The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2679-1

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

On designing Maxwell CUSUM control chart: an efficient way to monitor

failure rates in boring processes
M. Pear Hossain 1,2 & Ridwan A. Sanusi 3 & M. Hafidz Omar 4 & Muhammad Riaz 4

Received: 21 June 2018 / Accepted: 7 September 2018

# Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
The ordinary CUSUM chart is based on normality assumption. But in real-life phenomenon such as monitoring of lifetime
variable, this assumption is not always valid. Hence, a variant of the CUSUM chart, the VCUSUM chart, has been constructed to
monitor small shift in a process that is based on a Maxwell distribution. The performance of the chart has been checked by
studying the run length properties and it was found to perform better for small shifts as compared to Shewhart type V chart for
Maxwell parameter. Finally, a real-life application is presented to monitor the failure rate of a vertical boring machine.

Keywords Maxwell distribution . Gamma distribution . Exponential family of distribution . CUSUM control chart . Run length
distribution

1 Introduction have natural variations, which are acceptable and tolerable.

In a manufacturing or production process, the personnel in-
volved, such as the production engineers, quality control man-
agers, and operators, always ensure that the process is in a
stable state by continuously monitoring the process. This
helps to have an improved performance and reduction in the
variations of the process parameters. A stable process may
* M. Pear Hossain
mphossain3-c@my.cityu.edu.hk
Ridwan A. Sanusi
rasanusi2-c@my.cityu.edu.hk
M. Hafidz Omar
omarmh@kfupm.edu.sa
Muhammad Riaz
riazm@kfupm.edu.sa
1 chart will perform poorly if the assumed mean size is different
Department of Statistics, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman
Science and Technology University, Gopalganj 8100, Bangladesh
2 population means following a bivariate normal distribution
School of Data Science, City University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee
Avenue, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong
3 variate CUSUM-type chart was developed for more than two
Department of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management,
City University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon
Tong, Hong Kong
4
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, King Fahd University of
Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
However, assignable causes of variation in a process must
be monitored and detected as early as possible. These varia-
tions are unwanted and may arise as a result of machine errors,
defective raw materials, or operator errors [1]. One of the
commonly used tools of SPC is control chart. It is useful for
monitoring different types of shifts. The traditional Shewhart
chart is effective for monitoring large shifts in a process var-
iation, while the cumulative sum (CUSUM) chart [2] and the
exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA) chart [3]
are effective for detecting small to moderate shifts in a
process.
Most previous works on CUSUM chart assumed that the
process follows a normal distribution. Acosta-Mejia et al [4]
proposed three different CUSUM charts for monitoring the
dispersion parameter of a normal process. Furthermore, an
improved CUSUM-type chart was suggested to monitor shifts
in the mean of a normal process by assuming that mean shift
size in a process is unknown. It was claimed that CUSUM
from the actual mean size [5]. In addition, the ratio of two
was monitored using a CUSUM-type chart [6] and a multi-
populations by reference [7]. Sanusi et al. [8] also assumed the
normality assumption when introducing the fast-initial re-
sponse to the CUSUM chart for detecting early shifts in the
dispersion parameter of a process. Similar research can be
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

found in references [9–14, 15]. Some researchers studied where

CUSUM chart for variable sample sizes under various loss u
functions to optimize the performance of the chart [16, 17]. γ ðv; λuÞ ¼ λv ∫ xv−1 e−λx dx: ð3Þ
Abbasi and Miller and Khaliq et al. [18, 19] addressed the 0

issue of violation of the normality assumption while investi-

Figure 1 shows the skewness of the distribution for differ-
gating the appropriate choice of control chart for monitoring
ent values of the scale parameter.
the dispersion parameter of a process.
Despite the changes in the shape of the graph, the skewness
Some CUSUM-type charts have also been introduced for
of the Maxwell distribution remains constant. The skewness
monitoring non-normal processes. Different CUSUM-type
and the excess kurtosis of the Maxwell distribution are given
charts were introduced for monitoring process data following
as [28]
an exponential distribution [20], a t distribution [21], a gamma
pffiffiffi
distribution [22], and so on. A real example of a process that 2 2ð5π−16Þ
does not follow a normal distribution is the modeling of life γ1 ¼ ð4Þ
ð3π−8Þ3=2
time of vertical boring machine. The life time monitoring fol-
lows a Maxwell distribution, and it has been monitored using and
a Shewhart-type chart [23]. The focus of this work is to mon-
itor data from a Maxwell distribution using a CUSUM-type 4ð96−40π þ 3π2 Þ
γ2 ¼ − ð5Þ
chart. This will ensure effectiveness in detecting small to mod- ð3π−8Þ2
erate shifts in non-normal process.
Maxwell distribution was first developed by James Clerk Given a random sample of size n, Hossain et al. [23] esti-
Maxwell in 1860 for gas velocity in the field of kinetic energy mate the parameter of the Maxwell distribution using the max-
of gases which was later extended by Ludwig Boltzmann [24]. imum likelihood estimate (MLE) technique (see eq. 2.6 in
It was named after James Clerk Maxwell, and it is sometimes [23]).
referred to as the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution to honor qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Ludwig Boltzmann. Hence, the distribution is called σ
^ ¼ ∑ni¼1 r2i =3n; r > 0: ð6Þ
Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution or simply Maxwell distribu-
tion. It has numerous applications in Physics, especially where Maxwell distribution is related to the Rayleigh distribution,
magnitudes of normal variables are of ultimate concern. In and different transformations of R have been shown by
recent decades, this distribution is applied in lifetime model- Hossain et al. [23] to follow different distributions like the
ing, chemistry as well as in statistical mechanics [25–27]. gamma, Chi square, and normal distributions. The following
The rest of this article is arranged as follows; in Sect. 2, we theorem provides a helpful transformation that will be used
discuss briefly about Maxwell distribution along with its prop- throughout the paper.
erties. In Sect. 3, a new CUSUM-type chart named VCUSUM
chart is proposed and developed. Performance measure of the Theorem 1 Let the random variable V ¼ σ^2 . Hence, the
2 2
proposed chart based on run length properties has been given transformation T = R /2σ ~gamma(3/2, 1) and U = 3nV/
in Sect. 4. Section 5 and Sect. 6 are, respectively, for compar- 2σ2~gamma(3n/2, 1) [23]. Thus, the PDF of V is
ison and real-life example. Finally, we draw conclusion in
Sect. 7.

2 Maxwell distribution and its properties

The distribution only has a scale parameter. Assume that a

continuous random variable (say R) follows a Maxwell distri-
bution with scale parameter σ, the probability density function
(PDF) and the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the
Maxwell distribution are given, respectively, as
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f ðrÞ ¼ ð2=πÞσ−3 r2 e−r =2σ ; r > 0
2 2
ð1Þ

and
 pffiffiffi   
F ðrÞ ¼ 2= π γ 3=2; r2 = 2σ2 ; ð2Þ Fig. 1 Probability density function of Maxwell distribution for various
values of σ
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Table 1 Run length properties of VCUSUM chart for different sample size (n).

n=1 n=2 n=5

δ ARL SDRL q10 q25 q50 q75 q90 ARL SDRL q10 q25 q50 q75 q90 ARL SDRL q10 q25 q50 q75 q90
1 371.4 376.4 40 106 253 511.3 866.1 369.0 368.8 38 105 255.5 514 853 366.6 368.3 40 105 255 512 841
1.1 142.6 141.7 15 41 99 197 327.1 134.5 132.0 15 40 95 185 308 123.5 123.4 13 35 85 172 286
1.2 70.8 69.4 8 21 50 98 160 63.9 63.7 7 19 45 88 145.1 58.0 58.3 6 17 40 80 134
1.25 53.7 52.1 6 16 38 74 123 46.8 46.0 5 14 33 65 108 42.0 42.0 5 12 30 57 95.1
1.5 20.2 20.0 3 6 14 28 46 17.1 16.7 2 5 12 24 39 8.1 7.7 1 3 6 11 18
1.7 12.9 12.2 2 4 9 18 29 10.5 9.8 2 3 8 14 23 14.3 13.7 2 4 10 20 32
1.75 11.5 11.0 2 4 8 16 26 9.6 9.0 2 3 7 13 21 8.8 8.2 1 3 6 12 20
1.8 10.6 9.8 2 4 8 15 24 8.8 8.2 1 3 6 12 19 7.5 6.9 1 2 5 10 17
2 8.1 7.4 1 3 6 11 18 6.7 6.2 1 2 5 9 15 5.9 5.4 1 2 4 8 13
2.5 5.3 4.8 1 2 4 7 11 4.5 4.0 1 2 3 6 10 3.9 3.4 1 1 3 5 8
3 4.3 3.7 1 2 3 6 9 3.6 3.2 1 1 3 5 8 3.2 2.6 1 1 2 4 7

  distribution into the CUSUM structure, it is important to first

− v
review the gamma CUSUM chart. It should be noted that the
1 2σ2
ðvÞ 2 −1 e
3n
f ð vÞ ¼   3n : ð7Þ
3n  2σ2  3n2 primary aim is to monitor small amount of shifts in the scale
Γ 3n parameter of the Maxwell distribution. This is achieved by
2
posting the following hypotheses:
Proof. As U = 3nV/2σ2~gamma(3n/2, 1) with PDF H 0 : σ2 ¼ σ20 , or, the process is in-control (IC).
f ðuÞ ¼ Γ 13n u2−1 e−u , then using the transformation 2σ3nU ¼ V
1 2
H 1 : σ2 ¼ σ21 ¼ δσ20 , δ > 0 but δ ≠ 1; or, the process is out-
ð2Þ
of-control (OOC).
with the Jacobian J ðu→vÞ ¼ 2σ 3n
2 , the PDF of V can be written
where δ is the shift applied to the scale parameter for the i th
as given in eq. (7).■.
sample. The general form of the CUSUM plotting statistic for
Remark. Since the random variable V follows gamma dis-
monitoring a scale parameter is given as
tribution given in eq. (7) with parameters 3n/2 and 2σ2/3n, the
 
mean and variance of V are, respectively, μV = σ2 and Cþi ¼ max 0; V i −k þ C i−1 :
þ
ð9Þ
σ2V ¼ 2σ
4
 
3n . As the mean is equal to the square of the scale − −
C i ¼ min 0; V i −k þ C i−1 : ð10Þ
parameter, we can conclude that V is an unbiased estimator
of σ2. where C þ −
0 ¼ C 0 ¼ 0, which may also be any value between
For the development in Sect. 3, we will need the following zero and the control limit [8, 15]. k is referred to as the refer-
key theorem resulting from [29] which we will present with- ence value and can be determined as explained in Theorem 3
out a proof. below. The C’s are originally obtained based on normal dis-
tribution. But for the Maxwell distribution, we need to modify
Theorem 2 Since the distribution of V given in eq. (7) is a the CUSUM structure utilizing theorem 2 for exponential fam-
member of the exponential family of distributions, its ily as follows.
PDF can be expressed in the following form
0 1 Theorem 3 The reference value for VCUSUM chart is
   
B v 3n 3n 2σ2 3n C
f ðvÞ ¼ expB
@− 2σ2 þ −1 lnv− ln −ln Γ C:
2 2 3n 2 A lnσ2 −lnσ2 lnðδÞ
k ¼ −  −21 −20 ¼ −  −2 −2  : ð11Þ
3n σ1 −σ0 σ1 −σ0
ð8Þ
Proof. Let V~gamma(a, b)and f(v| b, a) = exp {c(v)d(b) +
 
g(v)w(b)}, where f ðvjb; aÞ≡exp v − 1b þða−1Þ lnðvÞ−ln Γ
3 The proposed VCUSUM chart ðaÞ−a lnðbÞg is the gamma density, written in ‘exponential
family’ form. Then, the reference value can be defined as
It has been shown in theorem 1 that a transformation of
k ¼ ffwd ððbb11 Þ−w ðb0 Þg fwðb1 Þ−wðb0 Þg
Þ−d ðb0 Þg ≡ fd ðb1 Þ−d ðb0 Þg . Replacing a and b with the pa-
Maxwell distribution is a special type of the gamma distribu-
tion. Hence, to explain the introduction of the Maxwell rameters in eq. (7) results in eq. (11). ■.
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Table 2 Run length properties of

V− chart [23] δ Sample size (n)

n=1 n=2 n=5 n=9

ARL SDRL ARL SDRL ARL SDRL ARL SDRL

1 370.78 371.53 372.02 377.87 374.69 373.06 369.29 365.14

1.25 147.28 146.92 116.26 115.75 69.04 67.92 42.4 41.35
1.5 62.63 60.81 39.64 38.4 17.55 17.21 8.97 8.51
1.75 32.15 31.44 18.67 18.31 7.36 6.99 3.76 3.28
2 19.8 18.98 10.84 10.12 4.19 3.65 2.21 1.64
2.25 13.25 12.62 7.08 6.47 2.75 2.23 1.6 1.01
2.5 9.87 9.26 5.17 4.65 2.09 1.51 1.33 0.67
2.75 7.66 7.25 4.04 3.54 1.74 1.13 1.19 0.48
3 6.36 5.88 3.33 2.8 1.51 0.87 1.11 0.36
6 2.18 1.6 1.37 0.71 1.02 0.15 1 0.01

Remark. When the null hypothesis is true, that is δ = 1, k
will be zero.
In this article, one-sided upper CUSUM chart is considered
since increase in variation is mostly a disadvantage than de-
crease in variation when monitoring a process. For this case,
the process is said to be OOC if the plotting statistic exceeds a
specific threshold, say h, that is, C þ
i > h.
4 Performance measures
The performance of the proposed chart is mainly determined by
the average run length (ARL) approach, which is the most com-
mon and effective approach [1]. ARL is the average number of
point (sample) plotted until there is an OOC signal [1, 14]. The
ARL for the CUSUM scheme can be determined by either of the
following methods: renewal equations—based on integral equa-
tions; Markov chain—the discrete approximations to the integral
equations; and simulation—based on variance reduction tech-
niques [29]. Without loss of generalization, the simulation meth-
od is used in this research, by guessing the threshold value for a
specific IC ARL (ARL0) through a Monte Carlo program written
in the R software [30]. In addition, the standard deviation of the
run length is also studied. Furthermore, the distribution of the run
length is also investigated with the use of percentiles. Following,
Table 1 gives the run length properties of VCUSUM control
chart. Table 1 shows the different characteristics of run length
for distinguish sample size and shift. For fixed false alarm rate
α = 0.0027 and sample size n = 1 we see that when the process is
in control state on an average, we must wait for approximately
370 samples to get the first signal. But in case a small shift for
example if there exist 10% shift in the process, the waiting

Table 3 Run length properties of

VCUSUM chart for σ = 1772.86 Sample size (n)
and k = 3313806
n=1 n=2 n=5 n=9
δ ARL SDRL ARL SDRL ARL SDRL ARL SDRL
1 368.05 331.40 369.80 321.57 373.98 348.93 371.61 354.10
1.1 117.73 90.13 86.76 65.33 52.85 35.79 36.52 24.25
1.2 63.44 41.29 41.14 23.64 23.48 13.40 15.87 7.71
1.25 48.38 29.49 33.93 18.71 18.25 8.43 12.65 5.58
1.5 25.02 13.06 16.10 7.08 9.15 3.43 5.98 2.21
1.7 17.84 8.78 11.72 4.66 6.49 2.28 4.32 1.41
1.75 17.15 8.19 10.88 4.50 6.06 2.13 4.11 1.35
1.8 15.32 7.01 10.03 4.09 5.69 1.99 3.74 1.20
2 12.43 5.60 8.19 3.35 4.58 1.58 3.09 0.94
2.5 8.79 4.08 5.59 2.19 3.22 1.08 2.22 0.62
3 6.62 3.01 4.36 1.78 2.51 0.80 1.82 0.57
6 3.15 1.53 2.13 0.87 1.32 0.48 1.04 0.20
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Table 4 Percentiles of RL of VCUSUM chart for σ = 1777.86 and k = 3313806

δ n=1 n=2 n=5 n=9

q10 q25 q50 q75 q90 q10 q25 q50 q75 q90 q10 q25 q50 q75 q90 q10 q25 q50 q75 q90

1 69 127 269 505 807 61 128 277 508 820 61 117 259 514 844 48 114 253 526 855
1.1 34 53 92 153 234 25 41 69 113 168 18 28 44 68 102 13 19 30 47 69
1.2 23 34 54 83 116 17 24 36 53 72 10 14 20 30 40 8 10 14 20 26
1.25 18 28 41 61 86 15 21 29 44 57 9 12 17 22 29 7 9 12 16 20
1.5 11 16 23 31 42 8 11 15 20 26 5 7 9 11 14 4 4 6 7 9
1.7 8 12 16 22 29 6 9 11 15 18 4 5 6 8 10 3 3 4 5 6
1.75 8 11 16 21 28 6 8 10 13 17 4 5 6 7 9 3 3 4 5 6
1.8 7 10 14 19 25 5 7 9 12 16 3 4 5 7 8 2 3 4 4 5
2 6 8 12 16 20 4 6 8 10 13 3 3 4 6 7 2 2 3 4 4
2.5 4 6 8 11 14 3 4 5 7 8 2 2 3 4 5 2 2 2 3 3
3 3 4 6 8 10 2 3 4 5 7 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 2
6 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

number of samples is declined to about 143 samples. For 25%
shift in the process parameter, the average number of samples is
only 54. By the increment of sample size for same shift, the
average number of sample to obtain signal reduced gradually.
Table 1 also depicts standard deviation of run length (SDRL),
quantiles for different shift, and sample size. (n)
5 Comparison with existing charts
(n) of 1 (see Table 2). But in our case of the VCUSUM in
Table 3 for the same sample size, the ARL is only 48.
Comparatively, the VCUSUM can potentially detect moderate
sized shift much faster than if we were to use the V Shewhart
chart. With the increment of sample size, the ARL gradually
decreases. Hence, we may infer that the proposed VCUSUM
chart is more sensitive in detecting shift as compared to V
chart. Table 4 shows the percentiles of run length.

In this section, we would like to compare the proposed 6 Illustrative example

VCUSUM chart with the V Shewhart type chart developed
by reference [23]. In their article, they showed that for 25% A boring machine is a device for making a bigger hole in an
increase in shift, the ARL is approximately 148 for sample size existing hole in a workpiece. The hole produced by using

Table 5 Plotting data for the

illustrative example Observation Parameter Plotting value Observation Parameter Plotting
number estimate (V) (C) number estimate (V) value (C)

1 3,336,713 22,831.85 16 4,354,789 8,273,484

2 2,859,270 0 17 2,805,902 7,765,506
3 3,666,550 352,669.4 18 4,588,520 9,040,146
4 3,132,794 171,582.3 19 4,829,929 10,556,194
5 3,781,886 639,587.8 20 3,910,538 11,152,851
6 2,378,780 0 21 2,841,708 10,680,678
7 1,759,270 0 22 2,566,451 9,933,248
8 4,370,996 1,057,115 23 4,267,153 10,886,521
9 4,503,843 2,247,078 24 4,202,461 11,775,101
10 4,761,577 6,504,774 25 3,406,360 11,867,580
11 2,893,367 6,084,261 26 3,459,810 12,013,509
12 2,931,706 5,702,087 27 3,723,778 12,423,407
13 3,068,791 5,456,997 28 3,430,499 12,540,025
14 2,934,246 5,077,362 29 4,419,754 13,645,899
15 4,469,095 6,232,576 30 3,378,578 13,710,596

Fig. 2 Boring machine [31]
this device is more accurate and smooth. It consists of a
single cutting tip of steel, cemented carbide, or diamond or
may be a small grinding wheel. In a plant where production
is huge, special boring machines with multiple spindles are
common [31].
Following references [23, 26], we use a real dataset based
on the failure rate of vertical boring machine. The data was
used by [32] to discuss an optimum maintenance strategy for a
vertical boring machine. Later, Krishna and Malik [26] did
some rigorous statistical analysis to determine the distribution
that best fit the data. They consider five reliability models such
as Gamma, Maxwell, Exponential, Log-normal, and Weibull.
The parameters of the models are estimated using the method
of maximum likelihood. Based on Akaike’s information cri-
terion, the second-order information criterion, the Bayesian
information criterion, and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, they
concluded that the Maxwell distribution is the best fit for the
data. Also, Hossain et al. [23] reconfirm that the data follows a
Maxwell distribution with a scale parameter σ = 1777.88 by
failing to reject the hypothesis that the data is from a Maxwell
distribution, using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.Hossain et
al. [23] also showed that no large shift occurs for this data.
Therefore, these show the applicability of the Maxwell distri-
bution in reliability testing. However, our use of the VCUSUM
chart here is to check whether it is small to moderate sized
shift that could not be detected.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
The failure times of the vertical boring machine (in hours)
are as follows:
2802, 2937, 2136, 4359, 4020, 1781, 2816, 2655, 3886,
2296, 3158, 3695, 4155, 3811, 2380, 376, 2172, 3705, 2848,
4339, 2076, 2672, 3632, 1976, 1700, 1596, 1701, 3575, 3802,
4351, 4291, 808.
We divide them into 8 observations of size 4 each and
estimate the scale parameter of the observations in the form
Vi ¼ σ ^2i , using eq. (6). The VCUSUM chart in Fig. 3a is con-
structed to be suitable for detecting a 10% increase in the scale
parameter. This gives a corresponding value of k = 3313881.
The properties of the chart are as follows:
n = 4; σ = 1777.88; k = 3313881; h = 13400000;
These are then used to simulate 22 out-of-control (OOC)
observations, with an upward shift of δ = 1.2. Hence, we have
a total of 30 observations for process monitoring with the first
8 being IC while the remaining are OOC (see Table 5). The
proposed chart responds quickly to the OOC situation by giv-
ing an OOC signal after the 29th observation (see Fig. 3a). In
the same figure, we plot the Shewhart control chart for V
statistic and find that it fails to detect this small amount of
shift. Similarly, we introduce a 20% and 350% increase in
the scale parameter in Fig. 3b, c to justify which chart per-
forms better V chart or VCUSUM chart and find our proposed
VCUSUM chart performs better for small amount of shift
whereas for large shift, Shewhart type V chart is better as
compared to the VCUSUM. The source of variation can then
be searched and removed so that the process would return
back to an IC state.
7 Summary, conclusion, and future
recommendations
We develop a memory type CUSUM chart called VCUSUM
chart for monitoring Maxwell process as an extension of the V
chart developed by Hossain et al. [23]. We find that the pro-
posed VCUSUM chart is more sensitive in detection of shift as
compared of Shewhart type V chart. The sensitivity of chart has
been measured based on studying the run length properties such
as ARL, SDRL, and percentiles of run length. We considered
an in control ARL as ARL0 = 370 and compared with out of
control ARLs for various shift and sample sizes. We found that
the proposed chart is extremely sensitive even for 20% increase
in shift (δ). Moreover, we compared our proposed VCUSUM
chart with Shewhart type V control chart in terms of ARL given
in Tables 2 and 3. For small shift such as for 25% increase in
scale parameter, the ARL in VCUSUM chart is much smaller as
compared to ARL in V control chart. We found the similar
scenario for detection capability of signal in a process while
we provide an illustrative example in boring machine failure
detection process (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 3). For 10% and 20%
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Fig. 3 Vertical boring machine

(in hours) failure detection using
Maxwell CUSUM

increase (small shift) in the scale parameter, the proposed
VCUSUM detects signal earlier than V chart whereas for
350% increase (large shift), the V chart detects signal earlier.
Based on our finding, we would like to recommend using
of this proposed VCUSUM control chart in manufacturing
requirements when smaller changes in the quality characteris-
tics need to be monitored and the distribution of the quality
characteristic is skewed in pattern.
Acknowledgements Dr. Omar and Dr. Riaz would like to acknowledge
research facilities made available to them by King Fahd University of
Petroleum and Minerals, Saudi Arabia.
Funding Mr. Hossain would like thank Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur
Rahman Science and Technology University for research support through
grant no. 5921.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
1. Montgomery DC, Introduction to Statistical Quality Control, 7th
ed. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2009
2. Page ES (1954) Continuous inspection schemes. Biometrika 41(1/
2):100–114
3. Roberts SW (1959) Control chart tests based on geometric moving
averages. Technometrics 1(3):239–250
4. Acosta-Mejia C a, Pignatiello JJ, Venkateshwara Rao B (1999) A
comparison of control charting procedures for monitoring process
dispersion. IIE Trans 31(6):569–579
5. Ryu J-H, Wan H, Kim S (2010) Optimal design of a CUSUM chart
for a mean shift of unknown shift. J Qual Technol 42(3):311–326
6. Tran KP, Castagliola P, and Celano G (2016) “Monitoring the ratio
of population means of a bivariate normal distribution using
CUSUM type control charts,”. Stat Pap, pp. 1–27
7. Ghobadi S, Noghondarian K, Noorossana R, Mirhosseini SMS
(2015) Developing a fuzzy multivariate CUSUM control chart to
monitor multinomial linguistic quality characteristics. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 79(9–12):1893–1903
8. Sanusi RA, Riaz M, Abbas N, Abujiya MR (2016) Using FIR to
improve CUSUM charts for monitoring process dispersion. Qual
Reliab Eng Int 33(5):1045–1056
9. Goel AL, Wu SM (1971) Determination of a.R.L. and a contour
nomogram for cusum charts to control normal mean.
Technometrics 13(2):221–230
10. Chiu WK (1974) Economic design of cusum charts for controlling
normal means. Journal of Appl Stat 23(3. JSTOR):420–433
11. Lucas JM, Crosier RB (2000) Fast initial response give your
CUSUM quality-control head start. Technometrics 42(1):102–107
12. Ou Y, Wu Z, Lee KM, Wu K (2013) An adaptive CUSUM chart
with single sample size for monitoring process mean and variance.
Qual Reliab Eng Int 29(7):1027–1039
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
13. Sanusi RA, Abbas N, Riaz M (2017) On efficient CUSUM-type
location control charts using auxiliary information. Quality
Technology and Quantitative Management 15(1):87–105
14. Sanusi RA, Abujiya MR, Riaz M, Abbas N (2017) Combined
Shewhart CUSUM charts using auxiliary variable. Comput Ind
Eng 105:329–337
15. Lucas JM, Crosier RB (1982) Robust Cusum: a robustness study
for Cusum quality control schemes. Communications in Statistics -
Theory and Methods 11(23):2669–2687
16. Zhang S, Wu Z (2007) A CUSUM scheme with variable sample
sizes for monitoring process shifts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 33(9–
10):977–987
17. Jiao JR, Helo PT (2008) Optimization design of a CUSUM control
chart based on taguchi’s loss function. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
35(11–12):1234–1243
18. Abbasi SA, Miller A (2012) On proper choice of variability control
chart for normal and non-normal processes. Qual Reliab Eng Int
28(3):279–296
19. Khaliq QUA, Riaz M, Ahmad S (2016) On designing a new Tukey-
EWMA control chart for process monitoring. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 82:1–4, pp. 1–23
20. Vardeman S, ou Ray D (1985) Average run lengths for cusum
schemes when observations are exponentially distributed.
Technometrics 27(2):145–150
21. Celano G, Castagliola P, Trovato E (2012) The economic perfor-
mance of a CUSUM t control chart for monitoring short production
runs. Quality Technology & Quantitative Management 9(4):329–
354
22. Huang W, Shu L, Jiang W, Tsui KL (2013) Evaluation of run-length
distribution for CUSUM charts under gamma distributions. IIE
Transactions (Institute of Industrial Engineers) 45(9):981–994
23. Hossain MP, Omar MH, Riaz M (2017) New V control chart for the
Maxwell distribution. J Stat Comput Simul 87(3):594–606
24. Morse PM (1962) Thermal physics. W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New
York
25. Kazmi SMA, Aslam M, Ali S (2011) A note on the maximum
likelihood estimators for the mixture of Maxwell distributions using
type-I censored scheme. The Open Statistics and Probability
Journal 3:31–35
26. Krishna H, Malik M (2012) Reliability estimation in Maxwell dis-
tribution with prograsively type-II censored data. J Stat Comput
Simul 82(4):623–641
27. Tomer SK, Panwar MS (2015) Estimation procedures for Maxwell
distribution under type-I progressive hybrid censoring scheme. J
Stat Comput Simul 85(2):339–356
28. Weisstein EW, “Maxwell Distribution,”. Wolfram mathworld,
2017. [Online]. Available: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/
MaxwellDistribution.html. [Accessed: 31-Dec-2017]
29. Hawkins DM and Olwell DH (1998) Cumulative sum charts and
charting for quality improvement
30. R Core Team, “R: a language and environment for statistical com-
puting. R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria.
2015. URL h ttp,” http://www.R-project.org, 2016
31. “Boring machine | Encyclopaedia Britannica.”
32. Majumdar SK (1993) An optimum maintenance strategy for a ver-
tical boring machine system. Operational Research Society of India
30:344–365