Control chart

Control charts is a graph used in production control to determine

Control chart
whether quality and manufacturing processes are being controlled
under stable conditions. (ISO 7870-1)[1] The hourly status is
arranged on the graph, and the occurrence of abnormalities is
judged based on the presence of data that differs from the
conventional trend or deviates from the control limit line. Control
charts are classified into Shewhart individuals control chart (ISO
7870-2)[2] and CUSUM(CUsUM)(or cumulative sum control
chart)(ISO 7870-4).[3]

Control charts, also known as Shewhart charts (after Walter A.

Shewhart) or process-behavior charts, are a statistical process
control tool used to determine if a manufacturing or business
process is in a state of control. It is more appropriate to say that the
One of the Seven basic tools of
control charts are the graphical device for Statistical Process
Monitoring (SPM). Traditional control charts are mostly designed quality
to monitor process parameters when the underlying form of the First Walter A. Shewhart
process distributions are known. However, more advanced described
techniques are available in the 21st century where incoming data by
streaming can-be monitored even without any knowledge of the
Purpose To determine whether
underlying process distributions. Distribution-free control charts
are becoming increasingly popular. a process should
undergo a formal
examination for
Overview quality-related
problems
If analysis of the control chart indicates that the process is currently
under control (i.e., is stable, with variation only coming from
sources common to the process), then no corrections or changes to process control parameters are needed or
desired. In addition, data from the process can be used to predict the future performance of the process. If
the chart indicates that the monitored process is not in control, analysis of the chart can help determine the
sources of variation, as this will result in degraded process performance.[4] A process that is stable but
operating outside desired (specification) limits (e.g., scrap rates may be in statistical control but above
desired limits) needs to be improved through a deliberate effort to understand the causes of current
performance and fundamentally improve the process.[5]

The control chart is one of the seven basic tools of quality control.[6] Typically control charts are used for
time-series data, also known as continuous data or variable data. Although they can also be used for data
that has logical comparability (i.e. you want to compare samples that were taken all at the same time, or the
performance of different individuals); however the type of chart used to do this requires consideration.[7]

History
The control chart was invented by Walter A. Shewhart working for Bell Labs in the 1920s.[8] The
company's engineers had been seeking to improve the reliability of their telephony transmission systems.
Because amplifiers and other equipment had to be buried underground, there was a stronger business need
to reduce the frequency of failures and repairs. By 1920, the engineers had already realized the importance
of reducing variation in a manufacturing process. Moreover, they had realized that continual process-
adjustment in reaction to non-conformance actually increased variation and degraded quality. Shewhart
framed the problem in terms of Common- and special-causes of variation and, on May 16, 1924, wrote an
internal memo introducing the control chart as a tool for distinguishing between the two. Shewhart's boss,
George Edwards, recalled: "Dr. Shewhart prepared a little memorandum only about a page in length. About
a third of that page was given over to a simple diagram which we would all recognize today as a schematic
control chart. That diagram, and the short text which preceded and followed it set forth all of the essential
principles and considerations which are involved in what we know today as process quality control."[9]
Shewhart stressed that bringing a production process into a state of statistical control, where there is only
common-cause variation, and keeping it in control, is necessary to predict future output and to manage a
process economically.

Shewhart created the basis for the control chart and the concept of a state of statistical control by carefully
designed experiments. While Shewhart drew from pure mathematical statistical theories, he understood that
data from physical processes typically produce a "normal distribution curve" (a Gaussian distribution, also
commonly referred to as a "bell curve"). He discovered that observed variation in manufacturing data did
not always behave the same way as data in nature (Brownian motion of particles). Shewhart concluded that
while every process displays variation, some processes display controlled variation that is natural to the
process, while others display uncontrolled variation that is not present in the process causal system at all
times.[10]

In 1924, or 1925, Shewhart's innovation came to the attention of W. Edwards Deming, then working at the
Hawthorne facility. Deming later worked at the United States Department of Agriculture and became the
mathematical advisor to the United States Census Bureau. Over the next half a century, Deming became the
foremost champion and proponent of Shewhart's work. After the defeat of Japan at the close of World War
II, Deming served as statistical consultant to the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers. His ensuing
involvement in Japanese life, and long career as an industrial consultant there, spread Shewhart's thinking,
and the use of the control chart, widely in Japanese manufacturing industry throughout the 1950s and
1960s.

Bonnie Small, worked in an Allentown plant in the 1950s after the transistor was made. Used Shewhart's
methods to improve plant performance in quality control and made up to 5000 control charts. In 1958, “The
Western Electric Statistical Quality Control Handbook” had appeared from her writings and led to use at
AT&T.[11]

Chart details
A control chart consists of:

Points representing a statistic (e.g., a mean, range, proportion) of measurements of a quality

characteristic in samples taken from the process at different times (i.e., the data)
The mean of this statistic using all the samples is calculated (e.g., the mean of the means,
mean of the ranges, mean of the proportions) - or for a reference period against which
change can be assessed. Similarly a median can be used instead.
A centre line is drawn at the value of the mean or median of the statistic
The standard deviation (e.g., sqrt(variance) of the mean) of the statistic is calculated using
all the samples - or again for a reference period against which change can be assessed. in
the case of XmR charts, strictly it is an approximation of standard deviation, the does not
make the assumption of homogeneity of process over time that the standard deviation
makes.
 Upper and lower control limits (sometimes called "natural process limits") that indicate the
threshold at which the process output is considered statistically 'unlikely' and are drawn
typically at 3 standard deviations from the center line

The chart may have other optional features, including:

More restrictive upper and lower warning or control limits, drawn as separate lines, typically
two standard deviations above and below the center line. This is regularly used when a
process needs tighter controls on variability.
Division into zones, with the addition of rules governing frequencies of observations in each
zone
Annotation with events of interest, as determined by the Quality Engineer in charge of the
process' quality
Action on special causes

(n.b., there are several rule sets for detection of signal; this is just one set. The rule set should be clearly
stated.)

1. Any point outside the control limits

2. A Run of 7 Points all above or all below the central line - Stop the production
Quarantine and 100% check
Adjust Process.
Check 5 Consecutive samples
Continue The Process.
3. A Run of 7 Point Up or Down - Instruction as above

Chart usage

If the process is in control (and the process statistic is normal), 99.7300% of all the points will fall between
the control limits. Any observations outside the limits, or systematic patterns within, suggest the
introduction of a new (and likely unanticipated) source of variation, known as a special-cause variation.
Since increased variation means increased quality costs, a control chart "signaling" the presence of a
special-cause requires immediate investigation.

This makes the control limits very important decision aids. The control limits provide information about the
process behavior and have no intrinsic relationship to any specification targets or engineering tolerance. In
practice, the process mean (and hence the centre line) may not coincide with the specified value (or target)
of the quality characteristic because the process design simply cannot deliver the process characteristic at
the desired level.

Control charts limit specification limits or targets because of the tendency of those involved with the
process (e.g., machine operators) to focus on performing to specification when in fact the least-cost course
of action is to keep process variation as low as possible. Attempting to make a process whose natural centre
is not the same as the target perform to target specification increases process variability and increases costs
significantly and is the cause of much inefficiency in operations. Process capability studies do examine the
relationship between the natural process limits (the control limits) and specifications, however.

The purpose of control charts is to allow simple detection of events that are indicative of an increase in
process variability. [12] This simple decision can be difficult where the process characteristic is continuously
varying; the control chart provides statistically objective criteria of change. When change is detected and
considered good its cause should be identified and possibly become the new way of working, where the
change is bad then its cause should be identified and eliminated.

The purpose in adding warning limits or subdividing the control chart into zones is to provide early
notification if something is amiss. Instead of immediately launching a process improvement effort to
determine whether special causes are present, the Quality Engineer may temporarily increase the rate at
which samples are taken from the process output until it is clear that the process is truly in control. Note that
with three-sigma limits, common-cause variations result in signals less than once out of every twenty-two
points for skewed processes and about once out of every three hundred seventy (1/370.4) points for
normally distributed processes.[13] The two-sigma warning levels will be reached about once for every
twenty-two (1/21.98) plotted points in normally distributed data. (For example, the means of sufficiently
large samples drawn from practically any underlying distribution whose variance exists are normally
distributed, according to the Central Limit Theorem.)

Choice of limits

Shewhart set 3-sigma (3-standard deviation) limits on the following basis.

The coarse result of Chebyshev's inequality that, for any probability distribution, the
probability of an outcome greater than k standard deviations from the mean is at most 1/k2.
The finer result of the Vysochanskii–Petunin inequality, that for any unimodal probability
distribution, the probability of an outcome greater than k standard deviations from the mean
is at most 4/(9k2).
In the Normal distribution, a very common probability distribution, 99.7% of the observations
occur within three standard deviations of the mean (see Normal distribution).

Shewhart summarized the conclusions by saying:

... the fact that the criterion which we happen to use has a fine ancestry in highbrow statistical
theorems does not justify its use. Such justification must come from empirical evidence that it
works. As the practical engineer might say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.[14]

Although he initially experimented with limits based on probability distributions, Shewhart ultimately
wrote:

Some of the earliest attempts to characterize a state of statistical control were inspired by the
belief that there existed a special form of frequency function f and it was early argued that the
normal law characterized such a state. When the normal law was found to be inadequate,
then generalized functional forms were tried. Today, however, all hopes of finding a unique
functional form f are blasted.[15]

The control chart is intended as a heuristic. Deming insisted that it is not a hypothesis test and is not
motivated by the Neyman–Pearson lemma. He contended that the disjoint nature of population and
sampling frame in most industrial situations compromised the use of conventional statistical techniques.
Deming's intention was to seek insights into the cause system of a process ...under a wide range of
unknowable circumstances, future and past.... He claimed that, under such conditions, 3-sigma limits
provided ... a rational and economic guide to minimum economic loss... from the two errors:
 1. Ascribe a variation or a mistake to a special cause (assignable cause) when in fact the
cause belongs to the system (common cause). (Also known as a Type I error or False
Positive)
2. Ascribe a variation or a mistake to the system (common causes) when in fact the cause was
a special cause (assignable cause). (Also known as a Type II error or False Negative)

Calculation of standard deviation

As for the calculation of control limits, the standard deviation (error) required is that of the common-cause
variation in the process. Hence, the usual estimator, in terms of sample variance, is not used as this estimates
the total squared-error loss from both common- and special-causes of variation.

An alternative method is to use the relationship between the range of a sample and its standard deviation
derived by Leonard H. C. Tippett, as an estimator which tends to be less influenced by the extreme
observations which typify special-causes.

Rules for detecting signals

The most common sets are:

The Western Electric rules

The Wheeler rules (equivalent to the Western Electric zone tests[16])
The Nelson rules

There has been particular controversy as to how long a run of observations, all on the same side of the
centre line, should count as a signal, with 6, 7, 8 and 9 all being advocated by various writers.

The most important principle for choosing a set of rules is that the choice be made before the data is
inspected. Choosing rules once the data have been seen tends to increase the Type I error rate owing to
testing effects suggested by the data.

Alternative bases
In 1935, the British Standards Institution, under the influence of Egon Pearson and against Shewhart's
spirit, adopted control charts, replacing 3-sigma limits with limits based on percentiles of the normal
distribution. This move continues to be represented by John Oakland and others but has been widely
deprecated by writers in the Shewhart–Deming tradition.

Performance of control charts

When a point falls outside the limits established for a given control chart, those responsible for the
underlying process are expected to determine whether a special cause has occurred. If one has, it is
appropriate to determine if the results with the special cause are better than or worse than results from
common causes alone. If worse, then that cause should be eliminated if possible. If better, it may be
appropriate to intentionally retain the special cause within the system producing the results.

Even when a process is in control (that is, no special causes are present in the system), there is
approximately a 0.27% probability of a point exceeding 3-sigma control limits. So, even an in control
process plotted on a properly constructed control chart will eventually signal the possible presence of a
special cause, even though one may not have actually occurred. For a Shewhart control chart using 3-sigma
limits, this false alarm occurs on average once every 1/0.0027 or 370.4 observations. Therefore, the in-
control average run length (or in-control ARL) of a Shewhart chart is 370.4.

Meanwhile, if a special cause does occur, it may not be of sufficient magnitude for the chart to produce an
immediate alarm condition. If a special cause occurs, one can describe that cause by measuring the change
in the mean and/or variance of the process in question. When those changes are quantified, it is possible to
determine the out-of-control ARL for the chart.

It turns out that Shewhart charts are quite good at detecting large changes in the process mean or variance,
as their out-of-control ARLs are fairly short in these cases. However, for smaller changes (such as a 1- or 2-
sigma change in the mean), the Shewhart chart does not detect these changes efficiently. Other types of
control charts have been developed, such as the EWMA chart, the CUSUM chart and the real-time
contrasts chart, which detect smaller changes more efficiently by making use of information from
observations collected prior to the most recent data point.[17]

Many control charts work best for numeric data with Gaussian assumptions. The real-time contrasts chart
was proposed to monitor process with complex characteristics, e.g. high-dimensional, mix numerical and
categorical, missing-valued, non-Gaussian, non-linear relationship.[17]

Criticisms
Several authors have criticised the control chart on the grounds that it violates the likelihood principle.
However, the principle is itself controversial and supporters of control charts further argue that, in general, it
is impossible to specify a likelihood function for a process not in statistical control, especially where
knowledge about the cause system of the process is weak.

Some authors have criticised the use of average run lengths (ARLs) for comparing control chart
performance, because that average usually follows a geometric distribution, which has high variability and
difficulties.
Some authors have criticized that most control charts focus on numeric data. Nowadays, process data can
be much more complex, e.g. non-Gaussian, mix numerical and categorical, or be missing-valued.[17]

Types of charts
Process Process Size of
Chart Process observation observations observations shift to
relationships type detect

Quality characteristic Large (≥

and R chart Independent Variables
measurement within one subgroup 1.5σ)

Quality characteristic Large (≥

and s chart Independent Variables
measurement within one subgroup 1.5σ)
Shewhart individuals
Quality characteristic Large (≥
control chart (ImR
measurement for one observation
Independent Variables† 1.5σ)
chart or XmR chart)

Quality characteristic Large (≥

Three-way chart Independent Variables
measurement within one subgroup 1.5σ)

Fraction nonconforming within one Large (≥

p-chart
subgroup
Independent Attributes† 1.5σ)
Number nonconforming within one Large (≥
np-chart
subgroup
Independent Attributes† 1.5σ)

Number of nonconformances Large (≥

c-chart
within one subgroup
Independent Attributes† 1.5σ)

Nonconformances per unit within Large (≥

u-chart
one subgroup
Independent Attributes† 1.5σ)
Exponentially weighted moving
Attributes or Small (<
EWMA chart average of quality characteristic Independent
variables 1.5σ)
measurement within one subgroup

Cumulative sum of quality

Attributes or Small (<
CUSUM chart characteristic measurement within Independent
variables 1.5σ)
one subgroup
Quality characteristic Attributes or
Time series model Autocorrelated N/A
measurement within one subgroup variables

Dependent of
Regression control Quality characteristic Large (≥
process control Variables
chart measurement within one subgroup 1.5σ)
variables

† Some practitioners also recommend the use of Individuals charts for attribute data, particularly when the
assumptions of either binomially distributed data (p- and np-charts) or Poisson-distributed data (u- and c-
charts) are violated.[18] Two primary justifications are given for this practice. First, normality is not
necessary for statistical control, so the Individuals chart may be used with non-normal data.[19] Second,
attribute charts derive the measure of dispersion directly from the mean proportion (by assuming a
probability distribution), while Individuals charts derive the measure of dispersion from the data,
independent of the mean, making Individuals charts more robust than attributes charts to violations of the
assumptions about the distribution of the underlying population.[20] It is sometimes noted that the
substitution of the Individuals chart works best for large counts, when the binomial and Poisson
distributions approximate a normal distribution. i.e. when the number of trials n > 1000 for p- and np-
charts or λ > 500 for u- and c-charts.
Critics of this approach argue that control charts should not be used when their underlying assumptions are
violated, such as when process data is neither normally distributed nor binomially (or Poisson) distributed.
Such processes are not in control and should be improved before the application of control charts.
Additionally, application of the charts in the presence of such deviations increases the type I and type II
error rates of the control charts, and may make the chart of little practical use.

See also
Analytic and enumerative statistical studies
Common cause and special cause
Distribution-free control chart
W. Edwards Deming
Process capability
Seven Basic Tools of Quality
Six Sigma
Statistical process control
Total quality management

References
1. "Control charts — Part 1: General guidelines" (https://www.iso.org/standard/69639.html).
iso.org. Retrieved 2022-12-11.
2. "Control charts — Part 2: Shewhart control charts" (https://www.iso.org/standard/40174.htm
l). iso.org. Retrieved 2022-12-11.
3. "Control charts — Part 4: Cumulative sum charts" (https://www.iso.org/standard/74101.html).
iso.org. Retrieved 2022-12-11.
4. McNeese, William (July 2006). "Over-controlling a Process: The Funnel Experiment" (http://
www.spcforexcel.com/overcontrolling-process-funnel-experiment). BPI Consulting, LLC.
Retrieved 2010-03-17.
5. Wheeler, Donald J. (2000). Understanding Variation (https://archive.org/details/understandin
gvar00dona). Knoxville, Tennessee: SPC Press. ISBN 978-0-945320-53-1.
6. Nancy R. Tague (2004). "Seven Basic Quality Tools" (http://www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/
seven-basic-quality-tools/overview/overview.html). The Quality Toolbox. Milwaukee,
Wisconsin: American Society for Quality. p. 15. Retrieved 2010-02-05.
7. A Poots, T Woodcock (2012). "Statistical process control for data without inherent order" (htt
ps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3464151). BMC Medical Informatics and
Decision Making. 12: 86. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-12-86 (https://doi.org/10.1186%2F1472-69
47-12-86). PMC 3464151 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3464151).
PMID 22867269 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22867269).
8. "Western Electric History" (https://web.archive.org/web/20110127163844/http://www.porticu
s.org/bell/westernelectric_history.html#Western+Electric+-+A+Brief+History).
www.porticus.org. Archived from the original (http://www.porticus.org/bell/westernelectric_his
tory.html#Western+Electric+-+A+Brief+History) on 2011-01-27. Retrieved 2015-03-26.
9. "Western Electric – A Brief History" (https://web.archive.org/web/20080511183038/http://ww
w.porticus.org/bell/doc/western_electric.doc). Archived from the original (http://www.porticus.
org/bell/doc/western_electric.doc) on 2008-05-11. Retrieved 2008-03-14.
10. "Why SPC?" British Deming Association SPC Press, Inc. 1992
11. Best, M; Neuhauser, D (1 April 2006). "Walter A Shewhart, 1924, and the Hawthorne factory"
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2464836). Quality and Safety in Health
Care. 15 (2): 142–143. doi:10.1136/qshc.2006.018093 (https://doi.org/10.1136%2Fqshc.200
6.018093). PMC 2464836 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2464836).
PMID 16585117 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16585117).
12. Statistical Process Controls for Variable Data. Lean Six sigma. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://theengineeringarchive.com/sigma/page-variable-control-charts.html.
13. Wheeler, Donald J. (1 November 2010). "Are You Sure We Don't Need Normally Distributed
Data?" (http://www.qualitydigest.com/inside/quality-insider-column/are-you-sure-we-don-t-ne
ed-normally-distributed-data.html). Quality Digest. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
14. Shewhart, W A (1931). Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product. Van
Nordstrom. p. 18.
15. Shewart, Walter Andrew; Deming, William Edwards (1939). Statistical Method from the
Viewpoint of Quality Control (https://books.google.com/books?id=GF9IAQAAIAAJ).
University of California: Graduate School, The Department of Agriculture. p. 12.
ISBN 9780877710325.
16. Wheeler, Donald J.; Chambers, David S. (1992). Understanding statistical process control
(2 ed.). Knoxville, Tennessee: SPC Press. p. 96. ISBN 978-0-945320-13-5. OCLC 27187772
(https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/27187772).
17. Deng, H.; Runger, G.; Tuv, E. (2012). "System monitoring with real-time contrasts". Journal of
Quality Technology. 44 (1). pp. 9–27. doi:10.1080/00224065.2012.11917878 (https://doi.org/
10.1080%2F00224065.2012.11917878). S2CID 119835984 (https://api.semanticscholar.or
g/CorpusID:119835984).
18. Wheeler, Donald J. (2000). Understanding Variation: the key to managing chaos (https://arch
ive.org/details/understandingvar00dona/page/140). SPC Press. p. 140 (https://archive.org/d
etails/understandingvar00dona/page/140). ISBN 978-0-945320-53-1.
19. Staufer, Rip. "Some Problems with Attribute Charts" (http://www.qualitydigest.com/inside/qua
lity-insider-article/some-problems-attribute-charts.html). Quality Digest. Retrieved 2 Apr
2010.
20. Wheeler, Donald J. "What About Charts for Count Data?" (http://www.qualitydigest.com/jul/s
pctool.html). Quality Digest. Retrieved 2010-03-23.

Bibliography
Deming, W. E. (1975). "On probability as a basis for action". The American Statistician. 29
(4): 146–152. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.470.9636 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?do
i=10.1.1.470.9636). doi:10.2307/2683482 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2683482).
JSTOR 2683482 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2683482).
Deming, W. E. (1982). Out of the Crisis: Quality, Productivity and Competitive Position (http
s://archive.org/details/outofcrisisquali00demi). ISBN 978-0-521-30553-2.
Deng, H.; Runger, G.; Tuv, Eugene (2012). "System monitoring with real-time contrasts".
Journal of Quality Technology. 44 (1): 9–27. doi:10.1080/00224065.2012.11917878 (https://
doi.org/10.1080%2F00224065.2012.11917878). S2CID 119835984 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:119835984).
Mandel, B. J. (1969). "The Regression Control Chart". Journal of Quality Technology. 1 (1):
1–9. doi:10.1080/00224065.1969.11980341 (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00224065.1969.11
980341).
Oakland, J. (2002). Statistical Process Control. ISBN 978-0-7506-5766-2.
Shewhart, W. A. (1931). Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product. ISBN 978-0-
87389-076-2.
 Shewhart, W. A. (1939). Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control. ISBN 978-
0-486-65232-0.
Wheeler, D. J. (2000). Normality and the Process-Behaviour Chart. ISBN 978-0-945320-56-
2.
Wheeler, D. J.; Chambers, D. S. (1992). Understanding Statistical Process Control.
ISBN 978-0-945320-13-5.
Wheeler, Donald J. (1999). Understanding Variation: The Key to Managing Chaos (https://ar
chive.org/details/understandingvar00dona) (2nd ed.). SPC Press. ISBN 978-0-945320-53-1.

External links
NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods (http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbo
ok/index.htm)
Monitoring and Control with Control Charts (http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/pm
c.htm)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Control_chart&oldid=1131901294"