Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

c-chart

A c-chart, also known as a count chart, is a type of statistical used to monitor the total number of defects or nonconformities in subgroups of constant size from a process, where the count of defects is assumed to follow a . It plots the number of defects per subgroup against time or subgroup order, helping to distinguish between common-cause and special-cause variation in defect rates. Developed as part of the broader family of Shewhart control charts introduced by in the 1920s for (), the c-chart is particularly suited for attribute data where the focus is on the occurrence of defects rather than defective units. Its primary purpose is to evaluate process stability by detecting shifts, trends, or unusual patterns in defect counts that may indicate assignable causes requiring intervention. Key assumptions include equal subgroup sizes, a constant inspection area or unit, and independence of defects, with the model ensuring that the variance equals the mean. To construct a c-chart, the center line is set at the average number of defects per (\bar{c}), while the upper limit (UCL) is calculated as \bar{c} + 3\sqrt{\bar{c}} and the lower control limit (LCL) as \max(0, \bar{c} - 3\sqrt{\bar{c}}), based on three standard deviations from the . Points falling outside these limits or exhibiting patterns like runs (e.g., nine points on one side of the center line) signal potential out-of-control conditions, prompting further investigation. Unlike the u-chart, which accommodates varying subgroup sizes, the c-chart requires fixed sample sizes, making it ideal for processes like inspecting fixed-length fabric for flaws or counting errors in standardized documents. In practice, c-charts are widely applied in , healthcare, and to maintain quality and reduce variability, often integrated with software tools like for automated analysis and visualization. They contribute to continuous improvement frameworks such as by providing a graphical method to track defect rates over time and assess process capability.

Introduction

Definition

A c-chart is a type of Shewhart control chart specifically designed for monitoring count data, particularly the total number of defects or nonconformities in items or units of constant size. It falls under the category of attributes control charts, which are used within (SPC) to detect variations in processes over time. The key components of a c-chart include the centerline, upper control limit (UCL), and lower control limit (LCL). The centerline represents the average number of defects per unit, denoted as \bar{c}, calculated as the mean of the observed defect counts. The UCL is given by \bar{c} + 3\sqrt{\bar{c}}, while the LCL is \bar{c} - 3\sqrt{\bar{c}}, with the LCL set to 0 if the calculated value is negative. These limits are plotted along with the sequential defect counts to visualize process stability. Unlike charts for proportions (such as p-charts) or measurable variables (such as X-bar charts), the c-chart focuses on Poisson-distributed count data for a fixed unit size, such as the number of defects per or per square meter of fabric. This makes it suitable for scenarios where the occurrence of defects is rare and independent, assuming a constant opportunity for defects.

Purpose

The c-chart, as a count-based control chart in statistical process control, primarily aims to detect process instability by monitoring the total number of defects or nonconformities in units with constant sample sizes. It tracks defect rates over time to identify shifts or trends that may indicate underlying issues, and it signals the need for corrective action in stable processes when points fall outside established control limits, thereby preventing escalation of quality problems. Key benefits of the c-chart include its ability to distinguish variation—random fluctuations inherent to the process—from cause variation attributable to specific, assignable factors like equipment malfunction or . This differentiation allows quality professionals to focus interventions effectively. Furthermore, by confirming process stability, the c-chart facilitates the prediction of process capability, estimating future defect rates and supporting data-driven decisions for enhancement. It also promotes continuous improvement in by enabling proactive monitoring and reduction of defect occurrences across production runs. The c-chart is specifically suited for attributes data involving constant sample sizes and rare defects, where the approximates the count variability effectively. For example, it is commonly applied to monitor the number of flaws in fixed batches, such as imperfections in wafers or scratches on automotive panels, ensuring consistent in high-precision environments.

Historical Development

Origins

Control charts, including attribute types such as the c-chart, were developed by Walter A. Shewhart starting in 1924 at Bell Telephone Laboratories to monitor defects in production processes. Shewhart, a physicist and statistician, created these tools to address the need for systematic quality assessment in manufacturing, where defects could be counted rather than measured on a continuous scale. This innovation formed an integral component of the broader control chart framework he introduced, enabling engineers to distinguish between random variation and assignable causes of defects. The emergence of these charts occurred amid the industrial era, when Bell Telephone Laboratories sought to reduce variation in telephone manufacturing to enhance product reliability and efficiency. At the time, the faced challenges from inconsistent quality in components, prompting Shewhart's research into statistical methods for process improvement. His first control chart memorandum, dated May 16, 1924, outlined the foundational principles that would underpin attribute charts, including the c-chart, marking a pivotal moment in statistical . Attribute control charts like the c-chart were applied to count defects in fixed-unit samples from production lines, allowing for ongoing of defect rates in early processes. This approach proved essential for identifying instability in processes, thereby supporting efforts to maintain high reliability during a period of rapid technological expansion.

Evolution and Adoption

Following Walter Shewhart's initial development of the control chart in 1924 at Bell Laboratories, his seminal 1931 publication, Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product, formalized the principles—including those for attribute charts like the c-chart—and provided the foundational framework for their application in industrial settings. This work emphasized economic aspects of quality control, establishing control charts as essential tools for distinguishing common from special cause variation in manufacturing processes. During , control charts, including variants like the c-chart, saw widespread adoption in U.S. defense industries to ensure consistent quality in munitions and weapons production, driven by military requirements for reliable equipment amid high-volume output. In the post-war era, integrated Shewhart's control charts into his teachings during lectures to Japanese executives in the early 1950s, promoting their use for statistical quality control and influencing the development of Japan's manufacturing renaissance. This adoption notably shaped the , where control charts helped monitor defect rates in assembly processes to achieve just-in-time efficiency and continuous improvement. By the 1980s and 1990s, control charts became embedded in emerging methodologies like , originating at , which utilized them for defect reduction toward near-zero variability goals. Their integration deepened in the 2000s with frameworks, combining waste elimination from principles with statistical rigor to enhance process stability across industries. Formal standardization arrived with ISO 7870-2, first published in 2013 and revised in 2023, which specifies Shewhart control charts, including the c-chart for constant sample sizes, as a core method for process monitoring.

Theoretical Foundation

Poisson Distribution Basis

The c-chart assumes that the number of defects or nonconformities in a fixed inspection unit follows a , a probability model appropriate for counting rare events that occur independently at a constant average rate \lambda. This distribution is particularly suitable for attribute data where the occurrences represent counts without an inherent upper limit, such as the number of imperfections in a manufactured item, but with a relatively low . Key properties of the underpinning the c-chart include its mean and variance both equaling \lambda, which implies that the spread of defect counts is directly tied to their average occurrence rate, leading to potentially asymmetric behavior for small \lambda. The is given by P(X = k) = \frac{\lambda^k e^{-\lambda}}{k!}, where X is the representing the number of defects, k is a non-negative , and e is the of the natural logarithm. This formulation captures the probabilistic nature of defect counts, assuming between events and a large number of potential defect opportunities relative to the actual occurrences. The rationale for applying the model to c-charts lies in its alignment with defect data from fixed units, such as scratches on a or flaws in a batch, where events are sporadic and the inspection area remains constant across samples. Unlike models for pass/fail items, the accommodates multiple nonconformities per unit without requiring a predefined maximum, making it ideal for quality monitoring in processes with low defect rates. Control limits for the c-chart are derived from this distribution to detect deviations from the stable process mean.

Control Limits Derivation

The centerline of the , denoted as \bar{c}, represents the estimated number of defects per unit under stable process conditions and is calculated as the total number of defects across n inspection units divided by n, or \bar{c} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^n c_i}{n}. The limits are derived using the 3- rule, leveraging the property of the that the mean equals the variance (\sigma^2 = \bar{c}), so the standard deviation is \sigma = \sqrt{\bar{c}}. The upper (UCL) is thus \bar{c} + 3\sqrt{\bar{c}}, while the lower (LCL) is \max(0, \bar{c} - 3\sqrt{\bar{c}}) to ensure non-negativity, as defect counts cannot be negative. This formulation relies on the normal approximation to the , which holds adequately for \bar{c} \geq 5, allowing the symmetric 3-sigma limits to approximate the behavior of defect counts. Under stable conditions, the probability of a point exceeding the (or falling below the LCL) is approximately 0.00135 each, yielding a total probability of about 0.0027.

Construction

Data Collection Requirements

The c-chart requires data in the form of counts of defects, representing the number of nonconformities observed per or sample, where the sample size remains constant across all subgroups to ensure comparable opportunities for defects. For example, each subgroup might consist of inspecting a fixed number of s, such as 10 items, and recording the total defects found in that group. These defects must be countable nonconformities, such as surface blemishes on manufactured parts or typographical errors in documents, rather than pass/fail classifications. To establish reliable control limits, at least 20-25 subgroups are typically needed, allowing for sufficient representation of process variation under stable conditions. Data collection should occur sequentially over time, capturing the natural progression of the process to reflect temporal patterns and potential shifts. This approach ensures the data aligns with the underlying assumption for rare defect counts, where the mean equals the variance. Preparation of the data involves verifying the independence of observations across subgroups, meaning each count should not influence the next to avoid that could distort process signals. Raw defect counts, denoted as c_i for the i-th , are recorded directly without or , preserving the nature of the data for accurate charting.

Step-by-Step Building Process

The construction of a c-chart follows a systematic to plot defect counts over time and establish control limits for monitoring process stability. This process assumes that defect counts have been gathered for subgroups of constant size, typically in sequential order to reflect time progression. The steps are as follows:
  1. Collect the defect counts c_i for each i, where each subgroup represents a fixed unit, such as a single product or a batch of uniform size. Subgroup identifiers should capture the time order to enable sequential plotting.
  2. Compute the average defect count \bar{c} as the total number of defects divided by the number of subgroups, providing the centerline for the chart. For instance, in a dataset of 25 subgroups with a total of 400 defects, \bar{c} = 400 / 25 = 16.
  3. Calculate the upper control limit (UCL) and lower control limit (LCL) using the formulas derived from the Poisson distribution basis outlined in the Theoretical Foundation section, with LCL set to zero if the computation yields a negative value. In the example above, this results in UCL = 28 and LCL = 4.
  4. Plot the defect counts c_i as points on a , with the y-axis representing the counts and the x-axis denoting the number or time sequence.
  5. Draw the centerline at \bar{c}, along with horizontal lines for the and LCL, to form the complete framework.
  6. Verify key assumptions by examining the plotted for evidence of , such as the absence of trends or patterns in the residuals around the centerline, to ensure the chart's validity.
To illustrate, consider the following hypothetical data table for 25 subgroups, each inspecting a single unit for defect counts (adapted from standard examples in statistical process control literature).
SubgroupDefect Count (c_i)
116
214
328
416
512
620
710
812
910
1017
1119
1217
1314
1416
1515
1613
1714
1816
1911
2020
2111
2219
2316
2431
2513
This chart can be constructed manually on or using statistical software. Tools such as (via Stat > Control Charts > Attributes Charts > C), (with built-in charting functions and formulas for limits), or (using the qcc package's qcc() function for c-charts) facilitate automated computation and visualization while preserving time-order subgrouping.

Interpretation

Out-of-Control Signals

In a c-chart, which monitors the number of defects or nonconformities per unit under the assumption of a constant sample size and Poisson-distributed counts, out-of-control signals serve as indicators of process instability beyond common cause variation. The primary signal occurs when one or more data points fall outside the upper control limit (UCL) or lower control limit (LCL), where these limits are derived as three standard deviations from the centerline (the average defect count). Due to the Poisson basis and non-negative defect counts, the LCL is frequently set to zero when the calculated value is negative, shifting focus to UCL violations that typically signal abrupt increases in defects from special causes. Beyond limit violations, non-random patterns on the c-chart also denote out-of-control conditions. A run of eight or more consecutive points entirely above or below the centerline suggests a sustained shift in the process level, often due to factors like a change in raw materials affecting defect rates. Similarly, a trend of six or more consecutive points steadily increasing or decreasing indicates gradual process drift, such as progressive that elevates nonconformities over time. These signals collectively point to assignable () causes requiring targeted investigation and corrective action to restore . For instance, an breach or run pattern might stem from material inconsistencies, while trends often reflect equipment degradation like , prompting checks on machinery or suppliers. Failure to address them can lead to persistent quality issues, underscoring the need for prompt upon detection.

Rules for Detection

In addition to basic out-of-control signals from individual points exceeding the control limits, enhanced rules for detection in c-charts identify non-random patterns using sensitizing criteria to improve for subtle process shifts. These rules, applicable to Shewhart control charts including the c-chart for defect counts, divide the chart into zones based on standard deviations from the centerline and test for unnatural sequences or clustering. The , developed in the mid-20th century and codified in industry s, form a foundational set for pattern detection. These include: one point beyond the 3-sigma limit; two out of three consecutive points beyond the 2-sigma limit on the same side of the centerline; consecutive points beyond the 1-sigma limit on the same side; eight consecutive points on one side of the centerline; six consecutive points steadily increasing or decreasing; and fourteen consecutive points alternating up and down. Such patterns suggest special causes like or measurement errors in defect monitoring, prompting investigation before major deviations occur. Integration of Nelson rules extends these tests for greater comprehensiveness, adding criteria such as fifteen consecutive points within the 1-sigma zone around the centerline or eight consecutive points with no points falling in Zone C (the region between 1-sigma and 2-sigma from the centerline). These supplementary rules, proposed in 1984, target stagnation or systematic bias not captured by criteria alone. Applying these combined rules to a c-chart increases detection power for small shifts in defect rates, such as a 20-50% change, while maintaining a low false alarm rate of approximately 1-5% under in-control conditions. For instance, in semiconductor manufacturing, the six-point trend rule might signal gradual buildup earlier than 3-sigma breaches. Overall, these rules balance vigilance against over-signaling, with software tools often automating their application to c-chart data.

Applications

Manufacturing Examples

In manufacturing environments, c-charts are frequently applied to monitor defect counts in fixed-unit samples, such as automotive processes where is critical. For instance, in the of newly painted , each truck serves as a constant inspection unit (equivalent to a fixed surface area, such as approximately 5 per panel section), and the number of paint defects—such as scratches, bubbles, or uneven coatings—is recorded per unit. The chart's centerline is established at the average defect count, with upper and lower limits derived from the Poisson-based standard deviation. In one documented case, an average of 7 defects per truck was observed across initial samples, yielding an upper control limit of approximately 15; a subsequent sample exceeding this limit (e.g., 15 defects) signaled an out-of-control condition, prompting investigation into potential causes. In the , attribute charts suitable for counting defects, such as c-charts, support tracking of or defects within fixed batch sizes during product , ensuring process stability for . Batches of uniform volume or quantity, such as tablet lots or fills, are sampled to count nonconformities like particulate or formulation inconsistencies per batch unit. The chart plots these counts over time, with limits set at three deviations from the defect rate, enabling detection of shifts that could compromise product safety or efficacy. This approach aligns with FDA guidelines for , particularly in the continued process verification stage, where charts monitor ongoing to confirm consistent levels below acceptable thresholds, supporting with current good practices (cGMP). For example, routine application in has helped identify and correct process drifts, maintaining defect rates within stable limits to validate batch release. Within electronics manufacturing, c-charts are utilized to oversee solder joint flaws on circuit boards, where each board represents a fixed opportunity for defects in a standardized production run. Defects such as bridges, insufficient , or voids are tallied per board, with the chart's centerline reflecting the average count and limits calculated to flag anomalies. This monitoring integrates seamlessly with methodologies, particularly the (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) framework, to drive defect reduction initiatives. In a mobile phone assembly case, initial solder defect rates were analyzed via data to pinpoint root causes like equipment misalignment, leading to process improvements that reduced defects from 3800 to 200 , enhancing overall yield and reliability in high-volume production.

Non-Manufacturing Uses

In healthcare, c-charts are applied to monitor the incidence of hospital-acquired infections, such as nosocomial infections, within fixed units like a during a specific shift, where the opportunity for events remains constant. This approach, as demonstrated in studies by Sellick (1993) and Morton et al. (2001), enables the detection of procedural lapses or outbreaks by tracking Poisson-distributed counts of infections, facilitating timely interventions to improve . In , c-charts support agile by counting or defects in fixed code modules across development sprints, assuming a constant area. For instance, analyses of open-source projects like and have utilized c-charts to track defect evolution over time, identifying shifts in that signal the need for code reviews or process adjustments. In the sector, particularly banking, attribute control charts track errors per fixed daily batch to ensure and error rates in repetitive processes. This method helps detect anomalies, such as spikes in processing mistakes for wires or transfers, allowing teams to investigate causes like staffing issues and implement corrective training.

Comparisons

With p-Chart and np-Chart

The c-chart and are both attribute control charts used in , but they address different aspects of quality data. The c-chart monitors the total number of nonconformities (such as defects or errors) in a fixed sample size, following a , and does not normalize for the number of inspected units beyond assuming a constant unit. In contrast, the tracks the proportion of nonconforming units (defective items) out of a sample, modeled by a , and explicitly normalizes the defect rate by the varying sample size to account for differences in volume. This makes the p-chart suitable for pass/fail assessments where each unit is either defective or not, without considering multiple issues per unit. Similarly, the np-chart measures the absolute number of nonconforming units in samples of constant size, also based on the , serving as a direct counterpart to the when sample sizes do not vary. Unlike the c-chart, which accommodates multiple nonconformities per unit (e.g., several scratches on a single panel), the np-chart treats units binarily as defective or acceptable, limiting it to scenarios where only one defect per unit is relevant. Selection between these charts depends on the nature of the quality metric: the c-chart is preferred for counting total nonconformities in processes allowing multiple occurrences per item, such as surface imperfections in , while p-charts and np-charts are chosen for evaluating the fraction or count of outright defective items, like faulty assemblies where the unit fails as a whole. Both p- and np-charts assume constant sample sizes for np applications, aligning with the c-chart's fixed inspection unit requirement.

With u-Chart

The c-chart and u-chart are both attribute control charts used to monitor the number of defects or nonconformities in a , assuming a for defect counts. However, they differ fundamentally in their handling of sample sizes: the c-chart requires a constant sample size across subgroups, resulting in fixed limits, whereas the u-chart accommodates variable sample sizes by normalizing the defect count to a per-unit basis, with limits that adjust for each subgroup's size. In terms of formulas, the c-chart's centerline is the average number of defects, \bar{c} = \frac{\sum c_i}{k}, where c_i is the number of defects in the i-th and k is the number of ; its upper and lower control limits are fixed at \bar{c} \pm 3\sqrt{\bar{c}}. By contrast, the u-chart's centerline is the average defects per unit, \bar{u} = \frac{\sum c_i}{\sum n_i}, where n_i is the sample size (number of units) for the i-th ; its limits vary by subgroup as \bar{u} \pm 3\sqrt{\frac{\bar{u}}{n_i}}. This distinction ensures the u-chart accounts for fluctuations in inspection volume without distorting process signals. The choice between the two depends on the process context: the c-chart is appropriate for scenarios, such as defects in a fixed batch of 100 items per , where sample sizes remain consistent. The u-chart is preferred for irregular production runs, like tracking defects across varying lengths of material (e.g., 50 meters one shift, 120 the next), allowing reliable despite size variability. Both charts share the foundation for modeling rare events but diverge in applicability to maintain statistical validity.

Limitations

Key Assumptions

The c-chart, used for monitoring the number of defects or nonconformities in a process, is grounded in specific statistical assumptions that ensure its reliability for detecting shifts in process performance. These assumptions derive from the underlying probability model and the structure of data collection in (). Violating them can lead to misleading signals, so validation is essential prior to implementation. A primary assumption is that the count of defects per inspection unit follows a , which models rare events occurring independently with a constant average rate. This distribution implies that the probability of a defect is low, and occurrences in disjoint units (such as different areas or time periods) are statistically independent, enabling the use of Poisson-based control limits. The c-chart further assumes constant sample sizes and consistent inspection methods across all subgroups, as the chart tracks total defects without normalizing for varying unit sizes; this uniformity allows direct comparison of counts over time. Additionally, must exhibit during the baseline period when control limits are established, meaning only common-cause variation is present and the process parameters remain constant. Subgroups must be independent of one another, with no serial correlation or in the defect counts over time, as the c-chart treats observations as exchangeable under a stable process. To validate these, practitioners can apply runs tests for randomness and or examine autocorrelation plots to confirm values near zero; moreover, the chart's control limits rely on a normal approximation to the , which holds adequately when the average defect count \bar{c} is at least 5.

Potential Issues and Alternatives

One common issue with c-charts arises when the data exhibit , where the variance exceeds the mean, violating the assumption and leading to an increased number of false out-of-control signals. In such cases, the standard control limits become unreliable, as the process variation is higher than expected under the model. Another limitation occurs when the average number of defects, \bar{c}, is small, typically less than 5, making the normal approximation to the Poisson distribution inadequate and resulting in asymmetrical distributions with unreliable control limits, often lacking a meaningful lower control limit. For \bar{c} < 2, the standard equations for limits are particularly invalid due to the non-symmetry of the Poisson. c-charts also assume constant sample sizes; if the inspection unit or opportunity for defects varies, the chart may produce misleading signals, necessitating a switch to alternatives like the u-chart for rates per unit. In processes with autocorrelated count data, standard c-charts fail to account for dependence between observations, reducing their sensitivity to shifts and requiring adjustments like exponentially weighted (EWMA) charts or residual-based methods. To address and stabilize variance, transformations such as the , \sqrt{x + 3/8}, can be applied to the count data before plotting, approximating a for better limit estimation. For variable sample sizes, the u-chart serves as a direct , normalizing defects by unit size. When dealing with continuous (variables) data instead of counts, X-bar and R charts provide a more suitable monitoring tool for means and variability. For proportion-based defects, p-charts or np-charts are preferred over c-charts. Mitigations include periodically recalculating limits as new accumulates to reflect evolving conditions, ensuring ongoing . Additionally, integrating c-charts with capability analysis, such as using indices like for associated continuous metrics, allows for deeper assessment of defect impacts beyond mere detection. For small \bar{c}, deriving limits directly from probabilities rather than approximations can improve accuracy.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] C CONTROL CHART
    Mar 3, 1997 · A C chart is a data analysis technique for determining if a measurement process has gone out of statistical control. The C chart is sensitive to ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  2. [2]
  3. [3]
    All statistics and graphs for C Chart - Support - Minitab
    Control limits are the horizontal lines that are above and below the center line. The control limits indicate whether a process is out of control, and they are ...Center Line · Control Limits · Tests For Special Causes
  4. [4]
    6.3.3. What are Attributes Control Charts?
    ### Summary of c-chart from https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section3/pmc33.htm
  5. [5]
    7 Basic Quality Tools: Quality Management Tools | ASQ
    ### Definition and Role of Control Charts in SPC
  6. [6]
    Chapter 4 Shewhart Control Charts in Phase I - Bookdown
    The control limits for c c -chart are based on the Poisson distribution and are given by the following formulas: UCL=¯¯c+3√¯¯cCenter line=¯¯cLCL=¯¯c−3√¯¯c ...
  7. [7]
    6.3.3.1. Counts Control Charts - Information Technology Laboratory
    Counts control charts monitor the total number of defects or the average number of defects per inspection unit, which is often a single product item.
  8. [8]
    Control Chart - Statistical Process Control Charts | ASQ
    **Summary of c-charts from ASQ Control Chart Page:**
  9. [9]
    6.1.1. How did Statistical Quality Control Begin?
    Shewhart of the Bell Telephone Laboratories. He issued a memorandum on May 16, 1924 that featured a sketch of a modern control chart. Shewhart kept improving ...
  10. [10]
  11. [11]
    The First Control Chart - The W. Edwards Deming Institute
    May 19, 2021 · Dr. Walter Shewhart developed the control chart in the 1920s while working for Bell Telephone. The text of the memo that including the image of the control ...
  12. [12]
    Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product - Google Books
    Walter A. Shewhart brought together the disciplines of statistics, engineering, and economics in a simple but highly effective tool: the control chart.
  13. [13]
    Statistical Process Control (SPC) - Quality-One
    The SPC process gained wide usage during World War II by the military in the munitions and weapons facilities. ... SPC - Control Charts.
  14. [14]
    The Ultimate Guide to Statistical Process Control (SPC) - Six Sigma
    Oct 7, 2024 · According to the American Society for Quality (ASQ), SPC is defined as “the application of statistical techniques to control a process.
  15. [15]
  16. [16]
    Toyota Control Charts 1950's Example - Art of Lean
    Feb 15, 2010 · Lectures by Deming and other statistical experts put the tool and other key quality concepts in the hands of Japanese companies. Here is a quite ...Missing: teachings | Show results with:teachings
  17. [17]
    The History of Six Sigma: From Motorola to Global Adoption
    This article highlights Six Sigma's early beginnings and those credited for its creation, evolution, integration with lean principles, and examples of its use ...
  18. [18]
    The Integration of Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing - IntechOpen
    The Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma methodologies are increasingly being executed together and what we have today is the united work of both.
  19. [19]
    Shewhart control charts - ISO 7870-2:2013
    ISO 7870-2:2013 establishes a guide to the use and understanding of the Shewhart control chart approach to the methods for statistical control of a process.Missing: c- | Show results with:c-
  20. [20]
    [PDF] international standard iso 7870-2
    A Shewhart control chart is a chart that is used to display a statistical ... c) c chart for number of nonconformities when the sample size is constant;.
  21. [21]
    6.3.2.1. Shewhart X-bar and R and S Control Charts
    This chart controls the process variability since the sample range is related to the process standard deviation.
  22. [22]
    Steps in Constructing a c-Chart - iSixSigma
    Oct 11, 2005 · Determine cbar. C-Chart Control Chart 1. There are k inspection units and c(i) is the number of nonconformities in the ith sample.
  23. [23]
    Overview for C Chart - Support - Minitab
    To create a C chart, choose Stat > Control Charts > Attributes Charts > C. When to use an alternate control chart. If your subgroup sizes are not equal, use U ...Missing: construction steps
  24. [24]
    6.3.2. What are Variables Control Charts?
    Variables control charts, proposed by Shewhart, monitor a process's continuously varying quality, using control limits to determine if the process is in ...
  25. [25]
    Control Chart Rules and Interpretation - SPC for Excel
    This month's publication examines 8 rules that you can use to help you interpret what your control chart is communicating to you.Control Chart Review · The 8 Control Chart Rules · Possible Causes by Pattern
  26. [26]
    [PDF] How do I Control a Process that Trends Naturally Due to Tool Wear?
    The trend (which is expected) results in inappropriate “out-of-control” signals. Control charts should detect unexpected changes in the process. If the trend ...Missing: material | Show results with:material
  27. [27]
    The Shewhart Control Chart—Tests for Special Causes
    Feb 22, 2018 · (1984). The Shewhart Control Chart—Tests for Special Causes. Journal of Quality Technology: Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 237-239.
  28. [28]
    [PDF] 7.4 The c-chart (fixed sample size)
    of control chart to help determine which type of defect is most common. 96. Page 3. Example for c-chart with known c: Newly painted trucks of the same model ...
  29. [29]
    [PDF] Control chart: A statistical process control tool in pharmacy
    This number is called “c” and is directly plotted on a c-chart [Figure 9]. ... whether a manufacturing of dosage form in pharmaceutical industry is in a ...
  30. [30]
    FDA gives Advice on the Use of Control Charts - ECA Academy
    Jan 7, 2016 · A SPC can be a valuable resource, particularly in stage 3 of the process validation lifecycle (continued/ongoing process verification). During ...<|separator|>
  31. [31]
    PCB Test Statistical Process Control (SPC)_Farway Electronic Co ...
    C-Chart, Monitors count of defects per unit, Number of solder defects per board, component misplacements, Average number of misaligned components per PCB in a ...
  32. [32]
    Reducing soldering defects in mobile phone manufacturing company
    Feb 25, 2020 · A DMAIC (an effective tool) approach has been presented in this paper for reducing defects in soldering in an endeavor to approach six sigma ...
  33. [33]
    Control chart applications in healthcare: a literature review
    There is very little use of c chart, g chart, and u charts in healthcare sector. ... D.R. Prajapati, Correlation level among the observations for a pharmaceutical ...
  34. [34]
    Monitoring Software Quality Evolution for Defects - ResearchGate
    Aug 10, 2025 · Quality control charts, especially c-charts, can help monitor software quality evolution for defects over time. c-charts of the Eclipse and ...
  35. [35]
    2 Use Cases for Control Charts in Finance - Minitab Blog
    Sep 15, 2023 · Discover how you can use control charts in finance! Explore two compelling use cases that drive performance and mitigate risk in financial ...
  36. [36]
    [PDF] Statistical Process Control (SPC)
    c-Chart Example: Hotel Suite Inspection--Defects Discovered/room. Day. Defects ... Statistical process control provides simple, yet powerful, for ...
  37. [37]
    Statistical Process Control: Part 8, Attributes Control Charts
    The main difference between the np chart and p chart is the rules regarding sample size. For np charts, the sample size of each subgroup must be the same. This ...
  38. [38]
    [PDF] Chapter 6 Control Charts For Attributes
    The poisson distribution is used as the underlying model for both of the c chart and the u chart. 1.Missing: basis | Show results with:basis
  39. [39]
    [PDF] 7 Control Charts for Attributes
    As an alternative to the p-chart when n is constant, it is possible to use a control chart based on the number of nonconforming units. This is called an np- ...
  40. [40]
    Control Chart - Minitab Engage - Support
    You should use a C chart only when your subgroup sizes are equal. If your subgroup sizes are not equal, use the U chart. For example, a quality engineer for a ...
  41. [41]
    [PDF] Online Quality Control - University of Connecticut
    Assumption: occurrence of defects in samples of constant size. (inspection units) modeled by Poisson distribution x: number of nonconformities in an ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  42. [42]
    [PDF] SAWG Enclosure B - Statistical Process Control 8-8-06 - FDA
    Aug 8, 2006 · During some “initial” period of time, it is assumed that the process is operating in a relatively stable manner – or is in control. During this ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] Analyzing Data Utilized in Process Control and Continuous ...
    Mar 31, 2016 · The assumptions of univariate SPC and multivariate SPC (MPC) is that the observations are serially uncorrelated or statistically independent ...
  44. [44]
    A novel experience in the use of control charts for the detection ... - NIH
    Statistical instability (indicating that the process is out of control) ... Under the independence assumption the autocorrelation values should be close to zero.
  45. [45]
    (PDF) C-chart, X-chart, and the Katz Family of Distributions
    To deal with under‐ or overdispersion, control charts ... transformation for binomial data or a square root transformation for Poisson data. ... stability ...
  46. [46]
    Small Sample Case for c and u Control Charts - SPC for Excel
    The c and u charts are based on or approximated by the Poisson distribution. If c is sufficiently large, the Poisson distribution is symmetrical and approaches ...c and u Control Charts · Control Limits · Poisson Distribution · Small Sample Case
  47. [47]
    The Pearson Residual‐Based Control Charts for Monitoring ...
    Oct 7, 2025 · Most existing control charts are designed for positively autocorrelated count data and seldom address the issue of overdispersion.
  48. [48]
    EWMA Control Charts for Monitoring the Mean of Autocorrelated ...
    Feb 20, 2018 · This paper considers the problem of monitoring the mean of a process in which the observations can be modeled as an AR(1) process plus a random error.
  49. [49]
  50. [50]
    6.3.1. What are Control Charts? - Information Technology Laboratory
    Control charts monitor quality, with univariate charts for one characteristic and multivariate for multiple. They show a mean, upper and lower control limits.Missing: c- | Show results with:c-