92 SUPPLEMENT 6 ST A T I S T I C A L PR O C E S S CO N T R O L
1. The first thing that must be done is to develop quality control
limits for the sample means. This can be done as follows. Because
the process appears to be unstable, we can use the desired mean as
a 99.73% confidence interval Z = 3:
3 50 3 0.489 50 1.47 51.47
3 50 1.47 48.53
Xx
Xx
UCL X
LCL X
= + = + = + =
= − = − =
Now that we have appropriate control limits, these must be
applied to the samples taken on the individual shifts:
10:00
49.9
49.2
52.3
50.2
49.6
51.8
51.0
48.1
55.2
11:00
50.3
48.6
51.7
50.0
49.0
52.3
50.4
49.5
54.1
12:00
48.6
46.2
50.4
50.0
48.8
52.4
50.0
48.7
50.9
10:00
49.9
49.2
52.3
50.2
49.6
51.8
51.0
48.1
55.2
11:00
50.3
48.6
51.7
50.0
49.0
52.3
50.4
49.5
54.1
12:00
48.6
46.2
50.4
50.0
48.8
52.4
50.0
48.7
50.9
12:00
48.4
45.4
50.2
49.8
48.2
50.4
47.2
46.4
49.2
1:00
47.6
44.3
49.7
49.6
48.4
51.7
47.4
46.8
49.0
2:00
47.4
44.1
49.6
50.0
49.0
52.2
48.8
47.2
51.4
12:00
48.4
45.4
50.2
49.8
48.2
50.4
47.2
46.4
49.2
1:00
47.6
44.3
49.7
49.6
48.4
51.7
47.4
46.8
49.0
2:00
47.4
44.1
49.6
50.0
49.0
52.2
48.8
47.2
51.4
* Boldfaced type indicates a sample outside the quality control limits.
(a) Day shift (6:00 A.M.–2:00 P.M.):
Number of means within control limits 23 96%
Total number of means 24
=→
(b) Evening shift (2:00 P.M.–10:00 P.M.):
Number of means within control limits 12 50%
Total number of means 24
=→
(c) Night shift (10:00 P.M.–6:00 A.M.):
As is now evident, none of the shifts meet the control specifi-
cations. Bag weight monitoring needs improvement on all shifts.
The problem is much more acute on the evening and night shifts
weight” is much greater than the number indicating excess weight.
With regard to the range, 99.73% of the individual bag
weights should lie within 3 of the mean. This would represent a
range of 6, or 7.2. Only one of the ranges defined by the differ–
ence between the highest and lowest bag weights in each sample
exceeds this range. Alternatively: D4 × Sample range = UCLR and
D2 × Sample range = LCLR. This is dangerous if the process is out
of control, but the mean range for the first shift is 3.14 (the lowest
of any shift) and D4 × 3.14 = 6.28 and D3 × 3.14 = 0. A range of
0 to 6.28 compares favorably with 7.2, with only two values
exceeding the range limit. It would appear, then, that the problem
is not due to abnormal deviations between the highest and lowest
bag weights, but rather to poor adjustments of the bag weight-
of 6, or 7.2. Only one of the ranges defined by the differ-ence
between the highest and lowest bag weights in each sample ex-
ceeds this range. Alternatively: D4 × Sample range = UCLR and
D2 × Sample range = LCLR. This is dangerous if the process is out
of control, but the mean range for the first shift is 3.14 (the lowest
of any shift) and D4 × 3.14 = 6.28 and D3 × 3.14 = 0. A range of
0 to 6.28 compares favorably with 7.2, with only two values ex-
ceeding the range limit. It would appear, then, that the problem is
not due to abnormal deviations between the highest and lowest
2. The proper procedure is to establish mean and range charts
to guide the bag packers. The foreman would then be alerted
when sample weights deviate from mean and range control limits.
The immediate problem, however, must be corrected by additional