As a part of validation, should i include the acceptance criteria of CPk index >1.33?

ifserav

Involved In Discussions
#1
Dear all

I have a question, as a part of validation, should i include the acceptance criteria of CPk index >1.33?
Only in this way can i conclude a process is validated?

Are there any other way to show it?

Thanks in advance

Sergio Ávila:thanks:
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Leader
Super Moderator
#2
Re: As a part of validation, should i include the acceptance criteria of CPk index >1

How about with actual data? I know some FDA reviewers are now asking for Cpk values but these are fraught with so many issues.

Validation of a process is intended to demonstrate that with the inputs properly controlled within known tolerances the output will be acceptable and stable. OQ verifies that process yields acceptable results across the allowable range of input conditions. PQ verifies that the process can create acceptable sequential lots under normal production operating conditions. The combination of these two studies demonstrates the validation and capability of the process. to reduce this data to a single index is silly.

And what will you do if you have a non-homogenous process? it may be perfectly stable and capable but the Cpk will be artificially low...

and what about your specifications? were they engineered to avoid tolerance stackups? so that if a part is in spec then it will perform perfectly well? Or were they created extra tight to provide you margin? how does a Cpk>1.33 help you?

The original intent of Cpk was NOT based on a prediction of defect rates. It was intended simply to provide an indication of how many parts were near the specification limits (back when spec limits were not well engineered). the idea was to drive reduced variation. Some specs are properly derived, some are not. Some characteristics are subject to stackups, some have a continual loss of 'quality' the further they get form the target (like visual characteristics), some aren't. which do you have? Does Cpk >1.33 make sense for your situation or is it just a convenient rubber stamp?
 

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
#3
Re: As a part of validation, should i include the acceptance criteria of CPk index >1

Not only that, Cpk only applies to process outputs (not print specifications) that have target values centered within a bilateral tolerance with an expected normal distribution (and it not NOT expected from all processes.) Do you know by looking at your print what the process distribution is? No. So, how can you demand that as a requirement?
 

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
#4
Re: As a part of validation, should i include the acceptance criteria of CPk index >1

So where do you guys learn the finer points of spc/gage RR and cpk? I need reference materials to show people who attend a 2 hour class and suddenly think they are "experts."
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Leader
Super Moderator
#5
Re: As a part of validation, should i include the acceptance criteria of CPk index >1

So where do you guys learn the finer points of spc/gage RR and cpk? I need reference materials to show people who attend a 2 hour class and suddenly think they are "experts."
1. Experience - we have used these methods for years, figured how they are valuable and not valuable. we don't treat them like some cookbook approach
2. Thinking - we THINK about what is actually happening vs what the 'theory' is
3. Reading - we research this stuff because we do 1&2 and realize we don't understand yet. then we repeat 1 and 2.

Its hard to find the good stuff for all of the **** out there. 90% of what we find through the web is just the same pabulum surface silly stuff over and over again. But we've been able to understand and synthesize what we have researched and what we've experienced.

a short list of GOOD references for these topics is below.
hope this helps.

REFERENCES
SPC
Anything by Donald Wheeler (his articles in Quality Digest, Quality and on his web site are free and his references and experience go back to the origins of these things; he skips those people who have misinterpreted the original intent of SPC)
Wise, Stephen A.; Fair, Douglas, C., Innovative Control Charting, ASQ Quality Press, 1998

MSA (guage R&R)
Donald J Wheeler, Craig Award Paper, “Problems With Gauge R&R Studies”, 46th Annual Quality Congress, May 1992, Nashville TN, pp. 179-185.
Youden, William John, “Graphical Diagnosis of Interlaboratory Test Results”, Industrial Quality Control, May 1959, Vol. 15, No. 11
Donald S. Ermer and Robin Yang E-Hok, “Reliable data is an Important Commodity”, The Standard, ASQ Measurement Society Newsletter, Winter 1997, pp. 15-30.
Donald J Wheeler, “An Honest Gauge R&R Study”, Manuscript 189, January 2009. http://www.spcpress.com/pdf/DJW189.pdf

Cpk/Ppk
Sullivan L. P., “Reducing Variability – A New Approach to Quality”, Quality Progress, July 1984
Gunter, Bert, “The Use and Abuse of Cpk, Parts 1, 2,3 and 4”, Quality Progress, January 1989, March, 1989, May 1989, July 1989
Pignatiello, Joseph J., Ramberg, John S., “Process Capability Indices: Just Say “No!””, ASQC Quality congress Transactions – Boston, 1993
Kane, Victor E., “Process Capability Indices”, Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 18, No. 1, January 1986
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
F 21 CFR Part 11 - Implicit requirements - Validation plan for a Software as a Service Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
R How to improve a Validation program and procedures to FDA (21 CFR part 820) & ISO13485 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
S Is Human Factor Testing required as part of Design Control Validation? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
Z SAP Validation for Part 11 Compliance - Examples (executed protocols) Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 6
C Validation of Applications in a Cloud, CFR 21 part 11 (Environmental Monitoring) Other US Medical Device Regulations 3
F 2 Year Part Re-Validation and FAIR Costs (Aerospace Parts) AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
T "Special Process" Validation Requirements (21 CFR Part 820) 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 15
A Finishing Design Validation per 21 CFR Part 820 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 6
B Validation Method Requirements - 21 CFR Part 820 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 14
A Software Validation for Class I - Manufacture of a Part for a Medical Device ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
R CNC OTS Software Validation Separate from full IQ/OQ/PQ for 21CFR Part 820 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 9
S CMM Software Validation - On every part we make? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 14
F Is self-serve password reset for Windows considered for validation under CFR Part 11 Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 2
S Code review as part of software validation ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
S FDA part 820 Software Validation - Can software be retrospectively validated? Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 10
T 21 CFR Part 11, "enforcement discretion" - Validation, Audit Trail, Record Retention Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 4
E Performing a GRR when you get multiple readings over time per part. Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
K 13485 do e-signatures have to be 21 CFR Part 11 compliant? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
I Restricting scope to one part number for one customer IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
P Certifying Staff leaving Part-145 organisation EASA and JAA Aviation Standards and Requirements 2
A Industry standard for stamped part Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 2
P Can credentials (ID/PW) used to login be the same as when applying Electronic Signature (Part 11) US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
M Mains on Patient with Part Attached to Protective Earth in Patient Area IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
M Documentation accompanying an aerospace part AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 6
H Better to retain previous made parts or one part that is perfect Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 2
T Accreditations as part of 9001 - Quality checks on your company ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
T Customer Rejecting Part for Basic Dimension Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 16
H Should we stop inspecting a part if its never been rejected? Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 6
M MSA - Dealing with inherent within-part variation in assemblies Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
C Multiple Part Numbers, IMDS RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 2
J IEC 60601 Applied Part - Probes intended to be covered by sheaths IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
M Saline Infusion- Applied Part, Patient Connection IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
D 21 CFR Part 11 Assessment (Fully Compliant or Not) Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 9
S Comparing measurement results for a part from two ring gage General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
PQ Systems SQCpack Tech Tuesday Webinar 3-Part Series Using SQCpack Software 0
E Biocompatibility testing of our applied part seems redundant Other Medical Device Related Standards 2
A APPLIED vs ACCESSIBLE PART IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 4
PQ Systems Device Integration with SQCpack - 3 Part Series Using SQCpack Software 0
PQ Systems Gage R&R - 3 Part Series Using GAGEpack Software 0
PQ Systems GAGEpack Tech Tuesday - 4 part series Using GAGEpack Software 0
PQ Systems GAGEpack Tech Tuesday - 3 part series Using GAGEpack Software 0
D Is an ethernet port part of the User Interface IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 5
C DV/PV Test Part Storage IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
D IATF Requirements if remote plant has no interface with OEMs who are part of IATF? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
W Classes and Applied Part IEC60601 Electromedical Equipment IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
E How to test 8.7.4.7 d) ? What "not protectively earthed accessible part" means? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
Anonymous16-2 Sinks and Sanitation - 21 CFR Part 111 Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 4
O PPAP'ed part manufacturer has discontinued production Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 7
N Reworked Finished Goods (FG) - Part of CoPQ? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 3
O Should a Covid vaccine and testing policy be included as part of ISO9001 or AS9100 risk management? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6

Similar threads

Top Bottom