Product Quality Inspection

By: Erik Martin Penn Sate University

What will be covered
This presentation deals with the question of describing and evaluating product quality inspection processes.

What is to be discussed
• Classification of characteristics proposed for describing the effects of industrial processes. • Formulation of definitions of the effectiveness and efficiency coefficients of quality inspection processes. • Practical examples of effectiveness and efficiency analysis, using numerical data.

Designating the effects of the process
• Ontological designations -describe the effect of the process in respect of quantity, quality, or financial value. • Axiological

-the determination of the relative worth of the process results.

Organizational usefulness
• Using some simple mathematical equations and some data from earlier productions, one can use those particular figures to demonstrate the practical usefulness of the characteristics of the effectiveness of the quality inspection process.

How it works
• Taking concepts and data; inspection processes are very important in many companies.

Notation for the main characteristics of the quality inspection process.
• Of(0), If(0) - are, respectively, the rejection losses and the total outlay for the inspection and preventive actions in the previous calculation period. • OFA, IFA outlay in • OFP, IFP present - are the expected losses and planned the present period. are the actual losses and costs in the period.

Selection of the most effective or the most efficient system of inspection and preventive action. Type of designatio n
assessment
Designations of the process

effectivenes s
EOA= Of(0) - OFA

Efficiency
SOA = OF(O) – OFA/ IFA SOB=OF(O) – OFP/ IFP SAB = (SOB)(SOA)

ontological Ex-ante ontological Ex-post axiological Ex-post

EOB= OF(0) OFP EAB = OF(O)-

The mathematical model for the optimization of the effectiveness of a quality inspection process takes 2 forms.

• Minimize the total expected loss OFA • Maximize the expected efficiency SOA

Examples of 2 quality inspection processes process A
Number of the production phase 1 Process fraction defective .2 Actual inspection operation None Actual rejection probability 0 Actual outlay

0

2

.2

None

0

0

3

.3

Type 3

8

300

Second example Process B
Number of the production phase 1 2 3 4 Process fraction defective 0 .077 .087 .073 Actual inspection operation none Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Actual rejection probability 0 .95 .932 .947 Actual outlay

0 166,490 224,130 427,200

Actual values of the outlay and the rejection losses in the previous period were

• Process A : IFP = 300; OFP = 4790 • Process B : IFP = 817,820 OFP= 5,282,180

Results of investigations

Production process

Expected
effectiveness Efficiency

Obtained
effectiveness Efficiency

EOA
A B 345.6 25,481,000

SOA
1.15 31.16

EOB / EAB SOB / SAB
170 / .49 25,528,820 .57 / .49 31.22 / 1.00

Conclusion of process A
• The actual system of inspection operations for the production process A is both ineffective, since the real effect is half as high as the expected result, and inefficient, since the decrease in the rejection losses is lower than the outlay for the inspection performance; the real efficiency is half as high as the expected result.

Conclusion of process B
• The actual organization of the quality inspection is much better: the real effect is nearly equal to the expectations (EAB = 1); the efficiency of quality inspection is both near to the expected efficiency (SAB = 1) and also high in absolute numbers (SOB = 31.22, I.e. one unit of the outlay produces 31 units of the effect, which means a reduction in losses.

summary
• • • • Quality inspection is useful Quality inspection is effective Quality inspection is efficient Quality inspection is necessary

references
• Hall, M. and Winsten, C., 1965. A dictionary of the Social Sciences. New York. • Lubicz, M., 1983. On the problem of optimization of a quality inspection process structure.. Int. J. Prod. Res., 21(3): 369. • Lubicz, M., 1979. Investigations of decision premises for product quality formation. Ph. Thesis, Techn. Univ. Wroclaw. • Milward, G.E., 1960. Organization and Methods. MacMillan, London.