• Editorial Board +
• For Contributors +
• Journal Search +
Journal Search Engine
ISSN : 1598-7248 (Print)
ISSN : 2234-6473 (Online)
Industrial Engineering & Management Systems Vol.21 No.2 pp.345-354
DOI : https://doi.org/10.7232/iems.2022.21.2.345

# Development of New Control Charts to Monitor Product Failure Times with Normal and Log Normal Distributions

Ahmad Kultur Hia*, Akhmetova Gulmira, Nurpeiis Gulshat Sakenkyzy, Kenzhegaliyeva Zita, Muneam Hussein Ali, Ghaffar Ahmad Hussein, A. Heri Iswanto, Dedy Achmad Kurniady, Dani Hidayatuloh
STIE Pertiwi University, Bekasi, Indonesia
Dosmukhamedov Atyrau University, Atyrau, Kazakhstan
Atyrau Institute of engineering and Humanities, Atyrau, Kazakhstan
Dosmukhamedov Atyrau University, Atyrau, Kazakhstan
Scientific Research Center, Al-Ayen University, Thi-Qar, Iraq
SKM, MARS, Public Health Department, Faculty of Health Science, University of Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta, Indonesia
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
March 2, 2022 ; March 20, 2022 ; March 21, 2022

## Abstract

Reliability is referred to as quality over time and one of the dimensions of quality. Improving product reliability is one of the major concerns in manufacturing and service processes that can be achieved by applying statistical process control. Statistical control chart is a process monitoring tool that is widely used in the manufacturing industry and can be used to monitor the failure process. The development of control charts for this purpose is one of the topics of interest to researchers in the field of reliability. However, research in this area has been limited to the development of control charts for separate monitoring of statistical indicators. In the present study, a new control chart will be proposed to monitor failure times and product reliability. The purpose of this chart is to simultaneously monitor various parameters of failure time distribution. For this purpose, in this research, normal distribution and normal log are investigated.

## 1. INTRODUCTION

Reliability in quality, as one of the most significant aspects of product/service quality assurance, has long been a universal challenge and will remain so in the 21st century (Qazani et al., 2019;Rjoub et al., 2017;Singh, 2021;Afanasyev et al., 2021). Indeed, because of the increasing complexity of manufacturing systems, the cost of product warranty is increasing (Singh and Dhamija, 2019;Ab Yajid, 2020). Low reliability severely affects the bottom line of business and hinders their ability to gain and maintain market share (Yousif et al., 2020). Therefore, in order to achieve continuous market presence and a lasting brand, it is crucial for businesses to alleviate the concerns of customers about whether their products will work as intended over a certain period of time (Azzawi, 2021;Zainal et al., 2021;Haq et al., 2021). Using any system without due attention to its reliability may increase the likelihood of sudden failures. In many industries (e.g. aircraft manufacturing), such failure can have profound consequences in terms of economic performance, loss of life, political implications, sense of safety, and loss of prestige (Mitra and Khan, 2021). For example, the Chernobyl incident in 1986 killed 31 employees, causes serious illness in 200 people, and caused economic losses to the tune of about three billion dollars. The explosion of Challenger spacecraft in the same year, the failure of shuttle spacecraft in 2003, the repeated oil spills off the coast of the United States, the more recent explosion of the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, and many smaller incidents that occur every year around the world all highlight the importance of the subject of system reliability and safety (O’Connor and Kleyner, 2012). For a product to have the specifications desired by the customer, it must be produced by a stable or reproducible process. In other words, the production process must have minimum variability within the target range (Dan et al., 2021;Josiah et al., 2021).

In the majority of aforementioned control charting schemes, reliability assessments are performed through separate monitoring of variables of failure time distributions and plotting them between statistical control limits. This study aims to contribute to the simultaneous monitoring of these variables. The paper present new control charts for reliability monitoring in cases where failure times follow normal and log-normal distributions. These charts are plotted such that one can determine whether the process is in control or out of control based on the mean and standard deviation of failure times. After the simulation, we assess the validity of the proposed charts in terms of average run length (ARL).

## 2. METHODOLOGY

A normal distribution is a two-parameter distribution with parameters (μ, σ), where μ is the mean and σ is the standard deviation. The probability density function and the cumulative distribution function of this distribution are as follows (Mitra and Khan, 2021):

$f ( t ) = 1 2 πσ e − 1 2 ( t − μ σ ) 2$
(1)

$μ ∈ ( − ∞ , + ∞ ) , σ > 0 , t ∈ ( − ∞ , + ∞ ) F ( t ) = ∫ − ∞ t 1 σ 2 π exp [ − 1 2 ( τ − μ σ ) 2 ] dτ$
(2)

In many practical situations, failure rate of components or parts can be described by a normal distribution. For example, most mechanical components that are exposed to periodic and repetitive loads exhibit normally distributed failure rates because of fatigue (O’Connor and Kleyner, 2012). Another important distribution in the field of failure time modeling is the log-normal distribution. This distribution is commonly used to model the failure times of reliability tests. The log-normal distribution is closely related to the normal distribution. If T follows the log-normal distribution, then will follow the normal distribution.

Because of this relationship, log-normal failure times can be easily converted to normal failure times. Therefore, in the following, the control chart is developed for normal distribution. To monitor log-normal failure times, we first convert them to normal.

Considering the extensive use of this function in reliability and failure probability calculations, we can convert the normal distribution of interest into the standard normal form by changing the variable $z = ( x − μ ) / σ$. Essentially, the standard normal distribution is the same as the normal distribution but with parameters (μ = 0, σ = 1). The probability distribution function and the cumulative distribution function of this distribution are as follows (Mitra and Khan, 2021):

$ϕ ( z ) = 1 2 π exp ( − z 2 2 )$
(3)

$Φ ( z ) = ∫ − ∞ z 1 2 π e z 2 2 dz$
(4)

### 2.1 Development of Normal Distribution Control Charts

In this section, we try to develop a control chart based on the mean and standard deviation of failure times using the logic outlined below. This chart will have an acceptance region and a rejection region. If the mean and standard deviation of the failure times are within the acceptance region, then there is no evidence of deviation in the distribution of failure times. Otherwise, the distribution of failure times may be deviated. Suppose variable X follows the normal distribution with mean μ and standard deviation σ and the distribution parameters are known ( X~ N(μ,σ2) ).

LSL and USL are the lower and upper specification limits of the normal distribution chart, and θ is the type-1 error. These parameters are plotted in Figure 1.

If f(x) is the probability density function and F(x) is the cumulative distribution function of the normal distribution, we have:

$∫ LSL USL f(x)dx = 1 − θ$
(5)

$P ( LSL < f ( x ) < U S L ) = 1 − θ$
(6)

The parameter θ (type-1 error) is given by:

$θ = 1 − ∫ LSL USL 1 σ 2 π e − 1 2 ( t − μ σ ) 2 dt$
(7)

$θ = Φ ( LSL − μ σ ) + 1 − Φ ( USL − μ σ )$
(8)

where Φ is the standard normal cumulative distribution function. If μ and σ are independent, each given amount of nonconformance or error (θ) can be produced from an infinite number of (μ, σ) combinations that satisfy the following condition.

$F ( USL ) − F ( LSL ) = 1 − θ$
(9)

In this equation, if there is a shift in mean (standard deviation), one can find a standard deviation (mean) that would produce the same θ. In other words, as long as the shift in one of the parameters of the failure time distribution coincides with an appropriate change in the other parameter, the process can still be considered in-control. In Figure 2, this chart is plotted for the case where $θ = 0.05 , USL = 3 , LSL = 2.2$.

In Figure 2, the points positioned on the curve have a nonconformance of θ, the points below the curve have a nonconformance of less than θ, and the points above the curve have a nonconformance of greater than θ. Therefore, if the mean and standard deviation of failure times are such that the combination falls below the curve, it can be concluded that failure times have a favorable distribution. Now, we try to express this chart in the form of specific formulations. As shown Figure 3, it is assumed that the edges have a fixed slope.

To obtain the equation of the line , we consider a special case where the mean of failure times is such that the probability of failure times being greater than USL is almost zero. Figure 4 shows an example of this situation.

In Figure 4, θ is given by:

$θ = P ( X ≤ LSL ) = P ( U ≤ LSL − μ σ )$
(10)

where has a normal distribution with zero mean and unit variance. Now, we try to use Equation (10) to determine the equation of the line between μ and σ. After applying a few simple mathematical operations on Equation (10), we arrive at:

$σ = − 1 Φ − 1 ( θ ) . μ + LSL Φ − 1 ( θ )$
(11)

According to Equation (11), the slope m1 is:

$m 1 = 1 Φ − 1 ( θ )$
(12)

Similarly, to obtain the equation of the other edge line, we consider a special case the probability of failure times being less than LSL is almost zero. In this case, we will have:

$θ = P ( X ≥ USL ) = P ( U ≥ USL − μ σ )$
(13)

where follows a normal distribution with zero mean and unit variance. Now, we use Equation (13) to determine the equation of the line between μ and σ. With a few simple mathematical operations, we arrive at:

$σ = − 1 Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ ) . μ + USL Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ )$
(14)

According to Equation (14) the slope m2 is

$m 2 = − 1 Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ )$
(15)

The two obtained equations intersect at the midpoint of the distance between LSL and USL, where $μ = ( USL + LSL ) / 2$. According to Equations (11) and (14), the standard deviation equivalent to this mean is:

$σ = U S L + LSL 2 Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ )$
(16)

The edges and their intersection are shown in Figure 5.

In Figure 5, $σ L$ or the maximum standard deviation of the chart can be calculated based on the midpoint of the interval asad. At this point, θ is evenly distributed over the range outside the specification limits, i.e.:

$P ( U ≥ LSL − μ σ L ) = P ( U ≥ USL − μ σ L ) = θ 2$
(17)

Thus, by substituting $μ = USL + LSL 2$ into the above equations, we arrive at:

$σ L = USL − LSL 2 Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ 2 )$
(18)

In the following, we obtain the coordinates of the intersection of the line σL with the edges of the chart. Substituting σL into Equations (11) and (14) gives the horizontal coordinates of the intersection of the line σL with the edges based on the notations provided in Figure 6:

$μ 1 = LSL − ( USL − LSL ) Φ − 1 ( θ ) 2 Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ / 2 )$
(19)

$μ 2 = USL − ( USL − LSL ) Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ ) 2 Φ − 1 ( 1 − θ / 2 )$
(20)

As shown in Figure 6, these points form a trapezoid with σL. Here, to develop an easy to draw control chart, we approximate the chart of Figure 3 with this trapezoid. Given the small difference between these two charts (see Figure 5), the approximation error can be safely ignored.

In the following sections, we will analyze the performance of the developed chart.

### 2.2 Failure Time Control Limits

Equations (10) and (13) can be used to obtain the upper and lower limits of failure time based on μ and θ. In other words, having these equations and knowing the mean and the nonconformance level, the upper and lower limits of failure time can be obtained as follows:

$LSL = μ + σΦ − 1 ( θ )$
(21)

$USL = μ + σΦ − 1 ( 1 − θ )$
(22)

### 2.3 Development of Log-normal Distribution Control Chart

Given the relationship between the normal and log-normal distributions, the log-normal failure time data can be easily converted to normal. Thus, to monitor log-normal failure times, we first use a logarithmic conversion method to convert them into normal failure time data and then use the chart developed for normal distribution.

### 2.4 Performance Evaluate of the Proposed Chart

We use the simulation method to evaluate the performance of the proposed chart. This evaluation is performed in terms of average run length (ARL), which refers to the average number of observations before reaching the first out-of-control observation. We also use the standard deviation of run length (SDRL), which measures the accuracy of computational results. A small ARL in phase zero indicates that the process is out-of-control and a large ARL means that the process is in-control. For this purpose, phases zero and one are performed as follows:

Phase Zero: In this phase, first the upper and lower limits of failure times must be obtained based on target μ and θ using Equations (21) and (22). Then, the θ level of the production process should be obtained through simulation. For this purpose, based on the obtained limits, we need to obtain the θ level that provides a certain amount of ARL. In other words, assuming that the process is in control, we must obtain the θ level based on which the process will be identified as in-control in terms of ARL. Then, having this θ value and Equations (18) to (20), the zero phase control chart can be drawn as shown in Figure 6.

Phase one: In this phase, the failure times are monitored based on the chart obtained in phase zero. To evaluate the performance of the proposed chart, we apply some shift to the failure time distribution parameters and assess the chart’s ability to detect them. Provided in the following is a brief description of the steps followed to conduct the simulation based on the following variables.

• n = Sample size

• N = Number of data required to estimate failure time distribution parameters

• ITN = Number of simulation iterations

• RNITN = Run number in iteration ITN

• MITN = Maximum number of simulation iterations

1. Assign values ​​to n, N, and MITN.

2. Set ITN = 1.

3. Generate N random failure times based on the failure time distribution parameters (in-control).

4. Apply shifts to the mean or standard deviation of the failure time distribution.

5. Set RN = 1.

6. Generate n failure times based on the new failure time distribution (out-of-control).

7. Select N last failure times out of N+n exiting failure times.

8. Obtain the mean $( μ' )$ and standard deviation $( σ ' )$ of the data selected in Step 7

9. Use Equations (18) to (20) to check whether or not the point obtained in Step 8 is within the acceptance region of the chart. If the point is in the acceptance area, set $RN ITN = RN ITN + 1$ and return to Step 6, otherwise go to the next step.

10. If ITN < MTN, then set ITN = ITN + 1 and return to Step 5, otherwise obtain the ARL using the following equation:

$ARL = ∑ ITN = 1 MITN RN ITN MITN$
(23)

## 3. NUMERICAL RESULTS

In this section, we examine the performance of the proposed control chart using the following parameter values:

• μ = 50

• σ=4

• θ=0.0027

• n =5

• N =30

• MITN=300

Therefore, the upper and lower limits of failure times are calculated as follows:

• LSL = 38.0001

• USL = 61.9999

For phase zero, we obtain the θ value of the process based on ARL=370. For example, the ARL values for different θ‌ values are given in Table 1. According to Table 1, the minimum θ value that satisfies the desired ARL level is approximately θ=0.0253.

Figure 7 shows all the points obtained in one iteration of the simulation. For example, in this iteration, the run length is 352.

In phase one, the selected θ level is used apply various shifts to mean and standard deviation. The ARL changes resulting from these shifts are given in Table 2. The ​​ ARL and SDRL values obtained for different sample sizes (n) are provided in Table 2.

Considering that the target mean and standard deviation are μ = 50 and σ = 4, the results obtained by applying shifts indicate the following:

• When the mean goes below the target value, the average run length decreases.

• When the mean goes above the target value, the average run length decreases.

• When the standard deviation goes below the target value, the average run length increases.

• When the standard deviation goes above the target value, the average run length decreases.

As the normal control chart indicates, any shift in the mean away from the target value (increase or decrease) corresponds to moving out of the trapezoid, which means the process is out-of-control. As a result, ARL, which is the average number of first out-of-control observations, decreases. An increase in the standard deviation also corresponds to moving out of the trapezoid, which decreases the ARL value. However, when we decrease the standard deviation for a constant mean, the points still fall inside the normal trapezoid, which means the process is in control. Therefore, when the standard deviation decreases, ARL increases. The trends of ARL changes for different shifts in mean and standard deviation and for different sample sizes are illustrated in Figures 8 and 9.

As these Figures 8 and 9 show, there is a direct relationship between the sample size and the average run length. In both cases of constant mean and constant standard deviation, ARL decrease with increasing sample size.

## 4. CONCLUSION

This study presented a new control chart for the monitoring of normal and log-normal failure times. The proposed chart allows for simultaneous monitoring of shifts in both mean and standard deviation of normal and log-normal distributions. With this chart, one can easily monitor the probability distribution of failure times based on their mean and standard deviation. The performance of the proposed chart was evaluated through simulation in terms of average run length. The proposed approach can be used to determine the uniformity of reliability of supply and production processes, help manufacturers assess the reliability of their products over time, and prevent the shipment of products that are substandard from the reliability standpoint. The proposed chart is based on the assumption that the failure time distribution parameters are determined. Thus, in future studies, these parameters can be considered unknown and predicted using various estimators. Also, while this study assumed that the products will fail in a single mode, future studies may expand the work by considering several failure modes. It is also possible to develop similar charts for monitoring the parameters of other probability distributions.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This research has was funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Grant No. AP08957363 «Economic assessment of energy supply in the housing sector of the Republic of Kazakhstan»).

## Figures

Normal distribution chart.

Plot of mean and standard deviation for θ = 0.05.

Notations used for formulating the chart.

Special case for formulating the slope of the edges of the chart.

Edges and their intersection.

Developed control chart.

Results of shifts in one iteration of the simulation.

Trend of ARL changes for σ = 4

Trend of ARL changes for μ = 50.

## Tables

Calculation of the process nonconformance level

Average run length and standard deviation of run length for different shifts

## References

1. Ab Yajid, M. S. (2020), Mediating role of organizational culture on the association between business social responsibility and organization performance in Nigeria, Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 11(1), 646-653.
2. Afanasyev, V. Y. , Ukolov, V. F. , and Tregubova, E. A. (2021), A vendor inventory management policy to optimize sales of thermal energy using evolutionary algorithms, Industrial Engineering & Management Systems, 20(4), 548-554.
3. Azzawi, F. J. I. A. (2021), Data mining in a credit insurance information system for bank loans risk management in developing countries, International Journal of Business Intelligence and Data Mining, 18(3), 291-308.
4. Dan, I. , Mihu, A. G. , and Radu, M. (2021), Reliability analysis through block diagram for a hybrid lighting system, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Modern Power Systems (MPS), IEEE, 1-6.
5. Faraz, A. , Saniga, E. M. , and Heuchenne, C. (2015), Shewhart control charts for monitoring reliability with Weibull lifetimes, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 31(8), 1565-1574.
6. Gan, F. F. , Ting, K. W. , and Chang, T. C. (2004), Interval charting schemes for joint monitoring of process mean and variance, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 20(4), 291-303.
7. Goli, A. , Zare, H. K. , Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. , and Sadeghieh, A. (2019), Application of robust optimization for a product portfolio problem using an invasive weed optimization algorithm, Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 9(2), 187-199.
8. Golubev, S. , Efremov, A. , Gorokhova, A. , Gayduk, V. , and Kravets, E. (2021), Development of the scientific and technological forecasting methodology based on using TIPS instruments, Economic Annals-XXI, 187(1/2), 223-231.
9. Haq, I. U. , Maneengam, A. , Chupradit, S. , Suksatan, W. , and Huo, C. (2021), Economic policy uncertainty and CRYPTOCURRENCY market as a risk management avenue: A systematic review, Risks, 9(9), 163-171.
10. Josiah, T. , Suhada, A. , Chetthamrongchai, P. , Purbasari, H. , Hazim, H. T. , Shidiq, A. A. P. , Wahyuningsih, T. H. , Potashova, I. Y. , and Aravindhan, S. (2021), Optimization of the location, inventory and routing of capacity vehicles with interval uncertainty, Industrial Engineering & Management Systems, 20(4), 654-661.
11. Khoo, M. B. C. and Xie, M. (2009), A study of time‐between‐events control chart for the monitoring of regularly maintained systems, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 25(7), 805-819.
12. Li, Z. and Kong, Z. (2015), A generalized procedure for monitoring right‐censored failure time data, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 31(4), 695-705.
13. McCracken, A. K. , Chakraborti, S. , and Mukherjee, A. (2013), Control charts for simultaneous monitoring of unknown mean and variance of normally distributed processes, Journal of Quality Technology, 45(4), 360-376.
14. Mitra, M. and Khan, R. A. (2021), Reliability shock models: A brief excursion, Proceedings in Business and Economics, Springer, Singapore, 19-42.
15. Munawir, H. , Mabrukah, P. R. , and Djunaidi, M. (2021), Analysis of green supply chain management performance with green supply chain operation reference at the batik enterprise, Economic Annals-XXI, 187(1/2), 139-145.
16. O’Connor, P. and Kleyner, A. (2012), Practical Reliability Engineering, John Wiley & Sons.
17. Qazani, M. R. C. , Asadi, H. , Bellmann, T. , Mohamed, S. , Lim, C. P. , and Nahavandi, S. (2020), Adaptive washout filter based on fuzzy logic for a motion simulation platform with consideration of joints’ limitations, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 69(11), 12547-12558.
18. Qazani, M. R. C. , Asadi, H. , Khoo, S. , and Nahavandi, S. (2019), A linear time-varying model predictive control-based motion cueing algorithm for hexapod simulation-based motion platform, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 51(10), 6096-6110.
19. Rjoub, H. , Civcir, I. , and Resatoglu, N. G. (2017), Micro and macroeconomic determinants of stock prices: The case of Turkish banking sector, Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 20(1), 150-166.
20. Sego, L. H. , Reynolds Jr, M. R. , and Woodall, W. H. (2009), Risk‐adjusted monitoring of survival times, Statistics in Medicine,28(9), 1386-1401.
21. Shewhart, W. A. (1931), Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product, Macmillan and Co Ltd, London.
22. Singh, K. and Dhamija, A. (2019), Macroeconomic factors as a predictor of stock market: Empirical evidences from India, US and UK International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(2), 743-751.
23. Singh, K. V. (2021), Green publicizing to gratify buyer’s demands and sustainable growth: Challenges and forecasts, Materials Today: Proceedings, 37, 2807-2811.
24. Sürücü, B. and Sazak, H. S. (2009), Monitoring reliability for a three-parameter Weibull distribution, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 94(2), 503-508.
25. Xie, M. , Goh, T. N. , and Ranjan, P. (2002), Some effective control chart procedures for reliability monitoring, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 77(2), 143-150.
26. Yousif, J. H. , N Abdul Majeed, S. , and Al Azzawi, F. J. I. (2020), Web-Based architecture for automating quantity surveying construction cost calculation, Infrastructures, 5(6), 45-55.
27. Zafar, R. F. , Mahmood, T. , Abbas, N. , Riaz, M. , and Hussain, Z. (2018), A progressive approach to joint monitoring of process parameters, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 115, 253-268.
28. Zainal, A. G. , Yulianto, H. , and Yanfika, H. (2021), Financial benefits of the environmentally friendly aquaponic media system, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 739(1), 012024
29. Zhang, H. Y. , Shamsuzzaman, M. , Xie, M. , and Goh, T. N. (2011), Design and application of exponential chart for monitoring time-between-events data under random process shift, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 57(9-12), 849-857.
 Do not open for a day Close