vdoc
300 Part IV: Quality AssuranceEXAMPLE 19.14Using the information given in example 19.12, compute Ĉ pl and Ĉ pu .Solution:CˆCˆplpuX LSL272264= = = 103 .3sˆ 3258 .( )USLX 280272= = = 103 .3sˆ 3258 .( )Note that both Ĉ pl and Ĉ pu are equal to Ĉ p , which will always be the case when the processmean is centered between the specification limits. Moreover, when both Ĉ pl andĈ pu are equal, the percentage of nonconforming units below the lower specificationlimit and above the upper specification limit are the same.EXAMPLE 19.15Uusing the information given in Example 19.13, compute Ĉ pl and Ĉ pu .Solution:Part IV.B.5CˆCˆplpuX LSL276264= = = 155 .3sˆ 3258 .( )USLX 280276= = = 052 .3sˆ 3258 .( )In this case, the value of Ĉ pl is much larger than one whereas the value of Ĉ pu is muchsmaller than one, which indicates that most of the nonconforming units produced bythe process are falling above the upper specification limit. Finally, note that both Ĉ pl andĈ pu are sensitive to where the process mean is located.Process Capability Index: C pkIn order to overcome the centering problem in C p discussed in the precedingsection, process capability index C pk was introduced. The PCI C pk , which is againone of the first five used in Japan, is defined asC min C , C . (19.68)= ( )pk pl puThe index C pk is related to the index C p asCpk( )= 1k C(19.69)p
Chapter 19: B. Statistical Process Control 301wherek =( USL + LSL/2 m ).USL LSL / 2( )(19.70)Furthermore, it can easily be seen that 0 k 1, so that C pk is always less than orequal to C p . Also, note that when the process mean m coincides with the midpointbetween the specification limits, then k = 0, and therefore C pk equals C p .Note that C pk takes care of the centering problem only if the process standarddeviation remains the same. If the process standard deviation changes, then thevalue of C pk may not change even when the process mean moves away fromthe center. It can easily be seen that this will always be the scenario providedthat the distance of the process mean from the nearest specification limit in termsof s remains the same. For example, in Table 19.11 we consider four processes withthe same specification limits but with different process means (m) and differentstandard deviations (s) such that the value of C pk in each case remains the same.Clearly, the value of C pk for each of the four processes remains the same eventhough the process mean has been moving away from the center, since in eachcase the distance between the process mean and the nearest specification limit (inthis example the LSL) is three times the process standard deviation. Thus, we cansay that in some ways C pk is also not an adequate measure of centering. Assumingthe process characteristic is normally distributed, Table 19.12 below gives the partsper million (ppm) of nonconforming units for different values of C pk .From Table 19.12, we can see that each of the processes in Table 19.11 will produce1350 nonconforming ppm. This is only possible if the process standard deviationis shrinking while the process mean is shifting and the natural tolerancelimits remain within the specification limits. In fact, in Table 19.11, the processwith standard deviation s = 2 would be of Six Sigma quality if the process meanTable 19.11 Different processes with same value of C pk .Process LSL USL Center l r C pk1 12 36 24 24 4 1.002 12 36 24 22 3.33 1.003 12 36 24 20 2.67 1.004 12 36 24 18 2.00 1.00Part IV.B.5Table 19.12Parts per million of nonconformingunits for different values of C pk .C pk 1.00 1.33 1.67 2.00PPM 1350 30 1 .001
- 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 286 and 287: 278 Part IV: Quality Assurance• T
- 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 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
- Page 336 and 337: 328 Part IV: Quality Assurance• S
- Page 338 and 339: 330 Part IV: Quality Assurance• K
- Page 340 and 341: About the Authors 425preparation co
- Page 342 and 343: xivList of Figures and TablesTable
- Page 344 and 345: xviList of Figures and TablesFigure
- Page 346 and 347: xviii List of Figures and TablesFig
- Page 348 and 349: 412 ReferencesChapter 7Bosch, J. A.
- Page 350 and 351: 414 ReferencesSimpson, J. A. 1981.
- Page 352 and 353: 416 ReferencesDeming, W. E. 1986. O
- Page 354 and 355: 418 ReferencesChapter 19Deleryd, M.
- Page 356 and 357: How to Use This BookTo assist reade
300 Part IV: Quality Assurance
EXAMPLE 19.14
Using the information given in example 19.12, compute Ĉ pl and Ĉ pu .
Solution:
Cˆ
Cˆ
pl
pu
X LSL
272
264
= = = 103 .
3sˆ 3258 .
( )
USL
X 280
272
= = = 103 .
3sˆ 3258 .
( )
Note that both Ĉ pl and Ĉ pu are equal to Ĉ p , which will always be the case when the process
mean is centered between the specification limits. Moreover, when both Ĉ pl and
Ĉ pu are equal, the percentage of nonconforming units below the lower specification
limit and above the upper specification limit are the same.
EXAMPLE 19.15
Uusing the information given in Example 19.13, compute Ĉ pl and Ĉ pu .
Solution:
Part IV.B.5
Cˆ
Cˆ
pl
pu
X LSL
276
264
= = = 155 .
3sˆ 3258 .
( )
USL
X 280
276
= = = 052 .
3sˆ 3258 .
( )
In this case, the value of Ĉ pl is much larger than one whereas the value of Ĉ pu is much
smaller than one, which indicates that most of the nonconforming units produced by
the process are falling above the upper specification limit. Finally, note that both Ĉ pl and
Ĉ pu are sensitive to where the process mean is located.
Process Capability Index: C pk
In order to overcome the centering problem in C p discussed in the preceding
section, process capability index C pk was introduced. The PCI C pk , which is again
one of the first five used in Japan, is defined as
C min C , C . (19.68)
= ( )
pk pl pu
The index C pk is related to the index C p as
C
pk
( )
= 1
k C
(19.69)
p