Probability-Based Statistical Quality Control for Sensor-Driven Process Monitoring and Anomaly Detection
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58429/pgjsrt.v5n3a238Keywords:
Statistical Quality Control, Control Charts, Exponentially Weighted Moving Average (EWMA), Cumulative Sum, Process Capability AnalysisAbstract
Statistical quality control (SQC) provides an essential analytical basis for monitoring process stability, detecting assignable causes, and improving product-quality performance in data-rich production systems. This study develops and evaluates a probability-based monitoring framework that integrates individuals and moving-range control charts, exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA) monitoring, cumulative sum (CUSUM) monitoring, process capability analysis, fitted probability distributions, and anomaly-detection logic. The framework is empirically examined using public, production-quality data comprising 2,103,841 minute-level process-sensor observations and 29,184 hourly laboratory quality measurements collected from a roasting production process. The process-sensor data were aligned with each quality measurement by aggregating the preceding 60-minute operating window, resulting in a complete hourly monitoring dataset with no missing values. Results show that the Weibull distribution provides the lowest information criterion for the quality response, indicating that a simple normal assumption is insufficient for all monitoring decisions. The Phase-I individuals chart identified 79 quality observations outside three-sigma probability limits, while the moving-range chart flagged 532 abrupt changes. Memory-type charts were more sensitive to sustained drift, with the exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA) chart flagging 7,642 observations and the cumulative sum (CUSUM) chart flagging 21,129 observations. Process capability analysis using a declared benchmark interval yielded a process capability index (Cp) of 0.432 and a process capability index adjusted for centering (Cpk) of 0.380, indicating that variability reduction and centering improvement are needed before the process can be considered capable. The strongest empirical relationship was between the third chamber temperature and product quality, with a negative correlation of −0.810. The study contributes a reproducible, interpretable, and probability-based statistical quality control (SQC) framework that can support quality engineers in distinguishing common-cause variation from abnormal process behavior.
Downloads
References
Aggarwal, C. C. (2017). Outlier analysis (2nd ed.). Springer.
Ahmed, M., Mahmood, A. N., & Hu, J. (2016). A survey of network anomaly detection techniques. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 60, 19–31.
Aminikhanghahi, S., & Cook, D. J. (2017). A survey of methods for time series change point detection. Knowledge and Information Systems, 51(2), 339–367.
Apsemidis, A., Psarakis, S., & Moguerza, J. M. (2020). A review of machine learning kernel methods in statistical process monitoring. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 142, 106376.
Capizzi, G., & Masarotto, G. (2011). A least angle regression control chart for multidimensional data. Technometrics, 53(3), 285–296.
Chakraborti, S., & Graham, M. A. (2019). Nonparametric (distribution-free) control charts: An updated overview and some results. Quality Engineering, 31(4), 523–544.
Chowdhury, S., Mukherjee, A., & Chakraborti, S. (2014). A new distribution-free control chart for joint monitoring of unknown location and scale parameters of continuous distributions. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 30(2), 191–204.
Ebadi, M., Chenouri, S., Lin, D. K. J., & Steiner, S. H. (2022). Statistical monitoring of the covariance matrix in multivariate processes: A literature review. Journal of Quality Technology, 54(3), 299–322.
Gani, W., & Limam, M. (2014). A one-class classification-based control chart using the K-means data description algorithm. Journal of Quality and Reliability Engineering, 2014, 239861.
Hawkins, D. M., & Wu, Q. (2014). The CUSUM and the EWMA head-to-head. Quality Engineering, 26(2), 215–222.
Ji, C., Sun, Q., & Wang, X. (2022). A review on data-driven process monitoring methods. Processes, 10(2), 335.
Kammerer, K., Hoppenstedt, B., Pryss, R., Stökler, S., Allgaier, J., & Reichert, M. (2019). Anomaly detections for manufacturing systems based on sensor data: Insights into two challenging real-world production settings. Sensors, 19(24), 5370.
Li, W., Zhang, C., Tsung, F., & Mei, Y. (2021). Nonparametric monitoring of multivariate data via KNN learning. International Journal of Production Research, 59(20), 6311–6326.
Liu, F. T., Ting, K. M., & Zhou, Z.-H. (2012). Isolation-based anomaly detection. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data, 6(1), Article 3.
Maboudou-Tchao, E. M., & Hawkins, D. M. (2011). Self-starting multivariate control charts for location and scale. Journal of Quality Technology, 43(2), 113–126.
Montgomery, D. C. (2020). Introduction to statistical quality control (8th ed.). Wiley.
Mukherjee, A., & Marozzi, M. (2022). Nonparametric Phase-II control charts for monitoring high-dimensional processes with unknown parameters. Journal of Quality Technology, 54(1), 44–64.
Park, Y.-J., Fan, S.-K. S., & Hsu, C.-Y. (2020). A review on fault detection and process diagnostics in industrial processes. Processes, 8(9), 1123.
Pittino, F., Puggl, M., Moldaschl, T., & Hirschl, C. (2020). Automatic anomaly detection on in-production manufacturing machines using statistical learning methods. Sensors, 20(8), 2344.
Qin, S. J. (2012). Survey on data-driven industrial process monitoring and diagnosis. Annual Reviews in Control, 36(2), 220–234.
Qiu, P. (2014). Introduction to statistical process control. Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Qiu, P. (2018). Some perspectives on nonparametric statistical process control. Journal of Quality Technology, 50(1), 49–65.
Qiu, P., & Xie, X. (2022). Transparent sequential learning for statistical process control of serially correlated data. Technometrics, 64(4), 487–501.
Reis, M. S., & Gins, G. (2017). Industrial process monitoring in the Big Data/Industry 4.0 era: From detection, to diagnosis, to prognosis. Processes, 5(3), 35.
Rousseeuw, P. J., & Hubert, M. (2018). Anomaly detection by robust statistics. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 8(2), e1236.
Severson, K., Chaiwatanodom, P., & Braatz, R. D. (2016). Perspectives on process monitoring of industrial systems. Annual Reviews in Control, 42, 190–200.
Sukchotrat, T., Kim, S. B., & Tsung, F. (2010). One-class classification-based control charts for multivariate process monitoring. IIE Transactions, 42(2), 107–120.
Weese, M. L., Martinez, W., Megahed, F. M., & Jones-Farmer, L. A. (2016). Statistical learning methods applied to process monitoring: An overview and perspective. Journal of Quality Technology, 48(1), 4–24.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Polaris Global Journal of Scholarly Research and Trends
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
