See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/236855186

Process performance analysis for non-normal data distribution

Article · October 2010

CITATIONS READS

4 1,204

2 authors:

Tatjana Sibalija Majstorovic Vidosav

Metropolitan University University of Belgrade
96 PUBLICATIONS   726 CITATIONS    172 PUBLICATIONS   1,095 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

8th International Conference of Industrial Engineering – SIE 2022 View project

Cyber Phisical Manufacturing Metrology Model (CP3M) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tatjana Sibalija on 31 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal ’’Total Quality Management & Excellence’’, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2010.

PROCESS PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR NON-NORMAL DATA

DISTRIBUTION
UDC:
1 2
Tatjana V. Šibalija , Vidosav D. Majstorović
1
Petroleum Industry of Serbia – Gazpromneft, Milentija Popovića 1, 11000
Belgrade, Serbia; sibalija@yahoo.com
2
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Belgrade, Kraljice Marije
16, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

Abstract: The process capability and performance analysis has become an inevitable step in quality
management of modern industrial processes. The objective of the study was to estimate the current
process performance, in order to provide accurate information for the customer, for performance
benchmarking and for the process improvement. In case of data that do not obey normal distribution, the
key issue in this analysis was to obtain correct estimate of process performance. This is successfully
accomplished by using performance indices calculation based on Clements’ percentile method.
Key Words: process capability, process performance, non-normal distribution.

1. INTRODUCTION ensure that the sample selected for the process

The challenge in today’s competitive markets is to
be on the leading edge of producing high quality
products at minimum costs. This cannot be done
without a systematic approach that allows quantifying
how well a process can produce products that meets
customer’ specifications. Process capability studies
indicate if a process is capable of producing virtually
all conforming products. If the process is capable, then
statistical process control can be used to monitor the
process, which leads to reduction of non-value added
inspections. If the process is not capable of producing
virtually all conforming products, the process is said
to be incapable and inspections according to the
acceptance sampling procedures must remain part of
the process. In such case, it is necessary to improve
process capability by using quality engineering
techniques.
As defined by Western Electric, a “process
capability study is a scientific systematic procedure
for determining the capability of a process by means
of control charts, which includes investigation of any
unnatural behaviour of process to determine its cause,
and action to eliminate the unnatural behaviour
(improving the process to obtain a better capability).
This procedure is continued as long as may be
necessary until the problem which prompted the study
is solved. In any case, the term process capability
study implies the solution of the problem” [1].
It is important to understand that the analysis of
process capability does not involve only calculating
the process capability indices. Process capability study
includes using control charts, process improvement
efforts via design and analysis of experiments to
improve capability as well as other statistical tools for
problem solving. Issues that must be addressed in a
process capability study are [1]:
• Plan the study, including representative time
frame for data collection and sampling plan, to
is representative of the population as a whole.
• Collect the data using control chart for
monitoring the data collection process. The
process needs to be shown stable. In case of
instability, special causes of variability must be
identified.
• Eliminate special cause of variability and
evaluate the stability of the process. Source of
variability may include measurement
variability, batch-to-batch variability, operator-
to-operator variability, etc.
• Identify further potential source of variability,
and estimate them using components of
variance model.
• Evaluate the underlaying probability of the
process.
Process capability analysis has become well
defined method in the last two decades, considered on
its own [1], [2], or within Six sigma methodology [3],
[4]. Several recent studies have been devoted to
deeper understanding of process capability and
performance [5], particularly for non-normally
distributed data [6] - [9].
2. PROCESS CAPABILITY AND
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
Capability studies are used to predict the overall
ability of a continuous distribution process to make
products within the required specifications. Process
capability and performance indices have been widely
investigated as a means of summarizing process
performance relative to a set of specifications.
2.1 Process capability
Product specifications regarding the observed
quality characteristic are usually given in term of
specification limits and target. Juran and Gryna

1
 International Journal ’’Total Quality Management & Excellence’’, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2010.
defined process capability as “the measured, inherent
reproducibility of the product turned out by a process”
[1]. Process capability indices related the
specifications to the process tolerance. The simplest
process capability index is Cp [1], [2]:
Tolerance specificat ion USL − LSL
Cp = = observations are independent of each other).
Tolerance natural 6σ
where
- Tolerance specification is specification tolerance of
the process;
- USL is upper and LSL is lower specification
limit with respect to the observed
characteristic;
- Tolerance natural is natural tolerance of the
process; and σ is the process standard
deviation.
The Cp index represents the ratio of the
specification width to the natural tolerance spread of
the process. The Cp index has been criticised since it
does not consider the process location or mean. Thus,
Cp is often referred to as a measure of a process
potential capability.
To incorporate some measure of process location
other indices have been proposed. One such popular
index of process capability is Cpk [1], [2]:
 USL − X X − LSL 
Cpk = min  ; 
 3σ 3σ 
where
- X is the average value of the observed
characteristic (the average of sample averages),
and
- σ is standard deviation of process with respect
to the observed characteristic [1], [2]:
R (3)
σ =
d2
where
- d2 is coefficient which depends on a sample
size, and
- R is the average range.
Process with Cp = 1.0 or greater provides products
that meet customer specifications, if process is centred
in the middle of the specification range. But, if
average value of the observed characteristic is
changed than distribution could be shifted so the
process could be shifted with respect to specifications.
Cp does not consider the location of the process, in
contrast to Cpk. Cpk presents the specification width
with respect to how well the process spread is located
about the target and the specification limits. A
Cpk=1.0 or greater implies that a process, which is in
control, is capable to meet customer specifications
with respect to the observed characteristic. A process
is considered to be “Six sigma” if Cp is equal to or
greater than 2.0 and Cpk is equal to or greater than
1.5. A process with these indices has a calculated
defect rate of 3.4 parts per million [3], [4].
Process capability indices are useful in estimating
future performance of the process. The assumptions
required for the interpretation of the process capability
indices are [1]: process stability; representative
samples; normality (the underlaying process
distribution is normal); independences (the
(1)
2.2 Process performance
Afore-mentioned capability indices indicate what
is achievable rather than what is currently being
achieved. The concept of process performance indices
was created in response to the above criticism. Process
performance indices Pp and Ppk are calculated using
the same formulae for process capability indices. The
difference is that process performances indices do not
assume that the process is in-control or is normal and
they are not calculated using subgroup sample
statistics. That is, there are calculated using all of the
data collected and without regard for whether points
were out-of-control. The process performance indices
make used of the within sample standard deviation
since it includes both common and special cause of
variation. Process performance indices do assume that
the data has been collected over a representative
period. Thus, process performances indices provide a
more realistic assessment of what is being produced
(2)
[1].
Cp and Cpk compute the index with respect to the
samples of data (average values of the samples), while
Pp and Ppk take into account whole process (all
individual data within all samples). Standard deviation
for Pp and Ppk is [1], [2]:
∑ (X − X i )2
σ = i (4)
N −1
where
- X is average value of characteristic,
- X i is individual measurement,
- N is total number of measurements (i=1, .., N).
Mathematical expressions for Pp and Ppk are [1],
[2]:
(5)
USL − LSL
Pp =
∑ (X − X i)2
6 i
N −1
 
 
 USL − X X − LSL  (6)
Ppk = min  ; 
 ∑ (X − X i )2 ∑i ( X − X i ) 2 
3 i
3 
 N −1 N −1 
For both Ppk and Cpk the 'k' stands for
'centralizing facteur'; it assumes the index takes into
consideration the fact that data maybe not centred
(hence, index shall be smaller). It is more realistic to
use Pp and Ppk than Cp and Cpk as the process
variation cannot be tempered with by inappropriate
subgrouping (samples). However, Cp and Cpk can be
2
 International Journal ’’Total Quality Management & Excellence’’, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2010.
very useful in order to know if, under the best
conditions, the process is capable of fitting into the
specifications or not. The values for Cpk and Ppk will
converge to almost the same value when the process is
in statistical control, because the real standard
deviation and the sample standard deviation will be
identical.
Until a few years ago, most organizations used a
goal of Ppk > 1.33, however, processes that must
deliver “Six sigma” performance require Pp > 2.0 and
Ppk > 1.5 [3], [4].
3. PROCESS PERFORMANCE FOR NON-
NORMAL DISTRIBUTION
The proper use of process capability indices,
which are statistical measures of process capability, is
based on several assumptions. One of the most
essential is that the process monitored is supposed to
be stable and the output is approximately normally
distributed. When the distribution of a process
characteristic is non- normal, process capability
indices calculated using conventional methods could
often lead to erroneous and misleading interpretation
of the process's capability.
Somerville and Montgomery studied the errors that
can occur in calculating Cp or Cpk for a non-normal
distribution. They have reached a conclusion for the
four non-normal distributions, most common in
engineering and reliability applications: the t, the
gamma, the lognormal, and the Weibull distributions,
that although the magnitude of an error can vary
substantially depending on the true (unknown)
distribution parameters, the errors are of consequence
in nearly all cases. Hence, if the capability indices
based on the normal assumption concerning the data
are used to deal with non-normal observations, the
values of the capability indices may, in a majority of
situations, be incorrect and quite likely misrepresent
the actual product quality [2].
In case of non-normal distributions, by replacing
the unknown 6σ distance by Up - Lp calculated based
on the available sample data obtained from a stable
process using the estimates of the mean, standard
deviation, skewness and kurtosis, a natural tolerance is
[2], [6] - [9]:
Tolerancenatural = Up - Lp = X 0.99865- X 0.00135
where:
- Up estimates the 99.865 percentile and Lp
estimates the 0.135 percentile to mimic the
property of a normal distribution that the tail
probability that the process is outside ±3σ
limits from the average value equals 0.27%;
- X 0.00135 is the value meeting the condition:
P(X < X 0.00135) = 0.00135;
- X 0.99865 is the value meeting the condition:
P(X < X 0.99865) = 0.99865
(i.e. P(X <= X 0.99865) = 0.00135).
Values X 0.99865 and X 0.00135 are the z-values of the
non-normal cumulative distribution curve at the
99.865 percentage point and the 0.135 percentage
point, respectively.
The definition (7) guarantees exactly the same as
the definition (1) in case of a normal distribution, i.e.
within the range determined by a natural tolerance
practically all possible realizations of the process
should be contained, and participation of the
realization outside the range determined by natural
tolerance limits equals 0.0027 (i.e. 2700 parts per
million). The distance between the 99.865th and
0.135th percentiles is equivalent to the 6σ spread in the
normal case. The process median is presented by the
50th percentile value for the non-normal distribution,
which is equivalent to the average value of the
characteristic ( X ) in case of normal distribution.
The above statements were drawn from Clements’
method of determining percentiles based on Pearson
family of distribution. For non-normal Pearsonian
distributions (which include a wide class of
"populations" with non-normal characteristics),
Clements has proposed a method for calculating
capability estimators which uses Pearson curves to
provide more accurate estimates of X0.00135, X0.50 (=
median) and X0.99865. The Clements’ method estimates
capability indices based on evaluation of the skewness
and kurtosis of the data. The method estimates
percentiles and medians of the process distribution to
define percentile based performance indices [2].
As described in the previous sub-sections, process
capability calculation requires the assumption that the
underlaying process distribution is normal, in contrast
to process performances estimation that does not
assume that the process data are normally distributed.
Hence, in case of non-normal distribution it does
make sense to discuss process performance indices in
reporting the actual process capability for non-normal
data. Relaying on this and based on the formulae (7)
for natural tolerance and calculations of process
performance indices (5) and (6), the process
performance indices for non-normal distribution could
be expresses as:
USL − LSL
Pp = (8)
X 0.99865 - X 0.00135
 USL − X 0.50 X 0.50 − LSL  (9)
Ppk = min  ; 
X
 0.99865 - X 0.50 X 0.50 - X 0.00135 
(7)
Beside the described approach based on commonly
used Clements’ percentile method, there are other
methods for estimation of process performance for non-
normal distribution, such as the Box-Cox transformation
method, Burr percentile method, and Cumulative
Distribution Function (CDF) method [2], [6] - [9]
The procedure for estimation of process
performance for non-normal data, by using software
Minitab 15, is consisted from the following elements
[10]:
1. Depending on the sample size, use X , R or
X , σ control chart to assess whether the
process is in control, before assessing process
capability. By analysing the X chart it is
3
 International Journal ’’Total Quality Management & Excellence’’, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2010.
possible to determine whether the average
subgroup measurements are in control, and by
looking at the R or σ chart it should be
determined whether the subgroup-to-subgroup
variation is in control.
2. Form the subgroups plot to show the
distribution of the measurements in the
subgroups, to determine if a subgroup contains
outliers and whether the distribution changes
across subgroups.
3. Use the capability histogram and probability
plot to find the most appropriate non-normal
distribution to fit the actual data and then
assess whether the data follows a chosen non-
normal distribution.
4. By using capability plot, compare the actual
process tolerance interval to the specification
interval. The specification interval represents
the interval between the lower and upper
specification limits for the observed
characteristic. The actual process tolerance
interval corresponds to the interval between -
3σ and 3σ in the standard normal distribution.
The interval is the difference between the
99.865th and 0.135th percentiles of the non-
normal distribution used in the analysis.
5. Calculate the overall process capability indices,
which are actually process performance
indices, to depict how the process is actually
performing relative to the specification limits.
The performance indices consist of the
following:
• Pp relates the process spread (X0.99865 –
X0.00135) to the specification spread (USL –
LSL), assuming that the process median is
within the specification spread.
• PPU refers to the upper limit and presents
the ratio of (USL – X 0.5) to (X 0.99865 – X 0.5).
PPL refers to the lower limit and presents
the ratio of (X 0.5– LSL) to (X 0.5– X 0.00135).
PPL and PPU are useful indices in case of a
single-sided specification limit.
• Ppk is the minimum of PPU and PPL, and
considers both process range and location
when comparing the process with the
specification.
4. CONCLUSION
In this study, some important issues regarding
process capability and performance have been
highlighted, particularly in case when the distribution
of a process characteristic is non-normal.
As proven in several case studies, if data are non-
normally distributed and the process
capability/performance study is performed under the
assumption of normally distributed data, the results for
capability and performance indices could be highly
misleading. Moreover, in such cases it could be found
that the process performance indices are higher than
capability indices, which is practically impossible
because performance indices include within-sample
View publication stats
variation, thus including both common and special
cause of variation. If Cp < Pp and Cpk < Ppk than
certain fixed pattern in subgroups exists, which,
among others, could mean that data do not follow
normal distribution which was confirmed in the above
analysis [11], [12].
This highlights the importance of a proper
calculation of process capability/performance indices,
providing accurate data for the customer and for the
process improvement.
It could be concluded that process capability and
performance analysis are crucial matters of an overall
quality improvement program, presenting a complex
issue that includes process monitoring and also
process improvement.
The approach presented in the paper could be
employed in industrial practice for estimation of
process capability in case of non-normal distribution
for any type of non-normal distribution.
REFERENCE
[1] Keats, J.B., Montgomery D.C., Statistical Applications
in Process Control, ISBN 0-8247-9711-6, Marcel Dekker,
Inc., New York 1996.
[2] Pearn, W. L, Kotz S., Encyclopaedia and Handbook of
Process Capability Indices, ISBN 981-256-759-3, World
Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Singapore 2006.
[3] Pyzdek T., The Six Sigma Handbook, ISBN 0-07-
141015-5, McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, New York 2003.
[4] Majstorović, V., Šibalija T., Soković, M., Pavletić, D.,
Six sigma model and application, ISBN 978-86-7892-193-3,
Faculty of Technical Sciences, Novi Sad 2009. (In Serbian)
[5] Rezaie, K., Ostadi, B., Taghizadeh, M.R., Applications
of Process Capability and Process Performance Indices,
Journal of Applied Sciences 6(5), pp. 1186-1191, 2006.
[6] Chang, P.L., Lu, K.H., PCI calculations for any shape of
distribution with percentile, Quality World, technical
section, Vol. September, pp.110-14, 1994.
[7] Chen, J.-P., Ding, C.G., A new process capability index
for non-normal distributions, Int. J. of Quality & Reliability
Management 18(7), pp. 762-770, 2001.
[8] Czarski, A., Estimation of process capability indices in
case of distribution unlike the normal one, Archives of
Materials Science and Engineering 34(1), pp. 39-42, 2008.
[9] Ahmad, S., Abdollahian, M., Zeephongsekul, P., Process
capability estimation for non-normal quality characteristics:
A comparison of Clements, Burr and Box-Cox Methods,
ANZIAM J. 49, pp. C642-C665, 2008.
[10] N.N., Minitab Statistical Software, Release 15 for
Windows, Minitab Inc. 2007.
[11] Šibalija, T., Majstorović, V., SPC and Process
Capability Analysis – Case Study, Proceedings of the 5th
International Conference “Total Quality Management -
Advanced and Intelligent Approaches”, ISBN 978-86-7083-
660-0, pp. 237-244, Belgrade, Jun 2009.
[12] Majstorović, V., Šibalija, T., An efficient use of quality
engineering techniques for analysis and improvement of
industrial processes: the automatic enamelling process case
study, Proceedings of 43rd CIRP International Conference on
Manufacturing Systems - ICMS 2010, Vienna, May 2010.