Harvard university Statistical Process Control Project Excel Sheet the Excel document containing your work on the SPC project. All answers should be record

Harvard university Statistical Process Control Project Excel Sheet the Excel document containing your work on the SPC project. All answers should be recorded in the Excel document, or you may type the memos and the answers in a separate Word document. Statistical Process Control Project (Frito-Lay)
x1
x2
Sample 1
1.98
2.11
Sample 2
1.99
2.00
Sample 3
2.20
2.10
Sample 4
2.18
2.01
Sample 5
2.01
2.08
x3
2.15
2.08
2.20
2.23
2.14
x4
2.06
1.99
2.05
1.98
2.16
̅X
Current Set Limits
UCL
2.22
New Process Limits
UCL
Current Set Limits
LCL
1.98
New Process Limits
LCL
Stensil Fertilizer and Chemical Company SPC Case
Stensil Fertilizer and Chemical Company produces both organic and inorganic fertilizers. Organic fertilizers are generally safe,
presence of hazardous waste materials (hazmat). Most bags contain some hazardous content, but theoretically there should
(PPM). The quality control department at Stensil feels that there is no problem with hazardous material content, which has b
estimates that a substantial investment would be required to lower the amount of this contaminant. These two departments
that a control chart be set up to monitor hazmat content. Five samples will be tested per day and plotted as one point on the
the limits are in place for this process, use Table 2 to determine whether or not the process remains in control for the week o
Table 1
Date
August
September
2
3
4
5
6
9
10
11
12
13
16
17
18
19
20
23
24
25
26
27
30
31
1
2
3
1
57
56
40
52
57
62
40
64
58
60
52
55
47
50
51
51
45
50
55
49
59
36
50
44
70
2
54
54
70
58
42
49
39
50
53
50
47
40
48
50
50
50
47
35
70
38
62
33
67
52
45
Samples
3
62
47
58
40
52
42
49
42
52
41
48
56
50
49
51
49
70
48
50
64
40
49
53
46
50
4
45
42
45
52
58
33
59
57
48
41
58
49
50
51
51
50
46
39
30
36
54
48
43
47
47
5
36
62
44
46
59
55
48
50
50
50
40
45
48
51
62
50
36
47
51
47
64
56
40
44
41
̅X
50.8
52.2
51.4
49.6
53.6
48.2
47
52.6
52.2
48.4
49
49
48.6
50.2
53
50
48.8
43.8
51.2
46.8
55.8
44.4
50.6
46.6
50.6
R
26
20
30
18
17
29
20
22
10
19
18
16
3
2
12
2
34
15
40
28
24
23
27
8
29
nic fertilizers are generally safe, but inorganic fertilizers are carefully monitored by the EPA due to the
t, but theoretically there should be none. The EPA allowable specification is 90 parts per million
us material content, which has been averaging just over 50 PPM. The production department
minant. These two departments, after consulting with the marketing department and the EPA, suggest
and plotted as one point on the chart. Use the data in Table 1 to set up the control limits. Then, after
emains in control for the week of September 6—10.
Table 2
Date
September
6
7
8
9
10
1
63
57
45
48
45
2
49
70
38
52
53
Samples
3
50
45
46
39
48
4
45
52
54
57
46
5
53
61
52
61
66
SPC Project Instructions
Complete SPC Project (Submit this week) – See details below in blue.
PLEASE NOTE: If the population standard deviation is provided, then use it for this project,
otherwise if it is not provided, then refer to Table S6.1 in your textbook (page 251 in the
Pearson 13th edition).
There are two cases in this project. Below are the details on the two cases in the SPC
Project (Based on Chapter 6S Statistical Process Control). In this module, there is an Excel
spreadsheet labeled SPC Project – BLANK New_2019 that has the sample data and includes
spaces to add your SPC Control Chart data (for Case 1) and includes the data to build the
SPC Charts in Case 2. That Excel file should be submitted during Week 4. Make sure to
substitute your name for the word BLANK when you save the Excel file.
Case 1: Frito-Lay Salt Test
A. Read the first case (Frito-Lay) description below.
B. Watch the video in this module for the Frito-Lay case (the video must be watched in its
entirety to get full credit).
C. You must also submit a Word document containing a memo to Angela McCormack and
answering the additional two questions.
Case 1 Description
Frito-Lay, the multi-billion-dollar snack food giant, produces billions of pounds of product
every year at its dozens of U.S. and Canadian plants. From the farming of potatoes-in
Florida, North Carolina, and Michigan-to factory and to retail stores, the ingredients and
final product of Lay’s chips, for example, are inspected at least 11 times: in the field, before
unloading at the plant, after washing and peeling, at the sizing station, at the fryer, after
seasoning when bagged (for weight), at carton filling, in the warehouse, and as they are
placed on the store shelf by Frito-Lay personnel. Similar inspections take place for its other
famous products, including Cheetos, Fritos, Ruffles, and Tostitos.
In addition to these employee inspections, the firm uses proprietary vision systems to look
for defective potato chips. Chips are pulled off the high-speed line and checked twice if the
vision system senses them to be too brown.
The company follows the very strict standards of the American Institute of Baking (AIB),
standards that are much tougher than those of the U.S Food and Drug Administration. Two
unannounced AIB site visits per year keep Frito-Lay’s plant on their toes. Scores,
consistently in the “excellent” range, are posted, and every employee knows exactly how
the plant is doing.
There are two key metrics in Frito-Lay’s continuous improvement quality program: (1)
total customer complaints (measured on a complaints per million bag basis) and (2) hourly
or daily statistical process control scores (for oil, moisture, seasoning, and salt content, for
chip thickness, for fryer temperature, and for weight).
In the Florida plant, Angela McCormack, who holds engineering and MBA degrees, oversees
a 15-member quality assurance staff. They watch all aspects of quality, including training
employees on the factory floor, monitoring automated processing equipment, and
developing and updating statistical process control (SPC) charts. The upper and lower
control limits for one check point, salt content in Lay’s chip, are 2.22% (UCL) and 1.98%
(LCL), respectively. To see exactly how the limits are created using SPC, watch the Frito Lay
Control Charts video in the Module below that accompanies this case.
In the Excel document (below in this Module) you are going to create a new set of UCL and
LCL measurements based on the below sample data and using the provided population
parameter for standard deviation. Calculate the measurements and show your work.
Angela is evaluating a new salt process delivery system and wants to know if the upper and
lower control limits at 3 standard deviations for the new system will meet the upper and
lower controls specifications currently used (2.22 and 1.98). The population standard
deviation is s = .07 and each sample is n=4. In a Word document, write a memo to
Angela explaining whether or not the new salination process (from which we obtained the
sample data) is delivering a new set of UCL/LCL measurements that is within the
specifications set by the current set of control limits. In other words, does the new set of
UCL/LCL measurement exceed the prior limits (meaning it is unacceptable) or equals or is
less than the current specifications?
Additionally, in the same Word document, answer the following two critical thinking
questions about Frito-Lay’s current quality process.
Question 1: How much of an improvement in variability did Frito-Lay make by
implementing SPC?
Question 2: What are the steps Karen Engels and Barbara Boudreau go through as part
of a testing cycle?
The data (in percent) from the initial trial samples using the new salting process are:
Sample 1:
Sample 2:
Sample 3:
Sample 4:
Sample 5:
1.98
1.99
2.20
2.18
2.01
2.11
2.0
2.10
2.01
2.08
2.15
2.08
2.20
2.23
2.14
2.06
1.99
2.05
1.98
2.16
Case 2: Stensil Fertilizer and Chemical Co. Inorganic Fertilizer Testing
A. Read the second case (Stensil) description below (also found in the Excel file, second
tab).
B. Watch the second video in this module which explains how to build an SPC chart in Excel
(the video must be watched in its entirety to get full credit).
C. You must also submit a Word document containing a memo to Bill Evans, Quality Control
Manager for Stensil.
Case 2 Description
Stensil Fertilizer and Chemical Company produces both organic and inorganic fertilizers.
Organic fertilizers are generally safe, but inorganic fertilizers are carefully monitored by
the EPA due to the presence of hazardous waste materials (hazmat). Most bags contain
some hazardous content, but theoretically there should be none. The EPA allowable
specification is 90 parts per million (PPM). The quality control department at Stensil feels
that there is no problem with hazardous material content, which has been averaging just
over 50 PPM. The production department estimates that a substantial investment would be
required to lower the amount of this contaminant. These two departments, after consulting
with the marketing department and the EPA, suggest that a control chart be set up to
monitor hazmat content. Five samples will be tested per day and plotted as one point on
the chart. Use the data in Table 1 to set up the control limits. Then, after the limits are in
place for this process, use Table 2 to determine whether or not the process remains in
control for the week of September 6—10.
The Excel file includes a second tab for the Stensil Fertilizer Case (Case 2). This is the data
you need for the problem. Build an appropriate SPC X-bar Chart and R-chart for the Table 1
data on this tab of the Excel worksheet.
Then, test to determine whether the Table 2 data indicates the process is under control for
that period. Show your work for this part in the same Excel worksheet and submit it.
Assuming the role of Quality Control Analyst, write a memo (using Word) to the Manager of
Quality Control for Stensil Fertilizer & Chemical Company (Bill Evans) explaining the
process you went through and making a recommendation regarding current hazmat levels
in Stensil’s fertilizer.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment