Chapter 8 – Problem 18

18. A machining process at the Mach4 Tool Co. has a required dimension on a part of 0.575
± 0.007 inch. Dimensions of twenty-five parts were measured as found in the worksheet
tab Prob. 8-18 in the Excel file C08Data.xlsx on the Student Companion Site for this
chapter.
a. What is its capability for producing within acceptable limits?
b. Adjustments were made in the process and 25 more samples were taken and measured,
as shown in the worksheet tab Prob. 8-18 in the Excel file C08Data.xlsx.What can you
observe about the process? Is it now capable of producing within acceptable limits?

Answer

18. a. For sample statistics at Mach4 Tool Co. of: x = 0.5740;  = 0.0067 and a tolerance
of 0.575 ± 0.007.

USL−LSL 0.582−0.568
C p= = =0.3483 ; not capable – unsatisfactory
6σ 6(0.0067)

USL−x 0.582−0.574
C pu= = =0.398 ; not capable – unsatisfactory
3σ 3(0.0067)

x−LSL 0.574−0.568
C pl = = =0.299 ; not capable – unsatisfactory
3σ 3 (0.0067)

See spreadsheet Prob08-18.xlsx, Part A in the Instructor materials for more descriptive
analysis.

Note: There is some rounding error in the above calculations versus numbers in the
spreadsheet. See spreadsheet for more precise descriptive analysis.

Nominal specification 0.5750 Average 0.5740 Cp 0.3495

Upper tolerance limit 0.5820 Std. deviation 0.0067 Cpl 0.2995

Lower tolerance limit 0.5680 Cpu 0.3994

Cpk 0.2995

b. The new sample statistics of: x = 0.5755;  = 0.0017 and the same tolerance of
0.575 ± 0.007 and shows that the standard deviation is smaller than previously, indicating
less “spread” within the data. See spreadsheet Prob08-18.xlsx, Part B, in the Instructor
materials for more descriptive analysis.

Thus, we calculate new values for Cp, Cpu, and Cpl:

USL−LSL 0.582−0.568
C p= = =1.373 ; The process capability is now
6σ 6(0.0017)
inside the tolerance limits

USL−x 0.582−0.5755
C pu= = =1.28 ; now capable – satisfactory
3σ 3(0.0017)

x−LSL 0.5755−0.568
C pl = = =1.47; now capable – satisfactory
3σ 3(0.0017)

Note: There is some rounding error in the above calculations versus numbers in the
spreadsheet. See spreadsheet for more descriptive analysis.

Nominal specification 0.5750 Average 0.5755 Cp 1.3838

Upper tolerance limit 0.5820 Std. deviation 0.00169 Cpl 1.4866

Lower tolerance limit 0.5680 Cpu 1.2810

Cpk 1.2810

Note also, that the other process capability indexes, above, show that there are still some
slight problems with process centering that must be addressed.

Chapter 8 – Problem 7
Compute a labor cost base index for Miami Valley Aircraft Service Co. to analyze the quality
cost information and prepare a memo to management explaining your conclusions. See
the data in the Excel workbook C08Data.xlsx. . [See the file on Quality Cost Indexes on
the Student Companion Site for an explanation].

Answer
7. Original data:

Quarterly Costs (in thousands of dollars)

1 2 3 4
External failure 1000 900 950 725
Internal failure 3,500 3,250 2,900 2,200
Appraisal 900 1,200 1,550 800
Prevention 400 500 650 800
Total Quality Cost 5,800 5,850 6,050 4,525
Total Labor Cost 21,000 19,500 24,500 20,500

Miami Valley Aircraft Service Company’s data show a decreasing total quality cost
index as a percent of labor costs (except for a slight rise in the 2nd quarter), with
significant decreases in internal failure costs, possibly due to a concerted quality effort.
The decrease in both internal and external quality costs, as a percentage of total quality
and labor costs, while the prevention costs percentage is rising, is good.
The recommendations would be to increase prevention costs even more rapidly, while
holding the line on appraisal costs (see spreadsheet Prob08-07.xlsx for details) and to
concentrate on projects especially aimed at external failure, which has not decreased
as rapidly as internal failure costs. However, the caution is that doing so may increase
total quality costs in the short run, as may have happened in the 2nd quarter.

PERCENTAGES QTRLY. QUALITY/LABOR COSTS

1 Qtr. 2 Qtr. 3 Qtr. 4 Qtr.

External failure 4.76 4.62 3.88 3.54

Internal failure 16.67 16.67 11.84 10.73
Appraisal 4.29 6.15 6.33 3.90
Prevention 1.90 2.56 2.65 3.90
Total Quality/Labor Cost 27.62 30.00 24.69 22.07

Miami Valley Aircraft Service Co. - Cost of Quality

35.00

30.00
Percent of Labor

25.00

20.00

15.00

10.00
External failure
5.00
Internal failure

0.00 Appraisal

1 Qtr. 2 Qtr. 3 Qtr. 4 Qtr. Prevention

Quarters Total Quality/Labor Cost