The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  Statistical Techniques and 6 Sigma
  Cpk for one sided dimension

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Cpk for one sided dimension
dave@utah
unregistered
posted 28 January 2000 06:24 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What is the formula (or concept) for calculating a Cpk on a "smaller is better" dimension. Specifically, I am trying to calc Cpk for a GD&T true position of .030. And would the same concept work for profiles, flatness, runout, etc.
Thanks
Dave

IP: Logged

Don Winton
Forum Contributor

Posts: 498
From:Tullahoma, TN
Registered:

posted 31 January 2000 07:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Don Winton   Click Here to Email Don Winton     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Go to /pdf_files and download CPK.PDF. That should explain all you need.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 22 March 2000 08:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Some additional 'thought food':

>Luiz Alberto Rodrigues wrote in message
<8b8r27$qbq$1@phi.procergs.com.br>...
>Who know ?
>
>Why the minimum requirement for potential capability (unilateral
>specifications) is the ability to produce 99.865, not 99.73, percent
>conforming product ?

-----------------------

From: "Kevin Terrill"
Newsgroups: misc.industry.quality
Subject: Re: Capability
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 06:41:06 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet

Luiz,

I'm sorry Luiz, but I am as dumb founded as you are at this. Can any Statismajicians please explain? 99.73% is arrived through a normal bilateral distribution, given a +/- 3 sigma dist.. The part that is not inside the +/- 3 sigma is 0.27%. I can see were the 0.135% came from, its just that I cannot justify it. If I put the outside of the normal curve on zero, the smallest sigma value would still be 0.135% of the total range away, and the max sigame value would be at 99.865% away, but this would still leave 0.27% of the curve outside of the +/- 3 sigma range. Luiz, could you explain who told you this?

Thank you,

Kevin Terrill

-----------------------

From: BML bmlank@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: misc.industry.quality
Subject: Re: Capability
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:54:47 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.

The problem with the one-sided Cp/Cpk etc. is the fact that it does not take into account the other side. For example, you state that even for a unilateral measurment, 0.27% is still outside the +/- 3S limits.

That is true. However, since the measurement is unilateral, we're not concerned with one of the tails, so it doesn't count. (Remember hypothesis testing?) The tolerance is unilateral exactly because that other tail doesn't count, i.e. the part is good even if it is in that one tail. Therefore the only way you can have a bad part is if you are in the *other* tail, which has an area of 0.27/2 = 0.135. Kinda confusing, but that's the way it works.

Ben

--------------------

From: "John Duffus" jduffus@wwonline.com
Newsgroups: misc.industry.quality
Subject: Re: Capability
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:29:29 GMT
Organization: MetroNet Communications Group Inc.

Here's another way of looking at it. You are running a marginal process with a Cpk of one, i.e with .00135 fraction defective in each tail for a total of .0027.

The specification is then changed so that one tolerance limit is disregarded, So you can now say, good, now I only have .00135 fraction defective. You improved the fraction defective, not by having a better process but by relaxing the tolerance.

If you start from an objective of a certain fraction defective, you could argue that you should have a lower Cpk for a one-sided tolerance, but if you put all your fraction defective in one tail you have an increased sensitivity of the fraction defective to shifts in the process average. In any event fraction defective depends on an assumption of a normally distributed population making the calculations only very approximate in most cases.

John Duffus

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 29 March 2000 08:35 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Tomo Doran tomodoran@aol.com
misc.industry.quality
Re: Capability

The whole argument about unilateral characteristics and their meaning in reality is often wrongly interpreted in industry.

Firstly, for a process with a natural boundary (such as flatness) of zero and a upper tolerance the model distribution when the system is tuned to peak performance (centred) and has no external variation is - Rayleigh Distribution.

However, this very seldom happens in reality. The secret of successful capability studies are to ignore what distribution model it should be {afterall, the process doesn't care what you 'think' it is} and concentrate on modelling the actual data. This model can then be used to get more realistic capability assessments of the process.

In order to do this you need a statistical analysis software that can do this. I recommend the package I use - qs-STAT by Q-DAS.
www.q-das.com

I have used this many times to the advantage of machine tool builders to rationalize just situations.

Email me back for further information

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!