1  0.9733  0.0267
0

x P( X <= x )
0 0.973326
 20 
m  20; 1  1  Pr{0 of 20 beyond}  1    (0.0027)0 (1  0.0027)20  0.0526
0

x P( X <= x )
0 0.947363
5.32. continued
 30 
m  30; 1  1  Pr{0 of 30 beyond}  1    (0.0027)0 (1  0.0027)30  0.0779
0

x P( X <= x )
0 0.922093
 50 
m  50; 1  1  Pr{0 of 50 beyond}  1    (0.0027)0 (1  0.0027)50  0.1025
0

x P( X <= x )
0 0.873556
Although the probability that a single point plots beyond the control limits is 0.0027, as the number of
samples increases (m), the probability that at least one of the points is beyond the limits also increases.
5.33.
Reconsider the situation in Exercise 5.32. Suppose that the process mean and variance were unknown
and had to be estimated from the data available from the m subgroups. What complications would this
introduce in the calculations that you performed in Exercise 5.32?
When the process mean  and variance 2 are unknown, they must be estimated by sample means x
and standard deviations s. However, the points used to estimate these sample statistics are not
independent—they do not reflect a random sample from a population. In fact, sampling frequencies are
often designed to increase the likelihood of detecting a special or assignable cause. The lack of
independence in the sample statistics will affect the estimates of the process population parameters.

ch05 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ch05 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 5

Methods and Philosophy of Statistical Process Control

IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS

NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR FROM THE AUTHOR (D.C. Montgomery):

(b) If your answer is no, propose an alternative procedure.

Many possible solutions.

MTB > Stat > Quality Tools > Cause-and-Effect

Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Late Arrival

F ind badge, key s

Many possible solutions.

MTB > Stat > Quality Tools > Cause-and-Effect

Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Car Accident

Windy Talking on cell phone

Texting w hile driv ing

Many possible solutions.

MTB > Stat > Quality Tools > Cause-and-Effect

Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Damaged Glassware

C arelessly packed Broken at start

C rushed Weak box

Dropped N ot enough padding

Internal Handling Glassware Pack aging

Many possible solutions.

MTB > Stat > Quality Tools > Cause-and-Effect

Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Coffee-Making Process

C offee roast Water temperature A ge of brew

Material Env ironment Method

MTB > Stat > Quality Tools > Pareto Chart

Pareto Chart of 5-31Defect

m  5; 1  Pr{at least 1 out-of-control}  Pr{1 of 5 beyond}  Pr{2 of 5 beyond}   Pr{5 of 5 beyond}

MTB > Calc > Probability Distributions > Binomial

Cumulative Distribution Function

Cumulative Distribution Function

Cumulative Distribution Function

Cumulative Distribution Function

Cumulative Distribution Function

You might also like