European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

European Journal of Operational Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ejor

Stochastics and Statistics

Integrating on-line process control and imperfect corrective maintenance: An

economical design
Linda Lee Ho a,⇑, Roberto C. Quinino b
a
Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
b
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Existing studies of on-line process control are concerned with economic aspects, and the parameters of
Received 27 November 2011 the processes are optimized with respect to the average cost per item produced. However, an equally
Accepted 18 April 2012 important dimension is the adoption of an efficient maintenance policy. In most cases, only the frequency
Available online 11 May 2012
of the corrective adjustment is evaluated because it is assumed that the equipment becomes ‘‘as good as
new’’ after corrective maintenance. For this condition to be met, a sophisticated and detailed corrective
Keywords: adjustment system needs to be employed. The aim of this paper is to propose an integrated economic
Applied probability
model incorporating the following two dimensions: on-line process control and a corrective maintenance
Markov process
Imperfect corrective maintenance
program. Both performances are objects of an average cost per item minimization. Adjustments are based
On-line process control by variables on the location of the measurement of a quality characteristic of interest in a three decision zone. Numer-
Economical models ical examples are illustrated in the proposal.
Variable sampling interval Ó 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Since the publication of the book ‘‘Quality Engineering in Pro-
duction in Systems’’, by Taguchi et al. (1989), which introduced
on-line process control designs applied to a production line, there
have been many developments related to on-line process control.
The first contributions related to on-line process control originated
from Taguchi (1985) and Taguchi et al. (1989). In these papers, pro-
cedures for on-line process control, which quality characteristic is
a continuous random variable, are presented to introduce an
inspection scheme that minimizes the cost function associated
with changes in the process quality. The process is initiated in an
in-control state (i.e., the process mean is l = l0), and within a ran-
dom time t, the process operates in an out-of-control state (the
process mean changes to l = l1, l1 – l0). The process monitoring
consists of examining a single item for every m items that are pro-
duced. If the examined item satisfies the control limits, then the
production continues; otherwise, the production is terminated
for adjustment. After the adjustment, the process resumes and is
in control. This type of monitoring has been the subject of many
studies, including those by Adams and Woodall (1989), Srivastava
and Wu (1991, 1995), Wang and Yue (2001), Ho et al. (2007), and
Chou and Wang (2007). Similar procedures involving on-line pro-
cess, which quality characteristic is an attribute, have also been
proposed by contributors such as Nayebpour and Woodall
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: + 55 11 3091 5363x404; fax: + 55 11 3091 5399.
E-mail addresses: lindalee@usp.br (L.L. Ho), roberto@est.ufmg.br (R.C. Quinino).
(1993), Nandi and Sreehari (1999), Borges et al. (2001), Trindade
et al. (2007), Zhang et al. (2008), and Quinino et al. (2010). How-
ever, all of these papers rely on a fixed sampling interval. Recently,
Ho and Quinino (in press) proposed a variable sampling interval
(VSI) with two sampling intervals, a shorter interval and a longer
interval, for the on-line process control of variables.
Most previous papers investigating on-line process control have
been concerned only with the quality control dimension. Quality
control and maintenance models have been proposed separately,
although these two dimensions have many characteristics in com-
mon and are equally important.
Contributions involving integrated models for the joint optimi-
zation of process control and maintenance can be found in the lit-
erature. Several authors consider a specific distribution function to
describe failure mechanisms. For example, Tagaras (1988) and
Panagiotidou and Nenes (2009) used an exponential distribution,
and Linderman et al. (2005) and Zhou and Zhu (2008) used a Wei-
bull distribution. Authors including Makis and Fung (1995), Ben-
Daya (1999), Ben-Daya and Rahim (2000), Lam and Rahim
(2002), Wang and Sheu (2003), Wang (2006), and Panagiotidou
and Tagaras (2010) have presented models that consider a general
probability function with an increasing hazard rate. A Weibull
shock model was used by Ben-Daya (1999) and Ben-Daya and Ra-
him (2000) to illustrate their examples. Partially observable Mar-
kov decision processes (POMDPs) have also been used as a
framework for many authors, such as Ivy and Nembhard (2005),
Kuo (2006), and Yeung et al. (2007), to develop their models. Most
of the above-mentioned papers include the variable quality charac-

0377-2217/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.04.019
254 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262

teristic of employing an X-bar control chart for process control,

Process parameters
although Panagiotidou and Nenes (2009) proposed a Vp X-bar con-
l The mean value of the quality
trol chart. Exceptions include the contributions from Wang and characteristic of the produced item.
Sheu (2003), Wang (2006), and Liao (2007). In these cases, process l0 The mean value of the quality
control relies on an attribute quality characteristic with inspector characteristic of the produced item
errors or an imperfect process. when the process is in control.
l1 The mean value of the quality
To generate the standard (Shewhart) control charts, three hori- characteristic of the produced item
zontal lines are used: a central line represents the average value of when the process is out of control.
the quality characteristic at the in-control state, and there are two N  (l,r2) The quality characteristic follows a
other horizontal lines that are called the (upper and lower) control normal distribution with a mean l
and a variance r2.
limits.
p The probability of a shift from an in-
Some analysts suggest two sets of limits in which the outer lim- control state to an out-of-control
its are the typical action limits (l0 ± C) and the inner limits are state in a productive process.
called the warning limits (l0 ± W). Points falling outside the con- l0 + LE The upper specification limit.
trol limits lead to a stoppage for an assignable cause, and after l0  LE The lower specification limit.

the process is recovered, it may wait a long time for an inspection. Cost parameters
Therefore, a longer sampling interval may be used. Points falling CI The cost to inspect one unit.
inside the inner limits may indicate that the process operates ade- Cn The cost to send a non-conforming
quately. Therefore, a longer sampling interval for the next inspec- unit to the customer or to the next
production stage.
tion can also be applied. In other cases, a shorter sampling interval
Ca The cost of perfect maintenance.
is used. However, a long sequence of h points falling between the Cai The cost of 50% effective
warning limits and the control limits may indicate that the process maintenance.
is not operating properly. Therefore, an additional rule (inspired by Cf The fixed cost for maintenance.
the rules in the Western Electric Handbook (1956)), which is Cd The cost to discard the inspected
item.
known as the m-of-m runs rule and is based on the results of the
last h inspections, is included to stop the process and search for Decision variables
an assignable cause. l0 ± C The upper and lower control limits.
The aim of this paper is to propose a model that integrates on- l0 ± W The upper and lower inner limits,
W 6 C.
line process control and corrective maintenance. Following the
m The sampling interval (in the number
method proposed by Ho and Quinino (in press), a variable sam- of produced units) if the value of the
pling interval is considered for the on-line process control of a var- quality characteristic of the current
iable. In this paper, two longer sampling intervals are proposed: LA inspection is in the yellow zone.
and LB. The sampling interval LA is applied if the process is termi- LA The sampling interval to be used after
a type A corrective maintenance.
nated for adjustment (and the process is recovered) after an obser- LB The sampling interval to be used after
vation falls outside the control limits, and the sampling interval LB a type B corrective maintenance.
is applied if the process is terminated due to a long sequence of h h The quantity of inspected units
observations falling between the warning limits and the control sequentially observed in the yellow
zone used to decide whether a type B
limits or if the observation falls inside the inner limits. For other
corrective maintenance is required.
situations, a sampling interval of m is used. cca The effectiveness of a type A
All of the above-mentioned papers assume that the corrective corrective maintenance.
maintenance of the equipment (adjustment) is perfect. In the pres- ccb The effectiveness of a type B
ent paper, a single item is sampled, and two different corrective corrective maintenance.

maintenances are included: a corrective maintenance of type A if Auxiliary variables

the stoppage is due to an observation outside of the control limits Xi,i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , 1 The observed value of a characteristic
and a corrective maintenance of type B if the stoppage is due to a of quality interest at the ith
sequence of h observations falling between the warning and con- inspection.
trol limits. The types A and B corrective maintenances are imper- 1  qLB ¼ 1  ð1  pÞLB The probability of a shift from an in-
control state to an out-of -control state
fect with the measured performances (they are also decision during the production of LB units.
variables), respectively, by cca ; 0:5 6 cca 6 1 and ccb ; 0:5 6 ccb 6 1. 1  qLA ¼ 1  ð1  pÞLA The probability of a shift from an in-
Therefore, it is assumed that after the adjustment, the equipment control state to an out-of-control
will become ‘‘as good as new’’ with a probability of at least 50%. state during the production of LA
units.
The corrective maintenance can be conducted with different levels
1  qm = 1  (1  p)m The probability of a shift from an in-
of detail. The more detailed the maintenance is, the more efficient control state to an out-of-control
and more expensive it will be. state during the production of m
This paper generalizes the previous contributions of Ho et al. units.
g0 The probability that the observed
(2007) and Ho and Quinino (in press) by considering an additional
value of the quality characteristic is
inspection interval and the possibility of imperfect maintenance. in the green zone when the process is
These papers by Ho et al. represent specific cases of the general in control.
concepts investigated in the present paper. Our model includes g1 The probability that the observed
three sample intervals of adjustment (m, LA and LB), depending value of the quality characteristic is
in the green zone when the process is
on the values of the observed quality characteristics. Additionally,
out of control.
the equipment may not be perfectly repaired by corrective mainte- y0 The probability that the observed
nance. Motivated by real cases, the effectiveness of the corrective value of the quality characteristic is
maintenance will be considered as a decision variable, i.e., the
 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262
in the yellow zone when the process
is in control.
y1 The probability that the observed
value of the quality characteristic is
in the yellow zone when the process
is out of control.
r0 The probability that the observed
value of the quality characteristic is
in the red zone when the process is in
control.
r1 The probability that the observed
value of the quality characteristic is
in the red zone when the process is
out of control.
(s, k) Denotes a Markov chain state (s, k).
The first element, s, indicates
whether the process is in control
(s = 0) or out of control (s > 0). The
second element, k, indicates whether
the value of some quality
characteristic of an inspected item is
in the red zone (k = 1), the green
zone (k = 0) or the yellow zone (k > 0).
a(s, k) The cost of maintenance related to
the state (s, k).
n(s, k) The cost of either sending non-
conforming items to the customer or
allowing non-conforming items to
proceed to later stages of the process
related to the state (s, k).
ðs;kÞ
pj The probability that the sampling
interval of length j is in state (s, k)
j = m, LA, LB.
d(s,k) The proportion of inspections in state
(s, k),s = 0, 1, 2; k = 1, 0, . . . , h in a
large number of inspections.
pðs;kÞðs ;k Þ ; s; s ¼ 0; 1; 2; k; Denotes the transitory probabilities
 from state (s, k) to (s⁄, k⁄).
k ¼ 1; 0; . . . ; h
TðW; C; m; LA ; LB ; h; cca ; ccb Þ The average cost per item.
E(V) The expected cost per inspection
cycle.
E(Q) The average quantity of items sent to
the customer per inspection cycle.
quality of the maintenance is a decision variable. Of course, more
effective maintenance implies higher costs, and paying for this
maintenance may not be the most cost-minimizing option. The
generalization approach is substantially different and requires
new mathematical developments.
For the convenience of the reader, a list of the symbols and
notations employed in this paper is provided below:
This paper is organized as follows: in Section 2, the probabilistic
model is detailed; in Section 3, the cost function is developed; in
Section 4, numerical examples are presented to illustrate the pro-
posal; and in Section 5, the conclusions and several final remarks
are presented.
2. Probabilistic model
In this paper, it is assumed that items are produced and that the
quality characteristic of interest follows a normal distribution
N  (l, r2).
The process initiates in an in-control state (l = l0, state I), and,
within a random time t, the process operates in an out-of-control
state (l = l1, l1 – l0, state II). This change is described by a geo-
metric distribution of parameter (p), where 0 < p < 1. The geomet-
ric distribution is typically used for the discrete case in which the
duration is measured by the number of units produced before the
shift. The geometric distribution is memoryless, which facilitates a
mathematical analysis, but it is useful for reasons other than its
mathematical facilities. Several researchers have recently used
geometric distributions to describe shifts from in-control to out-
255
of-control states, including Dasgupta (2003), Ho et al. (2007),
Trindade et al. (2007), Dasgupta and Mandal (2008), and Ding
and Gong (2008). Such a distribution not only facilitates the devel-
opment of a mathematical model but also enables the application
of mathematical models to real problems, as described in the cited
papers. Once the process begins to operate in an out-of-control
state, it can return to an in-control state only after an intervention
(after a corrective maintenance of type A or B).
Three horizontal lines are used to draw standard (Shewhart)
control charts, one at l0 and two others at l0 ± C (the upper and
lower control limits (CL)). However, additional limits may be in-
cluded. The outer limits are the usual action limits (l0 ± C), and
the inner limits are drawn at l0 ± W, W 6 C. To memorize the re-
gions, different colors may be assigned. For example, points plotted
outside of the control limits (that is,]1, l0  C] [ [l0 + C, + 1[)
lead to a stoppage for an assignable cause. The color red is used
for this region; therefore, it is called the red zone (RZ). Points falling
between the warning limits and the control limits (that
is,]l0  C,l0  W] [ [l0 + W, l0 + C[) may indicate that the process
is not operating adequately. The color yellow is used for this region;
therefore, this region is called the yellow zone (YZ). Otherwise, the
process must operate adequately if points fall between the warning
limits (that is,]l0  W, l0 + W[). The color green is used for this re-
gion; therefore, this region is called the green zone (GZ).
Before we present the description of the probabilistic model, let
us first introduce several notations: let Xi, i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , 1 be an
observed value of some characteristic of interest at the ith inspec-
tion and
g 0 ¼ Pðl0  W < X i < l0 þ Wjl ¼ l0 Þ
g 1 ¼ Pðl0  W < X i < l0 þ Wjl ¼ l1 Þ
y0 ¼ Pðl0 þ W 6 X i < l0 þ Cjl ¼ l0 Þ þ Pðl0  C < X i 6 l0  Wjl ¼ l0 Þ
:
y1 ¼ Pðl0 þ W 6 X i < l0 þ Cjl ¼ l1 Þ þ Pðl0  C < X i 6 l0  Wjl ¼ l1 Þ
r0 ¼ PðX i P l0 þ Cjl ¼ l0 Þ þ PðX i 6 l0  Cjl ¼ l0 Þ
r1 ¼ PðX i P l0 þ Cjl ¼ l1 Þ þ PðX i 6 l0  Cjl ¼ l1 Þ
The system of inspection can be described by a Markov chain
with a set of states (s, k) such that:
X ¼ fð0; 1Þ; ð0; 0Þ; ð0; 1Þ; ð0; 2Þ; . . . ; ð0; hÞ; ð1; 1Þ; ð1; 0Þ; ð1; 1Þ;
. . . ; ð1; hÞ; ð2; 1Þ; ð2; 0Þ; ð2; 1Þ; ð2; 2Þ; . . . ; ð2; hÞg
in which there is a total of 3(h + 2) states. The first index indicates
the state (State I: in control (s = 0); State II: out of control (s > 0))
of the process at the time of inspection and assumes three values.
A value of s = 0 implies that the inspected item is produced at
l = l0; s = 1 implies that the process’s mean shifts from l = l0 to
l = l1 in the current inspection, and, thus, a set of items is produced
at l = l0, and at least the inspected item is produced at l = l1; and
s = 2 implies that the process’s mean shifts to l = l1 and that all of
the items in the current inspection are produced at l = l1. The sec-
ond index assumes integer values in the interval 1 6 k 6 h and is
related to the result of the inspection:
 If k = 1, the observed value of the current inspection is in the
red zone, [(Xi P l0 + C) or (Xi 6 l0  C)], and the process is ter-
minated for a type A corrective maintenance. Then, an inspec-
tion occurs after the production of LA items.
 If k = 0, the observed value is in the green zone, (l0  W < Xi
< l0 + W). The production continues, the next inspection occurs
after the production of LB items, and no maintenance is
executed.
 If k = 1, the observed value is in the yellow zone, (l0 + W 6 Xi
< l0 + C) or (l0  C < Xi 6 l0  W), and the previous observation
is not in the yellow zone. The production continues, the next
inspection occurs after the production of m items, and mainte-
nance does not occur.
256 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262

8
 If k = 2, the observed value is in the yellow zone, > p ¼ pð0;hÞð0;1Þ ¼ qLB r 0
< ð0;0Þð0;1Þ
(l0 + W 6 Xi < l0 + C) or (l0  C < Xi 6 l0  W), as in the previ- pð0;0Þð0;0Þ ¼ pð0;hÞð0;0Þ ¼ qLB g 0 ð3Þ
ous case. The production continues, and the next inspection >
:
occurs only after the production of m items, and maintenance
pð0;0Þð0;1Þ ¼ pð0;hÞð0;1Þ ¼ qLB y0
does not occur. Additionally, if the observed value at the ith inspection is in the
 if k = 3, the observed value is in the yellow zone, yellow zone, then the following equalities hold:
(l0 + W 6 Xi < l0 + C) or (l0  C < Xi 6 l0  W), as in the two 8 m
previous inspections, the next inspection occurs only after the < pð0;kÞð0;1Þ ¼ q r 0
>
m
production of m items, and maintenance does not occur. pð0;kÞð0;0Þ ¼ q g 0 ; ð4Þ
>
:p
    If k = h, the observed value is in the yellow zone ¼ qm y
ð0;kÞð0;kþ1Þ 0
((l0 + W 6 Xi < l0 + C) or (l0  C < Xi 6 l0  W)), as in the
(h  1) previous cases. However, type B corrective maintenance where (1  p)m = qm for 1 6 k 6 h  1. Employing (2)–(4), we obtain
is executed, and the next inspection occurs only after the pro- the following matrix:
duction of LB items; therefore, k P 0, where the index k = t indi- 2 3
qLA r 0 qLA g 0 qLA y0 0  0 0
cates a sequence of t observed values in the yellow zone. 6 qLB r 7
6 0 qLB g 0 qLB y0 0  0 0
7
6 m 7
6 q r0 qm g 0 0 m
q y0  0 7
0
Fig. 1 represents the new proposal schematically. For example, 6 7
6 .. 7
if h = 2, k = 1 or 2 indicates a type A or type B corrective mainte- 6 7
A00 ¼ 6 qm r 0 qm g 0 0 0 . 0 0 7
nance, respectively. For other values of k, the production continues. 6 7
6 . 7
In this paper, the maintenance policy is integrated with on-line 6      ..  7
6 7
process control in a single model, and its design will be obtained 6 m 7
4 q r0 qm g 0 0 0    0 qm y0 5
through an economical approach that consists of the determination
qLB r 0 qLB g 0 qLB y0 0  0 0
of the following set of parameters:
The elements of A01 are the transitory probabilities of passing
 The warning and control limits (l0 ± W and l0 ± C). from states (0, k) to (1, k⁄). The process is in control at the ith
 Three sampling intervals: LA(to be applied after a type A correc- inspection, but the parameter l shifts from l0 to l1. Several items
tive maintenance), LB(to be applied after a type B corrective are produced at l = l0, but at least the inspected item is produced
maintenance) and m (after an observation in the yellow zone). at l = l1. The non-null elements of the matrix A01 are expressed in
 The length h of a sequence of observations in the yellow zone to (5)–(7).
initiate type B corrective maintenance. If the observed value at the ith inspection is in the red zone,
 The probabilities cca ; ccb that measure the effectiveness of the then
process recovery when the process is terminated for type A 8
and type B corrective maintenance, respectively. > p ¼ ð1  qLA Þr 1
< ð0;1Þð1;1Þ
pð0;1Þð1;0Þ ¼ ð1  qLA Þg 1 ð5Þ
>
:
The transition probabilities from state (s, k) at the time of pð0;1Þð1;1Þ ¼ ð1  qLA Þy1
inspection i to state (s⁄, k⁄) at the time of inspection (i + 1) are
the elements of the matrix P: However, if the observed value is in the yellow zone, as in the
0 1 (h  1) previous inspections, or if the observed value at ith inspec-
A00 A01 A02 tion is in the green zone, then
B C
P¼B A12 C 8
@ A10 A11 A; ð1Þ
> p ¼ pð0;hÞð1;1Þ ¼ ð1  qLB Þr1
< ð0;0Þð1;1Þ
A20 A21 A22 pð0;0Þð1;0Þ ¼ pð0;hÞð1;0Þ ¼ ð1  qLB Þg 1 ð6Þ
>
:
where A denotes the matrix of transitory probabilities pðs;kÞðs ;k Þ ,
ss  pð0;0Þð1;1Þ ¼ pð0;hÞð1;1Þ ¼ ð1  qLB Þy1
s;s⁄ = 0, 1, 2; k, k⁄ = 1, 0, . . . , h. In the paragraph below, the ele-
Additionally, if the observed value at the ith inspection is in the yel-
ments of matrix A00 are detailed.
low zone, then
The elements of A00 are the transitory probabilities of passing 8 m
from states (0, k) to (0, k⁄). The process is in control at the ith < pð0;kÞð1;1Þ ¼ ð1  q Þr 1
>
inspection, and it also stays in control at the (i + 1) th inspection. m
pð0;kÞð1;0Þ ¼ ð1  q Þg 1 ð7Þ
If the observed value at the ith inspection is in the red zone (with >
:p ¼ ð1  qm Þy
ð0;kÞð1;kþ1Þ 1
the in-control process), a type A corrective maintenance is exe-
cuted. The next inspection occurs only after the production of LA for 1 6 k 6 h  1. Employing (5)–(7),
items (the probability of this event is ð1  pÞLA ¼ qLA Þ; then, 2
ð1  qLA Þr 1 ð1  qLA Þg 1 ð1  qLA Þy1 0  0 0
3
6 ð1  qLB Þr ð1  qLB Þg ð1  qLB Þy 7
8 6 1 1 1 0  0 0 7
>
> pð0;1Þð0;1Þ ¼ qLA r0 6
6 ð1  qm Þr 1 ð1  qm Þg 1
7
7
> 6 0 ð1  qm Þy1  0 0 7
< 6 7
pð0;1Þð0;0Þ ¼ qLA g 0 : ð2Þ 6 .. 7
> A01 ¼ 6 ð1  qm Þr 1 ð1  qm Þg 1 0 0 . 0 0 7
>
> 6
6
7
7
: .
pð0;1Þð0;1Þ ¼ qLA y0 6
6      . .  7
7
6 7
4 ð1  qm Þr 1 ð1  qm Þg 1 0 0  0 m
ð1  q Þy1 5
However, if the observed value is in the yellow zone, as in the ð1  qLB Þr 1 ð1  qLB Þg 1 ð1  qLB Þy1 0  0 0
(h  1) previous inspections, then a type B corrective maintenance
is executed. In this case, the next inspection occurs only after the The matrix A02 is a null matrix; A10 = A20, and their non-null ele-
production of LB items. Similarly, if the ith inspection is in the green ments are the transitory probabilities with k =  1 (a type A correc-
zone, then the next inspection occurs only after the production of tive maintenance is executed) or k = h (a type B corrective
LBitems (the probability of this event is ð1  pÞLB ¼ qLB Þ. Therefore, maintenance occurs). However, the process may not be completely
the following equalities hold: recovered (with a probability of cca ; 0:5 6 cca 6 1 being completely
 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262 257

recovered) after the execution of a type A corrective maintenance Therefore,

(because the process was out of control); thus, the following equal- 2 3
ð1  cca Þr 1 ð1  cca Þg 1 ð1  cca Þy1 0   0 0
ities hold: 6 7
8 6 r1 g1 y1 0   0 07
> p ¼ cca qLA r 0 ; 6 7
< ðs;1Þð0;1Þ 6 7
6 r1 g1 0 y1   0 07
pðs;1Þð0;0Þ ¼ cca qLA g 0 ; ð8Þ 6
6
7
7
>
: 6 .. 7
pðs;1Þð0;1Þ ¼ cca qLA y0 ; A12 ¼ A22 ¼ 6 r1 g1 0 0 . y1 07
6 7:
6 7
If k = h, a type B corrective maintenance is executed (with a proba- 6 .. 7
6           .   7
bility of ccb ; 0:5 6 ccb 6 1 to be completely recovered), and the sub- 6 7
6 7
sequent equalities follow: 6 r1 g1 0 0   0 y1 7
4 5
8
>
> p ¼ ccb qLB r 0 ; ð1  ccb Þr 1 ð1  ccb Þg 1 ð1  ccb Þy1 0 0   0 0
< ðs;hÞð0;1Þ
pðs;hÞð0;0Þ ¼ ccb qLB g 0 ; ð9Þ
>
> Matrix P is ergodic recurrent, and, consequently, D = limu?1Pu
:p ¼ c q LB y ;
ðs;hÞð0;1Þ cb 0 exists and does not depend on the probability of the initial states of
the process. Therefore, all of the rows of D are equal. Denoting the
for s = 1;2. Employing (8) and (9),
2 3 first row of the matrix D by d = (d(0,1), . . . , d(0,h), d(1,1), . . . , d(1,h),
cca qLA r0 cca qLA g 0 cca qLA y0 0  0 0 d(2,1), . . . , d(2,h)), the system of linear equations d = dP can be
P2 Ph
6 7 solved subject to the restriction
6 0 0 0 0  0 0 7 s¼0 k¼1 dðs;kÞ ¼ 1. d(s,k) can be
6 7 interpreted as the proportion of inspections at state (s, k), s = 0, 1,
6 0 0 0 0  0 0 7
6 7 2; k = 1, 0, . . . , h in a large number of inspections.
6 .. 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 To complete the probabilistic model, it is also necessary to obtain
A10 ¼ A20 ¼6 . 7
6 .. 7
6 7 the proportion of inspections originating from the different lengths
6      . 7
6 7 of sampling intervals for each state of the Markov chain. For the
6 0 0 0 0  0 0 7 ðs;kÞ
4 5 state (s, k), let pj be the probability of the sampling interval of
P ðs;kÞ
ccb qLB r0 ccb qLB g 0 ccb qLB y0 0  0 0 length j; j = m, LA, LB and j¼m;LA ;LB pj ¼ 1. The sampling interval
is LB if a type B corrective maintenance is performed (a sequence
Similarly, A11 = A21, and their non-null elements are as follows: of h observations in the yellow zone) or an observation is in the
8 green zone. This situation corresponds to the rows of matrix P with
> p ¼ cca ð1  qLA Þr 1 ;
< ðs;1Þð1;1Þ k = 0 or k = h. For example, pLB
ð0;1Þ
denotes the probability that the
pðs;1Þð1;0Þ ¼ cca ð1  qLA Þg 1 ; ð10Þ
>
: process is at state (0, 1) with a sampling interval of length LB. For
pðs;1Þð1;1Þ ¼ cca ð1  qLA Þy1 ; this situation, a type B corrective maintenance was executed in
the previous cycle, or one observation was in the green zone; there-
and
8 fore, the possible states were (0, 0) or (s, h); s = 0, 1, 2 in the previous
>
> p ¼ ccb ð1  qLB Þr 1 ; cycle. Specifically for the state (0, 1), we have the following:
< ðs;hÞð1;1Þ
pðs;hÞð1;0Þ ¼ ccb ð1  qLB Þg 1 ; ð11Þ
>
> ð0;1Þ
pLB ¼ Pfðsi1 ; ki1 Þ ¼ ð0; 0Þjðsi ; ki Þ
:p ¼ c ð1  qLB Þy ;
ðs;hÞð1;1Þ cb 1
X
2
for s = 1; 2. Then, with (10) and (11), ¼ ð0; 1Þg þ Pfðsi1 ; ki1 Þ ¼ ðs; hÞjðsi ; ki Þ ¼ ð0; 1Þg ð15Þ
2 3 s¼0
cc ð1  qLA Þr1 cca ð1  qLA Þg 1 cca ð1  qLA Þy1 0  0 0
6 a 7 Using Bayes’ theorem and by employing the transitory probabilities
6 0 0 0 0  0 07
6 7 and the stationary distribution, (15) can rewritten as the following:
6 0 0 0 0  0 07
6 7
6 . 7 P 
6 0 0 0 0 .. 0 07 2
A11 ¼ A21 ¼ 6 7 q LB r 0 þ dð0;0Þ
6 7 ð0;1Þ s¼0 dðs;hÞ
6 . 7 pLB ¼ :
6         . .  7 dð0;1Þ
6 7
6 0 0 0 0  0 07
4 5 ð0;1Þ
To obtain pLA , the process is at state (0, 1), and the sampling
ccb ð1  qLB Þr1 ccb ð1  qLB Þg 1 ccb ð1  qLB Þy1 0  0 0
interval is of length LA. However, a type A corrective maintenance
has occurred in the previous cycle, and the possible states are (0,
Finally, A12 = A22, and their non-null elements are as follows:
1), (1, 1) or (2, 1). Thus,
8
< pðs;1Þð2;1Þ ¼ ð1  cca Þr1 ;
> P 
2
pðs;1Þð2;0Þ ¼ ð1  cca Þg 1 ; ð12Þ q LA r 0 s¼0 dðs;1Þ
>
:p ð0;1Þ
pLA ¼ :
¼ ð1  c Þy ;
ðs;1Þð2;1Þ ca 1 dð0;1Þ
ð0;1Þ
for s = 1; 2 and 1 6 k 6 h  1, Finally, for pm , the process is at state (0, 1), and the sampling
8 interval is of length m. In the previous inspection, an observation
< pðs;kÞð2;1Þ ¼ r 1
>
in the yellow zone was observed, but the sequence of observations
pðs;kÞð2;0Þ ¼ g 1 ð13Þ
>
:p in that region is lower than h; consequently,
¼y
ðs;kÞð2;kþ1Þ 1 P 
h1
qm r 0 j¼1 dðs;jÞ
and pð0;1Þ ¼ :
m
8 dð0;1Þ
< pðs;hÞð2;1Þ ¼ ð1  ccb Þr 1
>
pðs;hÞð2;0Þ ¼ ð1  ccb Þg 1 ð14Þ For all other states of the chain, similar calculations can be devel-
>
:p oped, thereby obtaining the expressions listed below:
¼ ð1  c Þy
ðs;hÞð2;1Þ cb 1
258 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262

State Sampling interval

LB LA m
P2  P2  P 
(0, 0) ð0;0Þ qLB g 0 dðs;hÞ þdð0;0Þ ð0;0Þ qLA g 0 dðs;1Þ qm g 0
h1
dð0;jÞ
pLB ¼ s¼0
pLA ¼ s¼0
ð0;0Þ j¼1
dð0;0Þ dð0;0Þ pm ¼ dð0;0Þ
P2  P2 
(0,1) ð0;1Þ qLB y0 d
s¼0 ðs;hÞ
þdð0;0Þ ð0;1Þ qLA y0 d
s¼0 ðs;1Þ pm
ð0;1Þ
¼0
pLB ¼ dð0;1Þ pLA ¼ dð0;1Þ
 P2   P2  P 
ð1qLB Þr1 ccb d þdð0;0Þ þdð0;hÞ ð1;1Þ ð1qLA Þr1 dð0;1Þ þcca d
s¼1 ðs;1Þ ð1qm Þr 1
h1
dð0;jÞ
(1,1) ð1;1Þ s¼1 ðs;hÞ pLA ¼ ð1;1Þ j¼1
pL B ¼ dð1;1Þ
dð1;1Þ pm ¼ d
ð1;1Þ
 P2   P2  P 
(1,0) ð1qLB Þg 1 ccb d þdð0;0Þ þdð0;hÞ ð1;0Þ ð1qLA Þg 1 dð0;1Þ þcca d
s¼1 ðs;1Þ ð1qm Þg 1
h1
dð0;jÞ
ð1;0Þ s¼1 ðs;hÞ pLA ¼ ð1;0Þ j¼1
pLB ¼ dð1;0Þ
dð1;0Þ pm ¼ dð1;0Þ
 P2   P2 
(1,1) ð1qLB Þy1 cc b d þdð0;0Þ þdð0;hÞ ð1;1Þ ð1qLA Þy1 dð0;1Þ þcca d
s¼1 ðs;1Þ pm
ð1;1Þ
¼0
ð1;1Þ s¼1 ðs;hÞ pLA ¼
pLB ¼ dð1;1Þ
dð1;1Þ
h i ð1cca Þr1 ðdð1;1Þ þdð2;1Þ Þ
P P 
ð2;1Þ 2 h1
(2,1) ð2;1Þ
r1 dð1;0Þ þdð2;0Þ þð1cc Þðdð1;hÞ þdð2;hÞ Þ
b
pLA ¼ dð2;1Þ ð2;1Þ
r1
i¼1 j¼1
dði;jÞ
pLB ¼ dð2;1Þ pm ¼ d
ð2;1Þ
g 1 ½dð1;0Þ þdð2;0Þ þð1cc Þðdð1;hÞ þdð2;hÞ Þ ð1cca Þg 1 ðdð1;1Þ þdð2;1Þ Þ
P P 
(2,0) ð2;0Þ
pLB ¼ b
ð2;0Þ
pLA ¼ g1
2 h1
dði;jÞ
dð2;0Þ dð2;0Þ ð2;0Þ i¼1 j¼1
pm ¼ dð2;0Þ
(2,1) ð2;1Þ y1 ½dð1;0Þ þdð2;0Þ þð1cc Þðdð1;hÞ þdð2;hÞ Þ ð2;1Þ ð1cca Þy1 ðdð1;1Þ þdð2;1Þ Þ ð2;1Þ
pLB ¼ b pLA ¼ dð2;1Þ
pm ¼0
dð2;1Þ
(s,k):s = 0,1,2;2 6 k 6 h  1 ðs;kÞ
pLB ¼0
ðs;kÞ
pLA ¼0 pm
ðs;kÞ
¼1

3. Cost function  The cost of the maintenances of the process;

To obtain the cost function, additional assumptions are re- The costs of the corrective maintenances (types A and B) of the
quired. Once a decision is made regarding the maintenance, the process are for states (s, k), s = 0, 1, 2; k = 1, h. Therefore,
stoppage of the process is instantaneous. After the corrective main- aðs; kÞ ¼ Iðk¼hÞ C cb þ Iðk¼1Þ C Ca ; s ¼ 0; 1; 2; :
tenance, the process restarts at State I (l = l0 = 0); however, the
corrective actions may not recover the process at its initial condi- From the Taguchi quadratic loss function Taguchi et al. (2004), the
tions. Moreover, it is assumed that the inspected items are dis- costs Cca and Ccb are obtained independently and are expressed as
carded. In this paper, the costs follow a structure similar to that follows:
of typical economical designs: CI is the cost of a single inspection; C a  C ai C a  C ai
Cca is the cost of a type A corrective maintenance; and Ccb is the C ca ¼ C f þ c2ca þ C a 
cost of a type B corrective maintenance. In this paper, one item is
ð1  0:52 Þ ð1  0:52 Þ
declared to be non-conforming if the observed value of the quality C a  C ai C a  C ai
C cb ¼ C f þ c2cb þ C a  :
characteristic is not within the specification limits (l0 ± LE). There- ð1  0:52 Þ ð1  0:52 Þ
fore, the following costs, which are related to non-conforming and
The cost Cca (Ccb) is compounded by two parts: a fixed cost (Cf) and
discarded items, are also included in the model: Cn is the cost to
a variable cost according to a quadratic function. If the process is
produce a non-conforming item (this item may be sent to the cus-
completely recovered after the corrective maintenance (100% of
tomer or to the following production stages); and CD is the cost to
effectiveness), then Cca(Ccb) will be equal to Ca, and in the case of
discard the examined item. Therefore, after each cycle (inspection),
50% effectiveness, it will be Cai.
(LA  1), (LB  1) or (m  1), the items are sent to the customer or to
the following stages of production.
 The cost to send non-conforming items to the customer or the
For a sufficiently large number of inspections, d = (d(0,1), . . . ,
cost during the later stages of the process;
d(0,h), d(1,1), . . . , d(1,h), d(2,1), . . . , d(2,h)) is the vector of the probabil-
ity of the states of the Markov chain. Let C be the random variables
For states (0, k), k = 1, 0, . . . , h, all of the items are produced at
related to the cost at each cycle of inspection, which assumes dis-
l = l0; therefore,
crete values related to the states of the Markov chain. The cost of h i
state (s, k), s = 0, 1, 2; k = 1, 0, . . . , h can be written as follows: nð0; kÞ ¼ C n p1 pð0;kÞ
ð0;kÞ ð0;kÞ
m ðm  1Þ þ pLA ðLA  1Þ þ pLB ðLB  1Þ ;

Cðs; kÞ ¼ C I þ aðs; kÞ þ nðs; kÞ þ C D ; s ¼ 0; 1; 2; k ¼ 1; . . . ; h; k ¼ 1; 0; . . . ; h;

where with p1 = 1  P(l0  LE 6 Xi 6 l0 + LEjl = l0). This cost is similar for
states (2, k), in which all of the items are produced at l = l1. Thus,
 CI, CD are the costs to inspect and discard, respectively, a single h i
ð0;kÞ ð0;kÞ ð0;kÞ
item and are constants for all of the states (s, k), s = 0, 1, 2; nð2; kÞ ¼ C n p2 pm ðm  1Þ þ pLA ðLA  1Þ þ pLB ðLB  1Þ ;
k = 1, 0, . . . , h;
k ¼ 1; 0; . . . ; h;
 a(s, k) is the cost for maintenance; and
 n(s, k) is the cost to send non-conforming items to the customer With p2 = 1  P(l0  LE 6 Xi 6 l0 + LEjl = l1). For states (1, k),
or the cost during the later stages of the process. k = 1, 0, . . . , h, i < m(i < Ls, s = A, B) items are produced atl = l0,
and the m  i(Ls  i) items are produced at l = l1, accounting for
In the following, the various costs are detailed. all of the possibilities.

" PB ð1;kÞ PLs #

ð1;kÞ Pm i1 i1
pm i¼1 pð1  pÞ ½ði  1Þp1 þ ðm  iÞp2  s¼A pLs i¼1 pð1  pÞ ½ði  1Þp1 þ ðLs  iÞp2 
nð1; kÞ ¼ C n þ ;
1  qm 1  qLs
k ¼ 1; 0; . . . ; h:
 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262
Thus, according to Montgomery (2009), for a large number of
inspections, and taking into consideration our setting as a renewal-re-
ward process, the average cost per item TðW; C; m; LA ; LB ; h; cC a ; ccb Þ is
the ratio of the expected cost per inspection cycle E(V):
X
2 X
h A manufacturer of high-volume integrated circuits needs to in-
EðVÞ ¼ Cðs; kÞdðs;kÞ
s¼0 k¼1
to the average quantity of items sent to the customer:
h i
X
2 X
h
EðQ Þ ¼
ðs;kÞ ðs;kÞ ðs;kÞ
dðs;kÞ ðLA  1ÞpLA þ ðLB  1ÞpLB þ ðm  1Þpm : an out-of-control state [State II (l1 = 1)] can be described by a geo-
s¼0 k¼1
The problem consists of determining the values of

o
 task (interested readers can request a copy of the program directly
mo ; LoA ; LoB ; W o ; C o ; h ; coca ; cocb ¼ arg min
ðm;LA ;LB ;W;C;h;cca ; cc Þ
b
LB is the sampling interval that is used after a type B corrective
maintenance (a sequence of h values in the yellow zone) or if the
observed value of the quality characteristic is in the green zone;
LA is the sampling interval that is used after a type A corrective
maintenance (an observation in the red zone); m is the sampling
interval that is applied if there is a sequence of t < h observations
in the yellow zone; and the constants W and C define the warning
and the control limits, respectively. The values of the quality char-
acteristic outside of the control limit l0 ± C yield a type A corrective
maintenance, and h is the length of the sequence of values in the
yellow zone. If a sequence of h values of quality characteristics is
observed in the yellow zone, a type B corrective maintenance is exe-
cuted, and cca ; ccb are the probabilities of recovery of the process
after a corrective maintenance of types A and B, respectively.
259
Fig. 1. Process monitoring.
4. Numerical examples
To illustrate the proposed procedure, consider an example
adapted from Taguchi et al. (1989), Taguchi et al. (2004), and Quin-
ino et al. (2010).
stall a system to control the measurement of some dimension of
interest. Historical data allow for an estimation of the cost compo-
nents to be proposed as CI = $0.25, Cn = $20, CD = $2.0, Ca = $1400,
Cai = $500 and Cf = $400. The specification limits were fixed at
l0 ± LE, and the shifts from an in-control state [State I (l0 = 0)] to
metric distribution with the parameter p = 0.001. The standard
deviation of the process is known and is equal to 0.5. To calculate
the optimum values, a program in MatLab was developed for this
½Tðm; LA ; LB ;W; C; h; cca ; ccb Þ:
from the authors).
Developing plots of the results is difficult because the average
cost per item depends on eight decision variables. Several numerical
values are used to describe the results near the optimum set of the
parameters. A representative sample of the 39,000 lowest costs con-
sidering the expected cost per unit versus the decision variables (m,
LB, LA, h, cca , ccb , W, and C) is shown in Table 1. The optimal design is
as follows: the sampling intervals are m0 ¼ 2; L0B ¼ 68; L0A ¼ 5 and
h0 = 8; the effectiveness of the different types of maintenance are
cca ¼ 0:85 and ccb ¼ 0:68; and the inner and outer limits are
W0 = 0.45 and C0 = 1.60, respectively. This design results in an aver-
age cost per unit of $2.066. From Table 1, the values of m, C, and cca
decrease as they become closer to the optimum set of values. Alter-
natively, the values of LB, h, W, and ccb increase as they approach the
optimum values. In addition, the value of LA initially increases, then
decreases and then stabilizes.
260 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262

The current proposal is 11.8% cheaper than the approach pre- Table 2
sented in Ho et al. (2007), which has a single sampling interval Factors and levels of the factorial experiment.

of m0 ¼ L0A ¼ L0B ¼ 38; h ¼ 1; W ¼ C ¼ 1:46; cca ¼ ccb ¼ 1 and an Dummy Codes of dummy
average cost of $2.310. When compared with the proposal in Ho variables
and Quinino (in press), our proposal is 8.5% cheaper. The proposal Dj1 0 1 1
in Ho and Quinino (in press) has two sampling intervals, Dj2 1 0 1
mo ¼ 3; LoA ¼ LoB ¼ 55; h ¼ 3; W o ¼ 0:70; C o ¼ 1:64; cca ¼ ccb ¼ 1, and Values of the levels
an average cost of $2.242. Our approach includes the earlier ap- Factor 1st 2nd 3rd
proaches presented by Ho et al. (2007) and Ho and Quinino (in
D1 – Cost to inspect (CI) 0.2125 0.2500 0.2875
press). Both of the previous approaches can be viewed as special D2 – Cost to send a non-conforming 17 20 23
cases of our proposal. item (Cn)
The results presented in Table 1 are useful, but they do not D3 – Cost to scrap an inspected item 1.7 2.0 2.3
clearly indicate which input parameters have the greatest impact (CD)
D4 – Cost for a perfect corrective 1190 1400 1610
on the cost function. The identification of these parameters is par-
maintenance (Ca)
ticularly important once they are not free of errors, and the input D5 – Cost for a 50% effectiveness 425 500 575
parameters that produce a larger impact on the average cost re- corrective maintenance (Cai)
quire more attention. Our experience, which is based on real cases D6 – Fixed cost for a corrective 340 400 460
in economical control implantation, indicates that a maximum er- maintenance (Cf)
D7 – The (out-of-control) process 0.85 1.00 1.15
ror of 15% in the input parameters is reasonable if their evaluation mean (l1)
is carefully conducted. Clearly, other values might be used for the D8 – Probability of a shift in the 0.85 1.00 1.15
method discussed below. process mean p  103
Consider the structure of a 3k factorial experiment with k = 8
factors, i.e., input parameters. Such a design has 38 = 6561 combi-
of the nonlinear model TðW; C; m; LA ; LB ; h; cC a ; ccb Þ discussed in this
nations. For each factor (input parameter), the value described in
article. The error is assumed to follow a normal distribution with
the beginning of this section is set as the reference level, and the
a mean equal to zero and a constant variance.
other two levels are fixed at the reference level ±15%. Two dummy
The factors (input parameters), the levels and their respective
variables are defined as follows for each factor Dj:
dummy variables are summarized in Table 2.
8
The well-known least-squares method is used to obtain the param-
< ð0; 1Þ for 1st level
>
^ ¼ ðX0 XÞ1 X0 Y,
eter estimates of the multiple linear regression with b
ðDj1 ; Dj2 Þ ¼ ð1; 0Þ for 2nd level
>
: where Y is a vector (column) of dimension 6561x1 with the average
ð1; 1Þ for 3rd level cost per item of the 6561 treatments and X is a square matrix of
dimension 6561. The first element of the vector b ^ estimates the inter-
for j = 1, . . . , 8. The choice of which level will occur first, second or
cept. The next 16 coefficients are related to the main effects followed
third will not alter the results.
by 112 coefficients related to the effects of 2nd-order interactions, 448
A linear multiple regression model is employed to relate the
coefficients related to the effects of 3rd-order interactions, 1120 coef-
average cost per unit as the response variable and dummy variables
ficients related to the effects of 4th order interactions, 1792 coeffi-
as the explanatory variables. A linear model may be reasonably ana-
cients related to the effects of 5th-order interactions, 1792
lyzed in the region ±15% from the reference level. Such a model indi-
coefficients related to the effects of 6th-order interactions, 1024 coef-
cates the impact of each input parameter in a similar way to a
ficients related to the effects of 7th-order interactions and 256 coeffi-
screening experiment. Note that a replication of any treatment will
cients related to the effects of 8th-order interactions.
provide the same response because TðW; C; m; LA ; LB ; h; cC a ; ccb Þ is a
At a fixed level of significance of 5%, the main effects are signifi-
deterministic function. The error associated with the regression
cant at a p-value <0.001, whereas the interactions of any order are
model arises due to the use of a linear model as an approximation
not significant. The assumptions (normality and constant variance)
related to the random error are valid, and a coefficient of determina-
Table 1 tion R2 = 99% was observed. In the second round, a non-saturated
Plots of the average cost versus the decision parameters. model with only the main effects is adjusted, and estimates of
^0 ; b
b ^j1 ; b
^j2 ; j ¼ 1; . . . ; 8 are obtained. The coefficients are significant
Order Cost ($) m LB LA h W C cc a cc b
at a 5% level with a p-value < 0.001 and a coefficient of determina-
1 2.065548 2 68 5 8 0.45 1.60 0.850 0.680
2 2.065549 2 67 4 8 0.44 1.61 0.850 0.674
tion R2 = 96%. The assumptions of normality and constant variance
3 2.065549 2 67 5 8 0.44 1.62 0.850 0.674 related to the random error are also valid in this case. With these
4 2.065550 2 68 4 8 0.44 1.62 0.853 0.673 estimates, the importance of each factor is calculated in two ways:
5 2.065550 2 67 4 7 0.43 1.62 0.855 0.671
         
         
          Table 3
19,950 2.083448 3 68 4 9 0.43 1.62 0.859 0.671 The relative impacts of the factors.
19,951 2.083448 4 65 6 10 0.43 1.62 0.859 0.645
19,952 2.083449 4 64 7 10 0.44 1.63 0.859 0.663 Factor Importance by
19,953 2.083449 4 65 6 10 0.44 1.63 0.850 0.671
Range (%) Sum of squares (%)
19,954 2.083449 5 66 6 6 0.43 1.63 0.859 0.645
          p 31.27 50.18
          l1 19.97 22.33
          Cn 13.19 8.97
38,996 2.127396 6 64 4 7 0.43 1.64 0.873 0.663 Ca 12.66 8.96
38,997 2.127396 6 65 3 6 0.42 1.64 0.839 0.671 Cai 9.47 4.66
38,998 2.127397 6 65 4 6 0.42 1.63 0.884 0.680 Cf 7.67 4.01
38,999 2.127398 6 64 3 6 0.42 1.64 0.884 0.671 CD 2.88 0.44
39,000 2.127403 6 63 4 6 0.42 1.61 0.839 0.663 CI 2.88 0.45
 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262
Fig. 2. The average cost by level of the factors CI, Cn, CD, Ca, Cai, Cf, l1 and p.
by the range of the estimates of the coefficients and by the propor-
tion of the sum of the squares. The range of the estimates of the coef-
ficients for each factor was used to evaluate the impact of each
factor on the cost function (importance by range). For more details,
see Green and Srinivasan (1990) and Malhotra (1999). For example,
the estimate of the coefficient (utility) of the first level of the factor j
^j1 , that of the second level is b
is b ^j2 and that of the third level is
ðb^j1  b^j2 Þ, in which b ^j1 and b
^j2 are obtained by the least-squares
method. The impact of factor j is proportional to the range
½maxðb ^j1 ; b
^j2 ; b
^j1  b
^j2 Þ  minðb
^j1 ; b
^j2 ; b
^j1  b
^j2 Þ when compared
with the range of the estimates of the coefficients of the other fac-
tors. Using this method, the impact of each factor is obtained, as
summarized in Table 3 (column 2). Note that factors D8, which is
the probability of a shift in the process mean (p), and D7, which is
the process mean when the process is out of control (l1), yield high-
er impacts of 31.3% and 20%, respectively. Thus, these factors re-
quire careful evaluation and estimation. Note that the costs
related to the maintenance (Ca, Cai and Cf) add up to 29.8%.
Montgomery (2001) suggested finding the importance of each
factor j as a percentage of the sum of the squares due to factor j
of the total of the sum of the squares. Table 3 presents the impor-
tance of the factors obtained in two ways. The ranks of the factors
using the two methods are identical. Both methods indicate that
the probability of a shift in the process mean (p) is the most impor-
tant. The second method ranked the shift in the process mean at
50%, whereas the first method ranked the shift at 31%. Special care
must be taken in the definition of the factors D8, the probability of
a shift in the process mean (p), and D7, the process mean when the
process is out of control (l1).
Descriptive statistics may help to understand these results. In
Fig. 2, plots of the average cost by each level of the factor are pre-
sented. An upward tendency of the average mean of the factors
that are considered more important is observed, whereas the aver-
age of the other factors is held constant when the levels are altered.
5. Conclusions
This paper generalizes the previous contributions of Ho et al.
(2007) and Ho and Quinino (in press) by considering an additional
inspection interval, two types of corrective maintenance and the
possibility of imperfect maintenance.
261
In this paper, we extend the system of control by implementing
control zones. Three zones are defined as follows: the green zone
(l0  W 6 Xi 6 l0 + W), the yellow zone (l0 + W 6 Xi < l0 + C) or
(l0  C < Xi 6 l0  W), and the red zone, (Xi > l0 + C) or (Xi < l0  C).
An observed value in the green zone indicates that the process is in
control and that the production should continue. However, a decision
in favor of an adjustment of the process is made if the observed value
falls within the red zone. Moreover, a sequential verification occurs if
an observed value is within in the yellow zone. If a sequence of hvalues
in the yellow zone is observed, then an adjustment is decided upon.
Moreover, adjustments may present performances in the range of
50% and 100%.
The aim is to find the values of m, LA, LB, h, W, C, cca and ccb that
minimize the average cost. According to the results presented in
Section 4, the inspection control and the policy presented in this
paper may yield at least equal or possibly more economical results
than those obtained by Ho et al. (2007) and Ho and Quinino (in
press).
Future research can be proposed on the basis of this work. For
example, the number of zones may increase. The tendency is to
introduce more automation into the process control so that the
more complex alternatives do not become overly complex for the
user. In addition, other distributions for the process failure mech-
anism can be developed. A natural candidate is the Weibull distri-
bution because it can take on a variety of shapes and mimic the
behavior of other distributions. Compared with the exponential/
geometric distribution, the Weibull distribution is more flexible
because it includes models with increasing or decreasing hazard
rates.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by CNPq Universal 472636/2009-
0. The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for
their constructive comments on the early version of this work,
which led to substantial improvements.
References
Adams, B.M., Woodall, W.H., 1989. An analysis of Taguchi’s on-line process control
procedure under a random-walk model. Technometrics 31, 401–413.
Ben-Daya, M., 1999. Integrated production maintenance and quality model for
imperfect processes. IIE Transactions 31 (6), 491–501.
262 L.L. Ho, R.C. Quinino / European Journal of Operational Research 222 (2012) 253–262
Ben-Daya, M., Rahim, M.A., 2000. Effect of maintenance on the economic design of

x-control chart. European Journal of Operational Research 120 (1), 131–143.
Borges, W., Ho, L.L., Turnes, O., 2001. An analysis of Taguchi’s on-line quality
monitoring procedure for attributes with diagnosis errors. Applied Stochastic
Models in Business and Industry 17, 261–276.
Chou, S.Y., Wang, M.C., 2007. Setting policy for on-line process control with
dynamic characteristics. Communications in Statistics—Simulation and
Computation 36, 217–232.
Dasgupta, T., 2003. An economic inspection interval for control of the defective
items in a hot rolling mill. Journal of Applied Statistics. 30 (3), 273–282.
Dasgupta, T., Mandal, A., 2008. Estimation of process parameters to determine the
optimum diagnosis interval for control of defective items. Technometrics 50,
167–181.
Ding, J., Gong, L., 2008. The effect of testing equipment shift on optimal decisions in
a repetitive testing process. European Journal of Operational Research 186,
330–350.
Green, P.E., Srinivasan, V., 1990. Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments
with implications for research and practice. Journal of Marketing 54, 3–19.
Ho, L.L., Quinino, R.C., in press. The variable sampling interval (VSI) in an analysis of
Taguchi’s on line quality monitoring procedure for variables. Communications
in Statistics – Theory and Methods.
Ho, L.L., Medeiros, P.G., Borges, W., 2007. An alternative model for on-line quality
monitoring for variables. International Journal of Production Economics 107,
202–222.
Ivy, J.S., Nembhard, H.B., 2005. A modeling approach to maintenance decisions
using statistical quality control and optimization. Quality and Reliability
Engineering International 21 (4), 355–366.
Kuo, Y., 2006. Optimal adaptive control policy for joint machine maintenance and
product quality control. European Journal of Operational Research 171 (2), 586–
597.
Lam, K.K., Rahim, M.A., 2002. A sensitivity analysis of an integrated model for joint
determination of economic design of control charts, economic production
quantity and production run length for a deteriorating production system.
Quality and Reliability Engineering International 18 (4), 305–320.
Liao, G.L., 2007. Optimal production correction and maintenance policy for
imperfect process. European Journal of Operational Research 182 (3), 1140–
1149.
Linderman, K., McKone-Sweet, K., Anderson, J.C., 2005. An integrated systems
approach to process control and maintenance. European Journal of Operational
Research 164 (2), 324–340.
Makis, V., Fung, J., 1995. Optimal preventive replacement, lot sizing and inspection
policy for a deteriorating production system. Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering 1 (4), 41–55.
Malhotra, N.K., 1999. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. Prentice-Hall.
Inc..
Montgomery, D.C., 2001. Design and Analysis of Experiments, fifth ed. John Wiley &
Sons Inc..
Montgomery, D.C., 2009. Introduction to Statistical Quality Control, sixth ed. John
Wiley & Sons Inc..
Nandi, S.N., Sreehari, M., 1999. Some improvements in Taguchi’s economic method
allowing continued quality deterioration in production process.
Communications in Statistics – Theory and Methods 28 (5), 1169–1181.
Nayebpour, M.R., Woodall, W.H., 1993. An analysis of Taguchi’s on-line quality
monitoring procedure for attributes. Technometrics 35, 53–60.
Panagiotidou, S., Nenes, G., 2009. An economically designed, integrated quality and
maintenance model using an adaptive Shewhart chart. Reliability Engineering &
System Safety 94 (3), 732–741.
Panagiotidou, S., Tagaras, G., 2010. Statistical process control and condition-based
maintenance: a meaningful relationship through data sharing. Production and
Operations Management 19 (2), 156–171.
Quinino, R., Colin, E.C., Ho, L.L., 2010. Diagnostic errors and repetitive sequential
classifications in on-line process control by attributes. European Journal of
Operation Research 201 (1), 231–238.
Srivastava, M.S., Wu, Y., 1991. A second order approximation on Taguchi’s on-line
procedures. Communications in Statistics – Theory and Methods 20, 2149–
2168.
Srivastava, M.S., Wu, Y., 1995. An improved version of Taguchi’s on-line control
procedure. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 43, 133–145.
Tagaras, G., 1988. An integrated cost model for the joint optimization of the process
control and maintenance. Journal of The Operation Research Society 39 (8),
757–766.
Taguchi, G., 1985. Quality engineering in Japan. Communications in Statistics –
Theory and Methods 14, 2785–2801.
Taguchi, G., Elsayed, E.A., Hsiang, T., 1989. Quality Engineering in Production in
Systems. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Taguchi, G., Chowdhury, S., Wu, Y., 2004. Taguchi’s Quality Engineering –
Handbook. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New Jersey.
Trindade, A., Ho, L.L., Quinino, R., 2007. Monitoring process for attributes with
quality deterioration and diagnosis errors. Applied Stochastic Models in
Business and Industry 23 (4), 339–358.
Wang, C.H., 2006. Optimal production and maintenance policy for imperfect
production systems. Naval Research Logistics 53 (2), 151–156.
Wang, C.H., Sheu, S.H., 2003. Determining the optimal production-maintenance
policy with inspection errors: using a Markov Chain. Computers & Operation
Research 30 (1), 1–17.
Wang, M.C., Yue, J., 2001. Economic design of process adjustment for on-line
control. International Journal of Production Research 29, 805–823.
Western Electric Company, 1956. Statistical Quality Control Handbook, Western
Electric Company, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana.
Yeung, T.G., Cassady, C.R., Schneider, K., 2007. Simultaneous optimization of X
control chart and aged-based preventive maintenance policies under an
economic objective. IIE Transactions 40, 147–159.
Zhang, C.W., Xie, M., Goh, T.N., 2008. Economic design of cumulative count of
conforming charts under inspection by samples. International Journal of
Production Economics 111, 93–104.
Zhou, W.H., Zhu, G.L., 2008. Economic design of integrated model of control chart
and maintenance management. Mathematical and Computer Modeling 47 (11–
12), 1389–1395.