{domain:"www.qualitydigest.com",server:"169.47.211.87"} Skip to main content

User account menu
Main navigation
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Videos/Webinars
    • All videos
    • Product Demos
    • Webinars
  • Advertise
    • Advertise
    • Submit B2B Press Release
    • Write for us
  • Metrology Hub
  • Training
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
Mobile Menu
  • Home
  • Topics
    • 3D Metrology-CMSC
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Login / Subscribe
  • More...
    • All Features
    • All News
    • All Videos
    • Contact
    • Training

Relationship Between Process Capability Index and Sigma

Calculating how many standard deviations the process window can hold

Photo by Peter Robbins on Unsplash

Harish Jose
Tue, 08/13/2024 - 12:02
  • Comment
  • RSS

Social Sharing block

  • Print
  • Add new comment
Body

Recently, I wrote about the process capability index and tolerance interval. Here, I’m writing about the relationship between the process capability index and sigma. The sigma number here relates to how many standard deviations the process window can hold.

ADVERTISEMENT

A +/– 3 sigma contains 99.73% of the normal probability density curve. This is also traditionally notated as the “process window.” The number of sigmas is also the z-score. When the process window is compared against the specification window, we can assess the process capability. When the process window is much narrower than the specification window and is fully contained within the specification window, we say that the process is highly capable. When the process window is larger than the specification window, we say that the process isn’t capable.

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
Enter your username or email address
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.
Create a FREE account
Forgot My Password

Comments

Submitted by Scott A. Hindle on Tue, 08/13/2024 - 00:22

Overly narrow treatment?

Given that capability confusion is somewhat common, does your narrow treatment of the topic not risk propagating this “confusion”?

Capability indexes, as I have no doubt you know, are reliable, or well-defined, indicators if, and only if, the process data display a reasonable degree of consistency (i.e. stable or “in control” process). All these assumptions of probability models are misleading unless there is some reasonable evidence of process stability over time.

Moreover, wouldn’t it also be advantageous to make a clear separation between Cp/Cpk as “capability indexes” and Pp/Ppk as “(past) performance indexes”?

Lastly, rather than getting bogged down in calculations how about keeping things simple with a primary use of time-series plots, control charts and histograms?

  • Reply

Submitted by Dr T Burns on Tue, 08/13/2024 - 01:52

Capability indices add no value

Capability indices are not a substitute for a control chart plus histogram.  These statistics add no value, as my animation demonstrates:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dr-tony-burns-b040541_is-capability-as-much-nonsense-as-oee-cp-activity-7221256560197476354-3kOJ?

  • Reply

Submitted by Allen Lee Scott on Tue, 08/13/2024 - 15:15

Accuracy of Inferences

You said in your previous article (linked in this one)

The accuracy of our inferences will depend on how closely the actual process probability distribution curve matches the beautiful symmetric normal curve. 

This sounds at odds in several ways with Dr. Deming's recommendations in Dr. Shewhart's second book**

"An inference, if it is to have scientific value, must constitute a prediction concerning future data. If the inference is to be made purely with the help of the distribution theories of statistics, the experiments that constitute the evidence for the inference must arise from a state of statistical control; until that state is reached, there is no universe, normal or otherwise, and the statistician’s calculations by themselves are an illusion if not a delusion. The fact is that when distribution theory is not applicable for lack of control, any inference, statistical or otherwise, is little better than conjecture. The state of statistical control is therefore the goal of all experimentation,"

**Shewhart, Walter A. (Walter Andrew), 1891-1967. Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control. Washington: The Graduate School, The Department of Agriculture, 1939.

 

Thanks, 

Allen

  • Reply

Add new comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Please login to comment.
      

© 2025 Quality Digest. Copyright on content held by Quality Digest or by individual authors. Contact Quality Digest for reprint information.
“Quality Digest" is a trademark owned by Quality Circle Institute Inc.

footer
  • Home
  • Print QD: 1995-2008
  • Print QD: 2008-2009
  • Videos
  • Privacy Policy
  • Write for us
footer second menu
  • Subscribe to Quality Digest
  • About Us
  • Contact Us