current news
Statistical Process Control
Reminder…
- The final exam is in two weeks
- We will be posting a study guide and exam breakdown later this week
- NOW is the time to start seriously preparing for the OM Exam
Only Two More Ideas…
- Process Control
- Process Capability
Statistical Process Control
- Concepts
- Driven by process data
- Common Cause vs. Special Cause
- Hypothesis testing and UCL/LCL
- Tools
- xbar Chart – continuous data, question is “are we close to the target/nominal value?” (“centered”)
- R Chart – continuous data, question is “are our values close together?” (“tight”)
- p Chart – categorical data, question is “is there special cause in our defect rate?”
Control Charts
- A control chart is a graphical tool, that uses actual variation in observed data to determine if a process is “in control” (just regular or common cause variation) or “out of control” (special cause variation).
- There are several types of control charts based on the kind of data that is being collected.
*
Common Cause Variation
Common causes are the process inputs and conditions that contribute to the regular, everyday variation in a process.
- Common causes are a part of the process
- They contribute to output variation because they themselves vary
- Each common cause contributes a small part of the total variation by looking at a process over time, we know how much variation to expect from common causes
- The process is stable, or predictable, when all the variation is due to common causes
*
Special Cause Variation
Special causes are factors that are not always present in a process but that appear because of some particular circumstance.
- Special causes are not usually present
- They may come and go sporadically; may be temporary or long-term
- A special cause is something special or specific that has a pronounced effect on the process
- We can’t predict when a special cause will occur or how it will affect the process
- The process is unstable, or unpredictable, when special causes contribute to the variation
- Also called “assignable cause” variation
*
Addressing Common & Special
*
Wastes Time
Increases Variation
Under-stand the system better
Reduce Variation
Gain useful information
Reduce Variation
Wastes time not responding to problem
Lost pro-ductivity may increase variation
ACTION
Look for differences between individual points
Common
Special
CAUSE
Take action based on the reported differences
Study all the data
Make basic changes to the process
What are Control Limits?
- A control limit defines the bounds of common cause variation in the process
- A control limit is a tool we use to help us take the right actions:
- If all points are between the limits, assume only common cause variation is present (unless one of the other Signals of a Special Cause is present)
- If a point falls outside the limit, you treat it as a special cause
- Otherwise, you do not investigate individual data points, but instead study the common cause variation in all data points
*
Characteristics of Control Charts
- Center line – average (central tendency)
- Upper control limit: + 3 standard dev
- Lower control limit: - 3 standard dev
- Data – collected through sampling
Interpreting Control Charts
- The purpose of control charting is to give us an objective, statistically based tool to judge if a process is in control or out of control
- In Control – functioning as it has historically, exhibiting only common causes of variation (sampling error)
- Out of Control – process is not functioning as it has in the past, exhibiting evidence that a special or attributable cause of variation has entered the process.
- Consider it a type of hypothesis test:
- H0: The system is in control
- Ha: The system is out of control
Processes and Sampling Distributions
- What is a sample?
- How many samples are possible from a given population? (nCr)
- What does the distribution look like?
- A normal curve
- Variation
- Much around the mean; a little at the tails
- Would you expect any trends? (hopefully not)
- Would you believe the process was “stable”?
- The application of these sampling distribution principles to production processes is the basis for statistical process control! (SPC)
- In Control
- A process is “in control” when the process variation is random and within the limits of the normal curve. Or, variation is due to chance or sampling error.
- The process needs no adjustment.
- Out of Control
- A process is deemed “out of control” when the process variation is non-random or outside of the limits of the normal curve. This variation is due to some assignable or special cause.
- The process needs some type of attention or adjustment.
Example of control with patterns
*
697.bin
- Unlikely data patterns that might lead us to conclude the system is out of control:
- A single sample statistic that is outside of the control limits
- Two consecutive sample statistics near the control limits
- Five consecutive points above or below the central line
- A trend of five consecutive points
- Very erratic behavior
Using Control Charts to Decide if a Process is “In-Control” or “Out of Control”
ACTUAL PROCESS
DIAGNOSIS BASED ON CONTROL CHART
IN
CONTROL2
OUT OF CONTROL
IN
CONTROL
OUT OF CONTROL1
We don’t have a problem, and we know it.
We do have a problem and we know it.
We don’t think we have a problem, but we do.
(TYPE II) FN
We think we have a problem, but we don’t.
(TYPE I) FP
1. “Out of Control” means that there is a “special cause” variation in the process.
2. “In Control” means that there is only “common cause” variation (random) in the process.
TYPE I ERROR: When a system that is in control is judged to be out of control and adjustments are made. (a.k.a. “False Positive”, or Producer’s Risk—the risk a producer takes when “adjusting” a system.)
TYPE II ERROR: When a system that is out of control is judged to be in control, and we fail to intervene in the system. (a.k.a. “False Negative, or ”Consumer’s Risk—the risk a consumer takes when buying a product from an out of control process.)
Type I and Type II errors
- Why 3 standard deviations for control limits?
- There is the possibility that 1% of the samples will fall outside of the control limits. This is a Type I statistical error. To reduce probability, widen the control limits.
- As you increase the limits, it increases the chance of a Type II error. (a false negative)
- As you widen the control limits, p(Type I) goes down, p(Type II) goes up.
- We use 3σ because it minimizes the sum of both errors…
- Typically, we focus on Type I errors (“Producer’s Risk”)
Why 3σ?
Widening the distance between the UCL and the LCL
Examples
Constructing Control Charts
- Many types of charts can be constructed
- We focus on three: X-bar, R, p charts
- For changes in the process mean: X-bar chart
- Center Line (average) = the average of the sample averages (X-double-bar)
- For our sample problem = 8.498
- Upper Control Limit
- (UCL) = X-dbl-bar + A2(R-bar)
- A2 factor is from a chart in the lecture packet
- 8.498 + .48*.114 = 8.553
- Lower Control Limit
- (LCL) = X-dbl-bar - A2(R-bar)
- 8.498 – .48*.114 = 8.443
- For changes in the process variance: R chart
- Center Line (average) = the average of the sample ranges (R bar)
- For our sample problem = .114
- Upper Control Limit
- (UCL) = D4 * (R-bar)
- D3 factor is from a chart in the lecture packet
- 2.00*.114 = .228
- Lower Control Limit
- (LCL) = D3 * R-bar
- 0 * .114 = 0
Example
X-dbl-bar
R-bar
| 11 | 11 | 33 | 34 | 26 | 23 |
| 12 | 51 | 34 | 39 | 41.33333 | 17 |
| 13 | 30 | 16 | 30 | 25.33333 | 14 |
| 14 | 22 | 21 | 35 | 26 | 14 |
| 15 | 11 | 28 | 38 | 25.66667 | 17 |
| 16 | 49 | 25 | 36 | 36.66667 | 24 |
| 17 | 20 | 31 | 33 | 28 | 13 |
| 18 | 26 | 18 | 36 | 26.66667 | 18 |
| 19 | 26 | 47 | 26 | 33 | 21 |
| 20 | 34 | 29 | 32 | 31.66667 | 5 |
| 30.56667 | 15.1 | ||||
| Sample | Tread Wear | Mean | Range | ||
| 1 | 44 | 41 | 19 | 34.66667 | 25 |
| 2 | 39 | 31 | 21 | 30.33333 | 18 |
| 3 | 38 | 16 | 25 | 26.33333 | 22 |
| 4 | 20 | 33 | 26 | 26.33333 | 13 |
| 5 | 34 | 33 | 36 | 34.33333 | 3 |
| 6 | 28 | 23 | 39 | 30 | 16 |
| 7 | 40 | 15 | 34 | 29.66667 | 25 |
| 8 | 36 | 36 | 34 | 35.33333 | 2 |
| 9 | 32 | 29 | 30 | 30.33333 | 3 |
| 10 | 29 | 38 | 34 | 33.66667 | 9 |
| The Long Last Tire Company, as part of its inspection process, tests its tires for tread wear under simulated road conditions. Twenty samples of Three tires each were selected from different shifts over the last month of operation. The tread wear is reported below in hundredths of an inch. |
Center line = x-dbl-bar = 30.567
UCL = x-dbl-bar + A2 * r-bar = 30.567 +1.02*(15.1) = 45.969
LCL = x-dbl-bar - A2 * r-bar = 30.567 -1.02*(15.1) = 15.165
Is the process in control?
An x-bar chart
Chart1
| 30.5667 | 45.9686666667 | 15.165 | 34.6666666667 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 34.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 29.6666666667 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 35.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 33.6666666667 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 41.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 25.3333333333 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 25.6666666667 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 36.6666666667 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 28 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.6666666667 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 33 |
| 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 31.6666666667 |
Sheet1
| The Long Last Tire Company, as part of its inspection process, tests its tires for tread | ||||||||
| wear under simulated road conditions. Twenty samples of three tires each were selected | ||||||||
| from different shifts over the last month of operation. The tread wear is reported below in | ||||||||
| hundredths of an inch. | ||||||||
| Sample | Tread Wear | CL | UCL | LCL | x-bar | Range | ||
| 1 | 44 | 41 | 19 | 30.5667 | 45.9686666667 | 15.165 | 34.6666666667 | 25 |
| 2 | 39 | 31 | 21 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30.3333333333 | 18 |
| 3 | 38 | 16 | 25 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.3333333333 | 22 |
| 4 | 20 | 33 | 26 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.3333333333 | 13 |
| 5 | 34 | 33 | 36 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 34.3333333333 | 3 |
| 6 | 28 | 23 | 39 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30 | 16 |
| 7 | 40 | 15 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 29.6666666667 | 25 |
| 8 | 36 | 36 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 35.3333333333 | 2 |
| 9 | 32 | 29 | 30 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30.3333333333 | 3 |
| 10 | 29 | 38 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 33.6666666667 | 9 |
| 11 | 11 | 33 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26 | 23 |
| 12 | 51 | 34 | 39 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 41.3333333333 | 17 |
| 13 | 30 | 16 | 30 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 25.3333333333 | 14 |
| 14 | 22 | 21 | 35 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26 | 14 |
| 15 | 11 | 28 | 38 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 25.6666666667 | 17 |
| 16 | 49 | 25 | 36 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 36.6666666667 | 24 |
| 17 | 20 | 31 | 33 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 28 | 13 |
| 18 | 26 | 18 | 36 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.6666666667 | 18 |
| 19 | 26 | 47 | 26 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 33 | 21 |
| 20 | 34 | 29 | 32 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 31.6666666667 | 5 |
| 30.5666666667 | 15.1 |
Sheet1
Sheet2
Sheet3
The Range chart
Centerline (average) = r-bar = 15.1
UCL = r-bar * D4 = 15.1 * 2.57 = 38.807
LCL = r-bar *D3 = 15.1 * 0 = 0
Is it in control?
Chart3
| 25 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 18 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 22 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 13 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 3 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 16 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 25 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 2 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 3 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 9 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 23 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 17 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 14 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 14 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 17 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 24 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 13 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 18 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 21 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 5 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
Chart2
| 25 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 18 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 22 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 13 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 3 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 16 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 25 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 2 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 3 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 9 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 23 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 17 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 14 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 14 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 17 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 24 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 13 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 18 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 21 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 5 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
Sheet1
| The Long Last Tire Company, as part of its inspection process, tests its tires for tread | |||||||||||
| wear under simulated road conditions. Twenty samples of three tires each were selected | |||||||||||
| from different shifts over the last month of operation. The tread wear is reported below in | |||||||||||
| hundredths of an inch. | |||||||||||
| Sample | Tread Wear | CL | UCL | LCL | x-bar | Range | r-bar | UCL | LCL | ||
| 1 | 44 | 41 | 19 | 30.5667 | 45.9686666667 | 15.165 | 34.6666666667 | 25 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 2 | 39 | 31 | 21 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30.3333333333 | 18 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 3 | 38 | 16 | 25 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.3333333333 | 22 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 4 | 20 | 33 | 26 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.3333333333 | 13 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 5 | 34 | 33 | 36 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 34.3333333333 | 3 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 6 | 28 | 23 | 39 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30 | 16 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 7 | 40 | 15 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 29.6666666667 | 25 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 8 | 36 | 36 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 35.3333333333 | 2 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 9 | 32 | 29 | 30 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 30.3333333333 | 3 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 10 | 29 | 38 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 33.6666666667 | 9 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 11 | 11 | 33 | 34 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26 | 23 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 12 | 51 | 34 | 39 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 41.3333333333 | 17 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 13 | 30 | 16 | 30 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 25.3333333333 | 14 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 14 | 22 | 21 | 35 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26 | 14 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 15 | 11 | 28 | 38 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 25.6666666667 | 17 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 16 | 49 | 25 | 36 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 36.6666666667 | 24 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 17 | 20 | 31 | 33 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 28 | 13 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 18 | 26 | 18 | 36 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 26.6666666667 | 18 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 19 | 26 | 47 | 26 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 33 | 21 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 20 | 34 | 29 | 32 | 30.5667 | 45.96867 | 15.165 | 31.6666666667 | 5 | 15.1 | 38.807 | 0 |
| 30.5666666667 | 15.1 |
Sheet1
Sheet2
Sheet3
- For data that is not on a continuous scale
- (typically defective vs. non-defective)
- We construct a p chart
- Center line = p-bar (average of the sample percentages)
- UCL = + z * Sp
- LCL = - z * Sp
- Z=usually is 3 (3 std deviations)
- Sp =
Replace p bar
*
Statistical Process Control
- Concepts
- Driven by process data
- Common Cause vs. Special Cause
- Hypothesis testing and UCL/LCL
- Tools
- xbar Chart – continuous data, question is “are we close to the target/nominal value?” (“centered”)
- R Chart – continuous data, question is “are our values close together?” (“tight”)
- p Chart – categorical data, question is “is there special cause in our defect rate?”
- For our sample problem, assuming we have two defectives yielding a p-bar of 2/120=.01667 and standard deviation of .05226
- Thus
- = .017
- UCL = .017+3(.052) = .174
- LCL = .017 – 3(.052) = 0
P-bar
Example 2
| Sample | Number Inspected | Number of forms completed incorrectly | Fraction defective | Upper control Limit | Lower control limit |
| 1 | 300 | 10 | 0.03333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 2 | 300 | 8 | 0.02667 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 3 | 300 | 9 | 0.03000 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 4 | 300 | 13 | 0.04333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 5 | 300 | 7 | 0.02333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 6 | 300 | 7 | 0.02333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 7 | 300 | 6 | 0.02000 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 8 | 300 | 11 | 0.03667 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 9 | 300 | 12 | 0.04000 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| 10 | 300 | 8 | 0.02667 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| Totals | 3000 | 91 | 0.03033 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 |
| Sample standard deviation | 0.00990 |
P-bar = .03033
UCL = p-bar + 3 * Sp =.03033 + 3 * .0099 = .06004
LCL = rpbar – 3 * Sp = .03003 - 3 * .0099 = .00063
Chart1
| 0.0333333333 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.0266666667 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.03 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.0433333333 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.0233333333 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.0233333333 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.02 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.0366666667 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.04 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
| 0.0266666667 | 0.0600384956 | 0.000628171 |
p-chart
| Sample | Number Inspected | Number of forms completed incorrectly | Fraction defective | Upper control Limit | Lower control limit | ||||
| 1 | 300 | 10 | 0.03333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 2 | 300 | 8 | 0.02667 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 3 | 300 | 9 | 0.03000 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 4 | 300 | 13 | 0.04333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 5 | 300 | 7 | 0.02333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 6 | 300 | 7 | 0.02333 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 7 | 300 | 6 | 0.02000 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 8 | 300 | 11 | 0.03667 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| 9 | 300 | 12 | 0.04000 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | 0.30333 | 0.0303333333 | ||
| 10 | 300 | 8 | 0.02667 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| Totals | 3000 | 91 | 0.03033 | 0.06004 | 0.00063 | ||||
| Sample standard deviation | 0.00990 |
p-chart
Changing the width of the control limits
- Why 3 standard deviations?
- Given a desired Type I error level, we use the standard normal distribution table to determine the number of standard deviations away from the mean we need to be. Here’s how:
- Determine the control limit desired.
- Divide the control limit in half. This is your look-up number.
- Using the standard normal table, find the entry that is as close to your lookup number as possible. To determine the z score, read out to the row and column.
- Example
- To find the z score that will yield a 93% control limits
- Divide .93 in half = .465
- Look up the closest value (in the middle of the table) to .465 which is .4649
- Read out z=1.81
Suppose we are a machine shop producing various parts for the
automotive industry. One particular part (let's call it part #101) requires
that a hole be bored with a diameter as close to 8.5 mm. as possible.
The process produces many such parts per day. During each hour of
production, a sample consisting of 6 parts selected at random is taken and
the hole diameter is measured accurately for each part. The table below
gives the last 20 samples of data collected, with sample 1 the first and
sample 20 the last.
Observation #
Sample #
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
8.493
8.540
8.593
8.552
8.500
8.526
2
8.514
8.490
8.463
8.566
8.421
8.489
3
8.537
8.576
8.524
8.540
8.426
8.464
4
8.499
8.477
8.574
8.457
8.579
8.493
5
8.525
8.469
8.484
8.511
8.550
8.445
6
8.491
8.497
8.532
8.504
8.525
8.430
7
8.514
8.527
8.503
8.452
8.550
8.534
8
8.457
8.480
8.483
8.526
8.581
8.485
9
8.478
8.443
8.421
8.513
8.491
8.452
10
8.436
8.500
8.460
8.538
8.493
8.533
11
8.460
8.565
8.521
8.550
8.455
8.567
12
8.491
8.397
8.454
8.460
8.539
8.529
13
8.549
8.498
8.449
8.470
8.481
8.492
14
8.459
8.500
8.518
8.446
8.532
8.542
15
8.518
8.488
8.539
8.495
8.524
8.506
16
8.558
8.480
8.517
8.454
8.399
8.549
17
8.501
8.476
8.473
8.472
8.412
8.571
18
8.444
8.527
8.536
8.451
8.512
8.451
19
8.545
8.529
8.447
8.489
8.413
8.430
20
8.453
8.553
8.470
8.498
8.481
8.533
Sample #
X-bar
Range
1
8.534
0.100
2
8.490
0.146
3
8.511
0.150
4
8.513
0.122
5
8.497
0.106
6
8.496
0.102
7
8.513
0.098
8
8.502
0.124
9
8.466
0.092
10
8.493
0.102
11
8.520
0.112
12
8.478
0.142
13
8.490
0.100
14
8.500
0.096
15
8.512
0.051
16
8.493
0.158
17
8.484
0.158
18
8.487
0.092
19
8.476
0.132
20
8.498
0.100
Average
8.498
0.114
0
10
20
30
40
50
135791113151719
CL
UCL
LCL
x-bar
0
10
20
30
40
50
135791113151719
Range
r-bar
UCL
LCL
[p(1− p)]/n
[p(1-p)]/n
p
p
n
p
p
/
)]
1
(
[
-
0.00000
0.00500
0.01000
0.01500
0.02000
0.02500
0.03000
0.03500
0.04000
0.04500
0.05000
0.05500
0.06000
0.06500
12345678910
Sample
Upper control
limit
Lower control
limit