TK 4038 Statistika Proses

Program Studi Teknik Kimia ITB

Dr. T. Walmiki Samadhi

PROCESS CAPABILITY
PROCESS CAPABILITY EVALUATION
WHAT CAPABILITY?
 In SPC, process capability has a very specific
meaning
 = the capability to consistently produce
products according to customer
specifications
 A consistent process implies a state of
statistical control
 Therefore, a process has to be stable first
before it can be capable
VOICE OF THE PROCESS VS. VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER

 Process capability involves 2 dimensions:

 Voice of the process = natural variability of a statistically-
controlled process
 Voice of the customer = specification limits demanded by
the customer
 The above two are fundamentally independent of
each other
 A capable process has to exceed customer
expectation
 Therefore, capability evaluation necessarily
compares process variability (natural process
limits) vs. customer specs
 Failure to be capable
A process may be stable, yet not capable. Why ?
(1) Overly tight spec limits
‘Elbow room’ for a process = distance between Spec Limits
(Specified Tolerance)

• Specified Tolerance (in measurement units) = USL – LSL

• Specified Tolerance (in sigma units) = (USL – LSL) /
where  = population (or process) standard deviation

A stable process with a Specified Tolerance < 6

sigma units does not have adequate elbow room

.... therefore, it has a high probability of producing non-conforming

product !
LSL USL
Improvement direction:
• reduce process variation
• and/or negotiate to loosen spec limits (obviously not very
popular with the customers…)

A Specified Tolerance of 6 sigma units is considered to be

the minimum for a process to be considered “capable”
(2) Process average is located in the wrong place

LSL USL

Need to evaluate the location of process average relative to spec limits:

Distance to nearest specification (DNS) evaluation :

• ZU = (USL – process average) / 

• ZL = (process average – LSL) / 

DNS = minimum of [ZU, ZL]

• Properly located process average results in a positive DNS, and vice versa
• Based on empirical rule, we like the DNS to be at least 3.0 sigma units
The logic of
process
capability
evaluation
Capability
Evaluation Example

Quality rank of a
distributor socket
produced by 4
different mold
cavities

Customer specs:
LSL = 0
USL = 15
A simple evaluation - use histogram

30

20
Frequency

10 Histogram of all recorded

values:
• All individual values
0 are within spec limits
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 • Process is likely to be
capable of meeting
LSL=0
C1 USL=15
specs
Xbar-R control chart:
Comparison between natural process limits & spec tolerance

• Natural process limits = 6 (± 3

from centerline)
• Spec tolerance = USL - LSL
The problem is that we almost always do not know the true value of 
Therefore, we use the estimate of 

Specified tolerance (in measurement units) = USL – LSL = 15.0

Specified tolerance (in sigma units):

R 3.71
   1.80
d 2 2.059
USL - LSL 15.0 - 0.0
Specified tolerance  
 1.80
 8.33

Specified tolerance > 6.0 .... Therefore, the spec limits

provide sufficient elbow room for the process
Distance to Nearest Specification (DNS):

First we compute the distances to the left and right of the

process average:
USL -  15.0 - 4.66
ZU    5.74
 1.80
 - LSL 4.66 - 0.0
ZL    2.59
 1.80

Then we calculate the DNS:

DNS = min {ZU, ZL} = 2.59

• The DNS value is positive, so the process average is properly
located
• DNS < 3.0, but we know that the process is skewed, so this is
considered acceptable
Capability Index
The capability indices are ‘single-number’ measures of process
capability
These indices are meant to be a more convenient way of stating &
comparing process capability
dpm
= defects per million
= (fraction of observations / products outside spec) x 1.000.000

 level
= no. of standard deviations between process center & the nearest spec
= DNS

Capability ratio, Cp
= (spec width) / (process width)
= (USL – LSL) / 6

Cpk
= proportion of NPL between the process center & nearest spec
= DNS / 3
CAPABILITY RATIO
 Capability ratio (Cp) is basically a ratio between
spec tolerance & natural process limits
 For 2-sided specs: Cp = (USL - LSL)/6
 For 1-sided specs: Cpu = (USL - )/3
Cpl = ( - LSL)/3
 Larger Cp means looser spec tolerance relative
to process variability
 Disadvantage of Cp: does not indicate process
centering
RECOMMENDED MINIMUM CP VALUES

Process characteristics 2-sided 1-sided spec

spec
Existing processes 1.33 1.25
New processes 1.50 1.45
Safety, strength, or critical 1.50 1.45
parameter (existing process)
Safety, strength, or critical 1.67 1.67
parameter (new process)
EXERCISE PROBLEM
 Open the Excel data sheet file 'Bursting Strength -
Glass Containers'
 This file contains 100 glass container bursting
strength (in psi) measurement data points
 Evaluate the process capability as measured by
capability ratio, if the minimum specified strength is
200 psi
 First, get a rough idea about the capability by
plotting the histogram of the data
CAPABILITY RATIO OF OFF-CENTER PROCESS

 The capability index that can also indicate if

the process is off-center is the Cpk
 Cpk = proportions of distance to nearest
spec = DNS/3
 Or, equivalently, Cpk = min[Cpu, Cpl]
 What is the Cpk of the previous exercise
problem? Why?
A BETTER INDEX FOR OFF-CENTER PROCESS

 The graph below is an  We can use the Cpm:

example where Cpk fails to
Cp  T
differentiate the capability Cpm  ; 
between 2 processes 1  2 
(why?)  This index considers the
discrepancy between
process average &
centerline (or target)
 Exercise: calculate the
Cpm of Process A & B
Which way to go ?
A capable process exhibits:
• low dpm
• high Cp
• high Cpk
• high level

As the previous graph suggests, both process spread &

location determine process capability
However, Cp depends only on process spread – considered
to be more of a process potential measure

To simultaneously improve all four indices:

• center the process
• reduce the standard deviation
(or, be “on target with minimum variation”)
GAUGE CAPABILITY
GAUGE CAPABILITY
Another capability issue is the gauge (gage) capability
This is the ability of a measuring system in delivering
accurate & precise observations

Properties of a measurement system:

1. Accuracy: the ability to produce average measurement
which agrees with the true value
2. Precision: the ability to repeatedly measure the same
product / signal & obtain the same results
3. Stability: the ability to repeatedly measure the same
product / signal over time & obtain the same average
measured values

Gage capability analysis  determines the contribution of

measuring system to total process variability
 The total process variance (variability) may be partitioned
into process & measurement contributions:

Total process variance:

2total = 2process + 2measurement

The contribution from measurement may be further partitioned

into:
1. Repeatability: ability of the same operator to obtain consistent
results from repeated measurements using the same
measurement system (device) of the same product/signal
2. Reproducibility: ability of different operators, using the same
measurement system, to obtain consistent results from the
same product / signal
Total measurement variance:
2measurement = 2repeatability + 2reproducibility
CALCULATION
• By comparing repeatability and reproducibility, we can
get an idea the predominant source of
measurement variability
• Comparison is also made between measurement and
total

• Rule of thumb:
• a measurement system is capable if
 measurement /  total ≤ 0.10 (10%)

• Another measure of capability:

• Capability Ratio (CR) – compares
measurement variation to spec range
CR = 6 measurement / (USL-LSL)
Example:
A GRR study was
done by asking
2 operators to
measure 20
units of identical
products. Each
operator
measures each
unit twice, using
the same
measuring
instrument
 Xbar-R chart for
Operator 1
Operator 1
50
Means

45
3.0SL=44.18 Measurements done by
X=42.30 the operators may be
40
-3.0SL=40.42 transformed into ‘control
Subgroup 0 10 20
charts’
3.0SL=3.267
3
Ranges

2
• The charts suggest
1 R=1.000
that Operator 2 has
0 -3.0SL=0.000
more trouble
Xbar-R chart for Operator 2 obtaining consistent
Operator 2
50
results (look at
3.0SL=47.50
‘control limits’ of
Means

45
X=42.80 his/her R-chart)
40 • Let us see how we
-3.0SL=38.10

Subgroup 0
can analyze the
10 20
gage capability more
9
8 3.0SL=8.168 rigorously.
Ranges

7
6
5
4
3 R=2.500
2
1
0 -3.0SL=0.000
 Calculate the repeatability variation from the grand
average of ranges:

R1  R 2 1.0  2.5
R   1.75
2 2
R 1.75
 repeatabil ity    1.55
d 2 1.13( n  2 )

Calculate the reproducibility variation:

Rx  xmax  xmin  42.8  42.3  0.5

Rx 0 .5
 reproducibility    0.44
d 2 1.13
For this example, it appears that repeatability (within-operator
consistency) is more of a problem compared to reproducibility
(between-operator consistency)
 To evaluate the overall capability of the measurement system, we
combine the within-operator & between-operator contributions:

 2 measurement   2 repeatability   2 reproducibility

 (1.55) 2  (0.44) 2  2.60
 measurement  1.61
Calculating the std.deviation of all 80 data points, we obtain: total = 3.36
Therefore:
 measurement 1.61
  0.48
 total 3.36
• The measurement-to-total ratio is >0.10
• This indicates that the measurement system is inadequate
• A revised system/device or better operator training may be necessary