2.830.

1x
Practice Questions Solutions
Problem 2

Saltwater is a more rapid quench medium than plain water because the bubbles are
broken easily and allow for rapid cooling of the part. A technician uses saltwater
quenching to harden a particular type of metal alloy. Hardness values for 61 samples of
the alloy are measured. An average hardness of 147 and a sample variance of 24.7 are
observed.

a- What are your best estimates 𝜇̂ and 𝜎̂ 2 of the process mean and process variance?

The best estimates are 𝜇̂ = 147 and 𝜎̂ 2 = 24.7

b- Construct a 95% confidence interval for the process mean and process variance?
List any assumptions you make.

Assumption: Hardness is normally distributed.

Mean Confidence Interval: A 95% confidence interval on the mean is given by

𝑠 𝑠
𝑥̅ − 𝑡(𝛼),𝑛−1 ≤ 𝜇̂ ≤ 𝑥̅ + 𝑡(𝛼/2),𝑛−1
2 √𝑛 √𝑛

Using the t distribution tables, 𝑡(𝛼/2),𝑛−1 = 𝑡0.025,60 = 2.00

√24.7 √24.7
147 − 2 ≤ 𝜇̂ ≤ 147 + 2
√61 √61

145.72 ≤ 𝜇̂ ≤ 148.27

Variance Confidence Interval: A 95% confidence interval on the variance is

(𝑛 − 1)𝑠 2 (𝑛 − 1)𝑠 2
≤ 𝜎̂ 2 ≤
𝜒𝛼2⁄2,𝑛−1 2
𝜒1− 𝛼⁄2,𝑛−1

2 2
Using the 𝜒 2 distribution tables, 𝜒0.025,60 = 83.3 and 𝜒0.975,60 = 40.48

(61 − 1) × 24.7 (61 − 1) × 24.7

≤ 𝜎̂ 2 ≤
83.3 40.48

17.79 ≤ 𝜎̂ 2 ≤ 36.61

c- A change of the process is proposed to increase the hardness. Using the modified
process, the 95% confidence interval of the process mean is [147.6 , 156.4] and
that of the process variance is [37.2 , 98.4]

6
1. What test can be used to find if the modification resulted in a larger or a smaller
variance? Are we better off using a one-sided or two-sided version of the test?

Comparing the confidence intervals of the variance, it seems that one variance is larger
than the other. A one-sided F test can be used to confirm this.

2. To 95%, has the modification resulted in a process mean that is different from that of
the initial saltwater quenching process?

No. The confidence intervals of the mean overlap.

3. The technician performs a hypothesis test on the difference of the means between the
𝜇1 −𝜇2
two processes to answer c-ii. He compares the t statistic given by 𝑡0 = 1 1
to
2( + )
√𝑠𝑝 𝑛1 𝑛2

the student t-distribution parameter 𝑡0.025,120 to make his judgment. Do you agree with
his method?

No. This test assumes equal variances. And we know that the variances are different
because the confidence intervals of the variance do not overlap.

d- The technician wants to compare oil to saltwater as a quench medium. In general,

oil quenching is used when a slower rate of cooling is desired. Using oil quenching
of 61 samples of the metal alloy, the observed mean and sample variance are 149
and 29.8

1. Test the hypothesis that the mean hardness of the unmodified saltwater quenching of
part (a) equals that of oil quenching. Use 𝛼 = 0.05 and assume equal variances.

We perform a two sample t – test on the difference of means assuming equal

variances:

H0 ∶ 𝜇1 = 𝜇2

H1 ∶ 𝜇1 ≠ 𝜇2

The pooled estimator of 𝜎 2 , denoted 𝑠𝑝2 is calculated as follows:

(𝑛1 − 1)𝑠12 + (𝑛2 − 1)𝑠22

𝑠𝑝2 = = 27.25
𝑛1 + 𝑛2 − 2

and the t statistic is given by:

7
 𝑥̅1 − 𝑥̅ 2
𝑡0 = = −2.09
1 1
√𝑠𝑝2 ( +𝑛 )
𝑛1 2

The student t distribution parameter 𝑡0.025,120 = −1.98

Since |𝑡0 | > |𝑡0.025,120 |, H0 must be rejected. There is no sufficient evidence that
the means are equal.

8
 Problem 3: SPC on Furnace Temperature (40%)

The four plots shown below are temperature data from a small furnace. The grand mean
for the data is 2.86 and the grand standard deviation is 4.97

Run Chart
16 Xbar with n=3
8
14
7
12
6
10
5
8
4
6

4 3

2 2

0 1

-2 0
-4 -1
-6
-2
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36
1 3 5 7 9 11 13

EWMA with r = 0.5 EWMA with r = 0.1

4 .5
12
4
10
3 .5
8
3
6
2 .5
4
2
2
1 .5

0 1

-2 0 .5

-4 0
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36

a- Sketch control limits for all four plots.

Run Chart

UCL = 𝑥̿ + 3𝑠̅ = 2.86 + 3 × 4.97 = 17.77

LCL = 𝑥̿ − 3𝑠̅ = 2.86 − 3 × 4.97 = −12.05

xbar Chart

3𝑠̅ 3 × 4.97
UCL = 𝑥̿ + = 2.86 + = 12.57
𝐶4 √𝑛 0.8862√3
3𝑠̅ 3 × 4.97
LCL = 𝑥̿ − = 2.86 − = −6.85
𝐶4 √𝑛 0.8862√3

9
 EWMA, r = 0.5 Chart

𝜎𝑥2 𝑟 4.972 0.5

𝜎𝐴 = √ ( )=√ ( ) = 1.66
𝑛 2−𝑟 3 2 − 0.5

UCL = 𝑥̿ + 3𝜎𝐴 = 2.86 + 3 × 1.66 = 7.83

LCL = 𝑥̿ − 3𝜎𝐴 = 2.86 − 3 × 1.66 = −2.11

EWMA, r = 0.5 Chart

𝜎𝑥2 𝑟 4.972 0.1

𝜎𝐴 = √ ( )=√ ( ) = 0.66
𝑛 2−𝑟 3 2 − 0.1

UCL = 𝑥̿ + 3𝜎𝐴 = 2.86 + 3 × 0.66 = 4.83

LCL = 𝑥̿ − 3𝜎𝐴 = 2.86 − 3 × 0.66 = 0.89

These control limits are shown on the charts below.

Run Chart
16 UCL=17.77 Xbar with n=3
8 UCL=12.57
14
7
12
6
10
5
8
4
6

4 3

2 Grand Mean
2 Grand
0
Mean 1

-2 0
-4 -1
-6
-2
1 1 LCL=-6.85 1 3
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 LCL=-12.05 1 3 5 7 9

EWMA with r = 0.5 EWMA with r = 0.1

4 .5
12 UCL=4.83
4
10
3 .5
8 UCL=7.83
3
6
Grand Mean
2 .5
4
Grand Mean 2
2
1 .5

0 1 LCL=0.89

-2 0 .5
LCL=-2.11
-4 0
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36

10
b- Using the rules from Devor, indicate on the Shewhart 𝑛 = 3 chart where any alarm
points should be.

The points between samples 7 and 12 are alarm points, because they represent a
consistent upward increase of 6 points.

Xbar with n=3

8

6 Steady Increase
5

-1

-2
1 3 5 7 9 11 13

c- The xbar chart and the EWMA 𝑟 = 0.5 chart show different behavior. Looking at each
separately, what would you conclude about the state of control of the process?

Looking at the xbar chart, the process seems to be in statistical control.

Looking at the EWMA r = 0.5 chart, there seems to be a mean shift that occurs between
points 18 and 20. Multiple points after 18 lie under the central line. Hence, the process
seems to be out of control.

d- What accounts for the significantly different appearance of the two charts?

In an EWMA chart, more weight is given on recent measurements, but in an xbar chart,
all readings are equally weighted. EWMA is faster at detecting smaller shifts. Hence, the
two charts show significantly different appearances.

e- The EWMA 𝑟 = 0.1 chart is even more severe. It seems to indicate the process is
starting off very far from target and then settling into the desired value. What is the
effect of a smaller 𝒓 and why would this account for the observed behavior?

A smaller r EWMA provides a stronger filter with tighter control limits. It indicates
significant weighting of the past data and less weight is given on the most recent
measurement. The initial value significantly impacts the initially plotted data. Hence, the
response time is longer.

11
 f- The target value for the process is 0 and the specification window is ± 5°. What is the 𝑪𝒑
and 𝑪𝒑𝒌 for this process? What is the expected quality loss?

USL − LSL 10
𝐶𝑝 = = = 0.335
6𝜎 6 × 4.97

USL − 𝜇 𝜇 − LSL 5 − 2.86 2.86 + 5)

𝐶𝑝𝑘 = min ( , ) = min ( , ) = 0.144
3𝜎 3𝜎 3 × 4.97 3 × 4.97

𝐸[𝑘(𝑥 − 𝑥 ∗ )2 ] = 𝑘𝜎 2 + 𝑘(𝜇 − 𝑥 ∗ )2 = 1 × 4.972 + 1(2.86 − 0)2 = 32.881

g- Assume now that the standard deviation of the process is reduced to 1/3 of the present
value but the mean remains the same. Compare the new 𝐶𝑝 , 𝐶𝑝𝑘 , and the expected loss
to the old ones.

USL − LSL 10
𝐶𝑝,new = = = 1.006
6𝜎 6 × 1.66
USL − 𝜇 𝜇 − LSL 5 − 2.86 2.86 + 5)
𝐶𝑝𝑘,new = min ( , ) = min ( , ) = 0.430
3𝜎 3𝜎 3 × 1.66 3 × 1.66

𝐸[𝑘(𝑥 − 𝑥 ∗ )2 ]new = 𝑘𝜎 2 + 𝑘(𝜇 − 𝑥 ∗ )2 = 1 × 1.662 + 1(2.86 − 0)2 = 10.935

𝐶𝑝 and 𝐶𝑝𝑘 increased 3 times, while the expected loss decreased 3 times.

NB: For the EWMA variable A

𝜎𝑥2 𝑟
𝜎𝐴 = √ ( )
𝑛 2−𝑟

𝐶4 (𝑛 = 3) = 0.8862

12