37 tayangan

Diunggah oleh Andrey Hcivokram

- What is a normal distribution curve.docx
- OCR S1 Revision Sheet
- 5. Michael S. Lewis-Beck-Data Analysis_ an Introduction, Issue 103-SAGE (1995)
- tif_ch07
- Modeling Risk and Realities Week 4 Session 3
- Chapter 5 lecture notes
- 9. Distribution Assignment
- Literature_Review Final
- Data Measuring
- Solved Problems Stats
- U4 Spot Speed Study
- Presentation7-MATH8
- Stats Formula
- 2008_NYJC_Paper_2.pdf
- biggs carter 2016 quality of life for transition-age youth
- Handout Nine
- 774-1863-1-SM
- Session_01(Introduction).ppt
- 66879157
- isthereadifferenceportfoliobriannatavares

Anda di halaman 1dari 26

CHAPTER 8

2. The general conclusion that can be reached for Imagimatrix from inspecting the

data is that costs for internal and external failure are larger than they should be

(totaling 47% of quality costs). Improvements that have been made to date have

probably involved increasing prevention and appraisal costs that now stand at

more than 50% of the total quality costs. Since appraisal costs are a large per-

centage of costs, and internal failures are a larger percentage than external fail-

ures, it is likely that quality is being inspected in, and many defective items

are being taken out and reworked after being caught by inspection. More

money and time needs to be invested in prevention, which will reduce defects

and costs in other areas in a fairly short time.

4. An Excel chart can be constructed to show details on Product B sales and cost

of quality presented in the problem, along with information on the percentage

of total quality cost attributable to each cost category (external, internal,

appraisal, and prevention). This problem contains time-phased data, unlike

problem 1. Thus it is possible to calculate an index base and quarterly indices

for the various cost categories. The data showthat the external and internal fail-

ure indices, as well as the appraisal index, are declining, while the prevention

index is increasing. The overall quality cost index as a percent of sales is also

declining. This is an ideal situation in which managers of the B product line are

continuing to put more emphasis on prevention and attempting to reduce costs

in other categories.

6. The data can be rearranged as follows:

Type of Cost Cost Category $ Cost % of COQ

Inspection and retest Appraisal 340,000 38.9

Scrap Int. failure 330,000 37.8

Customer returns Ext. failure 90,000 10.3

Repair Int. failure 80,000 9.2

Quality equipment design Prevention 25,000 2.9

Supplier quality surveys Prevention 8,000 0.9

$ Costs % of COQ

Internal failure 410,000 47.0

External failure 90,000 10.3

Appraisal 340,000 38.9

Prevention 33,000 3.8

873,000

Although scrap is part of the process, Smith Company needs to minimize the

amount of scrap produced, just as if it were making a product. The total cost of

quality is $873,000. Although the categories are not completely clear, the

assumed categories are listed in the revised table above. Internal failure (scrap

and repair) total 47% of quality costs, and external failure in the form of cus-

tomer returns adds another 10.3%. Only 3.8 % of total costs are being applied to

prevention. Apparently, based on high internal failure and appraisal costs, this

organization is attempting to screen out bad product and scrap or repair it.

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-1

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-1

Also, on this batch, they didnt accomplish their goal of 60% of book value goal

because (1,700,000 873,000)/1,700,000 = 48.65 %.

8. Miami Valley Aircraft Service Companys data show rapidly decreasing total

quality costs (except for a slight rise in the 4th quarter), possibly due to a con-

certed quality effort. The decrease in both internal and external quality costs, as

a percentage of total quality and labor costs, while the prevention costs per-

centage is rising, is good. The only recommendation would be to increase pre-

vention costs even more rapidly, while holding the line on appraisal costs

However, the caution is that doing so may increase total quality costs in the

short run, as may have happened in the 2nd quarter.

Percentages Quarterly Quality/Labor Costs

1 Qtr. 2 Qtr. 3 Qtr. 4 Qtr.

External failure 5.13 4.74 4.52 3.82

Internal failure 17.95 17.11 14.29 11.58

Appraisal 4.62 6.32 5.48 4.53

Prevention 2.05 2.63 2.62 4.21

Total Quality/Labor Cost 29.74 30.79 26.90 24.13

10. Spreadsheet data and the Pareto chart for Repack Solutions, Inc. show that the

company is spending too much on appraisal and internal failure cost and too

little on prevention. Checking boxes, machine downtime, and packaging waste

need immediate improvement to have the greatest impact on quality costs

because they constitute almost 82% of quality costs. However, it should be done

with caution because checking boxes represents appraisal costs designed to

screen out poor quality and prevent it from reaching the customer.

Repack Solutions, Inc. Quality Cost & Percentages

Quality Cost

Percent Cumulative % Cost ($) Category

Checking boxes 48.80 48.80 710,000 Appraisal

Mach. downtime 27.84 76.63 405,000 Int. Fail.

Pkg. waste 5.15 81.79 75,000 Int. Fail.

Income. insp. 4.12 85.91 60,000 Appraisal

Other waste 3.78 89.69 55,000 Int. Fail.

Cust. complaints 2.75 92.44 40,000 Ext. Fail.

Error corrn. 2.75 95.19 40,000 Int. Fail.

Qual. train. assoc. 2.06 97.25 30,000 Prevent.

Improv. proj. 1.37 98.63 20,000 Prevent.

Typo corrn. 0.69 99.31 10,000 Int. Fail.

Quality planning 0.69 100.00 10,000 Prevent.

Total 1,455,000

Note that costs could also be classied by aggregating them into the four cate-

gories of internal and external failure, prevention, and appraisal costs, instead

of the categories listed in the table.

12. For HiTeck Tool Company, the largest costs are internal failure (56.6%) and

appraisal (27.1%). More must be done in quality training, a component of pre-

vention (currently 7.8%), if failure, appraisal, and overall quality costs are to be

controlled. External failure costs are 8.6% of quality costs, so screening methods

are working fairly well. Note that the proportions are fractions of the total quality

costs of $247,450.

S-2 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-2

Quality Cost Categories

Cost Elements Costs ($) Subtotal Proportion

APPRAISAL

Incoming test & inspection 7,500

Inspection 25,000

Test 5,000

Laboratory testing 1,250

Design of Q.A. equipment 1,250

Material testing & insp. 1,250

Insp. equipt. & calibration 2,500

Formal complaints to vendors 10,000

Setup for test & inspection 10,750

Laboratory services 2,500

$67,000 0.271

PREVENTION

Quality training 0

Quality audits 2,500

Maintenance of tools and dies 9,200

Quality control admin. 5,000

Writing proced. & instr. 2,500

$19,200 0.078

INTERNAL FAILURE COSTS

Scrap 35,000

Rework 70,000

Correcting imperfections 6,250

Rework due to vendor faults 17,500

Problem solvingprod. engrs. 11,250

$140,000 0.566

EXTERNAL FAILURE COSTS

Adjustment cost of complaints 21,250

$21,250 0.086

Total costs $247,450

14. The data for Beechcom Software Corporation show that the three categories of

rejected disks (loaded), returns, and system downtime account for 74.64 percent

of the defects. These appear to be completely under the control of the rm, so

steps should be taken to analyze root causes for these problem areas in order to

correct them as quickly as possible.

Beechcom Software Corporation Quality Costs and Percentages

Percent Cumulative % Cost ($)

Rej. disks (load.) 39.34 39.34 360,000

Returns 20.22 59.56 185,000

Sys. Downtime 15.08 74.64 138,000

Rej. disks (blank) 9.73 84.37 89,000

Trng./sys. improve. 7.32 91.69 67,000

Rework costs 3.28 94.97 30,000

Insp.Out 3.06 98.03 28,000

Insp.In. 1.97 100.00 18,000

Total Costs 915,000

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-3

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-3

16. This is a very challenging problem, even for advanced students. Although you

may t a linear regression equation to the set of data given in the problem, t-

ting a curvilinear model would provide a higher R-squared value. This requires

a more complex solution process. There is no cut and dried answer to what

level of additional quality improvement effort would be best, of course.

A number of what if questions and scenarios could be raised. Some of

these might include the following:

1. What if the sample of hotel guests was not representative of the general popu-

lation of guests?

2. What if the site manager was simply interested in reducing, rather than

eliminating, dissatised customers?

3. What if her objective was to eliminate the competition, then go back to the

previous level of quality?

4. What are the disadvantages of tting a linear model to the data? (Note: In using

Excel 4.0 when this solution was developed, it appears that there is a bug in

the module that calculates the equation for the graph. Therefore, the add-in

Excel model was used to get the equation and the R-squared value, as follows.)

Excelsior InnReturn on Quality

Svc. Improvemt. Percent of Customers Predicted

Effort$ 000 Dissatised YRegression Line

0 0.200 0.1075

50 0.150 0.1046

150 0.100 0.0987

260 0.076 0.0922

290 0.067 0.0905

300 0.059 0.0899

450 0.052 0.0811

600 0.045 0.0723

750 0.040 0.0635

900 0.035 0.0547

1050 0.031 0.0459

1200 0.027 0.0371

1350 0.024 0.0283

1500 0.021 0.0195

1650 0.017 0.0107

1800 0.014 0.0019

1950 0.010 0.0070

2100 0.007 0.0158

Partial Summary Output

Excel Regression Analysis

Regression Statistics

Multiple R 0.795781742

R Square 0.633268581

Adjusted R Square 0.610347868

Standard Error 0.031875396

Observations 18

Coefcients

Intercept 0.107507099

X Variable 1 5.87234E-05

S-4 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-4

Equation: y 0.10751 .0000587 x

i

Assume that we use the calculated value of y 0 (no dissatised customers).

The model tells us that we will have:

0 0.10751 0.0000587 x

i

So x

i

0.10751/0.0000587 $1831.5 thousand

We can calculate the net present value, using standard present value table

figures of:

Year PV Factor for 10% Cost Present Value ($000)

1 0.909 1831.5 1664.83

2 0.826 1831.5 1512.82

3 0.751 1831.5 1375.46

Total Net Present Value 4553.11

The return on quality of: ROQ Annual prot increase/discounted present

value of investment

ROQ (2.5 points market share increase $600)/4553.11 32.9%, which is a

very healthy return on investment

CHAPTER 10

2. The defect rate is 65/1000 = 0.065. This is the same as: 0.065 1,000,000 = 65,000

dpmo. From Table 10.1, we see that this is slightly better than 3 sigma with off

centering of 1.5 sigma.

4. We use 3/1054 to get the number of defects per unit (DPUs). However, there are

2 opportunities per injection (wrong drug, wrong dosage) to make an error.

They must be considered to calculate dpmo.

dpmo (3/1054) 1,000,000/2 1423.1, which is slightly less than 4.5 sigma

with off centering of 1.5 sigma.

6. To calculate the overall dpmo and sigma level, we have:

dpmo (6/5000) 1,000,000/5 240, which is approximately 5 sigma with off-

centering of 1.5 sigma.

But for the one characteristic, we have:

dpmo (2/5000) 1,000,000 400, which is still good, but somewhat less than

5 sigma with off centering of 1.5 sigma.

ASix Sigma project should be launched to determine root causes for the defects

from this one characteristic.

CHAPTER 11

2. The following results were obtained from the Staunton Steam Laundry Data

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-5

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-5

Column1

Mean 34.280

Standard Error 3.241

Median 25.500

Mode 19.000

Standard Deviation 32.412

Sample Variance 1050.507

Kurtosis 3.847

Skewness 1.756

Range 169.000

Minimum 1.000

Maximum 170.000

Sum 3428.000

Count 100.000

Largest(1) 170.000

Smallest(1) 1.000

Condence Level(95.0%) 6.431

The conclusion that can be reached from looking at the summary statistics and

the histogram is that these data are exponentially distributed, with descending

frequencies. These data may show errors, by category, which are best repre-

sented by a histogram.

4. Descriptive statistics for the Harrison Metalwork foundry are shown in the

following chart:

Descriptive Statistics

Mean 38.6320

Standard Error 0.0444

Median 38.6000

Mode 38.4000

Standard Deviation 0.4436

Sample Variance 0.1967

Range 2.6000

Minimum 37.3000

Maximum 39.9000

Sum 3863.2000

Count 100.0000

S-6 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

15 30 45 60 75 90 105 More

Measures

F

r

e

q

u

e

n

c

y

Frequency

Frequency Histogram

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-6

The conclusion that can be reached from looking at the summary statistics and

the histogram is that these data are fairly normally distributed, with some slight

skewing to the right.

6. For Georgia Teas bottling process, the values for the 1% cutoff and the standard

deviation are:

x 1990 ml; 15 ml

For a total probability of 1% for overlling:

Using the Normal Table, Appendix A, z = 2.33

z

x

1990

2.33

15

1955.05 ml

The process mean should be 1955.05 ml, so that there is only a 1% probability

of overlling.

8. The mean for the Kiwi Blend product is = 927.5; the standard deviation,

15, x = 950.

z =

x

950 927.5

1.50

15

P(x > 950) 0.5000 P(0 < z < 1.5)

P(z > 950) 0.5000 0.4332 0.0668

(Results are based on the Standard Normal Table, Appendix A.)

10. Given that the process mean filling weight is = 16.8 oz for the Martin salt

containers,

By looking up 0.5000 0.0250 = 0.4775, we nd z = 1.96

z 1.96

16 16.8

= 0.4082 oz.

(Results are based on the Standard Normal Distribution Table, Appendix A.)

P x P

x

( > u fill limit) pper

1

]

1

0 5000 .

00 5000 4900 0 01 . . .

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

37.5 37.8 38.1 38.4 38.7 39.0 39.3 39.6 39.9

Cell Boundaries

F

r

e

q

u

e

n

c

y

Frequencies

Frequency Distribution

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-7

12. Adj. Cell

Midpoints Frequencies fx fx

2

Cell 1 37.35 1 37.35 1395.02

Cell 2 37.65 3 112.95 4252.57

Cell 3 37.95 8 303.60 11521.62

Cell 4 38.25 23 879.75 33650.44

Cell 5 38.55 25 963.75 37152.56

Cell 6 38.85 23 893.55 34714.42

Cell 7 39.15 10 391.50 15327.23

Cell 8 39.45 6 236.70 9337.82

Cell 9 39.75 1 39.75 1580.06

3858.90 148931.73

b. Answer may be found in Problem 11-3.

c. A normal probability plot shows that the data are approximately normally

distributed, with an R square value of 0.947.

a.

fx

n

3858.90

100

38.589 (vs. 38.670 fro x

mmthe data in problem11-3)

s

fx

n

fx

2

1

( )

22 2

1

148931 73

99

3858 9 100

99

0 4572

/ / n

n

. ( . )

. ((versus 0.4556 fromthe spreadsheet data)

S-8 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

37

38

39

40

41

0 20 40 60 80 100

Sample Percentile

Y

Normal Probability Plot

14. Specication for answer time for the Tessler utility is:

H

0

: Mean response time:

1

0.10

H

1

: Mean response time:

1

> 0.10

x

1

0.1023, s

1

= 0.0183

and the t-test is:

Specication for service time is:

H

0

: Mean service time:

2

0.50

H

1

: Mean response time:

2

> 0.50

x

2

= 0.5290, s

2

= 0.0902

and the t-test is:

t

x

s n

2

0 50 0 529 0 50

0 0902 30

0 029

0 0165

. . .

.

.

. /

1 761 1 699

29 05

. , .

,.

t

t

x

s n

1

0 10 0 1023 0 10

0 0183 30

0 0023

0 0

. . .

.

.

. / / 0033

0 697 1 699

29 05

. , .

,.

t

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-8

Because t

29,.05

= 1.699, we cannot reject the null hypothesis for t

1,

but we can

reject the hypothesis for t

2

. Therefore, there is no statistical evidence that the

mean response time exceeds 0.10 for the answer component, but the statistical

evidence does support the service component.

Note: Problems 1519 address sample size determination and refer to theory

covered in the Bonus Material for this chapter as contained on the student

CD-ROM.

16. Thesizeof thepopulationisirrelevant tothiscustomer satisfactionsurvey, although

it is good to knowthat it is sizable. Therefore, make the following calculations:

n (z

/2

)

2

p(1 p)/E

2

(1.96)

2

(0.04)(0.96)/(0.02)

2

368.79, use 369

18. Using the formula: n (z

/2

)

2

p(1 p)/E

2

, the engineer at the Country Squire

Hospital can solve for z

/2

as follows:

800 = (z

/2

)

2

(0.10)(0.90)/(0.02)

2

800 = (z

/2

)

2

(225)

(z

/2

)

2

= 800/225

(z

/2

)

2

= 3.556 = 1.886; use 1.87

From the Standard Normal Distribution table, Appendix A, we find a proba-

bility of 0.4693 for z = 1.87. Because it is only one tail of the distribution, we

multiply the area by 2 to get the confidence level of 0.9386. Thus, the man-

agement engineer can only be almost 94% confident of her results based on

this sample size.

20. The process engineer at Sival Electronics can calculate the main effects as follows:

Signal

High (18 + 12 + 16 + 10)/4 = 14

Low (8 + 11 + 7 + 14)/4 = 10

High Low = 4

Material

Gold (18 + 12 + 8 + 11)/4 = 12.25

Silicon (16 + 10 + 7 + 14)/4 = 11.75

Gold Silicon = 12.25 11.75 = 0.5

Temperature

Low (18 + 16 + 8 + 7)/4 = 12.25

High (12 + 10 + 11 + 14)/4 = 11.75

Low High = 12.25 11.75 = 0.5

The main effects of the signal far outweigh the effects of material and tem-

perature, indicating that these factors are insignicant. Therefore, interaction

effects will be negligible.

CHAPTER 12

2. With the new data given for Fingersprings potential customers, a partial House

of Quality for the design of the PDAcan be built. Note that there are strong rela-

tionships between customer requirements and associated technical require-

ments of the PDAdesign.

The inter-relationships of the roof may be sketched in. For example, they

would show a strong inter-relationship between size and weight.

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-9

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-9

The analysis suggests that Fingerspring should try to position itself between

Springbok and Greenspring in price and features. It should build on the strength

of the customers reliability concern, keeping battery life near 35 hours and use a

proven operating program, such as PalmOS. Enough features (10) should be

offered to be competitive. If Fingerspring can design a high-value PDAand sell it

at an attractive price (say, $350 or less), it should be a very protable undertaking.

4. With the new data given for Berthas customers, a partial House of Quality for

the design of the burritos can be built. Note that the relationships between cus-

tomer requirements (avor, health, value) and associated technical require-

ments (% fat, calories, sodium, price) of the burrito design are strong.

The inter-relationships of the roof may be sketched in. For example, they

would show a strong inter-relationship between fat and calories.

Berthas Big Burritos technical requirements must be placed on a more equal

basis, which would best be shown as units/ounce, except for the percent fat

value. These are shown in the following:

Company Price/oz Calories/oz Sodium/oz % Fat

Grabbys $0.282 80 13.63 13

Queenburritos $0.300 85 12.67 23

Sandys $0.292 90 13.33 16

Although Berthas is low in price per ounce, calories, and percent fat, this analy-

sis suggests that Berthas should try to increase its size and visual appeal, while

continuing to reduce the cost per ounce. At the same time, it should build on the

strength of the nutrition trend by keeping the sodium and percent fat low, as did

Grabbys, and slightly reducing the number of calories per ounce to be even more

competitive. If Berthas can design a avorful, healthy, 7-oz burrito and sell it at

an attractive price (say, $1.85 or less), it should be a very protable undertaking.

6. The following table can be used to sketch the reliability function.

Failure Rate CurveProblem 12-6

Cumulative Failures Hours Lambda = Cum. Failures/Hrs.

20 10 2.000

28 20 1.400

29 30 0.967

29.5 40 0.738

30 50 0.600

35 60 0.583

40 70 0.571

50 80 0.625

65 90 0.722

90 100 0.900

8. a. P(x > 875) = 0.5 P(750 < < 875)

Therefore, P(x > 875) = 0.5 0.4332 = 0.0668 or 6.68% should survive

beyond 875 days.

b. ( < 700) = <

650 750

50

( < P x P z P z

_

,

2.0)

P x P z P (750 < < 875) =

875 750

50

= (0 <

_

,

S-10 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-10

d. Let x

w

be the limit of the warranty period.

P(x < x

w

) = 0.10; z = 1.28, for z =

x 750

= 1.28,

50

x

w

= 686 hours for the warranty limit.

10. Massive Corporations motors have a failure rate of:

12. The MTTF is = 1; so, = 40000

R(T) = e

T/

= e

15000/40000

= e

0.375

= 0.687 or 68.7% probability of surviving

14. Supplier 1: R

a

R

bc

= (0.97) [1 (1 0.85)(1 0.95)] = 0.963

Supplier 2: R

a

R

bc

= (0.92) [1 (1 0.90)(1 0.93)] = 0.914

Supplier 3: R

a

R

bc

= (0.95) [1 (1 0.90)(1 0.88)] = 0.939

Therefore, choose Supplier 1.

16. a. R

a

R

b

R

c

= (0.98)(0.95)(0.93) = 0.866

b. R

a

R

bc

= (0.98) (0.95) [1 (1 0.90)(1 0.90)] = 0.922

Yes, this will provide better than the minimum required system reliability.

18. Spreadsheets for descriptive statistics can be used to structure details for this

solution.

Accuracy of: Scale A Scale B

Scale Ais more accurate.

The frequency distribution, taken from the Excel printout, shows that Scale B is

more precise than Scale A.

100

114

114

0 035 100

115 92

Abs[113.96 ] Abs[

. %

.

114

114

1 685

]

. %

+ + +

3

3 600 100 175 350

3

2425

0 001237

[( ) ]

. fail lures/hour

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-11

X = 875 X = 750

= 50

Therefore, P(x < 880) = 0.5 0.4772 = 0.0228 or 2.28% should survive less than

650 days.

c. This distribution looks approximately like:

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-11

20. Detailed calculations for the rst operator are as follows:

x

1

= (M

ijk

)/nr = 48.48/30 = 1.616

R

1

= (M

ij

)/n = 1.33/10 = 0.133

Use this method to calculate values for the second operator:

x

2

= 46.74/30 = 1.558;

R

2

= 1.58/10 = 0.158

Also, use this method to calculate values for the third operator:

R R = ( )/m= (0.133 + 0.158 + 0.061)/3 = 0 i ..117

= 2.574; = = (2.574) (0.1

4 R 4

D UCL D R 117) = 0.3012, all ranges below

= 3.05;

1

K K

22

1

= 3.65 (fromTable 12.3)

= = (3.05 EV K R )) (0.117) = 0.3569

= ( ) /

2 D

2

AV K x EV nr ( )

2

00 1424

0 3843

2 2

.

( ) ( ) . RR EV AV +

x R

3 3

47.05/30 = 1.568; = 0.610/10 = 0.061

xx x x

D i i

max { } min { } = 1.616 1.558 = 0 ..058

S-12 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

SCALE A FREQUENCY TABLE FOR PROBLEM 12-18(a)

Upper Cell

Boundaries Frequencies Standard Statistical Measures

Cell 1 112.00 3 Mean 113.96

Cell 2 112.67 0 Median 114.00

Cell 3 113.33 5 Mode 114.00

Cell 4 114.00 9 Standard deviation 1.14

Cell 5 114.67 0 Variance 1.29

Cell 6 115.33 6 Max 116.00

Cell 7 116.00 2 Min 112.00

Range 4.00

SCALE B FREQUENCY TABLE FOR PROBLEM 12-18(b)

Upper Cell

Boundaries Frequencies Standard Statistical Measures

Cell 1 114.00 3 Mean 115.92

Cell 2 115.33 5 Median 116.00

Cell 3 116.00 10 Mode 116.00

Cell 4 117.33 5 Standard deviation 1.12

Cell 5 118.00 2 Variance 1.24

Max 118.00

Min 114.00

Range 4.00

Scale B is a better instrument because it is likely that it can be adjusted to

center on the nominal value of 0.

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-12

Equipment variation = 100(0.3569/0.40) = 89.23%

Operator variation = 100(0.1424/0.40) = 35.60%

R & R variation = 100(0.3843/0.40) = 96.08%

Note that the range in sample 7 exceeded the control limit of 0.301 by for the

first operator. This point could have been due to a misreading of the gauge.

If so, this sample should be thrown out, another one taken, and the values

recomputed.

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-13

Repeatability (EV) 0.3579

Reproducibility (AV) 0.1423

Repeatability and Reproducibility (R&R) 0.3851

Control limit for individual ranges 0.3020

Note: Any ranges beyond this limit may be the result

of assignable causes. Identify and correct. Discard

values and recompute statistics.

Tolerance

analysis

89.47%

35.58%

96.28%

Average range 0.117

X-bar range (x

D

) 0.058

The recommendation is to concentrate on reducing equipment variation.

Note also that the calculator values, shown in the detailed calculations, and

computer values do not match precisely because a greater number of decimal

places are used by the computer to carry out calculations. All formulas are

identical, however.

22. The Taguchi Loss Function for Partspalaces part is: L(x) = k(x T)

2

$10 = k(0.025)

2

k = 16000

L(x) = k(x T)

2

= 16000(x T)

2

24. The Taguchi Loss Function is: L(x) = k(x T)

2

a. $5 = k(0.025)

2

k = 8000

L(x) = k(x T)

2

= 8000(x T)

2

b. L(x) = 8000(x T)

2

L(0.015) = 8000(0.015)

2

= $1.80

26. For a specication of 180 5 ohms:

a. L(x) = k(x T)

2

$100 = k(5)

2

k = 4

b. EL(x) = k(

2

+ D

2

) = 4(2

2

+ 0

2

) = $16

28. For a specication of 2.000 .002 mm and a $5 scrap cost:

Analysis of the dataset for problem 1229 provides the following statistics:

= 0.00104

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-13

a. L(x) = k(x T)

2

$5 = k(0.002 )

2

; k = 1,250,000

b. EL(x) = k(

2

+ D

2

) = 1,250,000 (0.00104

2

+ 0.00008

2

) = $1.36

30. a) The Taguchi Loss function is: L(x) = k(x T)

2

300 = k(30)

2

k = 0.333

So, L(x) = 0.333 (x T)

2

b) $2.25 = 0.333 (x 120)

2

6.76 = (x 120)

2

(x T)

Tolerance

= 6.76 = 2.60 volts

x = 122.60

32. For the AirPort 778 plane parts:

Specications are 24 3 mm

L(x) = 60,000 (x T)

2

For a typical calculation:

L(0.21) = 60,000(0.21 0.24)

2

= $54.00

Weighted loss = 0.12 $54.00 = $6.48

Problem 12-32

AirPort Airplane Co.

Calculation of Taguchi Loss Values

Process P Weighted Process Q Weighted

Value Loss ($) Probability Loss ($) Probability Loss ($)

0.20 96.00 0 0.00 0.02 1.92

0.21 54.00 0.12 6.48 0.03 1.62

0.22 24.00 0.12 2.88 0.15 3.60

0.23 6.00 0.12 0.72 0.15 0.90

0.24 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.30 0.00

0.25 6.00 0.12 0.72 0.15 0.90

0.26 24.00 0.12 2.88 0.15 3.60

0.27 54.00 0.12 6.48 0.03 1.62

0.28 96.00 0 0.00 0.02 1.92

Expected Loss 20.16 16.08

Therefore, Process Q incurs a smaller loss than Process P, even though some

output of Q falls outside specications.

34. For sample statistics of:

C

p

=

UTL LTL

=

0.582 0.568

= 0.359; not capable, unsatisfactory

6 6(0.0065)

36. a. Data set 1:

Data set 2:

Data set 3:

Part 1 will not consistently meet the tolerance limit because its 3s value is

greater than the tolerance limit. Parts 2 and 3 are well within their tolerance

limits because their 3s values are smaller than the stated tolerances.

S-14 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-14

b)

Process limits: 4.9930 3(0.0188) or

4.9366 to 5.0494 vs. specication limits of

4.919 to 5.081 for a condence level of 0.9973.

The parts will t within their combined specication limit with a 0.9973 con-

dence level.

38. a.

Conclusion: The process is centered on the mean, but it does not have adequate

capability at this time.

C

pk

= min (C

pl

, C

pu

) = 0.903

Because of the shift away from the target, capability is lower.

Conclusion: The process is skewed and still does not have adequate capability

at this time.

c.

2

new

= 0.4 (1.44) = 0.576

new

= 0.759

C

p

=

UTL LTL

=

28.25 21.75

= 1.427

6 6(0.759)

C C

p modified

2

/ mean target) / / + + 1 1 427 1

2

[( ] . [[( . . ) . ] . 25 0 25 0 0 759 1 427

2 2

/

C

C

pu

pl

UTL x

3

x LTL

28 25 23 0

3 1 2

1 458

. .

( . )

.

33

,

23 0 21 75

3 1 2

0 347

. .

( . )

. ; min( C C C

pk pl pu

)) . 0 347

b.

UTL LTL

x

C

p

23 1 2

6

28 25 21 75

6

; .

. .

(( . )

.

1 2

0 903 This result has not changged.

/ 1 [(mean target) /

modified

2

C C

p

+

2

] + 0 903 1 23 0 25 0 1 2 0 584

2 2

. / [( . . ) . . /

x

C

p

25 0 1 2

6

25 0 21 75

6 1 2

. ; .

. .

( . )

UTL LTL

00 903

1 0 903 1

2

.

[( ] . [ C C

m p

+ + / mean target) / /

2

(( . . ) . ] .

.

25 0 25 0 1 2 0 903

28 25

2 2

/

UTL

3

C

x

pu

221 75

3 1 2

0 903

3

25 0 21 75

3 1

.

( . )

.

. .

(

C

x

pl

LTL

.. )

.

2

0 903

x s s s

T

Estimated Process + +

4 9930

1

2

2

2

3

2

. ;

00 0163 0 0078 0 0052 0 0188

2 2 2

. . . . + +

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-15

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-15

If there is no shift away from the target, capability is equal to C

p

.

Reducing the variance brings the C

pl

and C

pu

to the point of adequacy, provided

the process can remain centered.

CHAPTER 13

2. The important quality characteristics for this drive-through window are the

machinery, materials, methods, and people (manpower). The machinery must

work well (e.g., most important is the speaker system by which the order is

transmitted and received), the bell and its operating system must work well, the

menu sign must be readable and conveniently placed, the order computer/cash

register must be working properly to give the total bill, and all the necessary

equipment in the food preparation area must also be working properly. The

materials used in order taking are few. However, the sign must be kept up-to-

date with the latest prices and selection of menu items. The method currently

being used is shown on the owchart (Figure 13.23), and possible improve-

ments are discussed in the next paragraph. The people who take the order must

be trained to be courteous, friendly, accurate, and knowledgeable, or the

systems quality will suffer.

Possible improvements to the system might include installation of a second

window, so that the order is taken at the rst window, money is collected there,

and the pickup is made at the second window. A radio transmit/receive unit

linking the customer at the sign to the employee wearing a headset could

increase the ability of the employee to hear the order and to move around to

assemble the order while the customer is driving through. Automatic order

entry of standard selections might be built into the menu board with push but-

tons (similar to an automated teller machine in a drive-through banking opera-

tion). This would probably need to be coupled with personal assistance from

employees for special orders via a speaker system.

4. a. The C-E diagram for this process analysis shows that possible major causes

relating to client dissatisfaction (the effect) may be classied into three cate-

gories: employees, processing method, and client procedures.

b. The supervisor might use flowcharts, check sheets, and Pareto analysis to

classify the types of defects and their frequencies. Then, training, cross-

checking for errors, and work redesign might be done in order to remove

40.

UTL LTL

Ther C

p

6

2 0

5 80 5 00

6

0 8

6

.

. . .

; eefore,

UTL

3 3

Th

0 0667

5 80

2 0

.

.

. ; C

x x

pu

eerefore, we get:

LTL

3

x

C

x x

pl

5 4

5 00

3

.

.

2 0 5 4 . ; . Therefore, we get: x

C

C

pu

pl

28 25 25 0

3 0 759

1 427

25 0 21 75

3

. .

( . )

.

. .

(( . )

.

min( , ) .

0 759

1 427

1 427

C C C

pk pl pu

S-16 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-16

those error causes. Once the process is under control, control charts might

be used to hold the gains.

6. The scatter diagram shows that the employees accuracy improves for approxi-

mately the rst 25 weeks. After that, it basically levels off. The differences dont

appear to be signicant after about 30 weeks.

8. The scatter diagram shows the packing time for a standard size package is lowest

for the rst group of 20 packers, who average 13.85 minutes, although Packers #20

and 21 are considerably higher than the lower time group members. The pack-

ing time for a standard size package is higher for the second group of 20 packers,

who average 19.25 minutes, which is considerably longer. This suggests that some

workers are able to perform the task much faster than the norm (mean of 16.55). If

the output quality is the same for the faster group, as well as the slower one, then

the production coordinator should attempt to nd the root cause, by observing the

methods of both groups, as well as testing to see if there are any signicant differ-

ences in abilities between the group members. If the methods used by the rst

group can be taught to the slower group members, this could increase productiv-

ity, reduce cost, and perhaps even improve quality, simultaneously.

10. It is obvious from the table and Pareto chart that may be constructed that the

rst two categories, accounting for 68% of the errors, need improvement.

Ace Printing Company

Quality Errors and Percentages

Percent Cumulative % Frequency

Setup delays 37.40 37.40 245

No press time 30.53 67.94 200

No paper 12.21 80.15 80

Design delays 9.16 89.31 60

Order info error 4.43 93.74 29

Cust. chg, delays 3.05 96.79 20

Lost order 3.21 100.00 21

Total 655

12. The medication administration process offers numerous possibilities for error at

every step. The physician may not write legibly (probably the most frequent

source of physician error), or even specify the wrong drug or dosage. The sec-

retary may not transcribe the order correctly. The reviewing nurse may approve

an order that is not correct. The pharmacist may not read or interpret the pre-

scription correctly, or may mix up orders. And the attending nurse may give the

wrong medication, or the wrong amount, to the patient.

A Medication Error Committee at one hospital identied the highest ranked

problemsthat weredeemedtobethemost critical incausingsevereerrorsasfollows:

Having lethal drugs available on oor stocks.

Mistakes in math when calculating doses.

Doses or ow rates calculated incorrectly.

Not checking armbands (patient identity) before drug administration.

Excessive drugs in nursing oor stock.

To reduce possible critical errors at the point of medication, these poka-yokes

could be applied:

Remove lethal and excessive drugs from oor stock.

Standardize infusion rates and develop an infusion handbook

Educate nurses to double-check rates, protocols, and doses

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-17

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-17

14. From the Pareto diagram that can be constructed, we can conclude that 55% of the

problems are with long delays and another 25.2% are due to shipping errors, for a

total in the top two categories of 80.2%. These categories should be improved rst.

DOT.COM Apparel House

Quality Errors and Percentages

Percent Cumulative % Frequency

Long delays 54.98 54.98 5372

Shipping errors 25.18 80.16 2460

Delivery errors 7.69 87.85 752

Electronic charge errors 6.65 94.50 650

Billing errors 5.50 100.00 537

Total 9771

16. The data on the syringes that may be graphed show a suspicious pattern that

indicates that the process may be unstable. Ten values, from samples 20 to 29,

are alternating above and below the average, indicating that some instability

may be found in the system, if it is carefully investigated.

CHAPTER 14

2. Results from 50 samples of 5 for Mount Blanc Hospitals customer service project

show that the R chart is obviously out of control. On the x

ples 6 and 7 are on, or almost on, their control limits. Assignable causes should

be determined and eliminated, and control limits should be recalculated.

For the Center Lines, CL

x

: x

=

= 22.62; CL

R

: R

= 1.94

Control limits for the x

- chart are: x

=

A

2

R

UCL

x

= x

=

+ A

2

R

LCL

x

= x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

4. a. Descriptive statistics for Babbage Chips, Inc., based on all 50 samples, are

shown in the following. The histogram, when drawn, shows the classic

bell-shaped curve.

Descriptive Statistics for Problem 14-4

Mean 9.046

Standard Error 0.070

Median 9.011

Mode 9.215

Standard Deviation 1.103

Sample Variance 1.218

Kurtosis 0.323

Skewness 0.071

Range 5.716

Minimum 6.341

Maximum 12.057

Sum 2261.440

Count 250.000

Conf. Level(95.0%) 0.137

S-18 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-18

b. Results from rst 30 samples of 5 for Babbage show that both the x

and R

charts are apparently in control.

For the Center Lines, CL

x

: x

=

= 9.170; CL

R

: R

= 2.543

Control limits for the x

- chart are: x

=

A

2

R

UCL

x

= x

=

+ A

2

R

LCL

x

= x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart:

UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

c. Using these control limits to monitor the last 20 samples, there is one unusual

occurrence, with seven out of the last eight samples below the centerline,

indicating a probable out-of-control condition. Note to instructors: The tem-

plates for the x

based only on the rst 30 samples, and the data for the additional 20 samples

were then added to the table and as shown as follows.

6. For the Quality Service Companys center lines, CL

x

= x

=

= 8.0; CL

R

: R

= 2.0

Control limits for the x

chart are:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

= 2.004(2.0) = 4.01

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

Estimated = R

/d

2

= 2.0/2.534 = 0.79

8. We can see from the initial control charts [labeled as x-bar chart (A) and R-chart

(A)], for the Hertz Company that there are two out-of-control points, one on the

x

-chart and one on the R-chart. We must throw out outliers #16, #23, and revise

the chart to yield the results shown in part b.

For the Center Lines, CL

x

: x

=

= 402.92; CL

R

: R

= 33.20

Control limits for the x

-chart are:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

= 2.574(33.20) = 85.46

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

For the revised x

- chart:

x

=

A

2

= 400.29 1.023(30.96) = 368.62 to 431.96

For the revised R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

10. For 50 samples of 5 given for Beta Sales Corp., we obtain the following control

limits. We can conclude from the x

control because the points seem to be randomly distributed in both charts.

For the Center Lines, CL

x

: x

=

= 0.011; CL

R

: R

= 1.372

Control limits for the x

-chart are:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-19

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-19

12. Interpretation of each of the control charts reveals:

a. Two points outside upper control limit.

b. Process is in control.

c. Mean shift upward in second half of control chart.

d. Points hugging upper and lower control limits.

14. a. Center Lines, CL

x

: x

=

= 5.100; CL

R

: R

= 1.083

Control limits for the x

-chart are:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

= 2.282(1.083) = 2.47

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

b. We can see from the x

R-chart shows point 18 is out of control on the range. We obtain the fol-

lowing control limits and related charts after dropping these 3 points:

New Center Lines: Center Lines, CL

x

: x

=

= 5.037; CL

R

: R

= 1.057

Control limits for the x

- chart are:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

The x

c. The additional data from the database show that the process is still operating

within control limits.

16. a. CL

x

: x

= 0.1115; CL

R

: R

= 0.0124

(with a 4-period moving average)

Estimated=R

/d

2

=0.0124/2.059=0.0060; actual =0.0055, closetotheestimate.

x

3

est

= 0.1115 3 (0.0060) = 0.0935 to 0.1295;

for x

These limits apply to individual items only. Individual items can only be plot-

ted on x

-charts. See the following chart on individuals and the previous prob-

lem for a more thorough discussion.

b. The detailed comparisons of process capability using estimated can be seen

in a table on the spreadsheet template.

Although individual values must be plotted on x

students need to understand their relationship to x

for comparison with the charts for individuals.

For the x

-chart:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

These limits apply to sample groups of 4 items each.

S-20 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-20

c. The calculations of process capability using the estimated value are shown

on the following table.

Estimated = R

/d

2

= 0.0124/2.059 = 0.0060; actual = 0.0055, as shown in part

a, above.

18. For the Center Lines, CL

x

: x

=

= 69.147; CL

R

: R

= 21.920

Control limits for the x

-chart are:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

These limits apply to sample groups of 5 items each.

Estimated = R

/d

2

= 21.920/2.326 = 9.423

The problem asks that students perform a process capability analysis. This is

only justied if the process is in control. The fact that the process is thought to

be normally distributed does not establish that it is in control. The x

-chart

shows that the process is, in fact, out of control because 4 out of 5 samples

within samples 610 are on one side of the center line. The % outside calculation

can be performed as follows. Note the warning, however.

Percent outside Specication Limits (45 to 95)

Therefore, the percent outside is calculated as 0.83%

Although the % outside calculations seem to show that the process has a rel-

atively small % outside specications, it should be noted that the x

-bar chart

shows that the process is not in control. Hence, the % outside calculation is

going to generate questionable results.

20. With data from Problem 14 and using USL = 6.75, LSL = 3.25, from the template

spreadsheet we see:

%

.

.

.

BelowLSL: z

LSL

x

z

45 69 147

9 423

2 56;; . ) ( . . )

.

P z ( <

that

2 56 0 5 0 4948

0 0052 iitems will exceed lower limit

%Above USL : USL

( > 2.74

z x

z P z

95 69 147

9 423

2 74

.

.

. ; ))

that items will e

( . . )

.

0 5 0 4969

0 0031 xxceed upper limit

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-21

Average 0.1115 Cp 1.1190

Standard Deviation 0.0092 Cpu 1.0071

Cpl 1.2309

Cpk 1.0071

Nominal specication 0.110

Upper tolerance limit 0.125

Lower tolerance limit 0.095

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-21

Note that the spreadsheet uses an estimated standard deviation of:

Estimated = R

/d

2

= 1.057/2.059 = 0.5134

From this, we obtain:

Percent outside Specication Limits (3.25 to 6.75)

*Note: This was taken from an outside table because Appendix Aextends only

to z = 3.09.

Therefore, the percent outside is calculated as 0.07%

These calculations show that the process has a relatively small % outside

specications. In problem 14b, points that showed assignable causes were elim-

inated, so the process should be in control. The process still needs some ne

tuning in order to become more capable (ideally the Cp should be 2.0, or

better) as shown by the % outside calculation and the capability indexes. The

modied control limits are:

URL

x

= US A

m

R

LRL

x

= LS + A

m

R

22. See the following data and control charts and a template spreadsheet for details

on the Moby Molding Co.s plastic molding process.

a. For the Center Line, CL

x

: x

=

= 0.0093; CL

R

: R

= 0.1037

Control limits for the x

- chart are:

x

=

A

2

R

For the R-chart: UCL

R

= D

4

R

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0

b. We can see from the x

ging the center line creating an out-of-control condition on the means and

their ranges. The cause for this condition may be judged from the structure of

%

. .

.

BelowUSL:

USL

z

x

z

6 75 5 037

0 5134

33 33 0 4995 . ; . P z ( < 3.33) (0.5 )

0.0005 th

aat items will exceed upper limit

%

. .

.

BelowLSL:

LSL

z

x

z

3 25 5 037

0 5134

33 48 0 4998 . ; . * P z ( < 3.48) (0.5 )

0.00002

tthat items will exceed lower limit

S-22 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

Upper specication 6.75 Cp 1.137

Lower specication 3.25 Cpl 1.113

Nominal specication 5.00 Cpu 1.161

Cpk 1.113

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-22

the data. It appears that each of the heads on the molding machine has a sep-

arate distribution of data. Thus, control charts should be prepared for each

head, rather than treating the data as if it came from the same population.

24. See control charts for Wilmer Machine Co. and template spreadsheet for details.

a. For the center line, CL

x

: = 3.526; CL

s

: s

= 0.359

Control limits for the x

-s charts are:

x

=

A

3

s

For the s-chart: UCL

s

= B

4

s

LCL

s

= B

3

s

= 0

The x

the center line. Causes must be investigated and the process must be brought

under control before x

26. The data and control charts from the template spreadsheet show that.

For the Hertz Co. data from problem 14-7, the center line, CL

x

:

x

=

= 400.290; CL

s

: s

= 16.404

Control limits for the x

- s charts are:

x

=

A

3

s

For the s-chart: UCL

s

= B

4

s

LCL

s

= B

3

s

= 0

Because the revised data from problem 14-7 (b) with 23 samples was used, the

process is under control, with no apparent problems.

28. Using data from problem 14, Slobay Co. as individual measures, with 5 sample

moving ranges, the calculations for the x-chart for individuals and R-chart show:

From the data shown below, : x

= 0.0762; R

= 0.0050

Control Limits on x:

UCL

x

= x

+ 3 (R

/d

2

) = 0.0762 + 3 (0.0050)/2.326 = 0.0827

LCL

x

= x

3 (R

/d

2

) = 0.0762 3 (0.0050)/2.326 = 0.0698

Control limits on R: UCL

R

= D

4

R

= 2.114(0.0050) = 0.0106

LCL

R

= D

3

R

= 0(0.0050) = 0

The process is probably out of control, with points 2536 hugging the center

line on the x-chart and points 3360 on the Moving Range Chart above the

center line. Reasons for the out-of-control condition need to be sought out and

corrected.

30. Control limits for Yummy Candy Company are as follows:

Control limits:

UCL

p

= p

+ 3 s

p

UCL

p

= 0.0333 + 3(0.0207) = 0.0954

CL

s p p n

s

p

p

p

75 2250 0 0333

1

0 0333

/

/

.

[( )( )]

( . ))( . ) / . 0 9667 75 0 0207

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-23

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-23

LCL

p

= p

3 s

p

LCL

p

= 0.0333 3(0.0207) = 0.0288, use 0

32. The data and control chart for Quality Printing Companys plant from the tem-

plate spreadsheet show:

CL

p

= 0.06

Control limits:

UCL

p

= p

+ 3 s

p

= 0.06 + 3(0.0336) = 0.1608

LCL

p

= p

3 s

p

= 0.06 3(0.0336) = 0.0408 use 0

The process appears to be under control.

b. When the additional data is added, while the process is being monitored

using the previously calculated control limits, the process starts to go out of

control, with samples 29, 30, and 31 being the rst indicators. Two out of three

of these are more than 2 away from the mean, p

ples between 37 and 41 are more than 1 away from the mean, p

. Finally,

sample 48 exceeds the upper control limit. The process should have been

stopped and corrected when the rst indications were seen. If these were

missed, it is certain that sample 48, which was above the control limits, should

have been spotted, and the process should have been stopped.

34. The spreadsheet for Full Life Insurance Co., when constructed from the tem-

plate, shows:

a. Initially, based on the sum of the p values for the 25 samples,

Throw out #9 and #23, out-of-control values, and revise.

b. Revised

CL

p

= 0.480/28 = 0.0171

Control limits:

UCL

p

= p

+ 3 s

p

= 0.0171 + 3(0.0130) = 0.0561

LCL

p

= p

3 s

p

= 0.0171 3(0.0130) = 0.0219, use 0

The conclusion is that the process is now in control.

36. The template spreadsheet for AtYourService.com shows:

The average sample size = 15755/30 = 525.17

s p p n

p

[( )( )]/ [( . )( . )]/ . 1 0 0171 0 9829 100 0 013 30

CL

p p p

N

CL

s p

p

p

p

+ + +

1 2 3

0 63 30 0 0210

1

. / .

[( )( pp n

p

p

)]/ [( . )( . )]/ .

+

0 0210 0 979 100 0 0143

3 UCL . ( . ) .

.

s

p s

p

p

+

0 0210 3 0 0143 0 0640

0 02 LCP 3 110 3 0 0143 0 0220 ( . ) . , use 0

s p p n

p

[( )( )]/ [( . )( . )] . 1 0 06 0 94 50 0 0336 /

S-24 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-24

CL

p

= 202/15755 = 0.0128

UCL

p

= p

+ 3 s

p

= 0.0128 + 3(0.0049) = 0.0275

LCL

p

= p

3 s

p

= 0.0128 3(0.0049) = 0.0019, use 0

All points fall within the control limits.

38. The template spreadsheet, using data from problem 1434, can be used to con-

struct the np-chart for the Full Life Insurance Company, yielding the following

results:

CL

np

= n p

= 100(0.021) = 2.1

Control limits:

UCL

np

= np

+ 3 s

np

= 2.1 + 3(1.434) = 6.402

LCL

np

= np

3 s

np

= 2.1 3(1.434) = 2.202, use 0

As was shown in the previous control chart for problem 14-34, values for sam-

ples 9 and 23 are out of limits. Eliminating these points, we get revised control

limits shown for the nal control chart (follows). Note that the two values of 6

or more were dropped.

Problem 38Revised

So, CL

np

= np

Control limits:

UCL

np

= np

+ 3 s

np

= 1.71 + 3(1.296) = 5.598

LCL

np

= np

3 s

np

= 1.71 3(1.296) = 2.178, use 0

40. Center line for the c-chart: c

= 1000/40 = 25

42. Data for defects per pizza in a new store being opened by Robs Pizza Palaces is

used to construct a c-chart. The chart shows:

Number defective = 84; number of samples = 25

Center Line for the c-chart: c

= 84/25 = 3.36

The process appears to be in control.

44. For the c-chart: Center Line: c

c c 3 18 3(4.24) 18 12.72 5.28 to 30 72 .

c c 3 3.36 3 3.36 = 3.36 5.50

= 2.14

tto 8.86, use 0 for lower control limit.

c c 3 to 30 3 25 30 15 15 45

s n p p

np

[ ( )( )] ( . )( . ) . 1 100 0 0171 0 9829 1 296

s n p p

np

[ ( )( )] ( . )( . ) . 1 100 0 021 0 979 1 434

s p n

p

[( )( )]/ [( . )( . )]/ . 1 0 0128 0 9872 525 17 0 p ..0049

Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems S-25

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-25

46. The appropriate sample size for detecting shifts in means is simply an exercise in

reading values from the curves to t required conditions.

a. For a 1 shift and a 0.80 probability, use n = 15 (if rounded to next higher value).

b. For a 2 shift and a 0.95 probability, use n = 8 (rounded to next higher value).

c. For a 2.5 shift and a 0.90 probability, use n = 3 (rounded to next higher value).

48. The stabilized p-chart diagram, based on the post ofce example, plots the

transformed z statistic instead of p, and it shows the process is in control. To

verify calculations from the spreadsheet, for example, the rst data point is:

Note that p

(1 p

dard deviation, not the sample standard deviation. Thus variations in sample

and lot sizes can be tolerated here, where they might cause problems with the

standard p-chart.

50. The control chart for the EMWA versus observed values shows that, with an

= 0.8, the process is under control, and the EMWAestimate fairly closely antic-

ipates the next observed value. The conclusion is that a better forecast of future

values may be obtained for volatile values such as these if a larger value is

used to give greater weight to more recent values.

For problems 52 through 54, see the Statistical Foundations of Control Charts

Section in the Bonus Materials folder on the CD-ROM.

52.

Therefore, z

0.02

= 1.64 or 1.65 because it is equidistant (0.4495 and 0.4505, respec-

tively) between the closest table values to 0.4500.

54. Using the binomial formula:

Probability (acceptance) and

x

n

f x f x

n

( ) (

0

)) ( ) ( )

( . ) .

x p p

x n x

in a row

1

11 0 5 0 04

11

99

11

11

10

0 5 0 5 11 0 5

10 1

%

( . ) ( . ) ( . ) of 11

_

,

111

9 2

0 539

9

11

9

0 5 0 5 55

_

,

. %

( . ) ( . ) ( of 11 00 5 2 695

8

11

8

0 5 0 5

11

8 3

. ) . %

( . ) ( . )

_

,

of 11

_

,

165 0 5 8 085

7

11

7

0 5

11

7

( . ) . %

( . ) ( of 11 00 5 330 0 5 16 17

4 11

. ) ( . ) . %

9 out of 11 pointss are statistically significant (p < 0.05)..

2

0 10

2

0 05

.

. ; Fromthe normal probability ttable, ) P z ( . 0 4500

z

p p

p

0 03 0 022

0 1467

0 0545

. .

.

.

p p p 0 022 0 022 1 0 022 0 146 . . ( . ) .

process

(1 ) 77

S-26 Solutions to Even-Numbered Problems

82286_16_Solution.qxd 12/12/06 4:54 PM Page S-26

- What is a normal distribution curve.docxDiunggah olehSoon Siew Lee
- OCR S1 Revision SheetDiunggah olehDKS215
- 5. Michael S. Lewis-Beck-Data Analysis_ an Introduction, Issue 103-SAGE (1995)Diunggah olehmichelglais
- tif_ch07Diunggah olehJDoe198811_219263216
- Modeling Risk and Realities Week 4 Session 3Diunggah olehhitesh
- Chapter 5 lecture notesDiunggah olehKyle Broflovski
- 9. Distribution AssignmentDiunggah olehAbhishek Kumar
- Literature_Review FinalDiunggah olehNicole Gray
- Data MeasuringDiunggah olehSam Leong
- Solved Problems StatsDiunggah olehSkullshadow
- U4 Spot Speed StudyDiunggah olehsyah123
- Presentation7-MATH8Diunggah olehPatrick Famini
- Stats FormulaDiunggah olehmnadeem_248131
- 2008_NYJC_Paper_2.pdfDiunggah olehkarpeo
- biggs carter 2016 quality of life for transition-age youthDiunggah olehapi-413068486
- Handout NineDiunggah olehCassie Desilva
- 774-1863-1-SMDiunggah olehksimpeh2001
- Session_01(Introduction).pptDiunggah olehYepu Mi Ah-Reum
- 66879157Diunggah olehNaveen Kumar
- isthereadifferenceportfoliobriannatavaresDiunggah olehapi-271065755
- Statistics, Probability and RiskingDiunggah olehadeelsn
- ch64Diunggah olehCarla Regina
- Measures of Central TendencyDiunggah olehAnJo Pasiolco Canicosa
- QM Tutorial Practice SetDiunggah olehRajat Ramesh
- T0_reviewDiunggah olehAnonymous gUySMcpSq
- Statistical Thinking and Applications 2Diunggah olehcoczmark
- QT 600Diunggah olehInnocent Ramaboka
- Homework WEEK 1Diunggah olehBrandon Sorenson
- chap18Diunggah olehSherlok Holmes
- Mckenzie 2000Diunggah olehEdward Ventura Barrientos

- Excel Statistical Formulas.xlsDiunggah olehankitshah21
- HistogramDiunggah olehAlex Chen
- S-ID.1 Interpret Data in Various FormsDiunggah olehVinodhkumar Palakode
- biology-9700-practical-znotes.pdfDiunggah olehSeong Hun Lee
- SPM Percubaan 2008 Sabah Mathematics Paper 2Diunggah olehChinWynn.com
- Class 10thDiunggah olehGaurav Kumar
- PHASE IIDiunggah olehmoriahwilliams17
- imresize.docDiunggah olehSundar Rajadurai
- Homework.pdfDiunggah olehSayyadh Rahamath Baba
- hw 4Diunggah olehapi-308773891
- Chapter 12 for CasioDiunggah olehrevisiongirlll
- Worksheets-Importance of MathematicsDiunggah olehHarsh Vyas
- Basic mathematicsDiunggah olehRanjan Singh Garhia
- Data DescriptionDiunggah olehmanan_09
- Presenting Data in Graphical Form 1Diunggah olehKathleen
- Dpt syllabusDiunggah olehshahidmahboob60
- 81762 Practical Skills Handbook Versions 1.4Diunggah olehZoe Nyawira
- General Maths HSC SyllabusDiunggah olehbwallace1997
- Assignment Statistics Q2Diunggah olehafferry
- 7QC tools nokia.pptDiunggah olehselvaganapathy1992
- BPTT 1053 Lecture 1Diunggah olehaddizam
- Lecture NoteDiunggah olehOlaolu Olalekan
- Histogram ProcessingDiunggah olehRakesh Inani
- 3D Modeling PrimerDiunggah olehHtun Hla Aung
- skittles final projectDiunggah olehapi-251571777
- CO1607 Final ReportDiunggah olehDiany M. Murillo Gomez
- Tom KeyDiunggah olehSibi Rs
- 7-Math-LM_Mod5-1Diunggah olehakasoriara
- Midtermtest_158-1.docxDiunggah olehminhchau
- Chart Types and Their UsesDiunggah olehNur Athirah