Counting instead of measuring? Enter your inspection results and see whether the defect rate is stable, what it is, and where it went out of control.
Measuring a value instead of counting? Use a variable control chart. Open I-MR Chart
| # | Units inspected (n) | Defectives |
|---|
Control limits and the tests for special causes follow the AIAG SPC manual and Montgomery, and are compared with specialised statistical software. Results are a guide for your engineering judgement.
Attribute charts are for results you count rather than measure: parts that pass or fail a check, or flaws found on a unit. They show whether the defect rate is stable over time and flag the subgroups where something changed.
Enter the subgroups in production order. Twenty to 25 subgroups are a sensible minimum, and each sample should be large enough to find a few defectives or defects on average.
Centre lines, control limits and the tests for special causes follow the AIAG SPC manual and Montgomery. When sample sizes differ, each subgroup gets its own limits, as specialised statistical software does. The results are tested against reference data sets for all four charts.
The p chart data behind “Try an example”: 25 subgroups of 200 units, 213 defectives in total.
| Result | Value |
|---|---|
| p chart | p̄ 0.0426 · UCL 0.0854 · LCL 0 |
| Test 1 (beyond the limits) | Subgroup 18 |
| Test 2 (9 in a row on one side) | Subgroups 5–13 below the centre line, 14–22 above it |
| % defective · PPM | 4.26% · 42,600 |
The rate shifted up around subgroup 14 and subgroup 18 is above the upper limit, so the process is not stable and 4.26% describes the past period only. Find what changed at subgroup 14 and what happened in subgroup 18 before using the rate as a baseline.