Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Available
Availableonline
Procedia atatwww.sciencedirect.com
Manufacturing
online 00 (2018) 000–000
www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736

Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
28th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing
28th International ConferenceJune
(FAIM2018), on Flexible Automation
11-14, 2018, and OH,
Columbus, Intelligent
USA Manufacturing
(FAIM2018), June 11-14, 2018, Columbus, OH, USA
Improvement of the Statistical Process Control Certainty in an
Improvement
Manufacturing of the
Engineering Statistical
Society
Automotive Process
International Control
Conference
Manufacturing 2017, Certainty
UnitMESIC in anJune
2017, 28-30
2017, Vigo (Pontevedra),
Automotive Manufacturing Unit Spain
Radu Godinaa, Carina Pimentelb, F. J. G. Silvac, João C. O. Matiasb
Costing Radu
models fora, capacity
Godina optimization
Carina Pimentel b inc,Industry
, F. J. G. Silva João C. O. 4.0: Trade-off
Matias b
a
C-MAST, University of Beira Interior, Portugal
between usedGOVCOPP,
capacity
C-MAST, DEGEIT, and
b
University
a
of Beiraoperational
University of Aveiro,
Interior, Portugal efficiency
Portugal
c
ISEP – School of Engineering, Polytechnic
b
GOVCOPP, of Porto,
DEGEIT,RuaUniversity
Dr. António
of Bernardino de Almeida, 431,4200 Porto, Portugal
Aveiro, Portugal
c
ISEP – School of Engineering, Polytechnic of Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 431,4200 Porto, Portugal
A. Santana , P. Afonso , A. Zanin , R. Wernke
a a,* b b

a
University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
Abstract b
Unochapecó, 89809-000 Chapecó, SC, Brazil
Abstract
To control a process means to make adjustments in order to improve the performance, identify and fix anomalies. The statistical
process
To controlcontrol (SPC)means
a process is a solution
to make developed
adjustmentstoineasily
ordercollect and analyze
to improve data, allowing
the performance, performance
identify monitoring
and fix anomalies. Theas well as
statistical
achieving
process
Abstract sustainable
control (SPC)improvements in quality to
is a solution developed which in collect
easily turn allows increasing
and analyze data,theallowing
profitability. The SPCmonitoring
performance makes it possible
as well asto
monitor
achievingthesustainable
process, identifying
improvements special causes of
in quality variation
which in turnandallows
defining the corresponding
increasing corrective
the profitability. actions.
The SPC The itSPC
makes enables
possible to
the monitoring
monitor
Under the of theidentifying
the process,
concept characteristics
of "Industry of4.0",
special interest,
causes ensuring
of that
variation
production they
and willwill
defining
processes remain within pre-established
thebecorresponding
pushed to corrective limits andThe
actions.
be increasingly indicating when
SPC enables
interconnected,
corrective
the and improvement
monitoring of theon actions should
characteristics be taken. Thethat
focus of will
this remain
study iswithin
to analyze the SPC control chart of an industrial
information based a real time of interest,
basis and, ensuring
necessarily, they
much more efficient. pre-established
In this context,limits and indicating
capacity when
optimization
unit operating
corrective and in the automotive
improvement industry.
actions should Thebe normality
taken. Thetest usedofatthis
focus thisstudy
manufacturing
is to analyze unitthe
is Kolmogorov-Smirnov
SPC control chart of an(K-S). This
industrial
goes beyond the traditional aim of capacity maximization, contributing also for organization’s profitability and value.
test
unit shows
operating thatinifthe
theautomotive
data follows a normal
industry. distribution
The normality testthen
usedthe SPCmanufacturing
at this is valid. However,unit isby increasing the accuracy
Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S).ofThis
the
Indeed,
normality lean amanagement and continuous improvement inapproaches suggest capacity optimization instead of
test showstest that starkly different
if the data followsresult could bedistribution
a normal obtained. Thus,
then the this
SPC paper a comparison
is valid. However,between two
by increasing normality tests
the accuracy isofmade
the
maximization.
and the results
normality test aandThe study of
the consequences
starkly capacity
different result optimization
of could
the Anderson-Darling and
be obtained. Thus, costing
testinare models
analyzed
this is
paper a and an important
discussed.
comparison research topic that deserves
between two normality tests is made
contributions
and the results and fromtheboth the practical
consequences of theand theoretical perspectives.
Anderson-Darling This paper
test are analyzed presents and discusses a mathematical
and discussed.
model
© 2018for Thecapacity
Authors. management based on
Published by Elsevier B.V.different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A generic model has been
© 2018
2018
developed
This
© The
is an
The Authors.
and
open it wasPublished
access
Authors. used to
article
Published by
by Elsevier
analyze
under the CC
Elsevier B.V.
idleBY-NC-ND
capacity and
B.V. to design
license strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/)
value.
This The
Peer-review
is an trade-off
under
open access capacity
responsibility
article under maximization
of the scientific
CC BY-NC-ND vs operational
committee of the
license efficiency
28th FlexibleisAutomation
highlighted andand it is shown
Intelligent
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing
that capacity
Manufacturing
(FAIM2018)
optimization
Peer-review Conference.
might
under
(FAIM2018) Conference. hide operational
responsibility of the inefficiency.
scientific committee of the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing
(FAIM2018)
© Conference.
2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Keywords: Statistical
Peer-review process control;ofAnderson-Darling
under responsibility test; Kolmogorov-Smirnov
the scientific committee of the Manufacturing test;Engineering
Quality improvement; Automotive industry;
Society International Conference
Keywords: Statistical process control; Anderson-Darling test; Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; Quality improvement; Automotive industry;
2017.

1. Introduction
Keywords: Cost Models; ABC; TDABC; Capacity Management; Idle Capacity; Operational Efficiency
1. Introduction
The automotive sector is highly competitive and car manufacturers generally have a complex supply chain [1].
1.The
The Introduction
automotive
automotive sectorisisconsidered
industry highly competitive and car
an oligopoly, whichmanufacturers generally
helps to minimize thehave a complex
effects of price supply chain Car
competition. [1].
The automotive industry is considered an oligopoly, which helps to minimize the effects of
manufacturers have realized that price-based competition does not necessarily lead to an increase in the size of the price competition. Car
The cost of idle
manufacturers havecapacity
realizedis that
a fundamental
price-basedinformation
competition fordoes
companies and theirlead
not necessarily management of extreme
to an increase in theimportance
size of the
in modern production systems. In general, it is defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
in
Thisseveral ways:
is an open accesstons
articleofunder
production, available
the CC BY-NC-ND
2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
hours
license of manufacturing, etc. The management of the idle capacity
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
* Paulo
This is anAfonso.
Peer-review under
open Tel.:
access +351 253
responsibility
article 510
of
under the761;
the CC fax: +351
scientific 253license
604of741
committee
BY-NC-ND the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing (FAIM2018)
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
E-mail
Conference.address: psafonso@dps.uminho.pt
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing (FAIM2018)
Conference.
2351-9789
2351-9789©©2017
2018TheTheAuthors.
Authors.Published by Elsevier
Published B.V. B.V.
by Elsevier
Peer-review underaccess
This is an open responsibility
article of the scientific
under committee oflicense
the CC BY-NC-ND the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing
(FAIM2018) Conference.
10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.123
730 Radu Godina et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736
2 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

market. Historically, they have tried to avoid price-based competition, but more recently, competition has intensified
- promotions, preferred and long-term financing have helped attract customers, but it has also had the effect of
increasing pressure on margins [2].
The automotive sector is an economic model in transition: competition from low-cost brands; environmental
requirements that lead to new technological directions [3]; new expectations from consumers who, while seeking a
high level of safety, are waiting for cheaper and more energy-efficient vehicles and a carbon-free vehicle program
requiring new resources and skills [4].
There are therefore, on the one hand, stakes around the product: due to the evolution linked to newly asserted
consumption needs and, on the other hand, issues around the production process in order to remain competitive [5]
and the fact that the increasingly sophisticated technology is poorly combined with current production methods.
Quality is therefore a major issue for the entire automotive industry [6]: manufacturers, major equipment
manufacturers and subcontractors. Quality plays a role in companies’ competitiveness on two counts, on the one
hand, by reducing production costs (by reducing scrap, for example) and, on the other hand, by improving the
quality image of a company in order to meet the expectations of its customers [7].
Quality, which was initially limited to examining the compliance of technical specifications of industrial products
with standards, has been enriched, over the years, by the notions of customer service and organizational efficiency
[8]. Methods and tools for improving industrial performance enable companies to introduce a dynamic and a culture
of continuous improvement both technically and organizationally, which are essential for recording the company's
performance in the long term [9].
It is a culture of quality and rigor, based on shared values, which must be established to mobilize all staff and thus
improve the effectiveness of the organization's operations to achieve sustainable results [10]. Regardless of the size
and activity of the structure (public or private), it is indeed the meaning that is given to the action of the organization
and the management of skills that is essential [11].
In the design of their products, the automotive industry is confronted with the implementation of procedures
allowing the products’ quality control and the adequacy of the production processes to the legal regulations in force
with regard to the requirements and conformity of products [12]. The implementation of such procedures requires in-
depth knowledge of the different ways on how to acquire data, processing them continuously and returning the
results to all stakeholders in a precise, simple and structured way [13].
The quality of a product or service is its ability to meet the needs of users, it is easy for a craftsman or a trader to
directly perceive the satisfaction of the customer and improve the quality of its product or its service. But in the case
of a complex production organization, the operators are not in direct contact with the customer and cannot perceive
the expected quality. So, an intermediate step is needed which is the transformation of customer needs into
specifications, the production departments must then create the products according to the specifications. But if it is
assumed that any system is not reliable it is necessary to ensure that the products (services) are properly compliant
and for this purpose a quality verification is required [14].
Product control can be executed at the end or during the process. It can be done systematically (control of all
parts) or statistically, by taking and verifying samples. When the number of operations on a product is important the
detection of the defect is often too late and it is difficult to perform a corrective action on the process to eliminate the
defect. Control is an operation that is expensive and does not add value. It is therefore advantageous to reduce the
number of parts to be controlled without greatly reducing the reliability. This is what statistics allow by giving the
possibility of estimating the total population from samples [15].
By collect data to solve a problem, to understand a series of events or to understand a situation in a manufacturing
process, variations can always be seen. The numbers are not exactly the same from one point to another or from one
moment to another; they show differences. If these numbers are recorded on a sheet of graph paper to study the
variations, an irregular randomized profile can always be seen – the variability. The variability of the process is often
the main source of quality problems in factories. This variability is often due to factors that are not abnormal per se
for the unit of production, but are generally not diagnosed as they should be [16].
The term Statistical Process Control (SPC) is generally used in industrial processes (although it can also refer to
services or other activities) and refers to statistics used to monitor and improve the quality of the respective
operations. By collecting information at different stages of the process and performing statistical analyzes on this
information, the SPC engineer is able to make the right decisions (often preventive actions) to ensure that the overall
 Radu Godina et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736 731
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 3

process remains under control and that the product meets the desired specifications. SPC involves following the
processes, identifying problem areas, recommending methods to reduce variation (dispersion) and verify that they
work, optimize the process, test the reliability of parts, and perform other analytical operations [17]–[19].
The basic goals of the SPC are monitoring of variability and control chart control and the assessment of process
capability and it uses relatively simple statistical control methods, such as quality control charts, capability analysis,
repeatability/reproducibility and reliability analysis [20]. However, specialized experimental methods (Experimental
Plans) and other advanced statistical techniques are often an integral part of SPC systems [21]. Modern, efficient
SPC systems integrate real-time data access with features to document and respond to online quality control data,
efficient and centralized quality control data warehousing, and groupware capabilities for quality engineers to share
their data and reports [22].
The SPC consists in taking samples and verifying that the mean, the range or the standard deviation is in the
confidence interval represented by limits on a control graph called a control chart [23]. A common control chart
usually contains two graphs, one consigned to the average and one to the range, both with their respective graphical
limits. It also contains the values of the average and the extent of the sample. The samples are taken periodically
with a fixed sample size and the operator calculates the mean and the range (maximum value - minimum value) of
the sample. These two values are the reported on each of the two graphs. The set of values reported must fall
between two limits: lower control limit and higher control limit [16].
The analysis of the productions on a machine shows that, in the absence of maladjustment the distribution of
products follows a bell curve or normal distribution. However, this is not always true [20]. Therefore, the control
chart needs to have a normality test with the intent to examine if the collected samples follow a normal distribution,
more specifically, data are tested against the null hypothesis that it is normally distributed. That is why in this paper
a case study is made of an industrial unit where the normality test of the official SPC control chart is replaced by the
Anderson-Darling test. The purpose of this switch is to observe weather by increasing the accuracy of the normality
test a starkly different result could be obtained since the Anderson-Darling test is more powerful and it could give a
different answer by substituting the K-S test [24]. The overall goal is to make a comparison between these two
normality tests and to analyze the results and the consequences of changing the control chart to the Anderson-
Darling test.
The organization of this paper is as follows. In section 2 the used nonparametric tests in this study are addressed
with detail. In section 3 the depiction of the selected industrial unit and the description of the process are addressed.
The result analysis and discussion is found in section 4. Finally, the concluding remarks of this study can be found in
section 5.

2. Nonparametric tests

The term "nonparametric test" is due to the fact that it is not necessary to specify the distribution of the population
from which the sample originates (up to now, in most cases, we have assumed that such population had a normal or
at least approximately normal) [25]. Non-parametric methods use procedures that are applicable regardless of
population distribution; at most, some hypotheses such as symmetry or continuity of distribution are sometimes
required. Some of these methods can be applied to qualitative data (recall that, except for confidence intervals and
tests for proportions, all procedures studied so far apply only to quantitative data). Another situation in which
parametric tests are useful is that in which the sample size is very small and the exact population distribution is
unknown [26].

2.1. Kolmogorov–Smirnov test

The K-S test is a method of statistical analysis that allows one to compare a sample of data and a theoretical
distribution (or two samples of data) in order to verify the following statistical hypothesis: if a sample comes from a
population with a specific distribution (or the hypothesis that both samples come from the same population) [27].
An interesting feature of this method is that it does not require the prior, and more or less arbitrary, division of
data into frequency classes; defining the latter in a different way is obviously obtained, from the method of χ 2,
different results for the same samples. The K-S tests are based on the relative cumulative frequency of the data, and
732 Radu Godina et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736
4 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

on the analogous concept of distribution function of a continuous variable [28]. For the compatibility between a
sample and a hypothetical law that is supposed to describe its population of origin, and connected to a distribution
function Φ(x), we must compare the relative cumulative frequency F(x) of the sample with Φ(x) to obtain the
absolute value of the maximum difference between them, as the following equation indicates:
= 
max F ( x ) −  ( x )  (1)
It can be shown that, if the hypothesis to be verified were true, the probability of randomly obtaining a value of δ
not less than a prefixed quantity (positive) δ0 would be given by
Pr (   0 ) = FKS ( 0 ) (2)
where FKS is represented by the series:


( x ) 2 (−1)k −1 e−2 k x
2 2
FKS = (3)
k =1

where δ′0 is:

 0.11 
 0  N + 0.12 +
= 0 (4)
 N 

This test, however, shows some significant disadvantages since it can only by applied to continuous distributions.
It is also more likely to be more sensitive close to the center of the distribution and less at the tails. Another
disadvantage is that the distribution has to be completely defined. Namely, the critical region of the K-S test no
longer remains valid if from the data – the scale, location, and shape specifications are estimated.

2.2. Anderson-Darling test

The Anderson-Darling test takes its name from the authors Theodore Wilbur Anderson and Donald Darling, who
developed it in 1952, and is basically a modification of the Cramer-Von Mises test that differs from it due to the fact
that it loses weight to the tails of distribution [29]. Unlike the Cramer-Von Mises which is free from distributions, the
Anderson-Darling test makes use of a specific theoretical distribution in the calculation of critical values, therefore it is
more sensitive than the previous one; a drawback of this test is that critical values must be calculated for each specific
distribution [30]. In this test the distance between F(x) and Fn(x) is calculated by means of:

n  Fn( x ) − F( x )  ( x )dF( x )
2
(5)
−

which is an average of the quadratic distance, weighted by:

F(x)(1 − F(x))
−1
(x)
= (6)
we note that if the latter is equal to 1 we reduce to the statistics 𝑛𝑛ω 2 while in the general case the complete formula
is as follows:
Fn(x ) − F(x ) dF( x )
 2

 [F(x)(1 − F(x)]
−
(7)

Let the following equation:

X1  X2  ...  Xn (8)
be the ordered observations of a sample of number n, the Anderson-Darling statistic is calculated as:
AD =−n − S (9)
where:
n
2i − 1
=S 
i =1 n
[ln(( Xi )) + ln(1 − ( Xn + 1−i ))] (10)
 Radu Godina et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736 733
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 5

3. Process Description

The target of this study is an industrial unit located in Portugal and is part of automotive industry. There are two
working shifts at this industrial unit. Each shift has a total of 8 hours. This factory is an Original Equipment
Manufacturer (OEM) and produces products with a variety of sheet-metal forming manufacturing processes. The
leading effort of this factory is a certain manufacturing process that produces the most popular item. For its
production, this process contains both sections of manual and automatic welding of a small number of assemblies, it
also contains a step where the item’s surface is treated and painted. The process of fabrication of each item complies
with a specific procedure, as every manufactured item requires an individual tool.
By trying to achieve the highest quality possible, at different levels of the existing processes at the studied
industrial unit several SPC tools were employed. Due to the certification and client requirements statistical
techniques are demanded in the structure of these processes since the quality management system procedures have to
include statistical techniques in the essential steps of the process. For the inspection and measurement of dimensions
a selection of a sample of five pieces per shift was designated as the appropriate recording frequency since the
measurement of the main dimensions is made through a coordinate measuring machine (CMM), which is time
consuming. The mean and the variance of the recorded dimension are then documented in a control chart. The
mechanical dimension studied in this paper is the length of a small welded tube of 89.8 mm with a superior and
inferior tolerance of 0.1 mm. A total of fifty samples were recorded and measured for this study and plotted into the
control chart. The overall results of the mean (or average) and variance plot from the control chart can be seen in
Fig. 1.
The tool that exists in the control chart projected to recognize major detachments from a normal distribution is the
K–S test. Applying this tool to the abovementioned recorded data proved that the analyzed data is following a
normal distribution. This outcome can be seen in Fig. 2 and 3, respectively, by observing the normal probability plot
and the K-S test.

Fig. 1. Variables control chart of a) mean and b) range.

734 Radu Godina et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736
6 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

Fig. 2. The results of the normal probability plot.

Fig. 3. The results of the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test.

4. Result Analysis

Once the entire recordings of the data were made from every considered sample for this study, their statistical
analysis was made from the control chart. For this purpose the capability index (Cpk) was calculated as in [31]. The
lowest Cpk accepted in the field of quality for a given process is 1.33 [23] and the results achieved can be seen in
Fig. 4. These results show that such a condition is correctly fulfilled. In addition, by analyzing the obtained results in
Figs. 1-4, one can find that every point is under control and the process is capable.
It has been demonstrated in the research community that when many normality tests are compared, the Anderson-
Darling test is more powerful than K-S, which in turn is the least powerful test among the ones that were compared
[32]. As seen in [30] and since the p-value is characterized as the probability of achieving a result equal to or more
than what was observed. By putting the same sample through the Anderson-Darling statistical test, the results show
that the p-value is 0,081. Therefore, the p-value is higher than 0.05, meaning that the null hypothesis is not rejected
and that the recorded data is originated from a normally distributed population, as can be observed in Fig. 4.
Therefore, the data comes from a normal distribution.
 Radu Godina et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736 735
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 7

Fig. 4. The results of the Anderson-Darling test.

The results given by the Anderson-Darling confirmed as well that the recorded data follows a normal distribution.
Consequently, such an outcome indicates that the studied process is under tighter control. A positive result from a
more powerful nonparametric test gives the quality engineer a reinforced confidence in the control chart used at the
industrial unit since it conveys the information that the analyzed data follows a normal distribution with a higher
exactitude. This result of the study enables the industrial unit to strengthen the control charts presently at their
disposal. As a consequence, it could raise the odds to notice more nonconformities.

5. Conclusions

The focus of this study was to analyze the SPC control chart of an industrial unit operating in the automotive
industry. The normality test used at this manufacturing unit is Kolmogorov-Smirnov. This test showed that if the
data follows a normal distribution then the SPC is valid. However, by increasing the accuracy of the normality test a
starkly different result could be obtained. Thus, in this paper a comparison between two normality tests was made
and the results and the consequences of the Anderson-Darling test were analyzed and discussed. The Anderson-
Darling confirmed as well that the recorded data follows a normal distribution. Consequently, such an outcome
indicates that the studied process is under tighter control. A positive result from a more powerful nonparametric test
gives the quality engineer a reinforced confidence in the control chart used at the industrial unit since it allows to
support with a higher exactitude that the analyzed data follows a normal distribution.

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by the project Centro-01-0145-FEDER-000017 - EMaDeS - Energy, Materials and
Sustainable Development, co-financed by the Portugal 2020 Program (PT 2020), within the Regional Operational
Program of the Centre (CENTRO 2020) and the European Union through the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF). The authors wish to thank the opportunity and financial support that permitted to carry on this
project.

References

[1] R. J. S. Costa, F. J. G. Silva, and R. D. S. G. Campilho, “A novel concept of agile assembly machine for sets applied in the automotive
industry,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., vol. 91, no. 9–12, pp. 4043–4054, Aug. 2017.
[2] M. Gobetto, Operations Management in Automotive Industries: From Industrial Strategies to Production Resources Management, Through
the Industrialization Process and Supply Chain to Pursue Value Creation. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
[3] I. Antoniolli, P. Guariente, T. Pereira, L. P. Ferreira, and F. J. G. Silva, “Standardization and optimization of an automotive components
production line,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 13, pp. 1120–1127, Jan. 2017.
736 Radu Godina et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 729–736
8 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

[4] P. Nieuwenhuis and P. Wells, The Global Automotive Industry. John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
[5] W. F. S. Araújo, F. J. G. Silva, R. D. S. G. Campilho, and J. A. Matos, “Manufacturing cushions and suspension mats for vehicle seats: a
novel cell concept,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., vol. 90, no. 5–8, pp. 1539–1545, May 2017.
[6] B. Barbosa, M. T. Pereira, F. J. G. Silva, and R. D. S. G. Campilho, “Solving Quality Problems in Tyre Production Preparation Process: A
Practical Approach,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 11, pp. 1239–1246, Jan. 2017.
[7] J. A. Garza-Reyes, E. M. Ates, and V. Kumar, “Measuring lean readiness through the understanding of quality practices in the Turkish
automotive suppliers industry,” Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag., vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 1092–1112, Oct. 2015.
[8] M. J. R. Costa, R. M. Gouveia, F. J. G. Silva, and R. D. S. G. Campilho, “How to solve quality problems by advanced fully-automated
manufacturing systems,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., pp. 1–23, Mar. 2017.
[9] P. Bacoup, C. Michel, G. Habchi, and M. Pralus, “From a Quality Management System (QMS) to a Lean Quality Management System
(LQMS),” TQM J., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 20–42, 2018.
[10] T. Costa, F. J. G. Silva, and L. Pinto Ferreira, “Improve the extrusion process in tire production using Six Sigma methodology,” Procedia
Manuf., vol. 13, pp. 1104–1111, Jan. 2017.
[11] S. Klute-Wenig, S. Rebsch, H. Holzmüller, and R. Refflinghaus, “Improving the selection of international distribution partners by using
quality management methods,” Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci., vol. 9, no. 3/4, pp. 241–250, Jul. 2017.
[12] C. G. Lixandru, “Supplier Quality Management for Component Introduction in the Automotive Industry,” Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol.
221, pp. 423–432, Jun. 2016.
[13] R. Roy, P. Souchoroukov, and E. Shehab, “Detailed cost estimating in the automotive industry: Data and information requirements,” Int. J.
Prod. Econ., vol. 133, no. 2, pp. 694–707, Oct. 2011.
[14] C.-T. Su, Quality Engineering: Off-Line Methods and Applications. CRC Press, 2016.
[15] A. F. Siegel, “Chapter 18 - Quality Control: Recognizing and Managing Variation,” in Practical Business Statistics (Seventh Edition),
Academic Press, 2016, pp. 525–545.
[16] D. C. Montgomery, Statistical Quality Control, 7th Edition. Wiley, 2012.
[17] F. Rossi and V. Mirtchev, “Chapter 7 - Statistical Process Control (SPC),” in Statistics for Food Scientists, San Diego: Academic Press,
2016, pp. 71–81.
[18] R. Kent, “Chapter 5 - Statistical process control (SPC),” in Quality Management in Plastics Processing, Elsevier, 2016, pp. 125–182.
[19] A. Azizi, “Evaluation Improvement of Production Productivity Performance using Statistical Process Control, Overall Equipment
Efficiency, and Autonomous Maintenance,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 2, pp. 186–190, Jan. 2015.
[20] R. Godina, E. M. G. Rodrigues, and J. C. O. Matias, “An Alternative Test of Normality for Improving SPC in a Portuguese Automotive
SME,” in Closing the Gap Between Practice and Research in Industrial Engineering, Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018.
[21] D. S. Vicentin, B. B. Silva, I. Piccirillo, F. C. Bueno, and P. C. Oprime, “Monitoring process control chart with finite mixture probability
distribution: An application in manufacture industry,” Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 335–353, Dec. 2017.
[22] M. Elg, J. Olsson, and J. J. Dahlgaard, “Implementing statistical process control: an organizational perspective,” Int. J. Qual. Reliab.
Manag., vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 545–560, Jun. 2008.
[23] R. Godina, J. C. O. Matias, and S. Azevedo, “Quality Improvement With Statistical Process Control in the Automotive Industry,” Int. J.
Ind. Eng. Manag., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2016.
[24] J. Zhang, “Powerful goodness-of-fit tests based on the likelihood ratio,” J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol., vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 281–294,
May 2002.
[25] N. R. Smalheiser, “Chapter 12 - Nonparametric Tests,” in Data Literacy, Academic Press, 2017, pp. 157–167.
[26] S. M. Ross, “Chapter 14 - Nonparametric Hypotheses Tests,” in Introductory Statistics (Fourth edition), Oxford: Academic Press, 2017, pp.
621–666.
[27] A. P. Bradley, “ROC curve equivalence using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test,” Pattern Recognit. Lett., vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 470–475, Apr.
2013.
[28] S. M. Ross, Introduction to Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. Academic Press, 2014.
[29] J.-H. Heo, H. Shin, W. Nam, J. Om, and C. Jeong, “Approximation of modified Anderson–Darling test statistics for extreme value
distributions with unknown shape parameter,” J. Hydrol., vol. 499, pp. 41–49, Aug. 2013.
[30] F. P. Miller, A. F. Vandome, and J. McBrewster, Anderson-Darling Test. International Book Marketing Service Limited, 2011.
[31] E. Álvarez, P. J. Moya-Férnandez, F. J. Blanco-Encomienda, and J. F. Muñoz, “Methodological insights for industrial quality control
management: The impact of various estimators of the standard deviation on the process capability index,” J. King Saud Univ. - Sci., vol. 27,
no. 3, pp. 271–277, Jul. 2015.
[32] B. W. Yap and C. H. Sim, “Comparisons of various types of normality tests,” J. Stat. Comput. Simul., vol. 81, no. 12, pp. 2141–2155, Dec.
2011.