A different and simple approach for comparing sampling methods in quality control

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to measure the performance of a sampling method through the average number of samples drawn in control. Design/methodology/approach – Matching the adjusted average time to signal (AATS) of sampling methods, using as a reference the AATS of one of them the paper obtains the design parameters of the others. Thus, it will be possible to obtain, in control, the average number of samples required, so that the AATS of the mentioned sampling methods may be equal to the AATS of the method that the paper uses as the reference. Findings – A more robust performance measure to compare sampling methods because in many cases the period of time where the process is in control is greater than the out of control period. With this performance measure the paper compares different sampling methods through the average total cost per cycle, in systems with Weibull lifetime distributions: three systems with an increasing hazard rate (shape parameter b=2, 4 and 7) and one system with a decreasing failure rate (b=0, 8). Practical implications – In a usual production cycle where the in control period is much larger than the out of control period, particularly if the sampling costs and false alarms costs are high in relation to malfunction costs, the paper thinks that this methodology allows us a more careful choice of the appropriate sampling method. Originality/value – To compare the statistical performance between different sampling methods using the average number of samples need to be inspected when the process is in control. Particularly, the paper compares the statistical and economic performance between different sampling methods in contexts not previously considered in literature. The paper presents an approximation for the average time between the instant that failure occurs and the first sample with the process out of control, as well