6.14 Process Capability and Performance Indices
Key Takeaways
- Process Capability (Cp, Cpk) evaluates short-term potential assuming statistical control using within-subgroup variation, while Process Performance (Pp, Ppk) evaluates overall historical performance using long-term total standard deviation.
- Cp measures potential capability regardless of centering, whereas Cpk accounts for process centering relative to specification limits.
- Minimum capability benchmarks require Cpk >= 1.33 for existing processes and Cpk >= 1.67 for critical or new processes.
- Non-normal data must be transformed using Box-Cox (y^(lambda)) or Johnson transformation families before standard normal capability formulas are applied.
Evaluating baseline process capability is a central objective of the Measure phase. Process Capability compares the natural voice of the process (process variation, $6\sigma$) against the voice of the customer (specification limits, $\text{USL} - \text{LSL}$). Before conducting capability calculations, a Black Belt must verify two strict prerequisites:
- Statistical Stability: The process must be in a state of statistical control, free from special cause variation, as verified by control charts.
- Normality: Data must follow a standard Normal distribution (or be transformed to normality).
Capability ($C_p, C_{pk}$) vs. Performance ($P_p, P_{pk}$) Indices
Six Sigma maintains a strict distinction between short-term potential capability and long-term actual performance:
1. Short-Term Process Capability ($C_p, C_{pk}$)
Short-term capability represents the inherent technical capability of a stable process operating under controlled conditions over a short timeframe. It utilizes within-subgroup standard deviation ($\sigma_{\text{within}}$ or $\sigma_{\text{st}}$), estimated from control chart ranges or standard deviations:
2. Long-Term Process Performance ($P_p, P_{pk}$)
Long-term performance represents actual historical performance over extended time horizons, incorporating environmental shifts, raw material lot changes, and tool wear. It utilizes total sample standard deviation ($s_{\text{total}}$ or $s_{\text{lt}}$), calculated across all individual observations:
Mathematical Formulations of Capability Indices
Potential Capability Index ($C_p$)
$C_p$ measures the maximum potential capability of the process assuming the process mean $\mu$ is perfectly centered between specification limits. It ignores process centering:
Centered Capability Index ($C_{pk}$)
$C_{pk}$ accounts for actual process centering by evaluating capability relative to both Upper Specification Limit (USL) and Lower Specification Limit (LSL):
- Key Relationship: $C_{pk} \le C_p$ always. $C_{pk} = C_p$ only when the process mean is centered perfectly at the specification midpoint $\frac{\text{USL} + \text{LSL}}{2}$.
Taguchi Capability Index ($C_{pm}$)
Developed by Genichi Taguchi, $C_{pm}$ incorporates target centering loss by incorporating the squared deviation of the process mean from the target nominal value $T$:
Performance Indices ($P_p, P_{pk}$)
Calculated using identical formulas to $C_p$ and $C_{pk}$, but substituting overall long-term standard deviation $s_{\text{lt}}$ for $\sigma_{\text{st}}$:
Six Sigma Capability Benchmarks & Worked Numerical Example
| Capability Index ($C_{pk}$) | Sigma Level ($Z_{\text{st}}$) | Short-Term Defect Rate | Long-Term DPMO (with 1.5$\sigma$ shift) | Quality Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $0.67$ | $2.0\sigma$ | $4.55%$ (45,500 PPM) | 308,538 DPMO | Unacceptable |
| $1.00$ | $3.0\sigma$ | $0.27%$ (2,700 PPM) | 66,807 DPMO | Barely Capable (3-Sigma baseline) |
| $1.33$ | $4.0\sigma$ | $62.1$ PPM | 6,210 DPMO | Minimum Benchmark for existing processes |
| $1.67$ | $5.0\sigma$ | $0.57$ PPM | 233 DPMO | Required for critical/safety characteristics |
| $2.00$ | $6.0\sigma$ | $0.002$ PPM | 3.4 DPMO | World-Class Six Sigma Quality |
Worked Capability Calculation
A machining process produces shaft diameters with specifications $\text{LSL} = 19.80\text{ mm}$ and $\text{USL} = 20.20\text{ mm}$. Subgroup sample data ($n = 5$, $k = 20$ subgroups) yields a sample mean $\bar{\bar{x}} = 20.08\text{ mm}$, an average range $\bar{R} = 0.092\text{ mm}$, and an overall sample standard deviation $s_{\text{lt}} = 0.045\text{ mm}$. Using $d_2 = 2.326$ for $n = 5$:
- $\hat{\sigma}_{\text{st}} = \frac{\bar{R}}{d_2} = \frac{0.092}{2.326} = 0.03955\text{ mm}$.
- $C_p = \frac{20.20 - 19.80}{6 \times 0.03955} = \frac{0.40}{0.2373} = 1.685$.
- $C_{pu} = \frac{20.20 - 20.08}{3 \times 0.03955} = \frac{0.12}{0.11865} = 1.011$.
- $C_{pl} = \frac{20.08 - 19.80}{3 \times 0.03955} = \frac{0.28}{0.11865} = 2.360$.
- $C_{pk} = \min(1.011, 2.360) = 1.011$.
- Diagnosis: The potential capability is excellent ($C_p = 1.685 > 1.33$), but the process is off-center toward the USL, reducing $C_{pk}$ to $1.011$. Re-centering the process mean from $20.08$ to $20.00\text{ mm}$ will immediately raise $C_{pk}$ to $1.685$.
$Z$-Score Transformation & The 1.5$\sigma$ Shift
Process capability can be expressed on the Standard Normal Distribution $Z$-scale:
- The 1.5$\sigma$ Shift Assumption: Motorola empirical research established that over long-term operations, process means shift and drift by approximately $1.5\sigma$. Thus:
Handling Non-Normal Data: Data Transformations
When data violates normality (e.g., Anderson-Darling test $p$-value $< 0.05$), standard $C_{pk}$ equations produce severe calculation errors. Black Belts apply two primary transformation methods to achieve normality:
1. Box-Cox Power Transformation
The Box-Cox Transformation transforms skewed non-normal data $y$ into normal data $y^{(\lambda)}$ using a power parameter $\lambda$:
- Restriction: Box-Cox can ONLY be applied to strictly positive data ($y > 0$).
2. Johnson Transformation System
The Johnson Transformation fits non-normal data into one of three distribution families (Unbounded $S_U$, Bounded $S_B$, Log-Normal $S_L$), mapping complex non-normal data (including negative values or bounded data) into a Standard Normal distribution.
3. Non-Parametric Percentile Capability Method
If transformations fail, capability is computed directly from empirical percentiles ($P_{0.135}$, $P_{50}$, $P_{99.865}$):
A machining operation produces pins with an Upper Specification Limit (USL) of 110.0 mm and a Lower Specification Limit (LSL) of 90.0 mm. Process sampling reveals a stable process mean of 104.0 mm and a short-term standard deviation of 2.0 mm. What is the actual process capability index (Cpk)?
What primary operational distinction separates short-term Process Capability (Cpk) from long-term Process Performance (Ppk)?
A Black Belt attempts to apply a Box-Cox transformation to normalize cycle time data that includes zero and negative values resulting from a baseline offset adjustment. Why will the Box-Cox transformation fail?