VARIATIONS ON THE p-CHART We have discussed the fact that there is no

basic difference between the p-chart (fraction nonconforming) and the 100p-chart
(percent nonconforming). The np-chart also involves basically the same
calculations. It represents the number of observed defectives in those inspected.
It may be used in situations where the sample size is constant. In situations
where the sample size may represent the total production in a span of time, the
sample size will fluctuate. This means that since the standard deviation of the
fraction (or percent) nonconforming is affected by the number of items inspected,
we must calculate the limits for a given sample size. In cases where the sample
size does not vary, the np-chart may prove effective. n calculating the standard
deviation for this data we use the following formula: SD(np) = np' (1-p')
Since we may not have the standard value for p we may use the average fraction
nonconforming as the best available estimate of p'. Using pbar in the formula and
remembering that the control limits are 3 standard deviations either side of the
central line we have the following formulas for the control limits: npbar =
sum of nonconforming / number of samples pbar = sum of defectives / total
number observed 3SD(np)= 3 nbar (1-pbar) UCL(np) = npbar + 3SD(np)
LCL(np) = npbar - 3SD(np) Lets look at an example. Production
Lot Number order number size Nonconforming
n np 1 200 23
2 200 15 3 200 17
4 200 15 5 200 41
6 200 0 7 200 25
8 200 31 9 200 29
10 200 0 11 200 8
12 200 16 Totals 2400 220
Let's calculate the limits for the np-chart. npbar = 220/12 = 18.3
pbar = 220/2400 = 0.0917 3SD(np) = 3 npbar(1-pbar) = 12.23 UCL(np) =
npbar + 3SD(np) = 30.5 3 LCL(np) = npbar - 3SD(np) = 6.07 Now lets plot
the np-chart to see how it looks. 40 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
30 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- 20 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
+-+-+-+- 10 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- 0 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- 0 5 10 15 Some Things
to Consider Often the question arises as to whether to use an Xbar and R chart
or a p-chart on an operation which could be designed for either type of chart. One
basic fact must be understood: the measurement of several parts provides more
information about parts than does classifying a much larger group of parts as
either good or bad. On the other hand, the inspection by attributes is much faster
and often is less expensive than is an inspection by measurements. The selection of
the type of chart must be based upon the merits and conditions of the specific job.
Some additional help may be obtained from some of the more advanced books on
quality control. OTHER ATTRIBUTE CHARTS Without spending a great deal of
time on all of the various of attribute charts, we need to point out the similarity
in construction and interpretation with the p-charts. Chart for Number of
Nonconformities Often a classification of an article as good or bad is not a
sufficient measure of quality. If we were to consider a large mechanical assembly
composed of thousands of parts, we might assume there would be a potential for a
great many errors or nonconforities to occur. We could classify the completed
assembly as good if it contained no nonconformities, and bad if it contained one or
more nonconformities. This type of classification could prove extremely
inefficient. There is no distinction between one which contained one nonconformity
and one which contained twenty nonconformities. The c-chart permits us to apply the
information we have about the "goodness" or "badness" of the assembly.
Calculations for the c-chart are very similar to those of the np-chart except that
the number of nonconformities, rather than the number of nonconforming items, is
used. The formulas are: Total Nonconformities
Observed
Center Line = cbar = ------------------------------
Total Samples Inspected. Upper Control Limit = UCL(c) = cbar + 3 cbar
Lower Control Limit = LCL(c)= cbar - 3 cbar The c-chart can be used where the
potential number of errors per item or lot is large and yet the expected number is
relatively small. Some examples of applications for the c-chart are: 1. The
number of welding nonconformities in a welded assembly. 2. The number of
weaving nonconformities per square yard of material. 3. The number of
surface irregularities in a painted surface. 4. The number of assembly
errors on a completed machine. Chart for Nonconformities Per Unit A chart
for the number of nonconformities (discrepancies or so-called defects) per
inspection reporting unit in subgroups which may have varying sample sizes (or
amounts of material inspected) is called a u-chart. It is similar to the c-chart
except that the number of nonconformities is expressed on a per unit basis. Both u
and c chart are appropriate for the same basic data situations; however,
the u-chart may be used if the sample includes more than one "unit" (to
make the reporting meaningful), and it must be used if the sample size
varies from period to period. The details for construction of the u-chart are
similar to those for the p-chart. Various formulas for the necessary
calculations are as follows: u = c/n where c is the number
of nonconformities found, and n is the sample size (number of inspection reporting
units) of the subgroup; c and n should also be recorded on the form. NOTE: The
sample size for each subgroup, n, is expressed in terms of inspection reporting
units. Sometimes the reporting unit is a single production unit, e.g., an engine.
Often, however, the inspection reporting unit is other than one production unit.
For instance, in reports showing nonconformities per 100 units, the reporting unit
is 100 production units, and n shows how many hundreds were inspected. Process
Average Nonconformities Per Unit c(1) + c(2) +. . .+ c(k)

ubar = ------------------------ n(1) +

n(2) +. . .+ n(k) where c(1), c(2) . . . and n(1), n(2) . . . are the number of
nonconformities and sample size of each of the k subgroups. Upper and Lower Control
Limits UCL(u) = ubar + 3 ubar / nbar LCL(u) = ubar - 3 ubar / nbar
where nbar is the average sample size.