np chart, C chart, u chart

np chart
Graph of sample number vs. D (No. of
defectives)
Used when sample size is constant
Save one step of calculating p for each sample
D=np
 Steps in np chart
Record data for each sample on number of
defectives
Compute p (average fraction defective)

p
np
n
np = total number of defectives
n= total number of inspected items
Compute trial control limits for each
subgroup

UCL np
n p 3 n p(1 p)

LCL np
n p 3 n p(1 p)
 Numerical
In a manufacturing process the number of
defectives found in the inspection of 15 lots of
400 items each are given below

Date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

No. of 2 5 0 14 3 0 1 0 18 8 6 0 3 0 6
defectives
 Calculations for numerical

np 66 (Total number of defectives)

n 400 15 (Total number of inspected items)

p
np

66
0.011 n p 400 0.011 4.4
n 400 15
n p 3 n p (1 p ) LCL n p 3 n p (1 p )
UCL np
np

4.4 3 4.4(0.989) 4.4 3 4.4(0.989)

10.65 1.85

LCL should be taken 0 as no negative

defective exist
 np chart
20

18

16

14

12
No. of Defectives

10 np
UCL
8 LCL

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
 Difference between defects and
defective
Defective- if an item fails to conform to the
specification in any of characteristic
Defect each characteristic that does not
meet the specification is a defect
E.g. Casting containing hard spots, blow holes
is defective and hard spots and blow holes are
defects
p chart and np chart for defectives
c chart and u chart for defects
 c chart
Occurrence of non-conformities in an
inspection unit of a product
Inspection unit entity for which it is
convenient to keep records
Inspection unit either single unit of product
or more than one unit of product
Suppose that defects occur according to
Poisson distribution
 c chart
c x

P( x) e c X=0,1,2,.......
x!
Where x is the number of defects and c>0 is
parameter of Poisson distribution
mean c
Variance c
Std.Deviation c
UCL and LCL of c chart

If c is known

UCL c3 c

LCL c 3 c
 UCL and LCL of c chart
If no standard value of c is available then c
may be estimated as the observed average
number of non-conformities (c) in a sample of
inspected unit

UCL c 3 c
LCL c 3 c
 Steps for c chart
Record number of defects in each inspection
unit
Calculate c if c is not available
c=total no. of defects/total number of samples

c x
n

Calculate UCL and LCL

 c chart Numerical
Magnesium I beams are being extruded and
cut in 1 m length. As they are cut they are
inspected visually for surface defects and
inspected internally for sub surface flaws by
means of an ultrasonic detector. Each
inspected beam is considered a unit. As these
are inspected the number of defects noted in
each is recorded in the order than the beam is
produced
 c chart Numerical
Lot No. Number of defects Lot No. Number of defects
1 33 13 28
2 32 14 33
3 17 15 26
4 22 16 43
5 19 17 28
6 28 18 30
7 31 19 20
8 38 20 17
9 24 21 23
10 12 22 27
11 41 23 12
12 18 24 15
 c chart Numerical

33 32 17 22 19 28 31 38
24 12 41 18 28 33 26 43
28 30 20 17 23 27 12 15
c
24

617
c 25.7
24
 c chart Numerical

UCL c c 25.7 25.7 30.7

LCL c c 25.7 25.7 20.6
 c chart Numerical
50

45

40

35

30
Number of defects

25 c
UCL
20 LCL

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
 c chart Numerical
Conclusion as number of defects for lot no.
16 are higher than upper control limit the
process is out of control.
U CHART
 U chart with constant sample size
Sample size need not be restricted to one
inspection unit
Several inspection units would increase area
of opportunities for occurrence of
nonconformities
The sample size should be chosen according to
statistical considerations
Such as specifying sample size large enough to
ensure positive LCL
 U chart with constant sample size
x- total nonconformities in a sample
n- number of nonconformities in an inspection
unit
The average number of nonconformities per
inspection unit (u) is
x
u
n
x- Poisson Random variable
 UCL and LCL for u chart

u
UCL u 3
n
Centerline u
u
LCL u 3
n
u is the ratio of total observed number of nonconformities to total number of
inspection unit
 U chart with variable sample size
Control chart for nonconformities are
occasionally formed using 100% inspection of
the product.
When this method of sampling is used, the
number of inspection unit will not be constant
U chart is used with constant center line and
variable control limits
 U chart numerical
In a textile finishing plant, dyed cloth
inspected for the occurrence of defect per 50
square meters. The data for ten rolls are
shown in table. Use this data to setup a
control chart for nonconformities per unit
 U chart numerical
Roll no. Number of sq. Total number Number of Number of
M of inspection nonconfirmitie
nonconformiti units in roll (n) s in inspection
es unit
1 500 14 10 1.4
2 400 12 8 1.5
3 650 20 13 1.54
4 500 11 10 1.1
5 475 7 9.5 0.74
6 500 10 10 1.0
7 600 21 12 1.75
8 525 16 10.5 1.52
9 600 19 12.0 1.58
10 625 23 12.5 1.84
 U chart numerical
The centre line of chart should be average
number of inspection unit per roll
153
u 1.42
107.5

(ratio of total number of observed

nonconformities to total number of inspection
unit)
 U chart numerical
The control limits are computed from
equations of UCL and LCL with n replaced by
ni
Where i is the number of sample
 U chart numerical
Roll No. ni UCL LCL
1 10.0 2.55 0.29
2 8.0 2.68 0.16
3 13.0 2.41 0.43
4 10.0 2.55 0.29
5 9.5 2.58 0.26
6 10.0 2.55 0.29
7 12.0 2.45 0.39
8 10.5 2.52 0.32
9 12.0 2.45 0.39
10 12.5 2.43 0.41
 U chart numerical
3

2.5

Number of nonconfirmities in inspection unit

1.5 u
UCL
LCL

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DEMERIT SYSTEM
 Demerit System
Not all types of defects are equally important
A unit of product having one very serious
defect would be classified as non-conforming
Whereas unit having several minor defect
need not be nonconforming.
Demerit system can be used in these
situations
 Demerit System for attribute data
Class A defects
Class B defects
Class C defects
Class D defects
 Class A defects
Very serious
The unit may be completely unfit for service
Or it may fail in service in such a manner that
it cannot be corrected
Or will cause personal injury or property
damage
 Class B defects
Serious
The unit will possibly suffer a class A failure or
will cause less serious problems
It may have reduced life or increased
maintenance cost
 Class C defects
Moderately serious
The unit will possibly fail in service
Can cause trouble that is less serious than
operating failure
Possibly have reduced life or increased
maintenance cost
Can have major defects in finish appearance
or quality of work.
 Class D defects
Minor
The unit will not fail in service but has minor
defects in finish, appearance and quality of
work
 Let CiA, CiB, CiC, CiD be number of defects in
class A, class B, class C, class D respectively for
ith inspection unit
Number of demerits in the inspection unit
di= 100CiA + 50CiB + 10CiC + CiD
Weights A=100, B=50, C=10, D=1
Number of demerits per unit
n
D di
D
u
i
n Where
i 1

n= number of inspection unit in a sample

ui can be plotted on control chart
 UCL and LCL for demerit system
^
UCL u 3
^
LCL u 3
Where

u 100u A 50u B 10u C u D

u A 50 u B 10 u u
2 2 2
^
100

n
C D

Where u A ,u B , u C ,u D represent average number of class A, class B, class D defects

per unit
Choice between attribute and variable
control chart
Attributes control charts have the advantage
that several quality characteristics can be
considered jointly
On the other hand, if the several quality
characteristics are treated as variables, then
each one must be measured, and a separate x
and R chart must be maintained for each
charactristic.
Choice between attribute and variable
control chart
Variables control charts, in contrast, provide
much more useful information about process
performance than does an attributes control
chart.
In addition, when points plot out of control on
variables control charts, usually much more
information is provided relative to the potential
cause of that out-of-control signal.
For a process capability study, variables control
charts are almost always preferable to attributes
control charts.
Choice between attribute and variable
control chart
Perhaps the most important advantage of the
and R control charts is that they often provide
an indication of impending trouble and allow
operating personnel to take corrective action
before any defectives are actually produced.
Choosing the Proper Type of Control
Chart
 Variable chart
The process has been in operation for some time,
but it is chronically in trouble or unable to hold
the specified tolerances.
Destructive testing (or other expensive testing
procedures) is required.
It is desirable to reduce acceptance-sampling or
other downstream testing to a minimum
when the process can be operated in control.
Attributes control charts have been used, but the
process is either out of control or in control but
the yield is unacceptable.
 Variable chart
There are very tight specifications, overlapping
assembly tolerances, or other difficult
manufacturing problems.
The operator must decide whether or not to
adjust the process, or when a setup must be
evaluated.
A change in product specifications is desired.
Process stability and capability must be
continually demonstrated, such as in regulated
industries
 Attribute chart
Operators control the assignable causes, and it
is necessary to reduce process fallout.
The process is a complex assembly operation
and product quality is measured in terms of
the occurrence of nonconformities, successful
or unsuccessful product function, and so
forth. (Examples include computers, office
automation equipment, automobiles, and the
major subsystems of these products.
 Attribute chart
Process control is necessary, but
measurement data cannot be obtained.
A historical summary of process performance
is necessary. Attributes control charts, such as
p charts, c charts, and u charts, are very
effective for summarizing information about
the process for management review.