Qual Acc Sampling

Acceptance Sampling
Plans
AQL
2007 Pearson Education
LTPD
Acceptance Sampling Plans

An inspection procedure used to determine whether
to accept or reject a specific quantity of materials.
acceptable quality level (AQL) The quality level
desired by the consumer.
producers risk (A) The risk that the sampling plan
will fail to verify an acceptable lots quality and,
thus, reject it (a type I error).
lot tolerance proportion defective (LTPD) The worst
level of quality that the consumer can tolerate.
consumers risk ( The probability of accepting a
lot with LTPD quality (a type II error).
Types of sampling plans

single-sampling plan A decision to accept or reject a lot
based on the results of one random sample from the lot.
double-sampling plan A plan in which management specifies

two sample sizes and two acceptance numbers; if the quality
of the lot is very good or very bad, the consumer can make a
decision to accept or reject the lot on the basis of the first
sample, which is smaller than in the single-sampling plan. If
the number of defects is between c1 and c2, the consumer
takes a second sample of size n2. If the combined number of
defects in the two samples is less than or equal to c2, the
consumer accepts the lot.
Types of sampling plans

sequential-sampling plan A plan in which the consumer
randomly selects items from the lot and inspects them one by
one.
Sequential Sampling Chart

8
Number of defectives
7
6
5
Reject
Continue sampling
3
2
1
0
Accept
|
10
|
20
|
|
|
|
30
40
50
60
Cumulative sample size
|
70
Sequential Sampling Chart

8
Number of defectives
7
6
5
Reject
Decision
to reject
Continue sampling
3
2
1
0
Accept
|
10
|
20
|
|
|
|
30
40
50
60
Cumulative sample size
|
70
Operating Characteristic
Curve
Probability of
acceptance
Ideal OC curve
Proportion defective
Curve
Analysts create a graphic display of the performance of a
sampling plan by plotting the probability of accepting the lot
for a range of proportions of defective units. This graph, called
an operating characteristic (OC) curve, describes how
well a sampling plan discriminates between good and bad
lots
A typical OC curve for a single-sampling plan, plotted in red,
shows the probability a of rejecting a good lot (producers
risk) and the probability b of accepting a bad lot (consumers
risk). Consequently, managers are left with choosing a
sample size n and an acceptance number c to achieve the
level of performance specified by the AQL, , LTPD, and
Curve
Probability of
acceptance
Ideal OC curve
Typical OC curve
Curve
1.0
Probability of
acceptance
Ideal OC curve
Typical OC curve
AQL
LTPD
Drawing the OC Curve

The probability of accepting the lot equals the
probability of taking a sample of size n from a
lot with a proportion defective of p and finding
c or fewer defective items.
1. multiply p by the sample size n
2. find the value of np in the left column of the
table
3. move to the right until you find the column for c
4. record the value for the probability of
acceptance, Pa
Constructing an OC Curve
Example I.1
Probability of acceptance
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10
Proportion defective (hundredths)

Example I.1
1.0
Proportion
defective
(p)
0.9
0.8
np
Probability
of c or less
defects
(Pa)
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

n = 60
c=1
Comments
Example I.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
Proportion
defective
(p)
np
Probability
of c or less
defects
(Pa)
0.7
0
1
2
0.6
.05 .951 .999 1.000
.10 0.5.905
.995 1.000
.15 .861 .990 .999
0.4
.20 .819 .982 .999
.25 0.3.779
.974 .998
.30 0.2.741
.963 .996
.35 .705 .951 .994
.40 0.1.670
.938 .992
.45 0.0.638
|.925| .989
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.50 .607 .910 .986
1 2 3
4 5
6 7 8
9 10
.55 .577
.894
.982
(AQL)
(LTPD)
.60 .549 .878 .977
Proportion
.65 .522 .861
.972 defective (hundredths)
np
n = 60
c=1
Comments
Example I.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
Proportion
Defective
(p)
0.01 (AQL)
np
0.6
Probability
of c or less
defects
(Pa)
0.7
0
1
2
0.6
.05 .951 .999 1.000
.10 0.5.905
.995 1.000
.15 .861 .990 .999
0.4
.20 .819 .982 .999
.25 0.3.779
.974 .998
.30 0.2.741
.963 .996
.35 .705 .951 .994
.40 0.1.670
.938 .992
.45 0.0.638
|.925| .989
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.50 .607 .910 .986
1 2 3
4 5
6 7 8
9 10
.55 .577
.894
.982
(AQL)
(LTPD)
.60 .549 .878 .977
Proportion
.65 .522 .861
np
n = 60
c=1
Comments
Example I.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
Proportion
defective
(p)
np
Probability
of c or less
defects
(Pa)
0.01 (AQL)
0.6
0.878
0.7
np
0
1
2
0.6
.05 .951 .999 1.000
.10 0.5.905
.995 1.000
.15 .861 .990 .999
0.4
.20 .819 .982 .999
.25 0.3.779
.974 .998
.30 0.2.741
.963 .996
.35 .705 .951 .994
.40 0.1.670
.938 .992
.45 0.0.638
|.925| .989
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.50 .607 .910 .986
1 2 3
4 5
6 7 8
9 10
.55 .577
.894
.982
(AQL)
(LTPD)
.60 .549 .878 .977
Proportion
.65 .522 .861
n = 60
c=1
Comments
Example I.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
Proportion
defective
(p)
0.01 (AQL)
np
Probability
of c or less
defects
(Pa)
0.6
0.878
0.7
0
1
2
0.6
.05 .951 .999 1.000
.10 0.5.905
.995 1.000
.15 .861 .990 .999
0.4
.20 .819 .982 .999
.25 0.3.779
.974 .998
.30 0.2.741
.963 .996
.35 .705 .951 .994
.40 0.1.670
.938 .992
.45 0.0.638
|.925| .989
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.50 .607 .910 .986
1 2 3
4 5
6 7 8
9 10
.55 .577
.894
.982
(AQL)
(LTPD)
.60 .549 .878 .977
Proportion
.65 .522 .861
np
n = 60
c=1
Comments
Example I.1
1.0
Proportion
defective
(p)
0.9
0.8
0.01 (AQL)
0.7
np
Probability
of c or less
defects
(Pa)
0.6
0.878
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

n = 60
c=1
Comments
Example I.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
Proportion
defective
(p)
np
0.01 (AQL)
0.663 0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06 (LTPD)
0.07
0.308
0.08
0.09 0.199
0.10
0.6
1.2
1.8
2.4
3.0
3.6
4.2
4.8
5.4
6.0
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
Probability
of c or less
defects
(Pa)
0.878
0.663
0.463
0.308
0.199
0.126
0.078
0.048
0.029
0.017
0.048
|
8
|
9
|
10

n = 60
c=1
Comments
= 1.000 0.878 = 0.122
= 0.126
Example I.1
1.0
0.9
0.878
0.8
0.7
0.663
0.6
0.5
0.463
0.4
0.308
0.3
0.199
0.126
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
0.078
0.048
|
8
|
9
0.029
| 0.017
10

Example I.1
1.0
0.9
0.878 = 0.122
0.8
0.7
0.663
0.6
0.5
0.463
0.4
0.308
0.3
0.199
0.126
0.2
0.1
0.0
= 0.126
|
|
|
1 2 3
(AQL)
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
0.078
0.048
|
8
|
9
0.029
| 0.017
10


Application I.1
Finding (probability of rejecting AQL quality:
Cumulative
Poisson
Probabilities
p = .03
np = 5.79
Pa = 0.965
= 1 .965 = 0.035

Application I.1
Finding (probability of accepting LTPD quality:
Cumulative
Poisson
Probabilities
p = .08
np = 15.44
Pa = 0.10
= Pa = 0.10

Application I.1
Understanding Changes
in the OC Curve (with c = 1)
1.0
0.9
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
1.0
0.9
0.7
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.6
60
0.122
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
0.126
1.0
0.9
0.7
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.6
60
80
0.122
0.191
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
0.126
0.048
1.0
0.9
0.7
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.6
60
80
100
0.122
0.191
0.264
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
0.126
0.048
0.017
1.0
0.9
0.7
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.6
60
80
100
120
0.122
0.191
0.264
0.332
0.8
0.5
0.4
Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
0.126
0.048
0.017
0.006
0.3
0.2
principle: Increasing n while holding

c constant increases the producers risk and reduces
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

the consumers risk
Curves (with c = 1)
1.0
0.9
n = 60, c = 1
0.8
0.7
n = 80, c = 1
0.6
n = 100, c = 1
0.5
0.4
n = 120, c = 1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

in the OC Curve (with n = 60)
1.0
0.9
0.8
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.5
0.122
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
0.126
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.5
1
2
0.122
0.023
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
0.126
0.303
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.5
1
2
3
0.122
0.023
0.003
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
0.126
0.303
0.515
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
Producers
Risk
(p = AQL)
0.5
1
2
3
4
0.122
0.023
0.003
0.000
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
0.126
0.303
0.515
0.726
demonstrate the following principle: Increasing

c while holding n constant decreases the producers
risk and increases the consumers risk
|
8
|
9
|
10

Consumers
Risk
(p = LTPD)
Curves (with n = 60)
n = 60, c = 1
n = 60, c = 2
n = 60, c = 3
n = 60, c = 4
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
|
|
1 2
(AQL)
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6 7
(LTPD)
|
8
|
9
|
10

Improving sampling plan

Thus, to improve single-sampling acceptance plan, management
should increase the sample size, which reduces the consumers
risk, and increase the acceptance number, which reduces the
producers risk. An improved combination can be found by trial
and error using next Table I.1
Alternatively, a computer can be used to find the best
combination. For any acceptance number, the computer
determines the sample size needed to achieve the desired
producers risk and compares it to the sample size needed to
meet the consumers risk. It selects the smallest sample size that
will meet both the producers risk and the consumers risk. The
following table shows that a sample size of 111 and an acceptance
number of 3 are best. This combination actually yields a
producers risk of 0.026 and a consumers risk of 0.10 (not
shown).
Acceptance Sampling Plan

Data
AQL Based
Acceptance
Number
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Expected
Defectives
0.0509
0.3552
0.8112
1.3675
1.9680
2.6256
3.2838
3.9794
4.6936
5.4237
6.1635
LTPD Based
Sample
Size
Expected
Defectives
Sample
Size
5
36
81
137
197
263
328
398
469
542
616
2.2996
3.8875
5.3217
6.6697
7.9894
9.2647
10.5139
11.7726
12.9903
14.2042
15.4036
38
65
89
111
133
154
175
196
217
237
257
average outgoing quality

(AOQ) The expressed
proportion of defects that
the plan will allow to pass.
rectified inspection
The assumption that all defective items
in the lot will be replaced with good
items if the lot is rejected and that any
defective items in the sample will be
replaced if the lot is accepted.
Average outgoing quality (percent)
Average Outgoing Quality
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.4
0
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
Defectives in lot (percent)

|
8
np
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
1.10
2.20
3.30
4.40
5.50
6.60
7.70
8.80
Probability
of Acceptance
(Pa)
Estimate the
probabilities of
acceptance for portion
defective values from
0.01 to 0.08
in steps of 0.01
Proportion
Defective
(p)
King uses rectified inspection

1.6Noise
for its single-sampling plan with
n = 110, c = 3, N = 1000
0.974
1.2
0.819
0.581 = (0.603 + 0.558)/2
0.359
0.8
0.202 = (0.213 + 0.191)/2
For p = 0.01:
0.01(0.974)(1000 110)/1000 = 0.0087
0.105
For p==(0.055
0.02:
0.02(0.819)(1000 110)/1000 = 0.0146
0.052
0.048)/2
0.4+
For p = 0.03:
0.03(0.581)(1000 110)/1000 = 0.0155
0.024
For p = 0.04:
0.04(0.359)(1000 110)/1000 = 0.0128
For p = 0.05:
0 0.05(0.202)(1000 110)/1000 = 0.0090
For p = 0.06:
0.06(0.105)(1000 110)/1000 = 0.0056
For p = 0.07:
0.07(0.052)(1000 110)/1000 = 0.0032
|
|
| | 110)/1000
|
| = 0.0017
|
|
For p = 0.08:
0.08(0.024)(1000
1
2
3 4
5 6
7 8

Example I.2
np
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
1.10
2.20
3.30
4.40
5.50
6.60
7.70
8.80
Probability
of Acceptance
(Pa)
Proportion
Defective
(p)
1.6
1.2
0.974
0.819
0.581 = (0.603 + 0.558)/2
0.8
0.359
0.202 = (0.213 + 0.191)/2
0.105
0.4+
0.052 = (0.055
0.048)/2
0.024
0
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7

|
8
yst can calculate AOQ to estimate

mance of the plan over a range of
possible
tion defectives in order to judge
he plan will provide an acceptable
. value
of protection. The maximum
average outgoing quality over all
possible
f the proportion defective is called
verage outgoing quality limit
(AOQL). If the
eems too high, the parameters of
plan must be modified until an
acceptable .
AOQL is achieved.

Example I.2
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.4
0
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7

|
8

average outgoing quality limit

(AOQL) The maximum value of the
average
outgoing quality over all possible
values
of the proportion defective.
Example I.2
1.6
AOQL
1.2
0.8
0.4
0
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7

|
8

Qual Acc Sampling

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qual Acc Sampling

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Acceptance Sampling

Acceptance Sampling Plans

Types of sampling plans

double-sampling plan A plan in which management specifies

Types of sampling plans

2007 Pearson Education

Sequential Sampling Chart

2007 Pearson Education

Sequential Sampling Chart

2007 Pearson Education

Drawing the OC Curve

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

.35 .705 .951 .994

2007 Pearson Education

.35 .705 .951 .994

2007 Pearson Education

.35 .705 .951 .994

2007 Pearson Education

.35 .705 .951 .994

2007 Pearson Education

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

= 1.000 0.878 = 0.122

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Drawing the OC Curve

2007 Pearson Education

Drawing the OC Curve

Drawing the OC Curve

Drawing the OC Curve

2007 Pearson Education

Drawing the OC Curve

2007 Pearson Education

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

principle: Increasing n while holding

Proportion defective (hundredths)

the consumers risk

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

demonstrate the following principle: Increasing

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Proportion defective (hundredths)

Improving sampling plan

Acceptance Sampling Plan

average outgoing quality

Average outgoing quality (percent)

Average Outgoing Quality

Defectives in lot (percent)

Average Outgoing Quality

2007 Pearson Education

Average outgoing quality (percent)

King uses rectified inspection

for its single-sampling plan with

Average Outgoing Quality

Average outgoing quality (percent)

Defectives in lot (percent)

yst can calculate AOQ to estimate