ANSI/ASQ Z1.9 Sampling Standard

Hey there. I was a very infrequent poster at Elsmar, but I found it to be the best resource for QC questions that crop up in my job from time to time. I was really bummed to see that it shut down. Foudn out on the same day that I found out David Bowie died. Double whammy...

II do have a few questions regarding ANSI/ASQ Z1.9, but I wasn't sure where to put them, so I guess I'll put the question here and you guys tell me where it goes (or help me here if you wish).

I have an acceptance sampling plan by variables in use now. Everything was going great... until I had a lot come back as non-conforming. Looking at the data, out of 150 samples (lot size = 80,000 pcs), there was a single outlier that threw off the mean and standard deviation enough that it meant a lot non-conformance.

I really don't want to scrap an entire 80,000 unit lot based on a single outlier. I also don't want to accept a lot if there's even 1% bad parts. AQL = 0.65, Normal, General Inspection Level II (Code = M). What is the general approach to investigating and re-submitting the lot? Do I move to a Tightened Inspection? How does that work? Do I change the AQL? Can you even re-submit the lot like this at all?

Any help appreciated. Thanks.

 

I'd imagine it depends on:
a) the nature of the product (risks involved)
b) the nature of your system (how much control you have)

If the risk of accepting non-conforming product is really high, or if you don't have much control of the system (e.g. perhaps upper management, or customers push strict adherence to ANSI/ASQ Z1.9), then your hands may be tied.

If, on the other hand, you can affect the system use this as an opportunity to modify the system, or make allowances for acceptance of certain product, under certain conditions, base on your own risk-assessment. Because, at the end of the day, it boils down to: what level of confidence do YOU have?

If you suspect that there are a tiny number of outliers, one suggestion (again, assuming no strict allegiance to ANSI/ASQ, and appropriate risk-consideration), might be to, divide the 80000pcs into separate "receiving batches" (perhaps 3 sets of 20000), and perform the same exercise on each.

 

Thank you, Mark. Are you saying that in ANSI Z1.9 (or MIL-STD-414) there's no typical carve-out or procedure for re-submitting or re-sampling the non conforming lot?

 

Vaguely, I remember few years back, I faced the similar scenario on one of product. We had only one defect for AQL level 2.0, but then I used tightened inspection to confirm if the team had any similar defects. This helped us to estimate and give us more brief idea on to accept the lot or not. But, at the end of the day, as Mark said it depends on the risk and urgency to get out the good product of the door.

 

Mean = 90.36, STDEV = 2.350. The outlier was 105.66. That's over 6.5 Sigma to one side. Next highest value was 93.23. Upper limit is 95.25. Sure looks like an outlier to me.

We rechecked the measurement, and it's legit. This same sample also failed the upper limit on a separate metric, but didn't result in a non-compliance on that metric.

 

IMHO , in your investigation mode also identify if possible from Batch records is there any change and perform a RCA to rule out that its not Process /Rawmaterial/Equiment/Measurement/Personnel related!

 

Within MIL-STD-414, there were provisions allowing for utilizing attribute sampling (MIL-STD-105) when the sample failed the variable acceptance. I don't remember all the details but from a quick look it seems to be arround sections A9.3 and A9.4 (page #3). I don't know if there are similar provisions within Z1.9 (I don't have a copy at the moment).

As an aside, more modern plans (MIL-STD-1916 or ISO 21247) don't allow for "reresting/reverting" to attribute when you fail variable.

David

 

Very interesting DavidD. Here's what MIL-STD-414 says in Section A9.2.2:

A9.2.2 Mixed Variables-Attributes Inspection
Mixed variables-attributes inspection is inspection of a sample by attributes, in addition to inspection by variables already made of a previous sample, before a decision as to acceptability or rejectability of a lot can be made.

Here's what Z1.9 says in A2.5:

A2.5 Mixed Variables-Attributes Inspection: Mixed variables-attributes inspection is inspection of a sample by attributes, in addition to inspection by variables already made of a previous sample from the lot, before a decision as to acceptability or rejectability of a lot can be made.

So there is a carve-out in MIL-STD-414 and Z.19 to convert to a MIL-STD-105E or Z1.4 plan (with an increase in sample size, obviously) as a "re-submission" of the lot.

 

Another question: If I am switching to Tightened Inspection, how do I execute that? I couldn't find an example of tightened inspection in Z1.9. I am using Table B-3 (Double Specification Limit, Variability Unknown. Previously, under Normal Inspection, I was Sample Code N, AQL = 0.65, M = 1.42. What changes when I go to Tightened?

 

I don't recall having alot of personal experience with switching w/ Z1.9 or 414 but taking a quick look, it appears that 414 uses a separate AQL scale at the bottom of the charts for tightened. In effect, what would have been done with an 0.65 AQL for normal now shifts a column to the left and uses the 0.40 AQL requirements (I'm looking at table B-3 on page 45 of MIL-STD-414).

David

 

you might like to take a look at this site (I'm not affiliated)
http://www.sqconline.com/