SUPPLEMENT TO

CHAPTER 10
Acceptance Sampling

SUPPLEMENT OUTLINE Key Terms Learning

Introduction and Sampling Plans Solved Problems Objectives
Operating Characteristic Curve Discussion and Review Questions
After completing this supple-
Determining Single Sampling Plans Internet Exercises
ment, you should be able to:
Average Quality of Inspected Lots and Problems
Mini-Case: CRYSTAL S.A.
LO1 Explain acceptance
a Related Sampling Plan
sampling, and contrast
single and multiple
sampling plans.
LO2 Construct and use an
operating characteristic
curve.
LO3 Determine single sampling
plans.
LO4 Determine the average
quality of inspected lots,
and determine a related
sampling plan.
10S-2 PART 4 Quality
LO1
acceptance sampling A
form of inspection applied to
lots or batches of items
before or after a process to
judge conformance with
predetermined standards
(specifications).
Example 1
SOLUTION
sampling plan A plan that
specifies the sample size, the
number of samples, and the
acceptance/rejection criteria.
Introduction and Sampling Plans
Acceptance sampling is a form of inspection that is applied to lots or batches of items either
before or after a process. In the majority of cases, the lots represent incoming purchased items or
final products awaiting shipment to warehouses or customers. The purpose of acceptance sam-
pling is to decide whether a lot satisfies predetermined standards (specifications) for important
characteristics of the item. Lots that satisfy these standards are passed or accepted; those that do not
are rejected. Rejected lots may be subjected to 100 percent inspection or, if purchased, returned to
the supplier for credit or replacement (especially if destructive testing is involved).
The alternatives to acceptance sampling are (1) 100 percent inspection and (2) no inspection.
The decision of which one to choose is mainly based on the costs. A measure used is the break-
even point BEP:1
BEP = cost of inspection per item/cost of later repair due to a defective item
Let P = estimated proportion of defectives in the lot. The decision is:
If P ≈ BEP, use acceptance sampling.
If P > BEP, use 100% inspection.
If P < BEP but P is variable, use acceptance sampling.
If P < BEP and P is stable, don’t inspect.
A car assembly plant receives headlight assemblies from a new supplier in lots of 1,000 units. The
cost of testing a headlight assembly at receiving is $.10. If a defective headlight is assembled on a
car, the cost of disruption to the assembly line to replace the headlight is $100. It is expected that
only .05 percent to .1 percent of the headlight assemblies will be defective. Determine the extent
of inspection for the headlight assemblies.
BEP = $.1/$100 = .001. Because .001 ≈ .05% to .1%, perform acceptance sampling on the lot.
Noneconomic factors favouring acceptance sampling vs. 100 percent inspection include:
1. Time is short.
2. Destructive testing is required.
3. Fatigue or boredom caused by inspecting large numbers of items leads to inspection errors.
Acceptance sampling can be applied to both attribute (counts) and variable (measurements)
inspection. However, inspection of attributes is more widely used, so the discussion here focuses
exclusively on attribute acceptance sampling.
A key element of acceptance sampling is the sampling plan. Given the lot size N, a sampling
plan specifies the sample size, n; the number of samples to be taken; and the acceptance/rejection
criteria. A variety of sampling plans can be used. Some plans call for selection of a single sample,
and others call for two or more samples, depending on the nature of the plan. The following
briefly describes some of the different types of sampling plans. In this supplement, our focus will
be on single sampling, which is the simplest and most commonly used.
Single-Sampling Plans
In this plan, one random sample is drawn from the lot, and every item in the sample is examined
and classified as either “good” or “defective.” If the sample contains fewer than or equal to a speci-
fied number of defectives, c, the lot is accepted; otherwise (if it contains more than c defectives) the
lot is rejected.
1
A. V. Feigenbaum, Total Quality Control, 3rd ed., New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991, pp. 504–05.
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-3

Double-Sampling Plans
A double-sampling plan allows taking a second sample if the results of the initial sample are inconclu-
sive. Specifically, if the quality of the initial sample is high, the lot can be accepted without the need for
a second sample. If the quality in the initial sample is poor, the lot is rejected (and there is also no need
for a second sample). For results between those two cases, a second sample is then taken and the
items inspected, after which the lot is either accepted or rejected on the basis of the evidence obtained
from both samples. A double-sampling plan specifies the size of the initial sample, the accept/reject
criteria for the initial sample, the size of the second sample, and a single overall acceptance number.
With a double-sampling plan, two values are specified for the number of defective items in
the first sample, a lower level, c1, and an upper level, r1. For instance, the lower level might be
two defectives and the upper level might be five defectives. If the number of defective items in
the first sample is fewer than or equal to the lower value (i.e., c1), the lot is judged to be good and
sampling is terminated. Conversely, if the number of defectives in the first sample equals or
exceeds the upper value (i.e., r1), the lot is rejected. If the number of defectives in the first sample
falls somewhere in between c1 and r1, a second sample is taken and the total number of defec-
tives in both samples is compared to a third value, c2. For example, c2 might be six. If the com-
bined number of defectives does not exceed c2, the lot is accepted; otherwise, the lot is rejected.

Multiple-Sampling Plans
A multiple-sampling plan is similar to a double-sampling plan except that more than two samples
may be required. A multiple sampling plan will specify each sample size and two limits for each
sample. If, for any sample, the cumulative number of defectives found (i.e., those in the present
sample plus those found in all previous samples) is greater than or equal to the upper limit speci-
fied for that sample, sampling is terminated and the lot is rejected. If the cumulative number of
defectives is less than or equal to the lower limit, sampling is terminated and the lot is accepted. If
the cumulative number of defectives is between the two limits, another sample is taken. The pro-
cess continues until the lot is either accepted or rejected.

Choosing a Sampling Plan

The cost and time required for inspection often dictate the type of sampling plan used. The two
primary considerations are the number of samples needed and the total number of observations
required. Single-sampling plans involve only a single sample, but the sample size is larger than the
expected number of observations taken under double- or multiple-sampling plans. This stems
from the fact that a very good or very poor quality lot will often be accepted or rejected early in a
multiple-sampling plan, and sampling can be terminated. Where the cost to obtain a sample is
relatively high compared with the cost to analyze the observations, a single-sampling plan is more
desirable. Conversely, where item inspection costs are relatively high, such as destructive testing,
it may be better to use double or multiple sampling because the average number of items inspected
per lot will be lower. Another advantage of a single sampling plan is that it is easy to understand
and use. For this reason, we will focus on single sampling in this supplement.

Operating Characteristic Curve LO2

An important feature of a sampling plan is how it discriminates between lots of high and low quality.
The ability of a sampling plan to discriminate between lots of high and low quality is described by
its operating characteristic (OC) curve. A typical OC curve for a single-sampling plan is shown operating characteristic
in Figure 10S-1. The curve shows the probabilities of accepting lots with various qualities (proportion (OC) curve Curve that shows
defectives). For example, it shows that a lot with 3 percent defectives (a proportion of defectives of .03) the probabilities of accepting
would have a probability of .80 of being accepted (or a probability of 1.00 - .80 = .20 of being lots with various quality
rejected). Note the downward relationship: as lot quality decreases, the probability of lot acceptance (proportion defective).
decreases, although the relationship is not linear.
A sampling plan cannot provide perfect discrimination between good and bad lots; some low-
quality lots will inevitably be accepted, and some high-quality lots will inevitably be rejected.
Even lots containing more than 20 percent defectives still have some probability of being
accepted, whereas lots with as few as 3 percent defectives have some chance of being rejected.
10S-4 PART 4 Quality

Figure 10S-1 1.00

A typical OC curve. .90

.80

Probability of accepting the lot

.70

.60

.50

.40

.30

.20

.10

.00
0 .05 .10 .15 .20 .25
3% Lot quality (proportion defective)

acceptable quality level
(AQL) The percentage of
defects at which a consumer
(buyer) is willing to accept
lots as “good.”
The degree to which a sampling plan discriminates between good and bad lots is a function of
the steepness of its OC curve: the steeper the curve, the more discriminating the sampling plan
(see Figure 10S-2.) Principles of sampling imply that the larger the sample size n, the steeper the
curve. Note the curve for an ideal plan (i.e., one that can discriminate perfectly between good and
bad lots). To achieve that, you need to inspect 100 percent of each lot. Obviously, if you are going
to do that, theoretically all of the defectives can be eliminated (although errors due to boredom
might result in a few defectives remaining). However, the cost of additional discrimination may be
larger than the cost of additional inspection (i.e., it may not be cost-effective).
Buyers (or consumers) are generally willing to accept lots that contain small percentages of
defectives as “good,” especially if the cost related to a few defects is low. Often this percentage is
in the range of .01 to 2 percent. This figure is known as the acceptable quality level (AQL).
AQL should be set based on the criticality of the characteristic that is being inspected—the more
critical the characteristic, the smaller the AQL should be. For example, for spoons, the defect of
being cracked may have AQL of .5 percent whereas the defect of being scratched may have AQL
of 2 percent. Also, AQL should be set so that the good incoming lots have quality equal to AQL.
Otherwise the supplier will be overwhelmed with rejected lots and there may not be enough
accepted lots for the buyer to continue production. For example, if the incoming lots generally
have 1 to 4 percent defectives, then AQL should be set to 1 percent.

Figure 10S-2 1.00

The steeper the OC curve,
Ideal
the more discriminating the
sampling plan.
Probability of accepting the lot

Not very
discriminating

Better

0
“Good” “Bad”
Lot quality (proportion defective)
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-5

Because of the inability of random sampling to identify all lots that contain more than AQL
percentage of defectives, consumers (buyers) recognize that some lots that actually contain more
defectives than AQL will be accepted. However, there is usually an upper limit on the percentage
of defective items that a consumer is willing to tolerate in accepted lots. The percentage just larger
than this is known as the lot tolerance percent defective (LTPD). Thus, consumers want lot tolerance percent
quality equal to or better than the AQL, and are willing to live with poorer quality, but they prefer defective (LTPD) The
not to accept any lots with a defective percentage greater or equal to the LTPD. LTPD should also percentage just larger than
be set based on the criticality of the characteristic that is being inspected—the more critical the the upper limit of the
characteristic, the smaller the LTPD. Also, LTPD should be set so that the bad incoming lots have percentage of defectives
quality equal to LTPD. Otherwise the seller may receive more rejected lots than expected or the of a lot that a consumer is
buyer may lose the opportunity to demand higher quality for bad lots. For example, if the incom- willing to accept.
ing lots generally have 1 to 4 percent defectives, then LTPD should be set to 4 percent.
As mentioned above, sampling plans are not perfect in discriminating between good and bad consumer’s risk The
lots, i.e., mistakes will be made in acceptance of bad lots and rejection of good lots. The probabil- probability that a bad lot
ity that a bad lot containing defectives equal to the LTPD will be accepted is known as the containing defects equal to
consumer’s risk, or beta (β), or the probability of making a Type II error. On the other hand, the the LTPD will be accepted on
probability that a good lot containing defectives equal to the AQL will be rejected is known as the the basis of sample data.
producer’s risk, or alpha (α), or the probability of making a Type I error. Many sampling plans are
designed to have a producer’s risk of 5 percent and a consumer’s risk of 10 percent, although other producer’s risk The
combinations are also used. Figure 10S-3 illustrates an OC curve with the AQL, LTPD, producer’s probability that a good lot
risk, and consumer’s risk. Note that the probability of accepting a lot with AQL quality is 1 - α. containing defects equal to
A certain amount of insight is gained by constructing an OC curve. The probability of observ- the AQL will be rejected on
ing up to and including c defectives in a sample of size n from a lot with proportion of defectives P the basis of sample data.
is given by cumulative hyper-geometric formula:

NP N − NP NP ! 1N − NP2 !
ba b a
x n−x c x! 1NP − x2 !1n − x2 ! 1N − NP − n + x2 !
c
P1x ≤ c2 = a = a (10S-1)
N N!
x=0
a b x=0
n n !1N − n2 !

1.00 Figure 10S-3

.95 ␣ = .05
An OC curve with the AQL,
.90
LTPD, producer’s risk α, and
consumer’s risk β.
.80

.70
Probability of accepting the lot

.60

.50

.40

.30

.20

.10
␤ = .10
.00
0 .05 .10 .15 .20 .25
AQL LTPD proportion defective
Indifferent in the lot
“Good” “Bad”
10S-6 PART 4 Quality

N
where x = number of defectives in the sample, and a b represents the number of combinations
n
(different ways) of choosing a sample of n from the lot N, etc. Note that the expected number of
defectives in the lot is NP. Intuitively, probability of observing x defectives in a sample of size n
from a lot of size N equals the number of ways to choose x defectives from all the defectives in the
lot (NP) times numbers of ways to pick n - x nondefectives from all the nondefectives in the lot
(N  - NP) over the number of ways to choose a sample of n from the population N. For example,
suppose a short quiz will contain two questions. Each question is from a different topic. There are
four topics. You know two out of the four topics. There will be six different pairs of topics in the
quiz. One pair you know both questions, and another you don’t know either question. The remain-
ing pairs contain one question you know and one you don’t. There are four of these because there
are two ways to get the question you know multiplied by two ways to get the question you don’t
know. The probably that you will know both questions is 1/6, the probably that you will not know
either question is 1/6, and the probability that you will know exactly 1 of the two questions is 4/6.
Because there are no hyper-geometric tables, if the lot size N is large relative to sample size n
n
(so that ≤ 0.1 ) we can approximate the hyper-geometric probabilities by binomial probabilities.
N
The difference is that binomial probabilities assume that a sampled item is put back in a lot after
being inspected before the next item is selected from the lot. The probability of observing up to
and including c defectives in a sample (with replacement) of size n from a lot with proportion
defective P is given by cumulative binomial formula:
c
n!
P1x ≤ c2 = a P x 11 − P2 n−x (10S-2)
x=0
x !1n − x2 !

where x = number of defectives in the sample.

Example 2 Draw the OC curve for a situation in which a sample of n = 10 items is drawn from a lot contain-
ing N = 2,000 items, and the lot is accepted if no more than c = 1 defect is found and rejected if 2
or more defects are found in the sample.
SOLUTION Because the sample size is small relative to the lot size (10/2000 = .005 < .1), it is reasonable to
use the binomial distribution to obtain the probabilities that a lot will be accepted for various lot
qualities. Although we can use formula 10S-2 to calculate the probabilities, it is easier to use a
binomial table. A portion of the cumulative binomial table found at the end of this supplement is
reproduced here to facilitate the discussion.

PROPORTION DEFECTIVE, p

n x .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60

10 0 .5987 .3487 .1969 .1074 .0563 .0282 .0135 .0060 .0025 .0010 .0003 .0001
c=1 1 .9139 .7361 .5443 .3758 .2440 .1493 .0860 .0464 .0233 .0107 .0045 .0017
→ 2 .9885 .9298 .8202 .6778 .5256 .3828 .2616 .1673 .0996 .0547 .0274 .0123
3 .9990 .9872 .9500 .8791 .7759 .6496 .5138 .3823 .2660 .1719 .1020 .0548

To use the table, select various lot qualities (values of p listed across the top of the table), begin-
ning with .05, and find the probability that a lot with that percentage of defects would be accepted
(i.e., the probability of finding zero or one defect in this case). For p = .05, the probability of one or
no defects is .9139. For a lot with 10 percent defective (i.e., a proportion defective of .10), the
probability of one or fewer defects drops to .7361, and for 15 percent defective, the probability of
acceptance is .5443. In effect, you simply read the probabilities across the row for c = 1. By plot-
ting these points (e.g., .05 and .9139, .10 and .7361) on a graph and connecting them, you obtain
the OC curve illustrated in Figure 10S-4.
If the lot size N is large relative to sample size n (so that n/N ≤ 0.1) and np < 5, we can approxi-
mate the binomial probabilities by the Poisson probabilities. The probability of observing up to
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-7

1.00 Figure 10S-4

.9139 QC curve for single sampling plan
.90
n = 10, c = 1.
.80
.7361
.70
Probability of acceptance

.60
.5443
.50

.40
.3758

.30
.2440
.20
.1493 .0233
.0107
.10 .0860 .0045
.0464 .0017

.00
0 .10 .20 .30 .40 .50 .60
Proportion defective in lot

and including c defectives in a sample of size n from a lot with proportion defectives P is given by
cumulative Poisson formula:
c e −nP 1nP2 x
P1x ≤ c2 = a (10S-3)
x=0
x!
where x = number of defectives in the sample. The Poisson approximation involves treating the
mean of the binomial distribution (i.e., np) as the mean of the Poisson (i.e., μ ): μ = np. As with the
binomial distribution, you select various values of lot quality, p, and then determine the probability
of accepting a lot (e.g., finding up to and including c defects) by either using formula 10S-3 or referring
to the cumulative Poisson table in Appendix B, Table C. Values of p in increments of .01 are often
used in this regard. Example 3 illustrates the use of the Poisson table in constructing an OC curve.

Use the cumulative Poisson table at the end of the textbook to construct an OC curve for the Example 3
following single sampling plan:
N = 5,000, n = 80, c = 2

Note that 80/5,000 = .016 < .1 and np < 5 for most means below. Therefore, we can use the SOLUTION
Poisson distribution.
Pac = [P (x ≤ 2) from
Selected Values of p μ = np Appendix B Table C]

.01 80(.01) = 0.8 .953

.02 80(.02) = 1.6 .783
.03 80(.03) = 2.4 .570
.04 80(.04) = 3.2 .380
.05 80(.05) = 4.0 .238
.06 80(.06) = 4.8 .143
.07 80(.07) = 5.6 .082
.08 80(.08) = 6.4 .046
10S-8 PART 4 Quality

The probabilities of acceptance, Pac, are drawn against lot proportion defectives P to construct
the OC curve:

Pac
1.00

N = 5,000
.80 n = 80
c = 2
.60

.40

.20

.00
.01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08
Proportion defective

As mentioned above, as long as lot size N is large enough relative to n, it will not have a sig-
nificant effect on the OC curve. However, the parameters n (sample size) and c (acceptance num-
ber) of a single sampling plan do affect the shape of the OC curve. To illustrate this, given c = 2, the
OC curves for various n values are shown in Figure 10S-5. As expected, the OC curve becomes
steeper (will have more discriminatory power) as n increases.
On the other hand, for fixed sample size (n = 80), the OC curve becomes steeper (will have
more discriminatory power) as acceptance number c decreases (see Figure 10S-6). Perhaps it is
easier to understand this by considering very large c values: in this case, most lots will be accepted,
i.e., no discrimination.

Figure 10S-5 c=2

1.00
Probability of acceptance of the lot

Effect of sample size n on the .90

n = 80
shape of the OC curve. .80
n = 50
.70
n = 125
.60
n = 200
.50
.40
.30
.20
.10
.00
.01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .1 .11 .12 .13
Proportion defective

Figure 10S-6 n = 80
1.00
Effect of acceptance number c on .90 c=0
Probability of acceptance

.80 c=1
the shape of the OC curve.
.70
c=2
.60
c=3
.50
.40
.30
.20
.10
.00
.01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .1 .11 .12 .13
Proportion defective
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-9

Determining Single Sampling Plans LO3

A sampling plan and its operating characteristic (OC) curve have a one-to-one relationship.
Therefore, determining the sample size n and acceptance number c is equivalent to deter-
mining the sampling plan’s OC curve. One way to determine an OC curve is to specify two
points on it, for example, the two points (AQL, 1 - α) and (LTPD, β). Another approach, MIL-
STD-105E, created by the U.S. Armed Forces, uses the point (AQL, 1 - α), lot size N, and a
chosen inspection level to determine the sampling plan. We will illustrate these methods
below.

Using (AQL, 1 - α) and (LTPD, β)

Substituting (AQL, 1 - α) in the cumulative binomial formula 10S-2:
c
n!
1−α= a 1AQL2 x 11 − AQL2 n−x (10S-4)
x=0
x !1n − x2 !

Substituting (LTPD, β) in the cumulative binomial formula 10S-2:

c
n!
β= a 1LTPD2 x 11 − LTPD2 n−x (10S-5)
x=0
x !1n − x2 !

We can try to solve equations (10S-4) and (10S-5) simultaneously to determine the two
unknown quantities n and c. However, this is not easy because these equations are nonlinear.
Fortunately, Larson has determined a nomograph (a graphical calculating device) that will provide
the solution (Figure 10S-7, located at the end of this supplement).

Suppose AQL = .02 with α = 5% and LTPD = .08 with β = 10%. Use Larson’s nomograph at the Example 4
end of this supplement to determine n and c.

Larson’s nomograph can be used as follows: the vertical line on the left-hand side is for lot per- SOLUTION
centage defectives such as AQL and LTPD. The vertical line on the right-hand side is for the prob-
ability of lot acceptance such as (1 - α) and β. Connect AQL with (1 - α) and LTPD with β with
straight lines. The intersection of these two lines gives the sample size n and acceptance number c.
In this case, n = 90 and c = 3 (see Figure 10S-7).

Using MIL-STD-105E
The MIL-STD-105E uses the point (AQL, .95), the lot size N, the level of inspection desired,
and the type of inspection required (depending on the past history of the supplier) to deter-
mine n and c.
The inspection level determines the relationship between the lot size and sample size. There
are three general inspection levels (I, II, and III) and four special inspection levels (S-1 to S-4). Level
II is designated as normal. Level I requires about half the amount of inspection as level II, and is
used when reduced sampling is required and a lower level of discrimination can be tolerated.
Level III requires about twice the amount of inspection as level II, and is used when more dis-
crimination is needed. The four special inspection levels S-1,S-2,S-3,S-4 use very small samples,
and should be used when small sample sizes are necessary, and when large sampling risks can be
tolerated.
There are three types of inspection (other than Discontinue inspection): Normal inspection,
Reduced inspection, and Tightened inspection. Reduced inspection results in smaller n (less dis-
crimination after a good history) and Tightened inspection results in larger n (more discrimina-
tion after a bad history). The Discontinue inspection requires corrective action by the supplier
10S-10 PART 4 Quality

before any new lots are purchased. The switching rules between the four inspection types are
displayed below:2

10 consecutive 5 consecutive
batches not batches not
rejected rejected

Reduced Normal Tightened Discontinue

inspection inspection inspection inspection
1 batch not 2 of 5 5 consecutive
accepted consecutive batches remain
batches rejected on tightened
inspection

The following website will provide n and c according to the MIL-STD-105E: http://www.sqcon-
line.com/mil-std-105.html. Alternatively, a copy of the MIL-STD-105E document, which includes
results tables, can be found online, e.g., at http://www.dianyuan.com/bbs/u/39/1142140688.pdf.

Example 5 Suppose lot size N is 2,000 and AQL is 1 percent. We would like to use Normal type of inspection
at general inspection level 2. Determine the sample size n and the acceptance number c.

SOLUTION In sqconline.com/military-standard-105e-tables-sampling-attributes we choose the right range for

N and check to see that default values for AQL, inspection level, and type of inspection are right.
We click on Submit.

2
http://www.sqconline.com/switching_rules_enter.php4.
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-11

The values for n and c for single sampling appear: n = 125 and c = 3 (see image below). As an
added bonus, the results for double sampling plan, which has a similar OC curve, and the OC
curve are also provided:
http://www.sqconline.com

Average Quality of Inspected Lots and a Related LO4

Sampling Plan
It is fair to expect that acceptance sampling would reduce the proportion of defective items accepted.
Indeed, this is the case, provided that the rejected lots are not resubmitted for acceptance sampling
without improvement in quality. If they are, they will eventually be accepted and the whole point of
acceptance sampling is lost (i.e., the quality of accepted items will be the same as the quality of incom-
ing or rejected items). This fact can be seen by considering the following example: suppose that the
probability of a bad lot being accepted is .1. If this lot is rejected and is returned to the supplier but the
supplier sends it back to the customer unchanged, and this process is repeated 40 times, the probabil-
ity of acceptance within 40 tries is .1 + .9(.1) + .92(.1) + . . . + .939(.1) = .985. Therefore, the buyer has
to either require the supplier to perform 100 percent inspection of rejected lots or do it himself.
10S-12 PART 4 Quality

average outgoing quality
(AOQ) Average percentage
defective of accepted lots
assuming that rejected lots
are 100 percent inspected
and defective items in those
lots are replaced with good
items.
The average outgoing quality (AOQ) of the inspected lots is average percentage
defective of accepted lots assuming that rejected lots are 100 percent inspected and defective
items in those lots are replaced with good items. AOQ can be calculated using the following
formula:
N−n
AOQ = Pac × pa b (10S-6)
N
where
Pac = Probability of accepting the lot
p = Lot proportion defective
N = Lot size
n = Sample size
In practice, the last term in (10S-6) is often omitted because it is usually close to 1.0 and there-
fore has little effect on the resulting values. The formula then becomes:

AOQ = Pac × p (10S-7)

Example 6 Construct the AOQ curve for N = 500, n = 10, and c = 1 using formula 10S-7:

SOLUTION Let values of p vary from .05 to .40 in steps of .05. You can read the probabilities of acceptance, Pac,
from the binomial table at the end of this supplement.

AOQ = Pac × p
(Outgoing proportion defective)

Approximate AOQL = .082

.08
P Pac AOQ

.05 .9139 .046 .06

AOQ

.10 .7361 .074

.15 .5443 .082 .04
.20 .3758 .075
.25 .2440 .061 .02
.30 .1493 .045
.35 .0860 .030 .00
.10 .20 .30 .40
.40 .0464 .019
Incoming proportion defective

average outgoing quality
limit (AOQL) The worst
quality of outgoing (i.e.,
accepted) items.
Note that the average outgoing quality is best for either very good lots or very bad lots (i.e., the
outgoing proportion defective is least for lots with either very low or very high incoming propor-
tion defective). The reason very bad lots also will have high outgoing quality is that they will likely
be rejected and then 100 percent inspected and rectified.
A quantity of interest to the buyer is the maximum outgoing proportion defective, also called
average outgoing quality limit (AOQL). AOQL is the worst quality of outgoing (i.e., accepted)
items. In Example 6, the AOQL is approximately 8 percent, associated with incoming lots of
approximately 15 percent defective.
.4
An approximate value for AOQL can be obtained using the formula 11.25c + 12 .3 For
n
.4
Example 6, AOQL ≈ 11.25 × 1 + 12 = .09 , or 9%.
10

3
J. M. Juran and F. M. Gryna, Quality Planning and Analysis, 3rd ed., 1993, New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 25.13.
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-13

Key Terms
acceptable quality level (AQL) average outgoing quality limit (AOQL) operating characteristic (OC) curve
acceptance sampling consumer’s risk producer’s risk
average outgoing quality (AOQ) lot tolerance percent defective (LTPD) sampling plans

Solved Problems
Problem 1
A process for manufacturing shock absorbers for light trucks produces .5 percent defectives. Inspec-
tion cost per shock is $.40. Currently 100 percent inspection is performed, which is assumed to
catch all the defectives. If a defective shock absorber were to be installed on a truck, it must eventu-
ally be replaced at a cost of $120 per shock. Is 100 percent inspection justified?

Solution
The BEP = .4/120 = .0033 < .005, therefore 100 percent inspection is justified. However, if the
percentage defective is not stable, acceptance sampling should be used.

Problem 2
Shipments of 300 boxes of glassware are received at a warehouse. Random samples of five boxes are
checked, and the lot is rejected if more than one box contains a breakage. Construct the OC curve for
this sampling plan.

Solution
Because n/N = 5/300 = .0167 < .1, binomial distribution can be used to obtain the probabilities of
acceptance, Pac, for various lot percentage defectives. A portion of the cumulative binomial table is
shown below. Note that n = 5 and c = 1.

CUMULATIVE BINOMIAL PROBABILITIES

P = PROPORTION DEFECTIVE
n x .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30
5 0 .7738 .5905 .4437 .3277 .2373 .1681
c=1→ 1 .9974 .9185 .8352 .7373 .6328 .5282
2 .9988 .9914 .9734 .9421 .8965 .8369
3 1.0000 .9995 .9978 .9933 .9844 .9692
4 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9997 .9990 .9976
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

.35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80
.1160 .0778 .0503 .0313 .0185 .0102 .0053 .0024 .0010 .0003
.4284 .3370 .2562 .1875 .1312 .0870 .0540 .0308 .0156 .0067
.7648 .6826 .5931 .5000 .4069 .3174 .2352 .1631 .1035 .0579
.9460 .9130 .8688 .8125 .7438 .6630 .5716 .4718 .3672 .2627
.9947 .9898 .9815 .9688 .9497 .9222 .8840 .8319 .7627 .6723
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
10S-14 PART 4 Quality

The table indicates that Pac = .9974 when lot quality is 5 percent defective, .9185 when lot quality
is 10 percent defective, .8352 when 15 percent, and so on. The resulting operating characteristic
(OC) curve is:

Pac
1.00

.80 N = 300
n = 5
c = 1
.60

.40

.20

0 .10 .20 .30 .40 .50 .60 .70 .80 .90 1.00
Lot proportion defective

Problem 3
Develop the AOQ curve for the previous problem using formula 10S-7.

Solution
AOQ = Pac × p

(Values of probability of acceptance Pac, can be taken from the top portion of the binomial table
shown on the previous page)

Max = .158
.16
(Outgoing proportion defective)

.12
AOQ

.08

.04

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8
Incoming proportion defective, p

p Pac AOQ p Pac AOQ

.05 .9974 .050 .45 .2562 .115
.10 .9185 .092 .50 .1875 .094
.15 .8352 .125 .55 .1312 .072
.20 .7373 .147 .60 .0870 .052
.25 .6328 .158 .65 .0540 .035
.30 .5258 .158 .70 .0380 .027
.35 .4284 .150 .75 .0156 .012
.40 .3370 .135 .80 .0067 .005
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10
Discussion and Review Questions
1. What is acceptance sampling and what is its purpose?
LO1
2. How does acceptance sampling differ from process con-
trol using control charts? LO1
3. When should a buyer use sampling inspection vs. 100
percent inspection vs. no inspection? LO1
4. What general factors govern the choice between single-
sampling and multiple-sampling plans? LO1
5. What is an operating characteristic curve, and how is it
useful in acceptance sampling? LO2
6. Briefly explain or define each of these terms. LO2
a. AQL.
b. LTPD.
Internet Exercises
1. Visit http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/
section2/pmc22.htm, read about (a) sequential, and
(b) skip lot sampling plans, and define or explain
them. LO1
Problems
1. An assembly operation for the trigger mechanism of a
semiautomatic spray gun produces a small percentage of
defective mechanisms. Management must decide
whether to continue the current practice of 100 percent
inspection, perform acceptance sampling, or replace
defective mechanisms after final assembly when all
guns are inspected. Replacement at final assembly costs
$30 each; inspection during trigger assembly costs $12
per hour for labour and overhead. The inspection rate is
one trigger per minute. LO1
a. Would 100 percent inspection during trigger assem-
bly be justified if there are (1) 4 percent defective?
(2) 1 percent defective?
b. At what point would management prefer acceptance
sampling?
2. Random samples of n = 20 circuit breakers are tested for
damage caused by shipment in each lot of 4,000
received. Lots with more than one defective are pulled
and subjected to 100 percent inspection. LO2 & 4
Acceptance Sampling 10S-15
c. Producer’s risk.
d. Consumer’s risk.
7. When can each of the following distributions be used in
calculating the probability of acceptance of a lot? LO2
a. Hyper-geometric.
b. Binomial.
c. Poisson.
8. When would you use each of the four methods given in
this supplement for determining single sampling plans?
LO3
9. Explain or define each of the following: LO4
a. AOQ.
b. AOQL.
2. Visit http://www.astm.org/SNEWS/JF_2010/datapoints_
jf10.html, and summarize why we still need
acceptance sampling (given the existence of
control charts). LO1
a. Construct the OC curve for this sampling plan.
b. Construct the AOQ curve for this plan using formula
10S-7, assuming defectives found during 100 percent
inspection are replaced with good parts. What is the
approximate AOQL?
3. Auditors use a technique called discovery sampling in
which a random sample of items is inspected. If any
defects are found, the entire lot is subjected to
100 percent inspection. LO2 & 4
a. Draw an OC curve for the case where a sample of
15 credit accounts will be inspected out of a total of
8,000 accounts.
b. Draw an OC curve for the case where 150 accounts
out of 8,000 accounts will be examined. (Hint: Use
p = .001, .002, .003, . . .)
c. Draw the AOQ curve for the preceding case (part b),
and determine the approximate AOQL.
4. Random samples of lots of textbooks are inspected
for defective books just prior to shipment to the
10S-16 PART 4 Quality

publisher’s warehouse. Each lot contains 3,000 inspection at general inspection level II. Determine
books. LO2 the sample size n and acceptance number c using
a. On a single graph, construct OC curves for n = 100 MIL-STD-105E.4 LO3
and (1) c = 0, (2) c = 1, and (3) c = 2. (Hint: Use 8. A manufacturer of colour TV picture tubes is wondering
p = .001, .002, .003, . . .) if its current sampling procedure can be improved.5 Cur-
b. On a single graph, construct OC curves for c = 2 and rently, the defects are classified into critical (C: e.g., con-
(1) n = 5, (2) n = 20, and (3) n = 120. taminated anode), major (B: e.g., bent pins) and minor (A:
5. A manufacturer receives shipments of several thousand e.g., wrong label). The company has also grouped its cus-
parts from a supplier every week. The manufacturer tomers into three groups and has one plan for each
has the option of inspection before accepting the group: LO3
parts. Inspection cost is $1 per unit. If parts are not
inspected, defectives become apparent during a later Existing Sampling Plans
assembly operation, at which time replacement cost is
$6.25 per unit. LO1 & 2 Plan 1 Plan 2 Plan 3
a. At what proportion defective would the manufac- Nonconformity
C&B A C&B A C&B A
turer prefer acceptance sampling? class
b. For the sample size n = 15, what acceptance number Lot size (N) 48 48 48 48 48 48
c would result in probability of acceptance close to Documented AQL 1.0 1.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
.95 for AQL = 2%? Documented
c. If the shipment actually contains 1 percent defective Normal Reduced Reduced
inspection severity
items and AQL =2 percent: Sample size (n) 8 8 5 5 3 3
i. What is the correct decision? Acceptance
ii. What is the probability that the lot would be 0 1 1 1 0 0
number (c)
accepted if acceptable number c = 0?
iii. What is the probability that it would be rejected For each plan and defect category, determine the sample
if c = 0? size n and acceptance number c using MIL-STD-105E.
iv. Answer the questions in part c for a shipment Compare your results with the current plans above.
that contains 3 percent defective items.
9. A single sampling plan uses sample size n = 100
6. Suppose there are two defective units in a and the inspector accepts the lot if there are 2 or
sample. LO2 & 4 fewer defectives in the sample.6 You may use the
a. If the acceptance number is c = 1, what decision Poisson approximation to answer the following
should be made? What type of error is possible? questions. LO2 & 4
b. If the acceptance number is c = 3, what
a. What is the probability of accepting a lot with pro-
decision should be made? What type of error
portion defective p = .01?
is possible?
b. What protection does the buyer have against accept-
c. Use formula 10S-7 to determine the average outgoing
ing lots with proportion defective p = .05?
quality for each of the following percent defectives if
c. What is the average outgoing quality AOQ for
c = 1 and n =15.
p = .01? Use formula 10S-7.
i. 5 percent. d. What is the average outgoing quality AOQ for
ii. 10 percent. p = .05? Use formula 10S-7.
iii. 15 percent. e. What is the average outgoing quality limit AOQL
iv. 20 percent. for this plan? You may use the approximation
7. Suppose lot size N is 432 and acceptable quality level .4
11.25c + 12 .
AQL is .65 percent. We would like to use Normal n

4
E. F. Bauer, “A Move from Attribute to Variables Acceptance Sampling in an ISO-Certified Manufacturing
Plant,” M.S. thesis, California State University, Dominguez Hills, 2000.
5
E. Gamino, “Improvement to the Acceptance Control System of a Manufacturer of Color Picture Tubes,”
M.S. thesis, California State University, Dominguez Hills, 2005.
6
P. W. M. John, Statistical Methods in Engineering and Quality Assurance, New York: Wiley, 1990, p. 188.
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-17

*10. You are the quality manager for a company receiving large
quantities of material from a supplier in lots of 1,000 units.7
The cost of inspecting the items is $.76 per unit. The cost of
repair if bad material is introduced into your product is
$15.20 per unit. A single sampling plan of 75 units with
acceptance number of 2 has been suggested by one of
yourquality inspectors. In the past, lots submitted by this
supplier have averaged 3.4 percent defective. LO1–4
a. Is acceptance sampling economically justified?
b. If you want to accept only lots of 4 percent defective
or better, what do you think of the sampling plan of
the inspector?
c. Suppose that rejected lots are 100 percent inspected.
If a supplier submits many 4 percent defective lots,
what will be the average outgoing quality of these
lots? Use formula 10S-6.
11. a. Determine a sampling plan that will have AQL = 1%
with producer risk α = .05 and LTPD = 5% with
consumer risk β = .10.8 LO3
b. Suppose a sample is taken according to the sampling
plan derived in part a and two nonconforming units
are found. What action should be taken?
12. A housing development company buys heavy-duty
nails in lots of 10,000 nails. A destructive test is
performed to determine the strength of the
nails.9 AQL is 1 percent and LTPD is 10 percent.
A single sample of n = 100 and c = 2 is used.
Determine α and β. LO3
13. A manufacturer inspects all of its shipments to its custom-
ers prior to delivery using a double sampling MIL-STD-
105E standard plan, Inspection level II, Normal type of
inspection, and an AQL of 1 percent.10 The lot is 500
units. LO3
a. Find the sampling plan used and explain it in words.
b. Upon delivery of the product, the customer also
inspects the lot using a single sampling MIL-STD-
105E standard plan, AQL = 1.5 percent, inspection
level II, and Normal type of inspection. Find the cus-
tomer’s sampling plan.
c. If a lot that is 10% defective is produced, calculate
the probability that it will pass the manufacturer’s
inspection.
d. Calculate the probability that a 10 percent defective
lot will pass the customer’s inspection.
e. What is the probability that a 10 percent defective
lot will pass both inspections?
14. Binder clips are packaged 12 to a box and 12 boxes to a
carton.11 You have received a lot consisting of four
cartons of binder clips. LO3
a. Use MIL-STD-105E to determine a single sampling
plan to decide whether to accept or reject the lot.
Use Inspection Level II, Normal type of inspection,
and an AQL of 2.5 percent.
b. If in inspecting your sample you find three defective
binder clips, what would you do?

MINI-CASE

CRYSTAL S.A.
CRYSTAL S.A. is a Greek commercial fridge manufacturer.12 Dur-
ing packaging, CRYSTAL uses a wooden platform (pallet) under
the fridge. The pallets use some wooden pegs (nogs). However,
some nogs could be missing. The cost of inspecting a pallet is
$.119. The average cost of putting nogs in pallets missing them
is $.535 per pallet. If the defect is not identified before the pallet
is used in packaging, it will cost $2.3 to take the fridge off, insert
the nogs in the pallet, and put the fridge back on the pallet. The
pallets are bought in lot sizes of 800. The percentage of defective
pallets in the past has ranged between 5 and 8 percent.
Questions
a. Should the company perform 100 percent inspection,
acceptance sampling, or no inspection?
b. If acceptance sampling is best, what sampling plan should
the company use? Justify your choice.

7
J. M. Juran and F. M. Gryna, Quality Planning and Analysis, 3rd ed., 1993, New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 487.
8
J. M. Juran and F. M. Gryna, Juran’s Quality Control Handbook, 4th ed., 1988, New York: McGraw-Hill,
pp. 25.26–25.27.
9
S. Nahmias, Production and Operations Analysis, 3rd ed., 1997, Chicago: Irwin.
10
E. I. Grant and R. S. Leavenworth, Statistical Quality Control, 4th ed., 1972, New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 445.
11
http://www.shsu.edu/~mgt_ves/mgt481/lesson9/lesson9.htm.
12
Y. Nikolaidis and G. Nenes, “Economic Evaluation of ISO 2859 Acceptance Sampling Plans Used with
Rectifying Inspection of Rejected Lots,” Quality Engineering 21 (1), 2009, pp. 10–23.
 c
n
P1x ≤ c2 = a a bP x 11 − P2 n−x 0 1 2 3 4 x
x
10S-18 PART 4

x=0 c=1

Table 10S-1 Cumulative binomial probabilities

P
Quality

n x .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90

1. . . . 0 .9500 .9000 .8500 .8000 .7500 .7000 .6500 .6000 .5500 .5000 .4500 .4000 .3500 .3000 .2500 .2000 .1500 .1000
1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
2. . . . 0 .9025 .8100 .7225 .6400 .5625 .4900 .4225 .3600 .3025 .2500 .2025 .1600 .1225 .0900 .0625 .0400 .0225 .0100
1 .9975 .9900 .9775 .9600 .9375 .9100 .8775 .8400 .7975 .7500 .6975 .6400 .5775 .5100 .4375 .3600 .2775 .1900
2 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
3. . . . 0 .8574 .7290 .6141 .5120 .4219 .3430 .2746 .2160 .1664 .1250 .0911 .0640 .0429 .0270 .0156 .0080 .0034 .0010
1 .9928 .9720 .9393 .8960 .8438 .7840 .7183 .6480 .5748 .5000 .4253 .3520 .2818 .2160 .1563 .1040 .0608 .0280
2 .9999 .9990 .9966 .9920 .9844 .9730 .9571 .9360 .9089 .8750 .8336 .7840 .7254 .6570 .5781 .4880 .3859 .2710
3 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
4. . . . 0 .8145 .6561 .5220 .4096 .3164 .2401 .1785 .1296 .0915 .0625 .0410 .0256 .0150 .0081 .0039 .0016 .0005 .0001
1 .9860 .9477 .8905 .8192 .7383 .6517 .5630 .4752 .3910 .3125 .2415 .1792 .1265 .0837 .0508 .0272 .0120 .0037
2 .9995 .9963 .9880 .9728 .9492 .9163 .8735 .8208 .7585 .6875 .6090 .5248 .4370 .3483 .2617 .1808 .1095 .0523
3 1.0000 .9999 .9995 .9984 .9961 .9919 .9850 .9744 .9590 .9375 .9085 .8704 .8215 .7599 .6836 .5904 .4780 .3439
4 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
5. . . . 0 .7738 .5905 .4437 .3277 .2373 .1681 .1160 .0778 .0503 .0313 .0185 .0102 .0053 .0024 .0010 .0003 .0001 .0000
1 .9974 .9185 .8352 .7373 .6328 .5282 .4284 .3370 .2562 .1875 .1312 .0870 .0540 .0308 .0156 .0067 .0022 .0005
2 .9988 .9914 .9734 .9421 .8965 .8369 .7648 .6826 .5931 .5000 .4069 .3174 .2352 .1631 .1035 .0579 .0266 .0086
3 1.0000 .9995 .9978 .9933 .9844 .9692 .9460 .9130 .8688 .8125 .7438 .6630 .5716 .4718 .3672 .2627 .1648 .0815
4 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9997 .9990 .9976 .9947 .9898 .9815 .9688 .9497 .9222 .8840 .8319 .7627 .6723 .5563 .4095
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
6. . . . 0 .7351 .5314 .3771 .2621 .1780 .1176 .0754 .0467 .0277 .0156 .0083 .0041 .0018 .0007 .0002 .0001 .0000 .0000
1 .9672 .8857 .7765 .6554 .5339 .4202 .3191 .2333 .1636 .1094 .0692 .0410 .0223 .0109 .0046 .0016 .0004 .0001
2 .9978 .9842 .9527 .9011 .8306 .7443 .6471 .5443 .4415 .3438 .2553 .1792 .1174 .0705 .0376 .0170 .0059 .0013
3 .9999 .9987 .9941 .9830 .9624 .9295 .8826 .8208 .7447 .6563 .5585 .4557 .3529 .2557 .1694 .0989 .0473 .0159
4 1.0000 .9999 .9996 .9984 .9954 .9891 .9777 .9590 .9308 .8906 .8364 .7667 .6809 .5798 .4661 .3446 .2235 .1143
5 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9998 .9993 .9982 .9959 .9917 .9844 .9723 .9533 .9246 .8824 .8220 .7379 .6229 .4686
6 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
7. . . . 0 .6983 .4783 .3206 .2097 .1335 .0824 .0490 .0280 .0152 .0078 .0037 .0016 .0006 .0002 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000
1 .9556 .8503 .7166 .5767 .4449 .3294 .2338 .1586 .1024 .0625 .0357 .0188 .0090 .0038 .0013 .0004 .0001 .0000
2 .9962 .9743 .9262 .8520 .7564 .6471 .5323 .4199 .3164 .2266 .1529 .0963 .0556 .0288 .0129 .0047 .0012 .0002
3 .9998 .9973 .9879 .9667 .9294 .8740 .8002 .7102 .6083 .5000 .3917 .2898 .1998 .1260 .0706 .0333 .0121 .0027
 P

n x .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90

4 1.0000 .9998 .9988 .9953 .9871 .9712 .9444 .9037 .8471 .7734 .6836 .5801 .4677 .3529 .2436 .1480 .0738 .0257
5 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9996 .9987 .9962 .9910 .9812 .9643 .9375 .8976 .8414 .7662 .6706 .5551 .4233 .2834 .1497
6 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9998 .9994 .9984 .9963 .9922 .9848 .9720 .9510 .9176 .8665 .7903 .6794 .5217
7 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
8. . . . 0 .6634 .4305 .2725 .1678 .1001 .0576 .0319 .0168 .0084 .0039 .0017 .0007 .0002 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
1 .9428 .8131 .6572 .5033 .3671 .2553 .1691 .1064 .0632 .0352 .0181 .0085 .0036 .0013 .0004 .0001 .0000 .0000
2 .9942 .9619 .8948 .7969 .6785 .5518 .4278 .3154 .2201 .1445 .0885 .0498 .0253 .0113 .0042 .0012 .0002 .0000
3 .9996 .9950 .9786 .9437 .8862 .8059 .7064 .5941 .4470 .3633 .2604 .1737 .1061 .0580 .0273 .0104 .0029 .0004
4 1.0000 .9996 .9971 .9896 .9727 .9420 .8939 .8263 .7396 .6367 .5230 .4059 .2936 .1941 .1138 .0563 .0214 .0050
5 1.0000 1.0000 .9998 .9988 .9958 .9887 .9747 .9502 .9115 .8555 .7799 .6848 .5722 .4482 .3215 .2031 .1052 .0381
6 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9996 .9987 .9964 .9915 .9819 .9648 .9368 .8936 .8309 .7447 .6329 .4967 .3428 .1869
7 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9998 .9993 .9983 .9961 .9916 .9832 .9681 .9424 .8999 .8322 .7275 .5695
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
9. . . . 0 .6302 .3874 .2316 .1342 .0751 .0404 .0207 .0101 .0046 .0020 .0008 .0003 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
1 .9288 .7748 .5995 .4362 .3003 .1960 .1211 .0705 .0385 .0195 .0091 .0038 .0014 .0004 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000
2 .9916 .9470 .8591 .7382 .6007 .4628 .3373 .2318 .1495 .0898 .0498 .0250 .0112 .0043 .0013 .0003 .0000 .0000
3 .9994 .9917 .9661 .9144 .8343 .7297 .6089 .4826 .3614 .2539 .1658 .0994 .0536 .0253 .0100 .0031 .0006 .0001
4 1.0000 .9991 .9944 .9804 .9511 .9012 .8283 .7334 .6214 .5000 .3786 .2666 .1717 .0988 .0489 .0196 .0056 .0009
5 1.0000 .9999 .9994 .9969 .9900 .9747 .9464 .9006 .8342 .7461 .6386 .5174 .3911 .2703 .1657 .0856 .0339 .0083
6 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9997 .9987 .9957 .9888 .9750 .9502 .9102 .8505 .7682 .6627 .5372 .3993 .2618 .1409 .0530
7 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9996 .9986 .9962 .9909 .9805 .9615 .9295 .8789 .8040 .6997 .5638 .4005 .2252
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9997 .9992 .9980 .9954 .9899 .9793 .9596 .9249 .8658 .7684 .6126
9 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
10. . . . 0 .5987 .3487 .1969 .1074 .0563 .0282 .0135 .0060 .0025 .0010 .0003 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
1 .9139 .7361 .5443 .3758 .2440 .1493 .0860 .0464 .0233 .0107 .0045 .0017 .0005 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
2 .9885 .9298 .8202 .6778 .5256 .3828 .2616 .1673 .0996 .0547 .0274 .0123 .0048 .0016 .0004 .0001 .0000 .0000
3 .9990 .9872 .9500 .8791 .7759 .6496 .5138 .3823 .2660 .1719 .1020 .0548 .0260 .0106 .0035 .0009 .0001 .0000
SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10

4 .9999 .9984 .9901 .9672 .9219 .8497 .7515 .6331 .5044 .3770 .2616 .1662 .0949 .0473 .0197 .0064 .0014 .0001
5 1.0000 .9999 .9986 .9936 .9803 .9527 .9051 .8338 .7384 .6230 .4956 .3669 .2485 .1503 .0781 .0328 .0099 .0016
6 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9991 .9965 .9894 .9740 .9452 .8980 .8281 .7340 .6177 .4862 .3504 .2241 .1209 .0500 .0128
7 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9996 .9984 .9952 .9877 .9726 .9453 .9004 .8327 .7384 .6172 .4744 .3222 .1798 .0702
8 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9995 .9983 .9955 .9893 .9767 .9536 .9140 .8507 .7560 .6242 .4557 .2639
9 1,0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9997 .9990 .9975 .9940 .9865 .9718 .9437 .8926 .8031 .6513
10 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
15. . . . 0 .4633 .2059 .0874 .0352 .0134 .0047 .0016 .0005 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
Acceptance Sampling

1 .8290 .5490 .3186 .1671 .0802 .0353 .0142 .0052 .0017 .0005 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
2 .9638 .8159 .6042 .3980 .2361 .1268 .0617 .0271 .0107 .0037 .0011 .0003 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
10S-19
 P

n x .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 .35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90

3 .9945 .9444 .8227 .6482 .4613 .2969 .1727 .0905 .0424 .0176 .0063 .0019 .0005 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
10S-20 PART 4

4 .9994 .9873 .9383 .8358 .6865 .5155 .3519 .2173 .1204 .0592 .0255 .0093 .0028 .0007 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000
5 .9999 .9978 .9832 .9389 .8516 .7216 .5643 .4032 .2608 .1509 .0769 .0338 .0124 .0037 .0008 .0001 .0000 .0000
6 1.0000 .9997 .9964 .9819 .9434 .8689 .7548 .6098 .4522 .3036 .1818 .0950 .0422 .0152 .0042 .0008 .0001 .0000
7 1.0000 1.0000 .9994 .9958 .9827 .9500 .8868 .7869 .6535 .5000 .3465 .2131 .1132 .0500 .0173 .0042 .0006 .0000
Quality

8 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9992 .9958 .9848 .9578 .9050 .8182 .6964 .5478 .3902 .2452 .1311 .0566 .0181 .0036 .0003
9 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9992 .9963 .9876 .9662 .9231 .8491 .7392 .5968 .4357 .2784 .1484 .0611 .0168 .0022
10 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9993 .9972 .9907 .9745 .9408 .8796 .7827 .6481 .4845 .3135 .1642 .0617 .0127
11 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9995 .9981 .9937 .9824 .9576 .9095 .8273 .7031 .5387 .3518 .1773 .0556
12 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9997 .9989 .9963 .9893 .9729 .9383 .8732 .7639 .6020 .3958 .1841
13 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9995 .9983 .9948 .9858 .9647 .9198 .8329 .6814 .4510
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9995 .9984 .9953 .9866 .9648 .9126 .7941
15 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
20. . . . 0 .3585 .1216 .0388 .0115 .0032 .0008 .0002 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
1 .7358 .3917 .1756 .0692 .0243 .0076 .0021 .0005 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
2 .9245 .6769 .4049 .2061 .0913 .0355 .0121 .0036 .0009 .0002 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
3 .9841 .8670 .6477 .4114 .2252 .1071 .0444 .0160 .0049 .0013 .0003 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
4 .9974 .9568 .8298 .6296 .4148 .2375 .1182 .0510 .0189 .0059 .0015 .0003 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
5 .9997 .9887 .9327 .8042 .6172 .4164 .2454 .1256 .0553 .0207 .0064 .0016 .0003 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
6 1.0000 .9976 .9781 .9133 .7858 .6080 .4166 .2500 .1299 .0577 .0214 .0065 .0015 .0003 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000
7 1.0000 .9996 .9941 .9679 .8982 .7723 .6010 .4159 .2520 .1316 .0580 .0210 .0060 .0013 .0002 .0000 .0000 .0000
8 1.0000 .9999 .9987 .9900 .9591 .8867 .7624 .5956 .4143 .2517 .1308 .0565 .0196 .0051 .0009 .0001 .0000 .0000
9 1.0000 1.0000 .9998 .9974 .9861 .9520 .8782 .7553 .5914 .4119 .2493 .1275 .0532 .0171 .0039 .0006 .0000 .0000
10 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9994 .9961 .9829 .9468 .8725 .7507 .5881 .4086 .2447 .1218 .0480 .0139 .0026 .0002 .0000
11 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9991 .9949 .9804 .9435 .8692 .7483 .5857 .4044 .2376 .1133 .0409 .0100 .0013 .0001
12 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9998 .9987 .9940 .9790 .9420 .8684 .7480 .5841 .3990 .2277 .1018 .0321 .0059 .0004
13 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9997 .9985 .9935 .9786 .9423 .8701 .7500 .5834 .3920 .2142 .0867 .0219 .0024
14 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9997 .9984 .9936 .9793 .9447 .8744 .7546 .5836 .3828 .1958 .0673 .0113
15 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9997 .9985 .9941 .9811 .9490 .8818 .7625 .5852 .3704 .1702 .0432
16 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9997 .9987 .9951 .9840 .9556 .8929 .7748 .5886 .3523 .1330
17 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9998 .9991 .9964 .9879 .9645 .9087 .7939 .5951 .3231
18 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9999 .9995 .9979 .9924 .9757 .9308 .8244 .6083
19 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 .9998 .9992 .9968 .9885 .9612 .8784
20 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
 SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 10 Acceptance Sampling 10S-21

Figure 10S-7 Larson’s binomial nomograph.

n
⭐ 0.1
.01 N
0 1000
c n!
.02
700 P = P{m ⭐ c} = ⌺ pm(1 – p) n – m
5 m = 0 m!(n – m)!
500
400 p

Nu
ces (c)
.03 10 300 P

mb
.02
.04 .10

er
200
ccurren

20 .001

of
.05 140 .08

tria
40 100 .95
.06

ls
.005
Probability of occurrence in a single trial (p)

er of o

or
.07 70 .01

Probability of c or fewer occurrences in n trials (P )

50

sa
.08 50
.02

m
70 40 n = 90

ple
.09
Numb

.10 30 c=3 .05

siz
100
20

e(
.10

n)
140 10 .20
.15
.30
5 .40
.50
.20 200 2 .60
0 .70
.25 .80

1 .90
.30
.95
2
(c)

.35 3 .98
ces

4 .99
ren

5 .995
.40
cur

7
Oc

.999
.45 9
30 20 10
70 50 40
.50 140 100