vdoc
278 Part IV: Quality Assurance• The process performance has improved or it is improving. Thiscondition of the process should be investigated very carefullyso that such conditions of improvement are implemented on apermanent basis at this location and elsewhere in the industry.• The measurement system has changed.5. As with the X – and R and X – and S charts, the presence of any unusualpatterns or trends is either an indication of an unstable process or itis an advance warning of conditions that, if left unattended or withoutany appropriate action, could make the process unstable.6. If p – is moderately high (np 5) then an approximately equal number ofpoints should fall on either side of the center line. Therefore, either ofthe following conditions could indicate that the process has shiftedor a trend of shift has started:• A run of seven or more points going up or going down• A run of seven or more points falling either below or above thecenter line7. A run above the center line or a run going up generally indicates:• The process performance has deteriorated and may still bedeteriorating• The measurement system has changed8. A run below the center line or a run going down generally indicates:• The process performance has improved and may still beimprovingPart IV.B.4• The measurement system has changedTo illustrate the construction of the p chart we will consider the data from Example19.6, shown in Table 19.5.EXAMPLE 19.6A semiconductor manufacturer tracks the number of nonconforming computer chipsproduced each day. A team of Six Sigma Green Belts wants to improve the overall qualityby reducing the fraction of nonconforming computer chips. To achieve this goal, theteam decided to set up a p chart based on daily inspections of 1000 chips over a periodof 30 days. Table 19.5 gives the number of nonconforming chips out of 1000 inspectedchips each day during the study period of 30 days.Solution:Using the data in Table 19.5 we develop the trial control limits of the p chart as follows:Continued
Chapter 19: B. Statistical Process Control 279ContinuedTable 19.5Number of nonconforming computer chips out of 1000 inspected each dayduring the study period of 30 days.Number of Sample fraction Number of Sample fractionnonconforming nonconforming nonconforming nonconformingDay x p i Day x p i1 9 0.009 16 12 0.0122 5 0.005 17 5 0.0053 6 0.006 18 6 0.0064 11 0.011 19 12 0.0125 11 0.011 20 10 0.0106 12 0.012 21 6 0.0067 7 0.007 22 7 0.0078 11 0.011 23 11 0.0119 6 0.006 24 11 0.01110 6 0.006 25 9 0.00911 8 0.008 26 5 0.00512 5 0.005 27 12 0.01213 8 0.008 28 11 0.01114 5 0.005 29 7 0.00715 8 0.008 30 9 0.009First we calculate the sample fraction nonconforming values (p i ), which are listedin columns three and six of Table 19.5. Substituting the sample fraction nonconformingvalues in equation (19.31), we getp – = 0.00837.Plugging the value of p – = 0.00837 and n = 1000 into equations (19.32) and (19.34) we getthe control limits for the p chart, that isUCL = 0.01701CL = 0.00837LCL = 0.0The p control chart for the data in Table 19.5 is shown in Figure 19.10. From the controlchart in Figure 19.10 we observe that all the points are well within the control limits. Weshould note, however, that starting from point number nine, seven successive pointsfall below the center line. This indicates that from day nine through 15, the numberof nonconforming chips was relatively low. Investigation to determine the processPart IV.B.4Continued
- Page 236 and 237: 228 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 238 and 239: 230 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 240 and 241: 232 Part IV: Quality Assurancef (x)
- Page 242 and 243: 234 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 244 and 245: 236 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 246 and 247: 238 Part IV: Quality Assurances = 1
- Page 248 and 249: 240 Part IV: Quality Assuranceis th
- Page 250 and 251: 242 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 252 and 253: 244 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 254 and 255: Chapter 19B. Statistical Process Co
- Page 256 and 257: 248 Part IV: Quality AssuranceInfor
- Page 258 and 259: 250 Part IV: Quality AssuranceEnvir
- Page 260 and 261: 252 Part IV: Quality AssuranceTable
- Page 262 and 263: 254 Part IV: Quality Assuranceis ma
- Page 264 and 265: 256 Part IV: Quality Assuranceselec
- Page 266 and 267: 258 Part IV: Quality Assurance1.00.
- Page 268 and 269: 260 Part IV: Quality AssuranceCommo
- Page 270 and 271: 262 Part IV: Quality Assurance3. VA
- Page 272 and 273: 264 Part IV: Quality AssuranceCL =
- Page 274 and 275: 266 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 276 and 277: 268 Part IV: Quality AssuranceA pro
- Page 278 and 279: 270 Part IV: Quality AssuranceCL =
- Page 280 and 281: 272 Part IV: Quality AssuranceEXAMP
- Page 282 and 283: 274 Part IV: Quality AssurancePart
- Page 284 and 285: 276 Part IV: Quality Assurancerespe
- Page 288 and 289: 280 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 290 and 291: 282 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 292 and 293: 284 Part IV: Quality AssuranceFirst
- Page 294 and 295: 286 Part IV: Quality Assuranceˆ c
- Page 296 and 297: 288 Part IV: Quality AssuranceIf ec
- Page 298 and 299: 290 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 300 and 301: 292 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 302 and 303: 294 Part IV: Quality AssurancePart
- Page 304 and 305: 296 Part IV: Quality Assuranceis un
- Page 306 and 307: 298 Part IV: Quality AssuranceConti
- Page 308 and 309: 300 Part IV: Quality AssuranceEXAMP
- Page 310 and 311: 302 Part IV: Quality Assurancewere
- Page 312 and 313: Chapter 20C. Quality Improvement1.
- Page 314 and 315: 306 Part IV: Quality Assurance2. Ap
- Page 316 and 317: 308 Part IV: Quality AssuranceTerms
- Page 318 and 319: 310 Part IV: Quality AssuranceRoles
- Page 320 and 321: 312 Part IV: Quality Assuranceexamp
- Page 322 and 323: Chapter 21D. Quality Tools and Tech
- Page 324 and 325: 316 Part IV: Quality AssurancePlanT
- Page 326 and 327: 318 Part IV: Quality Assuranceparti
- Page 328 and 329: Chapter 22E. Resources1. ENVIRONMEN
- Page 330 and 331: 322 Part IV: Quality Assuranceand s
- Page 332 and 333: 324 Part IV: Quality AssuranceThrou
- Page 334 and 335: 326 Part IV: Quality Assurancewhere
Chapter 19: B. Statistical Process Control 279
Continued
Table 19.5
Number of nonconforming computer chips out of 1000 inspected each day
during the study period of 30 days.
Number of Sample fraction Number of Sample fraction
nonconforming nonconforming nonconforming nonconforming
Day x p i Day x p i
1 9 0.009 16 12 0.012
2 5 0.005 17 5 0.005
3 6 0.006 18 6 0.006
4 11 0.011 19 12 0.012
5 11 0.011 20 10 0.010
6 12 0.012 21 6 0.006
7 7 0.007 22 7 0.007
8 11 0.011 23 11 0.011
9 6 0.006 24 11 0.011
10 6 0.006 25 9 0.009
11 8 0.008 26 5 0.005
12 5 0.005 27 12 0.012
13 8 0.008 28 11 0.011
14 5 0.005 29 7 0.007
15 8 0.008 30 9 0.009
First we calculate the sample fraction nonconforming values (p i ), which are listed
in columns three and six of Table 19.5. Substituting the sample fraction nonconforming
values in equation (19.31), we get
p – = 0.00837.
Plugging the value of p – = 0.00837 and n = 1000 into equations (19.32) and (19.34) we get
the control limits for the p chart, that is
UCL = 0.01701
CL = 0.00837
LCL = 0.0
The p control chart for the data in Table 19.5 is shown in Figure 19.10. From the control
chart in Figure 19.10 we observe that all the points are well within the control limits. We
should note, however, that starting from point number nine, seven successive points
fall below the center line. This indicates that from day nine through 15, the number
of nonconforming chips was relatively low. Investigation to determine the process
Part IV.B.4
Continued