In traditional quality control charts, fixed sampling interval (FSI) schemes are used where the time between samples has fixed intervals. More efficient methods called variable sampling interval (VSI) schemes have been developed where one takes the next observation sooner than usual if there is an indication that the process is operating off the target value.
Another traditional assumption behind most statistical process control charts is that the sequential observations are independent. However, there are many situations where the sequential observations should not to be treated as independent. Rather, a time series model, in particular the first order autoregressive (AR (1)) model, is appropriate. A Markov chain representation is used to study the properties of the FSI and VSI Shewhart X control charts.
First, the results show that if the process variance is properly estimated and if traditional control limits are used in the FSI control charts, then the detection time is shorter when the consecutive observations are negatively correlated than when they are positively correlated. If they are positively correlated, then the false alarm rate decreases as the correlation between consecutive observations increases. On the other hand, the detection time increases as the correlation increases.
In VSI control charts with traditional control limits, if the process mean is on or near the target, then the average time to signal (A TS) and average number of samples to signal (ANSS) tend to decrease as the correlation increases until the correlation becomes rather moderate. Then, for more highly correlated data, the A TS and ANSS tend to increase as the correlation increases.
Next, the results show that, even under the AR (1) process, the VSI chart is more efficient than the FSI chart in terms of ATS. In contrast, the VSI chart is less efficient than the FSI chart in terms of ANSS. The efficiency (inefficiency) of ATS (ANSS) tends to decrease (increase) as the correlation between the consecutive observations becomes stronger.
Steady state ATS (A TS·) and steady state ANSS (ANSSO) under the AR (1) process show the same trend as the 'regular' ATS and 'regular' ANSS except when the deviation is very large. If the deviation is very large, then the VSI control chart does not seem to be more efficient than the FSI control chart in terms of steady state ATS.
If we have an AR (2) process, then for any given value of tP2 a PSI control chart has a shorter detection time when tPl is negative than when tPl is positive. In a FSI control chart, the effect of positive </>2 in addition to positive tPl is that the false alarm rate decreases even further and the detection time is even longer. / Ph. D.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:VTETD/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/39954 |
| Date | 19 October 2005 |
| Creators | Baik, Jai Wook |
| Contributors | Statistics, Reynolds, Marion R. Jr., Arnold, Jesse C., Foutz, Robert, Smith, Eric P., Lentner, Marvin M. |
| Publisher | Virginia Tech |
| Source Sets | Virginia Tech Theses and Dissertation |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Dissertation, Text |
| Format | x, 121 leaves, BTD, application/pdf, application/pdf |
| Rights | In Copyright, http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ |
| Relation | OCLC# 23843936, LD5655.V856_1991.B354.pdf |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds