Home / Lean Six Sigma / SPC & process capability
When the result is pass/fail or a defect count, capability is measured by the rate: how much comes out defective, how sure you are, and whether you can claim the process meets the customer target.
Pre-sizing and estimating tool: results do not replace design, calculations or reports signed by a licensed professional, nor verification against the applicable codes and standards.
Proportion defective of each sample, center line and 3σ limits (stepped when the size varies). Red points fail a test; the number above is the test.
Estimate recomputed at each sample, with confidence bounds. When the line levels off, there are enough samples.
Points scattered at random around the mean show that the rate does not depend on sample size; the funnel marks the 3σ limits.
Distribution of the rate per sample. In a capable process almost all bars are left of the target.
Confidence bounds of the rate as the total inspected grows, at the current rate. Where the upper bound crosses the target, the sample starts to prove the process meets it.
Estimated rate applied to annual production, with the confidence-interval range.
Rate, limits and z of each sample; z = distance from the center line in standard deviations.
Take this page’s results to another calculator with the fields already filled in.
The calculation report gathers this page's inputs, results, equations, assumptions and references, with fields for project, engineer and revision. The full report also includes the charts and interpretations, in color. In the print dialog, choose Save as PDF.
It measures how much a process produces out of specification when the result is not a continuous measurement but pass/fail (binomial) or a defect count (Poisson). Instead of Cpk you use % defective, PPM, process Z or defects per unit, always with a confidence interval.
Binomial when each part is classed as good or defective and you know how many were inspected. Poisson when you count defects and one unit can have several: bubbles per panel, flaws per meter of weld, errors per invoice. If a part with 3 defects counts as 1 defective, it is binomial.
It is the distance, in standard deviations of the normal curve, that would leave the same proportion defective in the tail: 2.3% equals Z = 2; 0.135%, Z = 3. It lets you compare an attribute process with the Cpk of a variables process (Cpk ≈ Z/3 for a centered, one-sided process).
Because the estimate comes from a sample. If the upper confidence bound exceeds the target, the true rate may still be above it. The "How much to inspect" chart shows how many parts, at the current rate, would make the proof possible.
The reference assistant asks for at least 25 samples, each with n·p̄ of at least 0.5 (in the connector example, at 2.3% defective, at least 22 parts per sample). With very low rates, combine periods or use the G chart for rare events.
It compares the variation of rates between samples with what the binomial or Poisson predicts. Above 130%, samples vary more than the model says (common with samples of thousands of parts) and the P or U chart gives false alarms: use the Laney P′ or U′ chart.
The formulas are those published for the binomial and Poisson capability reports: exact Clopper-Pearson interval via the F distribution and exact Poisson via chi-square. With 511 defectives in 5,342 items, the page gives 9.57% (CI 8.79% to 10.39%), 95,657 PPM and Z 1.31, the same figures as the published unanswered-calls example.
Important notice: Indus Metrics tools produce estimates and pre-sizing results from the data you enter and from published engineering methods. They do not replace design, calculations or reports signed by a licensed professional engineer (PE), nor verification against the applicable codes, standards and regulations, such as OSHA rules and the ASME codes. Material and fuel properties vary: check manufacturer data or your own process analyses before deciding. By using this site you agree to the Terms of Use.
© 2026 Indus Metrics. Found an error? Write to contato@seudominio.com.