Problem with AQL (Acceptable Quality Level)

D

damienbechaux

#1
Hello,

I am currently using the AQL system for my work but I think there is a problem with this system.

This system gives acceptance or rejection thresholds for major and minor defects but sometimes it can lead to an incherence.

Let me explain this problem with an exemple:

If we have for instance:
-Minor defects: acceptance 7, rejection 8
-Major defects: acceptance 2, rejection 3

If we find 8 minor defects and 0 major defects we reject the production.
If we find 7 minor defects and 1 or even 2 major defects we accept de production.

I think this is a real problem because the second case is more serious than the first one and we accept it while we reject the first one.

The proof of this problem is that we can easily put in order the different cases bellow, from de least serious to the most serious:

8 minor defects and 0 major defects < 7 minor defects and 1 major defect < 7 minor defects and 2 major defects.


Can someone help me to understand why AQL works like that?

Thanks a lot.

Damien
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

howste

Thaumaturge
Super Moderator
#2
Re: Problem with AQL

It works that way because your organization has agreed to accept a certain level of defects (the Acceptable Quality Level). If you really can't accept that level of defects, you need to change and use a plan with a lower AQL. You might also choose to use a "C=0" sampling plan which will never accept a lot with known defectives.
 
D

damienbechaux

#3
Re: Problem with AQL

First, thanks for you answer.

What I say is wathever the levels of defects chosen by the organization, this system can allow the organization to accept a production worse than a production it would reject (see my example above).

And "mathematically", this is due to the separation of major and minor defects.
 

harry

Super Moderator
#4
I find your reasoning to be without logic.

If your acceptance criteria is not more than 7 minor and not more than 2 major, then one minor is equivalent to 2/7 major.

Therefore, Conditions for acceptance should be:
not more than 7 minor
not more than 2 major
not more than 1 major + 3 minor
anything more - reject.

But this is just looking from the logical point of view.
 
B

brahmaiah

#5
The sampling tables work well in ideal situations.They are pure theory, basesd on probability.We can neither ignore the sampling tables nor strictly adhere to them. The quality inspector has to use lot of his experiance and discretion in using the tables.The Quality plan /control plan specification on AQL has to be fixed carefully, because Control Plan is mandatory.
V.J.Brahmaiah
 
G

Geoff Withnell

#6
Hello,

I am currently using the AQL system for my work but I think there is a problem with this system.

This system gives acceptance or rejection thresholds for major and minor defects but sometimes it can lead to an incherence.

Let me explain this problem with an exemple:

If we have for instance:
-Minor defects: acceptance 7, rejection 8
-Major defects: acceptance 2, rejection 3

If we find 8 minor defects and 0 major defects we reject the production.
If we find 7 minor defects and 1 or even 2 major defects we accept de production.

I think this is a real problem because the second case is more serious than the first one and we accept it while we reject the first one.

The proof of this problem is that we can easily put in order the different cases bellow, from de least serious to the most serious:

8 minor defects and 0 major defects < 7 minor defects and 1 major defect < 7 minor defects and 2 major defects.


Can someone help me to understand why AQL works like that?

Thanks a lot.

Damien

When using attribute inspection, and an AQL, one has sevral choices to make. One can determine what is the acceptable AQL for major defects and apply this sampling plan. One can also determine what is the acceptable AQL for minor defects, and apply this plan. These are two separate actions, and do not "add" together, so the mathematics of the situation is irrelevent. If you wanted to have a quality level score that included major and minor defects together, you could decide that, one major defect was equivalent to, say 3 minor defects. And then decide what was the appropriate AQL and sampling plan for this "blended" score. AQL works the way it does because the tables were set up to look at one AQL and sample at a time, not to "add" results of different samples and AQL levels.

Geoff Withnell
 

howste

Thaumaturge
Super Moderator
#8
The sampling tables work well in ideal situations.They are pure theory, basesd on probability.We can neither ignore the sampling tables nor strictly adhere to them. The quality inspector has to use lot of his experiance and discretion in using the tables.
This may or may not be true. If the inspector has experience, we may allow the person to use that experience to influence the decision. If the inspector doesn't have the right experience, we shouldn't rely on their experience to make judgment on the lot. More often than not, I see that the rules are set by the organization and must be followed.
The Quality plan /control plan specification on AQL has to be fixed carefully, because Control Plan is mandatory.
V.J.Brahmaiah
Control plans are mandatory only for TS 16949. I'm not aware of any other standards or regulations that require them. Of course, TS 16949 only allows acceptance with zero defects (C=0) for attribute sampling.
 
Q

qmslady - 2009

#9
Hey Brah!!

I was having some similar problems and questions a few days ago and these guys really helped. Since i had to do a lot of research on AQL, I know what you mean about getting confused with the way you look at the chart.

My problem being that we do not accept defects at all. Either in the parts we make or recieve from suppliers. So the Zero Based Acceptance Plan will probably help us because we inspect 100% but write down only "about" 10% of the results, AS9100 requires that I have a "statistically valid" plan that indicates how I have chosen to only write down a certain percentage instead of every one.

So..I have attached the procedure with the ZBA Plan I got. (from the book by Nicholas Squeglia), I found this on line and then more info on pdf from the DoD on MIL-STD-1916. Lots of stuff I downloaded and put together that helped me to understand some, how it works, hopefully enough to get by.

I also found a 30 day free trial on-line for AQL software that I played with all week. The more I used it and the more I read up, the more I knew about how to enter the correct info to get the right results from each plan and chart it makes. Search "Taylor Enterprises-Sampling Plan Analyzer" great product, but I don't think my boss will buy it for me....yet.

:agree1: Well enough from me...good Luck!!
QMSLADY
 
E

EdZachary

#10
Good insights from people who are using the tools. Here's another spin on this that I would like to get some feedback on ... it is really about using AOQL.

We have a Chinese supplier who will be a making a product and they always want to drop to the bottome line ... "What is the warranty expense? How many extra do I need to make to ensure that if there are problems in the field I have made enough to cover it?"

Obviously, not a process-driven quality approach because they are planning for some level of defects and not designing to a level of process quality. We want to work in a conservative AOQL to an overall agreement so that if there are escapes, we have some leverage. Here's the rub. On similar product built in the US or at South of the Border Contract Manufacturers the Field Failure rate is 0.25% with most of the fall-out happening early in production / deployment with no defined common failure modes (really IPC workmanship issues and PCBA process control lapses resulting in a multiple distributions of failures).

What is a good AOQL (that we can measure from field returns within a 2-3 year warranty period) that gives us protection for start-up concerns in China?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J How to keep MDD certificate valid when legal manufacturer has liquidity problem EU Medical Device Regulations 0
normhowe "The Problem with Quality Management: Process orientation, controllability and zero-defect processes as modern myths" Book, Video, Blog and Web Site Reviews and Recommendations 2
M Problem with nonlinear regression Using Minitab Software 12
M Problem Solving in Fiat Automobiles Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 0
R Problem solving activity - Three hours to fix the issue Manufacturing and Related Processes 15
T Formal Q Self Assessment - Problem with assigning Product and Process Customer and Company Specific Requirements 1
NDesouza Go See, Think, Do (GSTD) Problem Solving Activity Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 8
Marc Medical device vulnerability highlights problem of third-party code in IoT devices Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 1
P How far an operator can reach into a machine before it becomes an ergonomic problem CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 5
V Ammeter calibration - Measuring head (on pic.) problem General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
G Problem Resolution Report Monitoring - Customer complaint or PRR as general motors use Customer Complaints 12
S Relationship between IEC 62304 problem resolution and ISO 13485 IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 8
qualprod Add new action plans in CA, while waiting effectiveness - Same problem reappears ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
bryan willemot Documenting past problem history for fasteners for AS9100 Rev D AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 2
Marc Problem Opening Attachments Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 4
Marc Problem with 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) sub-forum link - 2 May 2019 Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 1
K Does anyone have a copy of a GM 5 Phase Problem solving form Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 1
D Training for AS13000 - Problem Solving Requirements for Suppliers Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 14
eule del ayre Manual Inventory System - Problem is discipline of the employees Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 7
G When preventative action is prohibited by cost in 8D problem solving Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 1
G When preventative action is prohibited by cost in 8D problem solving Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 8
Marc vBulletin to Xenforo Import Problem Reports 28180928 Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 25
M Training in 8D Problem Solving as a Preventive Action? Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 9
A 5Why vs. 8D - Problem Solving Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 19
K Documented problem solving and documented error-proofing - IATF 16949 10.2.3 & 10.2.4 Internal Auditing 7
V Query on PA66+GF15% - Color variation (Natural to Yellowish) problem Manufacturing and Related Processes 20
J Can someone help me get the UCL AND LCL for this problem? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
P Problem with IATF 16949 Clause 7.2.3 Requirements (Internal Auditor Competency) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
K Problem with Cable Composed of Coextruded Litz Wire and Tube Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
W Documented Problem-Solving for Automotive IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
R Review of "Key Data" for contract labs, but SOP doesn't define "key data". Problem? Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 2
M Taguchi Loss Function Problem Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
R RoHS Compliance Problem with One Component RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 5
Q Problem Solving Techniques - 5 why or Fishbone diagram ? Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 8
S Problem Solving Database for Each Machine Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
L Suppliers Problem - One of our material suppliers is not ISO certified ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
Y Please help me solve a DOE problem - New Minitab User Using Minitab Software 36
J Should failure mode caused by Fixture problem be into PFMEA? FMEA and Control Plans 2
K Quality Manual Problem Root Cause Analysis Nonconformance and Corrective Action 8
Ron Rompen Unusual problem with Excel - Need some help Excel .xls Spreadsheet Templates and Tools 7
automoto International Problem Solving Guide Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 2
R CQE Exam Problem Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 9
M Internal Audit Findings and Issuance Problem Internal Auditing 4
M Problem Solving: JDI (just do it) vs. A3 vs PDCA Projects Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 1
S Process Owner role in Problem Investigation/Corrective Action Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 9
P Global 8D Problem Solving Training Material Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 1
P Global 8D Problem Solving Example Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 5
Moncia Problem with Corrective Action for Flavor / Fragrance related Customer Returns Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 9
K Peculiar problem with my CSSGB exam with ASQ Six Sigma 1
D FAA 8130-3 Repaired Leather Dress Cover problem Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Standards and Requirements 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom