Chapter 5 Measure - GB

ADDAAP Process Solutions , GREEN BELT PROGRAM
GREEN BELT
COURSE MANUAL
MEASURE PHASE
ADAAP Process Solutions Private

Limited
BANGALORE 1
ADAAP/GBSP/2008/01
DATA GATHERING
• What is Data ?
Data is a numerical expression of an activity.
Conclusions based on facts and data are necessary for

any improvement.
-K. Ishikawa
If you are not able to express a phenomenon in

numbers, you do not know about it adequately.
-Lord Kelvin
ADAAP/GBSP/2008/01 2
TYPES OF DATA
CONTINUOUS DISCRETE
Measurable Subjective Assessment
e.g. :Length, Temperature e.g. :Score in a beauty
contest
Countable
e.g. :Number of defects
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

A SHAFT DIAMETER THE NUMBER OF SHAFTS
REJECTED FOR OVERSIZE
DIAMETER
The diameter of a shaft The number of shaft rejected
can take any value ever has necessarily to be a whole
after the decimal point number. e.g.. 0, 2, 7, 10
numbers rejected etc..
e.g.. 19.055, 19.0516 etc..
Data related to this type of
Data related to this type
parameters are called Discrete
of parameters are called
data.
Continuous data.
WHICH OF THE BELOW ARE CONTINUOUS

AND DISCRETE DATA?
• Width of sheet
• No. of liners thinned
• Tubes rejected by Go- Nogo Gauge
• Diameter of Piston
• Height of a Man
• Sheet thickness
• Out of 100 sheets the numbers that meet the thickness 4  0.9
• Time taken to process a purchase order
• No. of bugs in a program
FMEA
There are two primary flavors of FMEA:
Design FMEAs are used during process or product design and
development.
The primary objective is to uncover problems that will result
in potential failures within the new product or process.
Process FMEAs are used to uncover problems related to an
existing process.
These tend to concentrate on factors related to manpower,
systems, methods, measurements and the environment.
Although the objectives of design and process FMEAs may
appear different, both follow the same basic steps and the
approaches are often combined.
FMEA
FMEA drives systematic thinking about a product or process by
asking and attempting to answer three basic questions:
 What could go wrong (failure) with a process or system?
 How bad can it get (risks), if something goes wrong
(fails)?
 What can be done (corrective actions) to prevent things
from going wrong (failures)?
FMEA attempts to identify and prioritize potential process or
system failures. The failures are rated on three criteria:
 The impact of a failure - severity of the effects.
 The frequency of the causes of the failure - occurrence.
 How easy is it to detect the causes of a failure -
detectability.
FMEA
Notice that only the causes and effects are rated - failure
modes themselves are not directly rated in the FMEA
analysis.
FMEA is cause-and-effect analysis by another name – avoid
being hung up on the failure mode.
The failure mode simply provides a convenient model, which
allows us to link together multiple causes with multiple
effects.
It is easy to confuse failures, causes, and effects, especially since
causes and effects at one level can be failures at a lower level.
Effects are generally observable, and are the result of some
cause. Effects can be thought of as outputs.
FMEA
Effects are usually events that occur downstream that affect
internal or external customers.
Root causes are the most basic causes within the process
owner’s control. Causes, and root causes, are in the
background; they are an input resulting in an effect.
Failures are what transform a cause to an effect; they are often
unobservable.
One can think of failures, effects, and causes in terms of the
following schematic:
Root Cause Failure Effect

x f(x) y
FMEA
Note that a failure mode can have numerous distinct effects, and
that each effect has its own system of root causes.
With this in mind, another way to think of failures, effects, and

causes is:
Causes - x's
Failure - f(x) Effect - y
FMEA
Keep in mind that a single failure mode can have several effects,
and that the cause-and-effect diagram on the previous slide
should be repeated for each effect of the failure!!!
Cause Set 1 - x1's Effect 1 - y1
Cause Set 2 - x2's Effect 2 - y2
. Failure Mode - f(x) .

.
.
.
.
Cause Set n - xn's Effect n - yn
Risk Priority Numbers

The failures identified by the team in an FMEA project are
prioritized by what are called Risk Priority Numbers, or
RPN values.
The RPN values are calculated by multiplying together the
Severity, Occurrence, and Detection (SOD) values
associated with each cause-and-effect item identified for
each failure mode.
Note: The failure mode itself is not rated and only plays a
conceptual role in linking causes with their effects on the
product, process, or system.
For a given cause-and-effect pair the team assigns SOD values
to the effects and causes. Then an RPN is calculated for that
pair: RPN = Severity x Occurrence x Detection.
FMEA
Once the RPN values are assigned to each of the cause-and-
effect pairs identified by the team, the pairings are
prioritized.
The higher the RPN value, the higher the priority to work on
that specific cause-and-effect pair.
The measurement scale for the SOD values is typically a 5 or 10
point Likert scale (an ordinal rating scale).
The exact criteria associated with each level of each rating scale
is dependent upon either a company designed rating criteria
or a specified rating criteria from an industry specific
guideline.
We recommend the use of a 10 point Likert scale for each of the
three rating criteria: Severity, Occurrence, and Detection.
FMEA
Note: The 10 point scale facilitates the ability of the team to
assign ratings in a timely fashion.
Too many levels can lead to a false sense of precision and a
lot of agonizing over the exact rating to be assigned for each
item.
The rating systems used should be developed to reflect the
specific situation of interest.
Recall the example of the completed FMEA presented earlier.
The FMEA was developed by a team studying OS/390 online
systems availability to end users.
On the following slides, we will see the ratings systems agreed
upon by the team.
FMEA
Severity rates the seriousness of the effect for the potential

failure mode - how serious is the effect if the failure did
occur?
The more critical the effect, the higher the severity rating.
FMEA
Severity ratings for the online systems availability FMEA.
Severity Rank Criterion
None 1 No effect
Very Minor 2 No noticeable effect on production
Minor 3 Minor effect on production
Very Low 4 Very low effect on production
Low 5 Low effect on production
Moderate 6 Moderate effect on production
Significant 7 Noticeable effect on production
High 8 Production nearly halted
Very High 9 Production halted
Disaster 10 Implement Hotsite recovery
FMEA
Occurrence, or frequency of occurrence, is a rating that
describes the chances that a given cause of failure will occur
over the life of product, design, or system.
Actual data from the process or design is the best method for
determining the rate of occurrence. If actual data is not
available, the team must estimate rates for the failure mode.
Examples:
 The number of data entry errors per 1000 entries, or
 The number of errors per 1000 calculations.
An occurrence value must be determined for every potential
cause of the failure listed in the FMEA form.
FMEA
The higher the likelihood of occurrence, the higher the
occurrence value.
Once again, occurrence guidelines can be developed and should

reflect the situation of interest.
FMEA
Occurrence guidelines for the system availability FMEA:
Occurrence Rank Criterion Possible failure rate
Remote 1 Unklikely that cause occurs  1 in 15,00,000
Very low 2 Very low chance that cause occurs 1 in 1,50,000
Low 3 Few occurrences of cause likely 1 in 15,000
4 1 in 2000
Moderate 5 Medium number of occurences of cause 1 in 400
6 1 in 80
7 1 in 20
High High number of occurrences of cause
8 1 in 8
9 1 in 3
Very High Very high number of occurrences of cause
10  1 in 2
FMEA
The detection rating describes the likelihood that we will detect
a cause for a specific failure mode.
An assessment of process controls gives an indication of the
likelihood of detection.
Process controls are methods for ensuring that potential
causes are detected before failures take place.
For example, process controls can include:
• Required fields or limited fields in electronic forms,
• Process and/or system audits, and
• “Are you sure” dialog boxes in computer programs.
If there are no current controls, the detection rating will be high.
If there are controls, the detection rating will be low.
FMEA
The higher a detection rating, the lower the likelihood we
will detect a specific cause if it were to occur.
Detection guidelines developed for the system availability FMEA:
Detection Rank Criterion
Almost certain 1 Cause obvious and easy to detect
Very High 2 Very high chance of detecting the cause
High 3 High chance of detecting the cause
Moderately High 4 Cause easily detected by inspection
Moderate 5 Moderate likelihood of detection
Low 6
Low likelihood of detection
Very Low 7
Very low likelihood of detection
Remote 8 Cause is hard to identif y
Very Remote 9 Cause is very hard to identif y
Almost impossible 10 Cause usually not detectable
FMEA
Conducting an FMEA: Basic Steps
1. Define the scope of the FMEA.
2. Develop a detailed understanding of the current process.
3. Brainstorm potential failure modes.
4. List potential effects of failures and causes of failures.
5. Assign severity, occurrence and detection ratings.
6. Calculate the risk priority number (RPN) for each cause.
7. Rank or prioritize causes.
8. Take action on high risk failure modes.
9. Recalculate RPN numbers.
OBJECTIVES OF DATA COLLECTION

• To know and quantify the status
• To monitor the process
• To decide acceptance or rejection
• To analyse and decide the course of action
HOW TO COLLECT DATA ?

• Define the purpose
• Decide the type of analysis
• Define the period of data collection
• Is the the required data already available ?
LOCATION CHECK SHEET
Hood Paint Defects

Name: ____
Date: ____
Model: ____
DD D
S
XXX
B X
X = Dirt
D = Dent
S = Scratch
B = Bubble
No. inspected: _____
STRATIFICATION
• The method of grouping data by common points or
characteristics to better understand similarities and
characteristics of data is called stratification.
• Such classification helps in obtaining vital
information by distinguishing and comparing data
in different class or strata.
• It also identifies the key strata to concentrate on.
• The stratification may be based on machines,

operators, shifts or any other source of variation.
STRATIFICATION
• The purpose of stratification is to ascertain the
difference between different categories and to
analyze the reasons behind abnormal distribution.
• Stratification of data is an effective method for

isolating the cause of a problem.
• You can also stratify the data you collect by

different QC tools such as graphs, Pareto diagrams,
check sheets, histograms, scatter diagrams, and
control charts.
STRATIFICATION-AREA OF APPLICATION
• Raw Material
Quantity supplied, Delivery time, Rejection % -
supplier wise and batch wise.
• Production
Rejection percentage with respect to machine,
shift, operator, raw material, tool, jig and so on.
• Engineering and design

Draftsman wise drawing errors, Type of drawing
wise.
POPULATION AND SAMPLE

• The entire set of items is called the Population.
• The small number of items taken from the population to
make a judgment of the population is called a Sample.
• The numbers of samples taken to make this judgment is
called Sample size.
POPULATION SAMPLE OF SIZE

THREE
POPULATION, SAMPLE AND DATA
NO ACTION
Measurement /
Random Sampling Observation
POPULATION Sample Data
ACTION
ISI, SQC UNIT, BANGALORE SS-MEASURE PHASE
Data Collection Plan Features
Data Collection Plan Features, cont.
SAMPLE SIZE RULES OF THUMB

Statistic or Recommended Minimum
Chart Sample Size (n)
Frequency plot 50
(Histogram)
Pareto chart 50
Scatter plot 24
Control chart 24
WHAT IS VARIATION ?
• No two things in nature are alike.
• This is also true for manufactured products.
• This dissimilarity between two products for the
same characteristic is called variation.
• The variation may be or can be made to be so
small so as to make the product SEEM similar.
• When we say that 2 things are similar we actually mean
that it is not possible to measure the variation present
within the accuracy of the existing measuring equipment.
• Variation between 2 products are compared for SIMILAR
features or characteristics.
TYPES OF VARIATION
• Variations among pieces at the same

time
• Variations across time
6.50 6.55 7.00
6.55 a.m.  5 minutes.

This man wants to reach his work place by 6.55 a.m.. But he can
not do so, exactly at 6.55 a.m. daily. Sometimes he reaches earlier
(but almost never before 6.50 a.m.). Sometimes he reaches later
(but almost never after 7.00 a.m.). WHY ?
THIS IS BECAUSE....
OF CERTAIN FACTORS WHICH
• Affect the time he takes
• He cannot control
• Vary randomly
e.g. The traffic you encounter under normal course of travel
THE VARIATION THAT OCCURS DUE TO

THESE KIND OF FACTORS IS CALLED
INHERENT VARIATION OR COMMON CAUSE
VARIATION OR WHITE NOISE.
e.g.. m/c vibration,tool wear etc.
UNDER NORMAL SCHEME OF

OPERATION
Maximum deviation
Inherent
Aimed value Variability
(white noise)
Minimum deviation
TODAY HE IS EARLY ! PROBABLY BECAUSE :

• His watch was running fast.
WHY ? • He got a lift.
• His bus driver took a shortcut.
• He stayed over in the colony.
• He had some important work to
be finished before 7.30.
These causes are characteristic of
6.30 a specific circumstance and do
not occur in the normal scheme
of actions.
Variation due to these types of

reasons is called assignable or
special cause variation or black
noise
GRAPHICAL DISPLAY OF
VARIABILITIES
CASE I T
O
Assignable (Black noise) Assignable T
Variability Variability A
L
Inherent
Variability Aimed Value V
A
R
I
A
Assignable Assignable B
Variability I
Variability L
I
CASE II CASE III T
Y
COMMON PROBLEMS WITH MEASUREMENTS

•Problems with the measurements themselves
1. Bias or inaccuracy: The measurements have a different
average value than a “standard” method.
2. Imprecision: Repeated readings on the same material vary
too much in relation to current process variation.
3. Not reproducible: The measurement process is different
for different operators, or measuring devices or labs. This
may be either a difference in bias or precision.
4. Unstable measurement system over time: Either the
bias or the precision changes over time.
5. Lack of resolution: The measurement process cannot
measure to precise enough units to capture current product
variation.
DESIRED MEASUREMENT CHARACTERISTICS

FOR CONTINUOUS VARIABLES
Good
accuracy if
difference is
1. Accuracy
small
The measured value has little
deviation from the actual value.
Standard Observed Accuracy is usually tested by
value value
comparing an average of repeated
measurements to a known standard
value for that unit.
Good
repeatability
2. Repeatability
if variation is
small * The same person taking a
measurement on the same unit gets
the same result.
Data from repeated
measurement of
same item

3. Reproducibility
Data Collector 1
Other people (or other
Data from Part X
instruments or labs) get
the same result you get
Data Collector 2
when measuring the
Data from Part X
same item or
Good characteristic.
reproducibility if
difference is small *

Time 1 4. Stability
Observed Measurements taken by a
value
single person in the same
Time 2 way vary little over time.
Observed
value
Good stability
if difference is
Small*

5. Adequate Resolution
There is enough resolution in the
X measurement device so that the
X product can have many different
X X values.
X X X
X X X X
X X X X X
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5
MINITAB OUTPUT
Gage name:
Date of study:
Gage R&R (ANOVA) for legibility s Reported by:
Tolerance:
Misc:
Xbar Chart by reader reader*form Interaction

Fred J oe Martha 5 reader
5 3.0SL=4.824 Fred
Sample M ean
4 4 Joe
Averag e
X=3.531 Martha
3 3
2 -3.0SL=2.238
2
1 1
0 form 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
R Chart by reader By reader

Fred J oe Martha
3.0SL=2.246 5
2
Sample Rang e
1 3
R=0.6875
2
0 -3.0SL=0.000 1
0 reader Fred Joe Martha
Components of Variation By form

100 5
%Total Var
%Study Var 4
Percent
50 3
0 1
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part form 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
MINITAB OUTPUT
Gage R&R
Source %Contribution %Study Var
Total Gage R&R 37.39 61.15

Repeatability 28.64 53.51
Reproducibility 8.75 29.59
reader 8.75 29.59
Part-To-Part 62.61 79.13
Total Variation 100.00 100.00
Number of Distinct Categories = 2
Acceptance criteria for MSA

1. Gage R & R < 10% Excellent
2. Gage R & R 10% to 30% Acceptable
3. Gage R & R > 30% Not acceptable
In addition: No. of Distinct categories  4
Interpretation of MSA Results

Repeatability error shall be low.
If it is high, then,
a. Instrument is improper
b. Method of measurement is not OK
c. System improvement is required
Reproducibility error shall be low.

If it is high, then,
a. Train the operator
c. Inspector skill not OK
Interpretation of MSA Results

Part to Part variation shall be High.
If it is low, then,
a. Instrument is improper
Nominal/Ordinal Measures MSA

• Introduction
• Assessing Bias
• Kappa
• Example: Nominal MSA
• Kappa for Multiple Categories
• Ordinal Responses
• Recommended Approaches
• MSA in Transactional Projects
Objectives
After completing MSA, participants should be able to:
 Describe the characteristics of a good
measurement system;
 Undertake a formal MSA study, using variance
components analysis if the measure is continuous,
and both confidence intervals and kappa if the
measure is nominal;
 Document the MSA for their project;
 Explain the value of an MSA.
Introduction
This section focuses on MSA for data that are nominal
or ordinal.
Nominal data classifies occurrences into unordered
categories, for example:
 Color of Product is acceptable or not
 A customer survey response on a satisfaction
questionnaire is either “yes” or “no”
 A customer contact is considered acceptable or
not
 Categories of idle time
Introduction
Ordinal data classifies occurrences into ordered categories, for
example:
 A customer survey response on a questionnaire is
“strongly disagree”, “moderately disagree”, “neutral”,
“moderately agree”, or “strongly agree”
 A sales lead is considered “unlikely”, “likely”, or “very
promising”
 An IT failure is classified as being of “low”, “medium”,
or “high” severity
 A package to be delivered is categorized as acceptable,
Downgraded or Reject
Introduction
As with continuous data, nominal and ordinal measurement
systems are evaluated in terms of stability, bias, repeatability
and reproducibility.
Note that the operational definition of the measurement is
critical.
 Nominal and ordinal data often result from subjective
decisions by observers or raters.
 This subjectivity frequently results in bias, repeatability,
and reproducibility problems.
 The more one can remove subjectivity from the rating
process, the better.
Introduction
In this section, we will focus on assessing bias, repeatability and
reproducibility for nominal measurement systems.
Note: We will only briefly introduce methods for studying
ordinal measurement systems.
Although we would like a method for studying both repeatability
and reproducibility in a single experiment, this is not currently
possible for nominal data.
For this reason, we will address the components of repeatability
and reproducibility in terms of intrarater and interrater
agreement.
We will rely on a tool called “kappa” to measure intra-rater and
inter-rater agreement.
Assessing Bias
Studies of bias require knowledge of the true measure of an item
or occurrence.
Studies where rater responses are compared with those of an
expert are called expert re-evaluation studies.
An expert evaluates the items or occurrences that have been rated
by less experienced raters. The expert may be a person or a
reference measurement method.
The expert’s rating is considered to be the “gold standard”, and is
used to determine the percent of correct decisions by all raters.
Since this assumption is key, the performance of the expert
should be evaluated prior to performing the expert re-
evaluation.
Assessing Bias
Example: Consider an example
dealing with security violations
(file SecurityAudit.jmp).
Two Auditors and one Expert Auditor
inspected 25 areas chosen from
many areas that could have been
inspected, and classified each as
P or F (pass or fail).
An attempt was made to include
areas with security violations as
well as without (there should be at
least 25% representation of each
group).
Assessing Bias
Auditor 1 agrees with the Expert for 24 of the 25 areas.
Auditor 2 agrees with the Expert for 18 of the 25 areas.
The percent agreement is dependent upon the areas chosen; had
different areas been chosen, the sample percent agreement
would differ.
In other words, the percent agreement is a sample statistic and
is subject to sampling variation.
The sample percent agreement is an estimate of a population
parameter, the true percent agreement.
Thus it is useful to calculate a range of values that is likely to
contain the true percent agreement with some high probability.
Assessing Bias
Recall that such a range of values is called a confidence
interval.
For each auditor, it is reasonable to assume that the number of
instances of agreement for the 25 areas follows a binomial
distribution where n = 25 and p = unknown probability of
agreement.
For each auditor, we are interested in estimating the parameter
p, the probability of agreement.
As seen earlier, JMP calculates confidence intervals for the
parameter p of a binomial distribution under Distribution.
It is important to define the agreement response as nominal.
Assessing Bias
In the Distribution platform, select the agreement for Auditor 1,
Exp&Aud1 Agreement, as Y.
From the red arrow, select Confidence Interval, and choose 0.95
as the confidence level.
Assessing Bias
The resulting output gives an interval which, with 95%
confidence, contains the true proportion of agreement.
Notice that, according to this interval, the true probability of
agreement could range from 0.805 to 0.993.
Assessing Bias
The output for Auditor 2’s agreement with the Expert is given
below.
What do you conclude? Which actions might be appropriate at
this point?
Note: 25 is an extremely small sample size for attribute

measurement system studies - 50 is considered a minimum.
Kappa
Nominal measurement studies that address repeatability and
reproducibility are often called concordance studies.
In such studies, intrarater agreement measures repeatability
(within rater), and interrater agreement measures the
combination of repeatability and reproducibility (between rater).
The probability of overall agreement among raters, or within a
rater, can be estimated using a confidence interval.
However, analysis using confidence intervals can be misleading,
as we shall see.
In this section, we will introduce a measure called “kappa”, which
is useful in measuring both intrarater and interrater rater
agreement for nominal data.
Kappa
Suppose that a team is studying
customer complaint resolution.
Twenty-five occurrences of customer
complaints and their resolution are
presented, in random order, to each of
two raters, Lynn and Ted.
For each occurrence, each rater is asked
to determine whether the outcome
was acceptable or not, and to indicate
this with a “Yes” or “No” response.
The data are summarized in the data
table to the right (Lynn&Ted.jmp).
Kappa
This data can be summarized in
tabular form as in the table below.
Such a table is called a contingency
table.
This table can be obtained under
Analyze/Fit Y by X, using Lynn
as Y and Ted as X.
Kappa
Note that, in 20 of the 25 occurrences,
Lynn and Ted agreed on their
assessment of the complaint
resolutions.
A confidence interval for their probability
of agreement can be obtained.
An “Agreed” column is defined as shown
in the data table to the right.
A 95% level confidence interval is
obtained as shown earlier.
The probability of agreement is likely
somewhere between 0.61 and 0.91.
Kappa
Suppose that, instead of the responses in Table A, the responses
in Table B had been obtained.
Does one table show more agreement than the other? If so,
which?
Table A Table B
Kappa
As another example, consider the two tables below.
Which shows the greater degree of agreement?
Table A Table B
Kappa
Consider Table A.
How often would you expect Rater1
and Rater 2 to agree based on
chance alone?
Rater 1 classifies 50% of the occurrences as Yes and 50% as No.

Rater 2 does the same.
If the two rater’s decisions had nothing to do with each other (i.e.,
if they were independent), one would expect to see precisely the
counts that are given in the table.
For example, the probability that both would classify an
occurrence as a Yes is 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25, and the expected count
is 100 x 0.25 = 25.
Kappa
Thus, all we are observing is what would be expected by chance
alone, given the raters’ marginal classifications.
Since we are interested in non-chance agreement, the question is:
“How much of the observed agreement between two raters (or
ratings) would not happen by chance alone?”
So, we need to develop a measure of non-chance agreement.
We do this by estimating the chance agreement, and subtracting it
from the overall agreement.
This gives us a measure of what the raters would agree upon
beyond what they would agree upon by chance alone.
Kappa
Consider Table B.
The second entry in each cell of the
table represents chance, or
expected, agreement.
The expected counts are:

In the Yes/Yes cell: 0.90 x 0.40 x 100 = 36.0.
In the No/Yes cell: 0.10 x 0.40 x 100 = 4.0.
In the Yes/No cell: 0.90 x 0.60 x 100 = 54.0.
In the No/No cell: 0.10 x 0.60 x 100 = 6.0.
Kappa
Kappa is a measure of chance-
corrected agreement.
The number of occurrences where the
raters agree is 40 + 10 = 50.
The expected agreement by chance
alone is 36 + 6 = 42
The observed agreed count minus the expected agreed count is
(40 + 10) – (36 + 6) = 8.
We compare this to the number of observations minus expected
agreement: 100 – (36 + 6) = 58.
The ratio of these values is kappa: 8/58 = 0.138.
Kappa can be thought of as the rate of chance-corrected
agreement. ADAAP/GBSP/2008/01 75
Kappa
Kappa is defined by:
No. Observed Agreement  No. Expected Agreement


Total Observations  No. Expected Agreement
JMP computes this value in

the Fit Y by X platform,
when both variables are
nominal and can take on
the same values (for
example, “Yes” or
“No”).
Kappa
For a given level of chance agreement, values of kappa range
from a negative value to 1.
 Negative values reflect disagreement
 A zero value reflects no agreement
 Positive values reflect agreement
Kappa Strength of
Guidelines on strength of Agreement
agreement are given in the < 0.00 Poor or None
table. 0.00 – 0.20 Slight
A kappa of 0.60 or higher is 0.21 – 0.40 Fair
generally considered
0.41 – 0.60 Moderate
acceptable.
0.61 – 0.80 Substantial
77
0.81 –ADAAP/GBSP/2008/01
1.00 Almost perfect
Recommended Approach: Nominal MSA

1. Choose 2 to 4 raters.
2. Choose at least 50 occurrences or items to be inspected.
 For binomial data, attempt to include at least 25% from each
grouping unit.
 For nominal data with more than two categories, attempt to
obtain an equal distribution of categories.
3. If possible, have each rater inspect each occurrence twice, using
randomized presentations. Otherwise, skip to (5).
4. Compute kappa values for each rater to assess repeatability.
Any kappa values below 0.60 are a cause for concern. These
should lead to actions to improve repeatability.
ISI-01/BB/MES/KAPPA/2007
Recommended Approach: Nominal MSA
5. If the repeatability values for each pair of raters are

considered acceptable (0.60 or higher), continue:
 Compute kappa values for each pair of ratings between
raters.
Note that, if the intrarater kappas are high, these
interrater kappas should be similar for any given pair of
raters.
 If any of these interrater kappa values are less than 0.60,
address differences among the raters.
MSA in Transactional Projects

Guidelines for MSA in transactional projects:
1. Brainstorm an extensive list of possible sources of variation in
the measurement process.
2. Obtain measurement data, and check it for integrity using the
methods suggested in the section Preprocessing 1.
Pay particular attention to the idea of conducting a Data
Audit.
3. Evaluate what you have learned from the brainstorming
session and the data integrity check to determine if there are
obvious ways to reduce measurement system variation. If there
are obvious improvements to be made, make them.
MSA in Transactional Projects

Guidelines for MSA in transactional projects (continued):
5. Consider the need for a formal MSA study. Situations that
require interpretation or knowledge on the part of observers, or
that involve subjectivity, often benefit from a formal MSA.
6. If appropriate, conduct a formal MSA study.
7. Document the results of steps 1 – 6 above.
This documentation is the MSA for your project.
Note that there are at least three possible components to the MSA:
 A list of potential sources of variation
 A check for data integrity
HISTOGRAMS: VARIATION FOR A PERIOD OF TIME
DEFINITION A Histogram shows the shape, or

distribution, of the data by displaying how
often different values occur.
EXAMPLE “Number of Days for Approval”
Number of Occurrences
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Number of Days for Approval
WHAT
WHAT IS
IS THE
THE MEASURE
MEASURE
OF
OF CENTRAL
CENTRAL TENDENCY
TENDENCY OF
OF A
A SET
SET OF
OF
NUMBERS?
NUMBERS?
• There are three ways in which Central

Tendency of Numbers can be measured.
• These are the 3 M’s
MEAN
MEDIAN
MODE
MEASURES
MEASURES OF
OF DISPERSION
DISPERSION
 The extent of the spread of the values from the
mean value is called Dispersion.
 The measures of Dispersions are

– Range (R)
– Standard Deviation (s)
– Variance (s2)
– Co-efficient of Variation (CV)
 Standard deviation is the most commonly

used measure of dispersion.
THE NORMAL CURVE
Smooth curve
Center of the bar interconnecting the
center of each bar
 Units of
Measure
NORMAL DISTRIBUTION
• If the frequency distribution of a set of values is
such that :
– 68.26% of the values line within ±1s from the mean

AND
AND
Then the distribution is normal.

NORMAL DISTRIBUTION IS
CHARACTERISED BY A BELL SHAPED CURVE.
Is the process free of special cause variation?
On the
On the shop
shop floor
floor this
this isis aa control
control chart…
chart…
In reality
In reality itit isis aa process
process behavior
behavior chart.
chart.
A Process is Sending a Signal if...
THE INDIVIDUAL X CHART

When to Use:
In situations where opportunities to get data are limited, such as low
production volume or testing.
When sampling sizes greater than 1 simply do not apply, such as
accounting measures (overtime forecasting), sampling from
homogeneous batches (contaminants in a clean room); or when
samples have very small short-term variations (sheet metal
stamping).
How: By plotting each individual measurement on an Individual
X (IX) chart
Conditions:
• Sample size of one.
• Assumes normal distribution.
PLOT POINT CALCULATION STEPS FOR

IX CHART
Sample IX
1 4.25
2 4.78
3 3.95
4 3.86
5 3.72
6 5.17
7 5.07
8 4.65
9 4.70
10 4.35
IX Plot Points
THE INDIVIDUAL X CHART
IX Chart for Concentration

6
UCL=5.620
5
Concentration
Mean=4.45
LCL=3.280
3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Observation Number
Conclusion: The process is in Statistical Control

Checking Both
Time Order and Distribution
In practice, if your data has a natural time order, you should
always do a control chart as well as a frequency plot. Both give
you different information.
In this case, there are no special causes that appear in the control
chart (according to the Tests for Special Causes already taught),
but the frequency plot clearly has a bimodal pattern and you’d
want to investigate why.
WORK SHEET: Interpreting Distribution and

Time Order
•Objective: Gain an understanding of the
different types of information provided by
frequency plots and time plots, and how looking
at the data from different perspectives can lead to
different conclusions.
•Instructions: Divide into pairs or small groups. Read
the case study below and discuss your interpretation of
the data shown in the back-to-back frequency plots. Then
look at the time plot on the next page and discuss the
questions shown there. Be prepared to discuss your
answers with the class. Time: 10 min.
Interpreting Distribution and Time Order

Supplier A 4.5 Supplier B
40 Deliveries 40 Deliveries
4
3.5
This company was having trouble
3
Scheduling the services delivered to its
customers because of delays 2.5
in receiving materials from their 2

suppliers. They went into their 1.5
computer records and recovered data 1
from the past 40 weeks comparing
0.5
promised delivery dates to actual
0
delivery dates from their two
main suppliers. Based on the frequency plots, which -0.5
supplier would you recommend this company choose? Days from

Note: A negative number indicates Target
the delivery was early.
Interpreting Distribution and Time Order, cont.

•Now look at the time plot of the same data shown previously on the
frequency plots.
Time Plot of Suppliers A and B Late Deliveries
(40 weekly deliveries each)
4.5
4
3.5
=supplier A
3 =supplier B
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39
•What is your interpretation now that you’ve seen both the time plot
and frequency plot? Which supplier would you recommend using?
Answer
•In the frequency plot, Supplier B looks far superior to Supplier A, having a
much narrower distribution generally much nearer the target. In the time plot,
however, it looks like Supplier A is making rapid strides in improving its
ability to deliver on time. You would probably want to collect more data to
make sure that Supplier A can sustain its current level of performance.
Supplier A 4.5 Supplier B

40 Deliveries 40 Deliveries
4 Time Plot of Suppliers A and B Late Deliveries
(40 weekly deliveries each)
3.5
4.5
3
4
2.5 =supplier A
3.5
2 =supplier B
3
1.5 2.5
1 2
1.5
0.5
1
0 0.5
-0.5 0
–0.5
Days from 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39
Target
HISTOGRAM
HISTOGRAM FROM
FROM MINITAB
MINITAB
 Make Sure the data window is active.
 Choose GRAPH>HISTOGRAM (or) STAT > BASIC STATISTICS >

DISPLAY DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
 In X (or) Variables, enter the column containing the data, click OK (or)
choose GRAPHS > HISTOGRAM OF DATA > OK.
 You can choose Type of Histogram, No. of classes by clicking

OPTIONS in GRAPH>HISTOGRAM menu.
 You can use GRAPH>Dot plot to display the data
 You can classify the source wise data to display the data in two different
dot plots.
DOT
DOT PLOT
PLOT FROM
FROM MINITAB
MINITAB
 Make Sure the data window is active.
 Choose GRAPH> DOTPLOT
 Enter the column containing the data, click OK
 If you have source wise data, put the source variable (either
Text or Numeric) in the next column. Click By Variable in
the Dot Plot Menu, select the source column, click ok.
 You get the Stratified Dot Plot on the same Graph.
STRATIFIED DOT PLOT SHIFT WISE

Dotplot for PRODUCTION
NIGHT
SHIFT
DAY
15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 105
PRODUCTION
PARETO DIAGRAM
• The Pareto Principle is generally used to prioritize
quality improvement projects to get most returns for the
resources invested.
• It is one of the most powerful tools and is widely used as

means of attacking bulk of the problems with the
optimal utilization of resources.
• The basic principle of Pareto is “Around 80% of

overall effect is contributed by 20% of causes & vice
versa”
PARETO CHART BY EFFECT
• To find out what the major problem is viz...
 Quality Defects, Faults , Failures, Complaints,

Repairs, Returned items etc.
 Cost Amount of loss, Expenses
 Delivery Stock, Shortages, Delay in delivery,
Default in payment.
 Safety Accidents, Breakdowns, mistakes.
PARETO CHART BY CAUSE

• To find out what the major problem is Viz.
 Operator Shift, Group,

Experience, Skill.
 Machine Machines, Equipment,
Tools
 Raw material Manufacturer, Lot
 Operational method Conditions, Order,
Method
HOW TO PREPARE A PARETO DIAGRAM

 Decide which item to be studied.
 Stratify the problem according to sources (by
defects, by supplier etc.) and tabulate the
corresponding data.
 Preferably data should be expressed in monetary
terms rather than quantity or percentage.
 Arrange the stratified items in descending order of
value and draw a bar diagram.
 Draw a curve showing the cumulative % above the
bar chart starting from the greatest value.
USES OF PARETO DIAGRAM
 Find out the most important item/defect.

 Ratio of each item to the whole.
 Degree of improvement after remedial action in
some limited area.
 Improvement in each item/defect compared before
and after correction.
Pareto Diagram for Machine Stoppages (M/C No.14)
100
2000
80
Percent
60
Count
1000
40
20
0 0
Defect
Count 1115 430 145 140 120 120 115
Percent 51.0 19.7 6.6 6.4 5.5 5.5 5.3
Cum % 51.0 70.7 77.3 83.8 89.2 94.7 100.0
PARETO ANALYSIS OF
PASSENGER COMPLAINTS AT AN AIRPORT
97 100
100
140 87
90
120 70
80
100 70
No. of complaints
Cum. percentage
50
60
80 50
60 40
26
40 30
20
20 10
0 0
Flight Baggage Service Refund Fares others
Problems
PARETO ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINTS AT A LAUNDRY
200 93 98 100 100

180 85 90
160 75 80
140 70
60
No. of complaints
120 60
100 50
80 35 40
60 30
40 20
20 10
0 0
Late Missing or Fading Stains Creased Buttons Stretched
delivery wrong colours Missing or torn
items
PARETO
PARETO DIAGRAM
DIAGRAM FROM
FROM MINITAB
MINITAB
 Open MINITAB Worksheet.
 Put your data (no. of defects) in one column and the

nomenclature in the other column.
 Choose STAT > QUALITY TOOLS > PARETO
CHART
 Choose Chart Defects Table. In labels in: enter the
nomenclature column and in frequencies in: enter the
no. of defects column.
 Enter the required Title.
IMPORTANT SPC RATIOS USED

LSL x USL
-3s
- 3s +3s
+3
Maximum allowable range of characteristic

Cp 
Normal variation of process
Tolerance USL - LSL
 
6s 6s
This compares the requirement of the process output vis-a-vis the
inherent variability of the process. Higher value than 1 implies that the
process has got the capability to give the product within the set limits.
PROCESS POTENTIAL INDEX (Cp)

The numerator is
controlled by Design
Engineering
Maximum Allowable Range of Characteristic
Cp =
Normal Variation of Process
The denominator is controlled by

Process Engineering
USL - X
Cpu 
3s
This gives us the positioning of the mean vis-a-vis the
USL and the relationship between the two.
X  LSL
Cpl 
3s
This gives us the positioning of the mean vis-a-vis the
LSL and the relationship between the two.
Cpk - Process Performance Index. This is important
Cpk = Minimum of (Cpu and Cpl) ; for bilateral tolerances

+Y
= C pu ;for unilateral tolerance on upper side i.e..
X -O
+O
= Cpl ;for unilateral tolerance on lower side i.e..
X -Y
These ratios help you in:
 Predicting whether rejections will take place on the

higher side or on the lower side.
 Taking centering decisions.
 Deciding whether to consider broadening of

tolerances
 Taking Decisions on whether to go in for new m/cs.
 Deciding on the level of inspection required.
LSL USL
SOME
SOME TYPES
TYPES LSL USL
Failure likely on higher side Failure likely on lower side
TOLERANCE OR NEW
CENTERING RELATED PROBLEMS MACHINE DECISION
LSL USL LSL USL
LSL USL
LSL USL LSL USL
A FEW TERMINOLOGIES
• Defect : Any non-conformity in a product or service
– e.g. Late delivery or no. of tubes rejected
• Units : The nos. checked or inspected
– 100 deliveries were monitored for being late, no. of units
are 100
– 1000 tubes were checked for oversize dia., no. of units
are 1000
• Opportunity : Anything that you measure or check for.
– Finished refrigerator is checked for 25 defects at final
inspection, the no. of opportunities is 25
WHAT IS A DEFECT?
 A defect is any variation of a required
characteristic of the product (or its parts) or
services which is far enough from its target value
to prevent the product from fulfilling the physical
and functional requirements of the customer, as
viewed through the eyes of your customer.
 A defect is also anything that causes the processor

or the customer to make adjustments.
 ANYTHING THAT DISSATISIFIES YOUR

CUSTOMER
DEFINING AN UNIT
An 'unit' may be as diverse as
a:
 Piece of equipment
 Line of software
 Order
 Technical manual
 Medical claim
 Wire transfer
 Hour of labour
 Billable dollar
 Customer contact
THE CONCEPT OF OPPORTUNITY

• Every possibility of making an error is called an opportunity
• The total opportunities available for an error to take place are
Nos.Chkd. x Opp
• If there are more than 1 opp. The sigma can be calculated by finding
DPMO.
• Knowing DPMO we refer to the Normal Dist. Table to get the Sigma
value
• One could inflate the opp. and hence get an enhanced Sigma But the
opp.are limited to what exactly is checked for.
E.g. a sheet is checked for thickness, length & width and can be rejected
for either.Hence the opp. is 3
 No. of opportunities = No. of points checked
 If you don’t check some points then it becomes a

passive opportunity. We should take only active
opportunities into our calculation of d.p.o., and
Sigma level.
TOTAL OPPORTUNITY (TOP)
TOP
TOP ==NO.
NO.OF
OFUNITS
UNITSCHECKED
CHECKEDxx
NO.
NO.OF
OFOPPORTUNITIES
OPPORTUNITIESOF
OFFALIURE
FALIURE
e.g. If in final inspection 100 refrigerators, each having

25 opportunities are checked
TOP = 25 x 100 =2500
DEFECTS PER OPPORTUNITY (DPO)
DPO = DEFECTS
TOP
e.g. If in the above e.g. there were found 25 defects
DPO = 25 = 0.01
2500
DEFECTS PER UNIT (DPU)
DPU = NO. OF DEFECTS

NO. OF UNITS CHECKED
e.g. In the above example DPU = 25 = 0.25
100
DPMO
DPMO = NO. OF DEFECTS x 106
NO. OF UNITS x OPP.
e.g. In the above example DPMO = 25 x 106 = 10000
100 x 25
HOW WOULD YOU ESTABLISH THE SIGMA FOR THE BELOW

CATEGORY DEFECTS UNITS OPP TOP DPU DPMO
TYPE1 10 1000 2
TYPE2 02 1500 1
TYPE3 22 1300 5
TYPE4 25 2500 3
TYPE5 16 3000 2
COMPOSITE ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??
DPMO== 
DPMO DEFECTS
DEFECTS xx 10
6
106
 TOPTOP
 Units x Opp.) Should not be taken in the denominator as in

the normal case
ATTRIBUTE DATA
Step 1: Examine a sample of size ‘n’ units

Step 2: Count the number of defectives/defects as per defect
definition
Step 3: Calculate
DPU or DPO = No. of Defectives (or defects) / Total no. of
Units (or total no. of opportunities)
Preferred no. of opportunities= 1
Step 4: DPMU or DPMO = DPU ( or DPO) x 106 in ppm.
Step 5: Refer the ppm to Sigma rating conversion table
EXAMPLE
 We checked 500 Purchase Orders (PO) and PO had 10

defects then,
d.p.u. = d/u = 10/500 = 0.02
 In a P.O. we check for the following:

a) Supplier address/approval
b) Quantity as per the indent
c) Specifications as per the indent
d) Delivery requirements
e) Commercial requirements
 Then there are 5 opportunities for the defects to occur.

Then, The total no. of opportunities = m u = 5x500 = 2500
EXAMPLE
 Defects per opportunity, d.p.o. = d/(m u) = 10/2500 = 0.004
 If expressed in terms of d.p.m.o. (defects per million

opportunities) it becomes
d.p.m.o . = d.p.o. x 106 = 4000 PPM
 Refer Sigma conversion table and read the value of

Sigma Rating
EXERCISE
• For a 100% inspection process, 10000 units are produced.
Each can be rejected for 8 different reasons. 100 were
rejected. What is the DPU, TOP, DPMO & DPO.
• For the above the next day 20 units were rejected such that
2 units had 3 defects & 1 unit had 2 defects rest all had 1
defect. Find the DPU,TOP, DPMO & hence DPO.
• 20000 Items are supplied by a vendor. 5% of these are to

be checked as per the sampling plan for 5 characteristics.
100 defects were found. Find the Sigma rating of the
process.
CONTINUOUS DATA
Step 1: Ensure Gauge R&R (if the CTQ is measured using an
instrument) < 30%. Otherwise improve measurement
system
Step 2: Collect the data (Minimum of 50 readings) on the
CTQ’s as per the data collection plan.
Step 3: Check for trend or special cause using individual
control chart
Step 4: Plot Histogram (Follow MINITAB steps. GO TO: Stat
> Basic Statistics > Display Descriptive Statistics >Enter
Variables > ‘Click’ Graphs > ‘Tick’ Graphical
Summary>OK>OK
CONTINUOUS DATA
Step 5: Read mean & standard deviation and interpret the
data as coming from Normal distribution if p > 0.05,
otherwise treat the data as non-normal.
Step 6: Do the process capability analysis as follows.
1. Stat > Quality Tools > Capability Analysis (Normal) > Enter Variable
> Sample Size = 1 > Enter Specification Limits ( L/ U/ or both) > Go to
Options>Remove the tick from Within subgroup analysis>OK>Stamp
> Use Variable (if the date/ Time/ Batch no. to be incorporated) > OK
> OK
2. Read Expected performance in PPM if the data is normal
3. Read Observed performance if the data is non-normal.
4. In either case go to PPM – Sigma conversion table and find the Sigma
rating.
EXAMPLE (Normal)
Process Capability Analysis for Dia.
LSL USL
Process Data
USL 5.20000
Within
Target *
LSL 4.80000 Overall
Mean 4.96330
Sample N 50
StDev (Within) 1.06439
StDev (Overall) 1.04820
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Cpm *
Overall Capability Observed Perf ormance Exp. "Overall" Perf ormance

Pp 0.06 PPM < LSL 380000.00 PPM < LSL 438099.50
PPU 0.08 PPM > USL 400000.00 PPM > USL 410672.19
PPL 0.05 PPM Total 780000.00 PPM Total 848771.69
Ppk 0.05
PPM = 848771.67 Sigma Level = 0.47

EXAMPLE (Non-Normal)
Process Capability Analysis for Data
LSL
USL
Process Data
USL 4.10000
Target *
LSL 2.90000
Mean 3.92903
Sample N 50
StDev (Overall) 4.52914
Overall Capability
Pp 0.04
PPU 0.01
PPL 0.08
Ppk 0.01
-10 0 10 20 30
Cpm *
Observed Perf ormance Expected Perf ormance

PPM < LSL 480000.00 PPM < LSL 410133.41
PPM > USL 280000.00 PPM > USL 484943.80
PPM Total 760000.00 PPM Total 895077.22
PPM = 760000 Sigma Level = 0.80

Sigma and DPMO conversion table

Sigma DPMO Sigma DPMO Sigma DPMO Sigma DPMO Sigma DPMO Sigma DPMO Sigma DPMO Sigma DPMO
0.01 931888 0.26 892512 0.51 838913 0.76 770350 1.01 687933 1.26 594835 1.51 496011 1.76 397432
0.02 930563 0.27 890651 0.52 836457 0.77 767305 1.02 684386 1.27 590954 1.52 492022 1.77 393580
0.03 929219 0.28 888767 0.53 833977 0.78 764238 1.03 680822 1.28 587064 1.53 488033 1.78 389739
0.04 927855 0.29 886860 0.54 831472 0.79 761148 1.04 677242 1.29 583166 1.54 484047 1.79 385908
0.05 926471 0.30 884930 0.55 828944 0.80 758036 1.05 673645 1.30 579260 1.55 480061 1.80 382089
0.06 925066 0.31 882977 0.56 826391 0.81 754903 1.06 670031 1.31 575345 1.56 476078 1.81 378281
0.07 923641 0.32 881000 0.57 823814 0.82 751748 1.07 666402 1.32 571424 1.57 472097 1.82 374484
0.08 922196 0.33 878999 0.58 821214 0.83 748571 1.08 662757 1.33 567495 1.58 468119 1.83 370700
0.09 920730 0.34 876976 0.59 818589 0.84 745373 1.09 659097 1.34 563559 1.59 464144 1.84 366928
0.10 919243 0.35 874928 0.60 815940 0.85 742154 1.10 655422 1.35 559618 1.60 460172 1.85 363169
0.11 917736 0.36 872857 0.61 813267 0.86 738914 1.11 651732 1.36 555670 1.61 456205 1.86 359424
0.12 916207 0.37 870762 0.62 810570 0.87 735653 1.12 648027 1.37 551717 1.62 452242 1.87 355691
0.13 914656 0.38 868643 0.63 807850 0.88 732371 1.13 644309 1.38 547758 1.63 448283 1.88 351973
0.14 913085 0.39 866500 0.64 805106 0.89 729069 1.14 640576 1.39 543795 1.64 444330 1.89 348268
0.15 911492 0.40 864334 0.65 802338 0.90 725747 1.15 636831 1.40 539828 1.65 440382 1.90 344578
0.16 909877 0.41 862143 0.66 799546 0.91 722405 1.16 633072 1.41 535856 1.66 436441 1.91 340903
0.17 908241 0.42 859929 0.67 796731 0.92 719043 1.17 629300 1.42 531881 1.67 432505 1.92 337243
0.18 906582 0.43 857690 0.68 793892 0.93 715661 1.18 625516 1.43 527903 1.68 428576 1.93 333598
0.19 904902 0.44 855428 0.69 791030 0.94 712260 1.19 621719 1.44 523922 1.69 424655 1.94 329969
0.20 903199 0.45 853141 0.70 788145 0.95 708840 1.20 617911 1.45 519939 1.70 420740 1.95 326355
0.21 901475 0.46 850830 0.71 785236 0.96 705402 1.21 614092 1.46 515953 1.71 416834 1.96 322758
0.22 899727 0.47 848495 0.72 782305 0.97 701944 1.22 610261 1.47 511967 1.72 412936 1.97 319178
0.23 897958 0.48 846136 0.73 779350 0.98 698468 1.23 606420 1.48 507978 1.73 409046 1.98 315614
0.24 896165 0.49 843752 0.74 776373 0.99 694974 1.24 602568 1.49 503989 1.74 405165 1.99 312067
0.25 894350 0.50 841345 0.75 773373 1.00 691462 1.25 598706 1.50 500000 1.75 401294 2.00 308538

2.01 305026 2.26 223627 2.51 156248 2.76 103835 3.01 65522 3.26 39204 3.51 22216 3.76 11911
2.02 301532 2.27 220650 2.52 153864 2.77 102042 3.02 64256 3.27 38364 3.52 21692 3.77 11604
2.03 298056 2.28 217695 2.53 151505 2.78 100273 3.03 63008 3.28 37538 3.53 21178 3.78 11304
2.04 294598 2.29 214764 2.54 149170 2.79 98525 3.04 61780 3.29 36727 3.54 20675 3.79 11011
2.05 291160 2.30 211855 2.55 146859 2.80 96801 3.05 60571 3.30 35930 3.55 20182 3.80 10724
2.06 287740 2.31 208970 2.56 144572 2.81 95098 3.06 59380 3.31 35148 3.56 19699 3.81 10444
2.07 284339 2.32 206108 2.57 142310 2.82 93418 3.07 58208 3.32 34379 3.57 19226 3.82 10170
2.08 280957 2.33 203269 2.58 140071 2.83 91759 3.08 57053 3.33 33625 3.58 18763 3.83 9903
2.09 277595 2.34 200454 2.59 137857 2.84 90123 3.09 55917 3.34 32884 3.59 18309 3.84 9642
2.10 274253 2.35 197662 2.60 135666 2.85 88508 3.10 54799 3.35 32157 3.60 17864 3.85 9387
2.11 270931 2.36 194894 2.61 133500 2.86 86915 3.11 53699 3.36 31443 3.61 17429 3.86 9137
2.12 267629 2.37 192150 2.62 131357 2.87 85344 3.12 52616 3.37 30742 3.62 17003 3.87 8894
2.13 264347 2.38 189430 2.63 129238 2.88 83793 3.13 51551 3.38 30054 3.63 16586 3.88 8656
2.14 261086 2.39 186733 2.64 127143 2.89 82264 3.14 50503 3.39 29379 3.64 16177 3.89 8424
2.15 257846 2.40 184060 2.65 125072 2.90 80757 3.15 49471 3.40 28716 3.65 15778 3.90 8198
2.16 254627 2.41 181411 2.66 123024 2.91 79270 3.16 48457 3.41 28067 3.66 15386 3.91 7976
2.17 251429 2.42 178786 2.67 121001 2.92 77804 3.17 47460 3.42 27429 3.67 15003 3.92 7760
2.18 248252 2.43 176186 2.68 119000 2.93 76359 3.18 46479 3.43 26803 3.68 14629 3.93 7549
2.19 245097 2.44 173609 2.69 117023 2.94 74934 3.19 45514 3.44 26190 3.69 14262 3.94 7344
2.20 241964 2.45 171056 2.70 115070 2.95 73529 3.20 44565 3.45 25588 3.70 13903 3.95 7143
2.21 238852 2.46 168528 2.71 113140 2.96 72145 3.21 43633 3.46 24998 3.71 13553 3.96 6947
2.22 235762 2.47 166023 2.72 111233 2.97 70781 3.22 42716 3.47 24419 3.72 13209 3.97 6756
2.23 232695 2.48 163543 2.73 109349 2.98 69437 3.23 41815 3.48 23852 3.73 12874 3.98 6569
2.24 229650 2.49 161087 2.74 107488 2.99 68112 3.24 40929 3.49 23295 3.74 12545 3.99 6387
2.25 226627 2.50 158655 2.75 105650 3.00 66807 3.25 40059 3.50 22750 3.75 12224 4.00 6210

4.01 6037 4.26 2890 4.51 1306 4.76 557 5.01 224 5.26 85 5.51 30.4 5.76 10.2
4.02 5868 4.27 2803 4.52 1264 4.77 538 5.02 216 5.27 82 5.52 29.1 5.77 9.8
4.03 5703 4.28 2718 4.53 1223 4.78 519 5.03 208 5.28 78 5.53 27.9 5.78 9.4
4.04 5543 4.29 2635 4.54 1183 4.79 501 5.04 200 5.29 75 5.54 26.7 5.79 8.9
4.05 5386 4.30 2555 4.55 1144 4.80 483 5.05 193 5.30 72 5.55 25.6 5.80 8.5
4.06 5234 4.31 2477 4.56 1107 4.81 467 5.06 185 5.31 70 5.56 24.5 5.81 8.2
4.07 5085 4.32 2401 4.57 1070 4.82 450 5.07 179 5.32 67 5.57 23.5 5.82 7.8
4.08 4940 4.33 2327 4.58 1035 4.83 434 5.08 172 5.33 64 5.58 22.5 5.83 7.5
4.09 4799 4.34 2256 4.59 1001 4.84 419 5.09 165 5.34 62 5.59 21.6 5.84 7.1
4.10 4661 4.35 2186 4.60 968 4.85 404 5.10 159 5.35 59 5.60 20.7 5.85 6.8
4.11 4527 4.36 2118 4.61 936 4.86 390 5.11 153 5.36 57 5.61 19.8 5.86 6.5
4.12 4397 4.37 2052 4.62 904 4.87 376 5.12 147 5.37 54 5.62 19.0 5.87 6.2
4.13 4269 4.38 1988 4.63 874 4.88 362 5.13 142 5.38 52 5.63 18.1 5.88 5.9
4.14 4145 4.39 1926 4.64 845 4.89 350 5.14 136 5.39 50 5.64 17.4 5.89 5.7
4.15 4025 4.40 1866 4.65 816 4.90 337 5.15 131 5.40 48 5.65 16.6 5.90 5.4
4.16 3907 4.41 1807 4.66 789 4.91 325 5.16 126 5.41 46 5.66 15.9 5.91 5.2
4.17 3793 4.42 1750 4.67 762 4.92 313 5.17 121 5.42 44 5.67 15.2 5.92 4.9
4.18 3681 4.43 1695 4.68 736 4.93 302 5.18 117 5.43 42 5.68 14.6 5.93 4.7
4.19 3573 4.44 1641 4.69 711 4.94 291 5.19 112 5.44 41 5.69 14.0 5.94 4.5
4.20 3467 4.45 1589 4.70 687 4.95 280 5.20 108 5.45 39 5.70 13.4 5.95 4.3
4.21 3364 4.46 1538 4.71 664 4.96 270 5.21 104 5.46 37 5.71 12.8 5.96 4.1
4.22 3264 4.47 1489 4.72 641 4.97 260 5.22 100 5.47 36 5.72 12.2 5.97 3.9
4.23 3167 4.48 1441 4.73 619 4.98 251 5.23 96 5.48 34 5.73 11.7 5.98 3.7
4.24 3072 4.49 1395 4.74 598 4.99 242 5.24 92 5.49 33 5.74 11.2 5.99 3.6
4.25 2980 4.50 1350 4.75 577 5.00 233 5.25 88 5.50 32 5.75 10.7 6.00 3.4

Chapter 5 Measure - GB

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Chapter 5 Measure - GB

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADDAAP Process Solutions , GREEN BELT PROGRAM

ADAAP Process Solutions Private

Conclusions based on facts and data are necessary for

If you are not able to express a phenomenon in

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

WHICH OF THE BELOW ARE CONTINUOUS

Root Cause Failure Effect

With this in mind, another way to think of failures, effects, and

Failure - f(x) Effect - y

Cause Set 1 - x1's Effect 1 - y1

Cause Set 2 - x2's Effect 2 - y2

. Failure Mode - f(x) .

Risk Priority Numbers

Severity rates the seriousness of the effect for the potential

Once again, occurrence guidelines can be developed and should

Occurrence Rank Criterion Possible failure rate

Remote 1 Unklikely that cause occurs  1 in 15,00,000

Very low 2 Very low chance that cause occurs 1 in 1,50,000

Low 3 Few occurrences of cause likely 1 in 15,000

Moderate 5 Medium number of occurences of cause 1 in 400

Almost certain 1 Cause obvious and easy to detect

Very High 2 Very high chance of detecting the cause

High 3 High chance of detecting the cause

Moderately High 4 Cause easily detected by inspection

Moderate 5 Moderate likelihood of detection

Very Remote 9 Cause is very hard to identif y

Almost impossible 10 Cause usually not detectable

OBJECTIVES OF DATA COLLECTION

HOW TO COLLECT DATA ?

LOCATION CHECK SHEET

Hood Paint Defects

• The stratification may be based on machines,

• Stratification of data is an effective method for

• You can also stratify the data you collect by

• Engineering and design

POPULATION AND SAMPLE

POPULATION SAMPLE OF SIZE

POPULATION, SAMPLE AND DATA

Data Collection Plan Features

Data Collection Plan Features, cont.

SAMPLE SIZE RULES OF THUMB

• Variations among pieces at the same

6.50 6.55 7.00

6.55 a.m.  5 minutes.

THE VARIATION THAT OCCURS DUE TO

UNDER NORMAL SCHEME OF

TODAY HE IS EARLY ! PROBABLY BECAUSE :

Variation due to these types of

COMMON PROBLEMS WITH MEASUREMENTS

DESIRED MEASUREMENT CHARACTERISTICS

DESIRED MEASUREMENT CHARACTERISTICS

DESIRED MEASUREMENT CHARACTERISTICS

DESIRED MEASUREMENT CHARACTERISTICS

Xbar Chart by reader reader*form Interaction

R Chart by reader By reader

Components of Variation By form

Total Gage R&R 37.39 61.15

Number of Distinct Categories = 2

Acceptance criteria for MSA

2. Gage R & R 10% to 30% Acceptable

3. Gage R & R > 30% Not acceptable

In addition: No. of Distinct categories  4

Interpretation of MSA Results