Sampling

AEROSPACE ARP9013
RECOMMENDED Issued 2005-10
PRACTICE
Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements
FOREWORD
To assure customer satisfaction, aerospace industry organizations shall produce, and

continually improve, safe, reliable products that meet or exceed customer and regulatory
authority requirements. The globalization of the aerospace industry, and the resulting diversity
of regional/national requirements and expectations, has complicated this objective. End-
product organizations face the challenge of assuring the quality of, and integrating, product
purchased from suppliers throughout the world and at all levels within the supply chain.
Aerospace suppliers and processors face the challenge of delivering product to multiple
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
customers having varying quality expectations and requirements.
The aerospace industry established the International Aerospace Quality Group (IAQG) for the
purpose of achieving significant improvements in quality and safety, and reductions in cost,
throughout the value stream. This organization includes representation from aerospace
companies in the Americas, Asia/Pacific, and Europe. This recommended practice has been
prepared by the Americas Aerospace Quality Group (AAQG).
This document standardizes, to the greatest extent possible, the requirements on statistical
techniques for product acceptance in the aerospace industry. The establishment of common
requirements, for use at all levels of the supply-chain, by organizations around the world, should
result in improved quality and safety, and decreased costs due to the elimination or reduction of
organization-unique requirements and the resultant variation inherent in these multiple
expectations.
SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is
entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising therefrom, is the sole responsibility of the user.
SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be reaffirmed, revised, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments and suggestions.
Copyright 2005 SAE International
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE.
TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)

Fax: 724-776-0790
Email: custsvc@sae.org
SAE WEB ADDRESS: http://www.sae.org
Copyright SAE International
Provided by IHS under license with SAE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
SAE ARP9013
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
INTRODUCTION
This recommended practices series of documents establishes the general requirements

applicable to any of the methods of statistical product acceptance to reduce inspection costs
while still assuring acceptable quality. There is no single specific plan that can be considered
best suited for all applications or processes. This ARP9013 document contains the basic
requirements needed to implement the statistical methods described in ARP9013/1 through
ARP9013/4 series to control outgoing quality. All applicable requirements of this ARP9013
document shall be met when using one or more of the ARP9013/1 through ARP9013/4
recommended practices.
This document does not apply to statistical methods that are separate from product acceptance.
Many companies use excellent statistical methods solely to monitor and improve their product
quality, and those methods are not subject to the requirements of this document. This
document applies only to those statistical methods used for product acceptance.
The requirements are contained in the main body of this recommended practice. This
recommended practice also includes several appendices, which are offered for guidance or
recommendation purposes only. Each appendix herein contains only nonmandatory
suggestions, examples, or further discussion on specific topics that the authorship believes will
aid the successful implementation of this recommended practice for the user organization.
Products which may be eligible for the methods defined in this recommended practices series
include but are not limited to end items; cast, forged, wrought, machined, fabricated, plastic,
molded, powdered metal, or stamped components and raw material; electronic, electrical, and
mechanical components; lots subjected to receiving inspection, in-process inspection, and final
inspection; supplies in storage; and services, any of which may be produced in batches, large or
small lots, continuous processes, or single-piece flow manufacturing processes.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

-2-
SAE ARP9013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD................................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 2
1. SCOPE ................................................................................................................................ 4
1.1 Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 4
1.2 Field of Application......................................................................................................... 4
2. REFERENCES..................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Applicable Documents ................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Related Publications ...................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Definitions ...................................................................................................................... 7
3. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................ 16
3.1 Trained Personnel........................................................................................................ 16

3.2 Safety/Critical Characteristics ...................................................................................... 16
3.3 Quality Parameters ...................................................................................................... 17
3.4 Drawing Samples ......................................................................................................... 17
3.5 Identification of Design Characteristics ........................................................................ 17
3.6 Measurement Systems ................................................................................................ 18
3.7 Nonconformances in the Sample ................................................................................. 18
3.8 Statistical Product Acceptance Plans and Records ..................................................... 18
3.9 Alternate Statistical Techniques for Product Acceptance ............................................ 18
3.10 Auditing of Statistical Techniques for Product Acceptance.......................................... 18
4. REQUIRED CONTENT FOR DOCUMENTED PROCEDURES ........................................ 19
4.1 Assigning Quality Parameters and Statistical Techniques for Product Acceptance .... 19
4.2 Assigning Responsibilities............................................................................................ 19
4.3 Assigning Where Applied ............................................................................................. 19
4.4 Establishing a Training Program .................................................................................. 20
4.5 Controlling Nonconformances...................................................................................... 20
4.6 Monitoring Performance and Effectiveness ................................................................. 20
4.7 Defining Adjustments to Inspection Frequency............................................................ 20
4.8 Customer Approval of Procedures and Plans .............................................................. 20
APPENDIX A GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL

IMPLEMENTATION.......................................................................................... 21
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
APPENDIX B GUIDELINES FOR 4.1 ASSIGNING QUALITY PARAMETERS AND

STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES FOR PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE ..................... 29
APPENDIX C DISCUSSION ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF QUALITY PARAMETERS
TO RELIABILITY .............................................................................................. 32

-3-
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

SAE ARP9013
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
1. SCOPE:
1.1 Purpose:
This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) establishes the general requirements
when implementing any of the statistical product acceptance methods as defined in
ARP9013/1, ARP9013/2, ARP9013/3, and ARP9013/4. This recommended practice also
establishes the minimum content required to be covered in an organizations documented
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
procedures that govern their application of statistical product acceptance methods. These
general requirements and documented procedures apply the requirements of AS9100 plus
requirements for retrievability, safety/critical characteristics, quality parameters, and that
these parameters protect the customer. This recommended practice is to be used in
conjunction with the variety of sampling strategies, statistical techniques, and process
control methods of the ARP9013/1 through ARP9013/4 recommended practices as
chosen by the organization.
1.2 Field of Application:
This recommended practice is applicable when invoked in a purchasing contract or

specification, other contractual document, customer agreement, or adopted by the
organization. The appropriate slash-numbered recommended practice(s) in this series
applied by the organization may or may not be specified by the purchasers contract, but
does form a part of the ARP9013 flowdown requirement.
If desired to sample a series of lots without using ARP9013/1, ARP9013/2, or ARP9013/3,

the requirements of ARP9013/4 shall be used.
2. REFERENCES:
2.1 Applicable Documents:
The following publications form a part of this document to the extent specified herein. The
latest issue of SAE publications shall apply. The applicable issue of other publications
shall be the issue in effect on the date of the purchase order. Nothing in this document,
however, supersedes applicable laws, regulations, and contractual requirements.

-4-
SAE ARP9013
2.1.1 SAE Publications: Available from SAE, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA
15096-0001, Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) or 724-776-4970 (outside
USA), www.sae.org.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ARP9013/1 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Isolated Lot

Sampling Methods
ARP9013/2 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Attribute or

Variable Lot Acceptance Sampling Plans
ARP9013/3 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Process

Control Methods
ARP9013/4 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Continuous

Sampling, Skip-Lot Sampling, or Methods for Special Cases
AS9100 Quality Management Systems - Aerospace - Requirements
AS9103 Variation Management of Key Characteristics
2.1.2 ANSI/ASQC Publications: Available from the American Society for Quality (ASQ),
600 North Plankinton Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53203, Tel: 800-248-1946 or 414-272-
8575, www.asq.org
ANSI/ASQC B1 Guide for Quality Control Charts
ANSI/ASQC B2 Control Chart Method of Analyzing Data
ANSI/ASQC B3 Control Chart Method of Controlling Quality During Production
ANSI/ASQC Q3 Sampling Procedures and Tables for Inspection of Isolated Lots by

Attributes
ANSI/ASQC S1 An Attribute Skip-Lot Sampling Program
ANSI/ASQC Z1.4 Sampling Procedures and Tables for Inspection by Attributes
ANSI/ASQC Z1.9 Sampling Procedures and Tables for Inspection by Variables for
Percent Nonconforming
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\

-5-
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
SAE ARP9013
2.1.3 Applicable References: Available from the Document Automation and Production
Service (DAPS), Building 4/D, 700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094, Tel:
215-697-6257, http://assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/.
MIL-STD-1235 Single and Multi-Level Continuous Sampling Procedures and Table

for Inspection by Attributes
NOTE: MIL-STD-1235 has been cancelled but may be used as a guide for derivation
and application of continuous sampling plans. Appendix A of ARP9013/4
contains the essential text and tables of MIL-STD-1235C with some editing,
reformatting, and paragraph renumbering; however, all the functional curves
have been purposely omitted to conserve the length of the recommended
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
practice.
2.2 Related Publications:
ISO 2859/2 Sampling Plans Indexed by Limiting Quality (LQ) for Isolated Lot
Inspection, may be obtained from any ISO Licensors members or
from the ISO Secretariat, Case Postale 56, 1211 Geneva 20,
Switzerland.
N. L. Squeglia, "Zero Acceptance Number Sampling Plans," ASQ Quality Press, 611 East
Wisconsin Avenue, P.O. Box 3005, Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005.
Braverman, Jerome D., Fundamentals of Statistical Quality Control, New Jersey:

Prentice Hall, 1981.
Grant, Eugene L. and Leavenworth, Richard S., Statistical Quality Control, New York:
McGraw Hill Company, 1996.
Dodge, H. F., Chain Sampling Inspection Plan, Industrial Quality Control, 11, No. 4
(January 1955), 10-13.
Besterfield, Dale H., Quality Control, Additional Acceptance Sampling Plan Systems, 7,
Third Edition, 1990, 272-275.
Scheaffer, R. L. and McClave, J. T., Probability and Statistics for Engineers, 2nd Edition,
PWS Publishers, Duxbury Press, 1986, 280-281.

-6-
SAE ARP9013
2.3 Definitions:
ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL): The maximum percentage or proportion of

nonconforming units in a lot or batch that, for purposes of acceptance sampling, would be
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
considered satisfactory as a process average. See 3.3 and Appendix A.
ACCEPTANCE SAMPLING: Inspection in which decisions are made to accept or not

accept a lot (or other grouping of product or material) based on the results of a sample or
samples selected from that lot or grouping.
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (ANOVA): An arithmetic process developed for the purpose of

comparing several sample means by partitioning the total variation of a set of data into
components associated with recognized sources of variation.
ATTRIBUTE DATA: Qualitative data that counts the presence or absence of a

characteristic evaluated to a specified criterion, rather than data from a discrete
measurement on a continuous scale. Attribute data is typically measured on a go/no-go,
pass/fail, or yes/no basis.
AVERAGE OUTGOING QUALITY (AOQ): The average quality of outgoing product after
sampling inspection for a given steady value of incoming product quality. Achieving
reasonable values of the AOQ usually requires that units found nonconforming are
replaced with units known to be conforming. Both incoming and outgoing quality are
generally expressed in terms of the percent of nonconforming product.
AVERAGE OUTGOING QUALITY LIMIT (AOQL): Maximum AOQ over all possible values
of incoming product quality level for a given acceptance sampling plan.
AVERAGE RUN LENGTH (ARL): The average number of plotted points on a control chart
or the average number of items inspected before a shift in process level may be expected
to be signaled. A typical benchmark is the average number of samples before a 2-sigma
shift in the process produces a signal. A measure of effectiveness of detecting sustained
shifts.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

-7-
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
BERNOULLI TRIALS MODEL: A model where (1) the same kind of trial is repeated
several times; (2) on each trial there are two possible outcomes, for example, conforming
or nonconforming; (3) repeated trials (units of product) are independent; and (4) the
probability of each outcome remains the same for each trial. In a Bernoulli trials model,
the probability of exactly k nonconforming units in n trials is given by:
n
b(n, k; p ) = pk (1 p )
n k
(Eq. 1)
k
where:
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
b(n, k; p) is the probability of k nonconforming items in n trials
n is the fixed number of Bernoulli trials
k is the number of nonconforming units in n trials
p is the probability of a nonconforming unit and (1-p) is the probability of a conforming

unit. This is called a binomial probability.
BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION: In the literature of statistics, the binomial as a probability

distribution results from a Bernoulli trials model of the process.
C=0: An acceptance-sampling plan that requires rejection of the lot if the sample contains
one or more nonconformances.
CAPABILITY: The range of six standard deviations of the values in a process having no
changes in its mean or any other characteristic of its distribution. The inherent variation in
a stable process. For the case of attribute data, it is usually defined as the average
proportion or rate of defects or defectives (e.g., centerline of an attribute control chart).
The Bayesian estimator for defect rate when no defects are observed in the current
sample is:
1
P(d) = (Eq. 2)
(n + 2)
where:
P (d) is the probability of a defect (the defect rate)
n is the number of representative observations of the process, no defects observed

-8-
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
COMBINATIONS: The number of distinct groupings of m distinct objects taken i at a time,

where order of selection is immaterial, as 123, 321, and 213.
m m! (Eq. 3)
=
i i! (m i ) !
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
where:
m! = m (m-1) (m-2) 3 2 1
CONFORMANCE: When a characteristic of a product or process meets its requirements.

//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
Fulfillment of specified requirements. Also called Conformity.
CONSUMERS RISK: The probability that a lot with a fraction of nonconforming material
equal to a stated index value will be accepted by a sampling plan. Also referred to as beta
() risk.
CONTINUOUS ACCEPTANCE SAMPLING: Inspection intended for application on

continuous flow of individual items of product that involves acceptance or nonacceptance
on a unit-by-unit basis using periods of one-hundred percent (100%) inspection and
periods of sampling, depending on the quality of the observed product.
CONTINUOUS MANUFACTURING PROCESS: A combination of manufacturing methods

used in the continual flow of individual items of product that does not have any known
source of variation or quality risk other than those operating on the first and last units of
the production run. Where production is continuous, the formation of inspection lots
between the start and finish is somewhat artificial.
CRITICAL CHARACTERISTIC: A characteristic designated by the design authority,

where the responsibility for its definition is outside the scope of this recommended
practice.
CUSTOMER: The buying entity that is the issuer of a contract to a sub-tier supplier.
DEFECT: Non-fulfillment of a requirement related to an intended or a specified use. A

departure of a quality characteristic from its intended level or state that occurs with a
severity sufficient to cause an associated product or service not to satisfy intended normal,
or foreseeable, usage requirements.
DETERMINE: To reach a decision beyond reasonable doubt that each accepted unit
conforms to its requirements.

-9-
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
EQUAL RISK POINT (ERP): The fraction nonconforming at which the probability of
rejecting a lot is fifty percent (also noted as p.50). At this fraction nonconforming, the risk to
the producer and consumer are the same. When no integer number of nonconforming
units produces exactly 50% probability of acceptance, the equal risk point for that sample
size is computed as the weighted average of the two nearest points on its discrete OC
curve. This is also the point where a straight line connecting those two points would cross
the line Pa= .50.
EXPECTED OUTGOING QUALITY (EOQ): The probability that a unit accepted by sample
inspection is nonconforming, given both the sampling plan and a statement of what quality
patterns have been demonstrated for the process. An EOQ can only be computed if there
is a hypothetical distribution whether based upon parameters or an empirical distribution
and it depends upon the AOQ values.
GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY (GAGE R&R): A study used to

determine the degree of variability within a measurement system, and to separate this
variability into components associated with the gage and the use of the gage.
HOMOGENEOUS PROCESS: A process where there is a repetitive production running

under the same conditions.
HYPERGEOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION: Applies whenever one is computing the probability

of accepting a single finite lot, but is especially valuable when the sample is large
compared to the population size. A discrete probability distribution with probability
function:
M N M
x n x
Pr [X = x ] = (Eq. 4)
N
n

where:
x = 0, 1, 2, ..., min. (M, n)
N = 1, 2, (population size)
M = 1, 2, 3, , N (occurrences in population)
n= 1, 2, , N (sample size)
M M!
=
x x ! ( M x )!
- 10 -
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

SAE ARP9013
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
2.3 (Continued):
INDIFFERENT QUALITY LEVEL (IQL): See Equal Risk Point.
INITIAL RELIABILTY REQUIREMENT (IRR): Also know as Inspection Reliability

Requirement. An estimate of the probability of conformance for each unit of product
accepted through the associated sampling plan. See Appendix B.
INITIATION OF PRODUCTION: The amount of screening required before continuous

sampling may revalidate its qualification for reduced inspection after a period of poor
quality and process correction. See ARP 9013/4 Appendix A for examples.
INSPECTION: The process of measuring, examining, testing, gauging, or otherwise

comparing product or material with requirements.
ISOLATED LOT: A lot which is accepted on the basis solely of information derived from
within itself, separate from the sequence of lots in which it was produced or collected, and
not depending on information from any other part of a current sequence of inspection lots.
KNOWN DEFECTIVE: A part, material, or unit of product recognized as failing to fulfill

requirement(s) related to an intended specified use.
LIMITING QUALITY (LQ): A quality parameter where there is a small chance that a lot will
be accepted when acceptance sampling is employed. Also known as the Lot Tolerance
Percent Defective (LTPD), Lot Quality Protection (LQP), Unacceptable Quality Level
(UQL), and Limiting Quality Level (LQL). For use throughout this recommended practice,
the term LQ is established at p.10, matching its most common use in US military
specifications. The values of LQ in published standards are computed using the binomial
or Poisson distributions, so are precise only for infinitely large lots. For precise
computation of the LQ value for finite lots of discrete parts, it is generally the case that no
integer number of nonconforming units produces exactly 10% probability of acceptance,
so the LQ for that sample size may be computed as the weighted average of the two
nearest points on the discrete OC curve. This is also the point where a straight line
connecting those two points would cross the line Pa=.10.
LOT: A defined quantity of some product, material, or service collected and submitted for
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
acceptance together. It may or may not be the same as the definition of a lot for purposes
of a contract, shipment, or anything other than acceptance.
LOT-BY-LOT INSPECTION: Inspection of product submitted in a series of lots.
LOT FORMATION: The process of collecting, segregating, or delineating production units

into homogeneous, identifiable groups according to type, grade, class size, composition,
or condition of manufacture.

- 11 -
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
LOT HOMOGENEITY: A quantity of some product, material, or service that shows

consistent characteristics throughout the quantity within a lot.
LOT TOLERANCE PERCENT DEFECTIVE (LTPD): The level of quality in a lot that the
lot-sampling plan will accept 10% of the time. See Limiting Quality (LQ).
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
MATERIAL REVIEW: The process of determining the disposition of nonconforming

material.
MAY: Indicates a recommended approach where compliance is not mandatory, but

documentation of the rationale for taking exception is recommended.
MOVING PRODUCT: Any product for which acceptance decisions shall be made
separately for each unit of product. Examples include high-volume products such as
fasteners and piece parts for which lot definitions are unrelated to process start and stop
events, as well as low-volume products such as serialized assemblies for which there are
no lots.
MULTI-LEVEL CONTINUOUS SAMPLING PLAN: A continuous sampling plan that

changes frequency or amount of inspection by a set of rules based upon the results of
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
past plan inspections.
NONCONFORMANCE: Parts or materials that do not meet specifications or

requirements. The failure of a characteristic to conform to the requirements specified in
the contract, drawings, specifications, or other approved product description.
NONCONFORMITY: A specific occurrence of a condition that does not conform to a

specification or other inspection standard.
NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING (NDT): Technique of testing material properties without

impairing their future usefulness. Also known as Non-Destructive Inspection (NDI).
NORMAL INSPECTION: A level of inspection in the switching rules of most lot-by-lot

sampling plans. Switching rules in sampling standards begin with this level of inspection
as a default, and direct the inspection to greater or lesser inspection according to the
patterns of quality in the process.
ONE-HUNDRED PERCENT (100%) INSPECTION: Inspection of every item of product or

service.

- 12 -
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC (OC) CURVES: A curve on a graph for a given

sampling plan showing the lot fraction defective (x-axis) versus the probability that the
sampling plan will accept the lot (y-axis). This term is sometimes applied to AOQ curves,
Average Fraction Inspection curves, Average Total Inspected curves, and the Average
Run Length curves.
ORGANIZATION: The entity or party that is performing the work.
POISSON DISTRIBUTION: The probability distribution of a discrete random variable X

such that
m x m
Pr [X = x ] = e (Eq. 5)
x!
where:
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
x = 0, 1, 2, ... (the number of occurrences)
m > 0 (the population mean) and
e = 2.71828 the base of natural logarithms
PROBABILITY OUTGOING QUALITY LIMIT (POQL): An upper confidence limit on the

outgoing percent defective in a series of lots. Specifically, this is the maximum of the
curve that represents the 90% upper confidence limit on the outgoing quality and it
depends on the sample size, acceptance criteria, the length of the series of lots, and any
switching rules that apply.
PROCESS: A combination of people, material, machines, tools, environment, and

methods that produce a product or service.
PROCESS CONTROL: The exercise of discipline over the various inputs of a process to
ensure the resultant characteristic meets requirements.
PROCESS MONITORING: A periodic measurement of the characteristic being accepted
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
via process control to ensure that the process maintains stability.
PROCESS STABILITY: A condition or state of behavior of a process where, through the

use of past experience, we can predict within limits how that process will behave in the
near future. A condition where there is no indication of a special cause of variation, but
where only random common cause variation is present.

- 13 -
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
PRODUCERS RISK: The probability that a lot with a fraction of nonconforming material
equal to a stated index value will be rejected by the sampling plan. Also referred to as
alpha () risk.
QUALITY PARAMETER: An index that defines (in whole or in part) what is needed to
determine how much to inspect. The purpose of any assigned value for a quality
parameter is to define what it takes to determine and ensure conformance for each
accepted unit of product. See 3.3.
RANDOM SAMPLE: A selection of units collected in such a manner that all units being
accepted have an equal chance of being selected for inspection or evaluation.
REDUCED INSPECTION: One of several levels of inspection connected by switching

rules, and which involves a lower fraction inspected than one or more of the others. In
such a system the quality parameter is usually the AOQL, and that AOQL is maintained,
despite the lower fraction inspected, by the fact that the process generally only gets to that
level when the quality is as good as or better than the AOQL for some period of time.
REJECTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (RQL): The minimum percent defective at which a lot will
have 5 percent or less chance of being accepted when using a sampling plan. For use
throughout this recommended practice, the term RQL is established at p.05. For precise
computation of the RQL value for finite lots of discrete parts, it is generally the case that
no integer number of nonconforming units produces exactly 5% probability of acceptance,
so the RQL for that sample size may be computed as the weighted average of the two
nearest points on the discrete OC curve. This is also the point where a straight line
connecting those two points would cross the line Pa=.05.
SAFETY CHARACTERISTIC or SAFETY CRITICAL CHARACTERISTIC: See Critical

Characteristic.
SAMPLE: One or more units of product drawn from a lot or batch to provide information
about that lot or batch.
SAMPLING PLAN: A statement of sample size(s) or frequencies, associated acceptance

and rejection criteria, and switching rules if applied.
SEQUENTIAL SAMPLING: Involves making one of three decisions as each sample item
is obtained: accept the lot, reject the lot, or continue sampling.
SHALL: Indicates mandatory requirements.
SIGMA: A Greek letter () symbolizing standard deviation.
- 14 -
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
SINGLE-LEVEL CONTINUOUS SAMPLING PLAN: Alternating periods of 100%

inspection and of sampling inspection wherein the sampling rate is constant. The extent
of periods of 100% inspection depends on the exact pattern of nonconformances.
SKIP-LOT INSPECTION: Sampling inspection in which some lots in a series are

accepted without inspection, when the sampling results for preceding lots from the same
process meet stated criteria.
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
STABILITY: See Process Stability.
STANDARD DEVIATION: A measure of the spread (or dispersion) of the process output
that has the same unit of measure as the original observations and the process mean.
The square root of the variance in a population.
STATISTICAL CONTROL: Statistical control is achieved when all measurements are from
the same probability distribution. Typically, plotted points lie within 3 sigma control limits
calculated from a minimum of 20 subgroups. For low risk applications, this model is used
when a minimum of 15 to 20 subgroups plotted within 3 sigma control limits. See
Process Stability.
STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL (SPC): A method by which a process is monitored

for patterns of variation. The resulting data are analyzed statistically to identify incidents
of special causes of variation.
STATISTICALLY VALID: A legitimate conclusion, based on samples taken from a defined

population, claiming some probability value that is achieved by following a defined
procedure. Verifiable mathematics exists that shows this probability value is accurate.
SUBGROUP: A segregation of process output such that if a special cause of variation is

present, it is reasonable to expect it will be common to all elements of one or more
subgroups. Each point on the control chart represents a set of observed values belonging
to the same subgroup.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
SUPPLIER: The entity or party that supplies product or services to a customer per the
contract.
SWITCHING RULES: Regulations used to adjust the level of inspection, such as between
normal, tightened, and reduced inspections.

- 15 -
SAE ARP9013
2.3 (Continued):
TIGHTENED INSPECTION: A level of inspection in the switching rules of most lot-by-lot

sampling plans. Switching rules in sampling standards move the inspection to this level
when process quality has proven unreliable on Normal Inspection, and move the
inspection off of Tightened (down to Normal or up to 100%) depending on subsequent
product quality.
UNIT: Either a single part or a lot with small quantity of parts from a homogeneous
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
process.
UNREPORTED PROCESS CORRECTION: To have a process adjusted or altered at any

stage without documented evidence of such change.
VARIABLE DATA: Quantitative measurements taken on a continuous scale.
3. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
The requirements of this section are common to the application of methods and techniques
defined in ARP9013/1, ARP9013/2, ARP9013/3, and ARP9013/4, which may or may not be
restated therein. Additional requirements specific to each method are defined in its
respective slash-numbered document. Regardless of the use of these statistical product
acceptance methods, the organization shall be responsible to ensure that each part
conforms to the engineering design requirements.
3.1 Trained Personnel:
Personnel involved in the planning, application, and execution of statistical product

acceptance do affect product quality and therefore shall be subject to the training
requirements of AS9100.
3.2 Safety/Critical Characteristics:
Any characteristics identified in the design documentation as Safety or Critical (or

Safety Critical, et al.) characteristics shall not be accepted using statistical product
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
acceptance methods unless prior written authorization is granted from the customer (for
example, a customer-approved procedure), or the method for acceptance is specifically
defined in the design documentation. See Appendix A for guidance.

- 16 -
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
SAE ARP9013
3.3 Quality Parameters:
When the organization uses statistical techniques for product acceptance they shall
identify a quality parameter for each plan. The plan developed shall be statistically valid
and appropriate for use. For use throughout this recommended practice, a statistical
technique for product acceptance shall have a statistic, that is, a measure of protection
that relates to the probability of conformance. See Appendix A for guidance.
3.3.1 When instructions on the purchase order, contract, engineering drawing, and/or related
product definition documents from the customer require a specific quality parameter and
value, the statistical method shall provide at least that degree of protection. The
organization shall be responsible for ensuring that any product acceptance methods
comply with regulatory requirements.
3.3.2 The quality parameter(s) chosen shall protect the customer, that is, control the
probability of conformance for delivered product. The customer shall retain the right to
approve alternative classification methods.
NOTE: The column headings in many existing sampling tables are indexed by AQL.
The AQL is not a measure of protection for the customer. This recommended
practice, however, requires the defining of a quality parameter that provides
protection for the customer. Along with other statistical acceptance
requirements contained in this recommended practice, AQL figures shall not be
construed as allowing a nonconforming part to be knowingly sold and shipped
to the customer.
3.3.3 The quality parameter shall be selected or approved by individuals who understand the
consequences of nonconformance.
3.4 Drawing Samples:
Samples shall be representative of the unchecked production. Articles presented for

acceptance by sample inspection shall be homogeneous, that is, share similar variability,
quality level, and history as the unchecked production. See Appendix A for guidance.
3.5 Identification of Design Characteristics:
The statistical product acceptance plan shall identify the product characteristics to be
accepted under the plan. The organization shall create a sampling plan that covers each
characteristic that is sample inspected.
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\

- 17 -
SAE ARP9013
3.6 Measurement Systems:
Monitoring and measuring devices used to accept product shall be controlled per AS9100.
When reliability values are specified in the design, measurement capability shall support
those reliability requirements. See Appendices A and C for guidance.
3.7 Nonconformances in the Sample:
No discretion shall be permitted for measurements or conditions outside of the tolerances.

Any deviations from design tolerance shall be reported as nonconforming and the affected
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
production represented by the sample shall be controlled per the organizations quality
instructions that govern nonconformances. In the event that any characteristic is rejected
by the plan when lot or batch sampling is applied, the entire lot or batch shall be rejected
and withheld pending action required by the organizations quality instructions that govern
nonconformances. See Appendix A for guidance.
3.8 Statistical Product Acceptance Plans and Records:
The documentation of the sampling plan shall not provide for the acceptance of
characteristics that are inadequately inspected in the samples. A sampling plan shall
show the number of units of product from each lot or batch that are to be inspected and
the criteria for determining the acceptability of the lot or batch. Both the statistical product
acceptance plan and associated acceptance records shall show conformance to design
requirements, account for all nonconformities in the sample, and shall be maintained in
accordance with established procedures. Alternative methods, e.g., computer-based
plans, for compiling and retrieving statistical acceptance plan information and acceptance
data shall be permissible provided they can be shown to meet the intent of the statistical
acceptance plan requirements and can be verified by independent audit or evaluation.
See Appendix A for guidance.
3.9 Alternate Statistical Techniques for Product Acceptance:
Alternate statistical techniques and unique applications intended for special cases are
covered in ARP9013/4. Techniques, other than those stated in this recommended
practice, that are developed and used shall be statistically valid and meet or exceed the
required quality parameter (see 3.3 and 4.1). See requirements of Section 4 for
documenting these alternatives in written procedures and plans. See Appendix A for
guidance.
3.10 Auditing of Statistical Techniques for Product Acceptance:
Any statistical technique for product acceptance shall be reviewed as a part of periodic
audits conducted in accordance with AS9100.

- 18 -
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
SAE ARP9013
4. REQUIRED CONTENT FOR DOCUMENTED PROCEDURES:
The organization shall perform their planning and implementation of statistical product
acceptance activities to documented procedures and plans. These documents shall
address the requirements of this section, as a minimum:
4.1 Assigning Quality Parameters and Statistical Techniques for Product Acceptance:
The documentation governing applications of statistical techniques for product acceptance

shall provide instruction on the method(s) used to assign specific statistical acceptance
plans and quality parameters to specific part characteristics. See Appendix B for
guidance.
4.1.1 Every assigned statistical technique for product acceptance under the governing
document shall identify its quality parameter and the specific value that is achieved.
Every sampling plan shall show its quality parameter(s). Those quality parameters shall
be verifiable mathematically. If the statistical validity is claimed because the plan is
copied from a published standard, then the specific standard shall be identified.
4.1.2 Quality parameter assignments provide for customer protection from nonconformances
and shall be detailed enough to show this risk.
4.1.3 New Products or Features: In the absence of the customer defined quality parameters,
the procedure shall define the method used to assign the quality parameters for new
products or features introduced to the organizations facility (for example, when adding a
new product line).
NOTE: Safety or Critical (or Safety Critical, et al.) characteristics shall be 100%
inspected except as directed by the customer with written authorization (for
example, a customer-approved procedure). The customer retains the right to
withdraw this authorization at any time.
4.2 Assigning Responsibilities:
Procedures shall include assigned responsibility for administering statistical product

acceptance plans. See Appendix A for guidance.
4.3 Assigning Where Applied:

//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
The organization shall define all current statistical techniques for product acceptance and
the locations in the organization where they are applied. See Appendix A for guidance.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 19 -
SAE ARP9013
4.4 Establishing a Training Program:
To assure effective implementation of statistical product acceptance applications,

procedures shall require and define the training requirements of general and specific
statistical requirements, methods, and intended audiences. See Appendix A for guidance.
4.5 Controlling Nonconformances:
Procedures shall require ways to handle nonconforming products, assure that

nonconforming products do not escape, and provide for the prevention of nonconforming
products in the future. Procedures shall require that all discovered nonconformities be
reported as nonconforming. Methods used to control nonconformances shall be defined
or referenced in the procedure.
4.6 Monitoring Performance and Effectiveness:
Procedures shall define the processes used to ensure proper performance of statistical
acceptance applications, including the use of any switching rules or changes to inspection
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
frequency. See Appendix A for guidance.
4.7 Defining Adjustments to Inspection Frequency:
As applicable, procedures shall define any rationale used to adjust the level of inspection.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The adjustment of inspection levels defined in the procedure shall be based on quality
history.
4.8 Customer Approval of Procedures and Plans:
When statistical acceptance procedures and plans are subject to approval by the
customer prior to use, the organizations procedure shall define how that approval process
is controlled.
PREPARED UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF

SAE COMMITTEE G-14, AMERICAS AEROSPACE QUALITY GROUP (AAQG)

- 20 -
SAE ARP9013
APPENDIX A
GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION
The paragraph numbering below is sequenced to follow the noted paragraph and requirements
defined in Sections 3 and 4 of this recommended practice. The guidelines in this appendix are
considered nonmandatory and not subject to compliance audits, but are intended as an aid to
the organization for better understanding of requirements, planning, and implementation of
statistical product acceptance methods. The authorship of this recommended practice believes
that following these recommendations to the extent possible will enhance the success of
statistical applications that affect, improve, and maintain product quality.
A.1 GUIDELINE FOR 3.2 SAFETY/CRITICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
The customer may withdraw the authorization to inspect at less than 100% at any time.
In cases where the customer authorizes an exception to 100% inspection, but does not
specify the quality parameter, it is recommended that the RQL at the loosest sampling
level be identified in the design requirement. This recommended practice's
recommendation is an RQL.
A.2 GUIDELINE FOR 3.3 QUALITY PARAMETERS:
The purpose of any assigned value for a quality parameter is to define what it takes to
determine or to ensure conformance for each accepted unit of product. The quality
parameter is based on a risk assessment that may typically be performed by a cross-
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
functional team consisting of manufacturing engineering, quality engineering and design

engineering where possible. It is recommended that the selection or approval of quality
parameters include participation from the design engineers. If an organization cannot
perform this function, they may request assistance from the customer.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
A.2.1 For ongoing production (see ARP9013/2 and ARP9013/4), the statistic may reflect the
outgoing quality, for example by looking at the peak or a weighted average of the
average outgoing quality (AOQ) curve, which are the average outgoing quality limit
(AOQL) or expected outgoing quality (EOQ), or of confidence intervals around the
outgoing quality, such as the probability outgoing quality limit (POQL). Table A1
provides a conversion from AQL values to its corresponding AOQL values.
TABLE A1 - AQL to AOQL Conversion
AQL 0.010% 0.015% 0.025% 0.040% 0.065% 0.100% 0.150% 0.25%

AOQL 0.018% 0.033% 0.046% 0.074% 0.113% 0.143% 0.198% 0.33%
AQL 0.40% 0.65% 1.0% 1.5% 2.5% 4.0% 6.5% 10.0%

AOQL 0.53% 0.79% 1.22% 1.90% 2.90% 4.94% 7.12% 11.46%

- 21 -
SAE ARP9013
A.2.2 For any ongoing process, an Average Run Length (ARL) may cap how long it would
take for the statistical technique to find a change in the process of a certain kind or
magnitude. For process control techniques (see ARP9013/3), a specific minimum
capability value (Cpk, Ppk, et al.) may be an additional designated quality parameter.
A.2.3 The historic use of the acceptable quality level (AQL) parameter protected the
producer only, did not clearly reflect the consumers risks, and could be misleading if
used for any other purpose. Where it is important to maintain continuity with historic
practices the AQL may continue to be used, however, it is recommended that the
sampling plan also show its AOQL. See Table A1. If the plan involves lot or batch
sampling, then it may also show the maximum RQL. Some values for this parameter
are given in Table VII-A of ANSI/ASQC Z1.4.
A.2.4 See Appendix B for additional guidance on establishing quality parameters.
A.3 GUIDELINE FOR 3.4 DRAWING SAMPLES:
Random sampling is very important and is recommended. This requires that each unit
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
produced have an equal chance of being selected. Randomization devices (for
example, dice, marked marbles, random number generators and tables) may be used
whenever possible. This is done to overcome the human tendency of developing habits
in selecting units for a sample, such as always pulling from the top layer of a stack or
from certain corners of a tray of parts. If a specification or other design requirement
specifically requires random sampling, then the randomization method may be auditable;
unguided human selection (reach and grab) is not auditable.
Some manufacturing strategies, such as single-piece flow or continuous lot production,

present special considerations when random sampling is difficult to use. Taking periodic
samples at prescribed intervals, such as systematic sampling or taking stratified samples
where the run is broken into subgroups of equal size and the same number of samples
is selected from each subgroup, are alternatives designed to ensure that the samples
are evenly spread out across the lot or over time. Such techniques, however, increase
the risks of overlooking systematic quality problems.
Samples may be predetermined if it has been determined by an analysis of variance

(ANOVA) or other valid statistical analysis that the predetermined sample shall be over-
representative of nonconforming product.
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\

- 22 -
SAE ARP9013
A.4 GUIDELINES FOR 3.6 MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS:
A.4.1 Measurement Devices:
It is recommended that measurement capability meets or exceeds a 4:1 ratio between

the product tolerance and the certified accuracy of the measurement device to ensure
identification of nonconforming product consistent with the quality parameters. See
Appendix C for discussion of the influence of measurement capability on product
reliability.
A.4.2 Non-Destructive Testing (NDT):
Statistical methods for product acceptance may be used in conjunction with non-
destructive testing (NDT) unless disallowed by Engineering. Traditionally, NDT has
either been 100% inspected or sampled to some other quality parameter than would
have been used on simpler inspections. This is because quality parameters must
reflect the more stringent of two criteria: cost and product reliability. Where product
reliability is affected, the NDT is usually required to be at 100% inspection. If it is
highly affected, then multiple 100% inspection processes are required (for example,
using both X-ray and ultrasonic inspection 100%). Where product reliability is not
affected, however, the cost equation loosens the quality parameter in response to
increased inspection costs, and NDT is generally more expensive than visual or
dimensional inspection. If the governing standard or specification requiring NDT
allows less than 100% inspection, then the process control methods of ARP9013/3
may be useful. See Appendix B for recommended quality parameters for NDT.
A.4.3 Destructive Testing:
If design drawings or specifications give instructions on destructive testing, those

instructions take precedence over this document. Destructive testing is no different
from other testing, except that 100% inspection is not an option. The absence of the
100% inspection phase does change the common formulas for outgoing quality. The
common formula for the AOQ of a series of lots no longer equals p x Pa, since the
rejected lots are not replaced by good units and thus no dilution of the
nonconformances in the accepted lots occurs. Preferred approaches include the
expected outgoing quality approach of ARP9013/4 Appendix C, process control per
ARP9013/3, and the isolated lot approach of ARP9013/1. Destructive sampling plans
are not recommended unless there is no other practical method of verifying the
conformance of a quality characteristic. If it is not possible to get enough confidence
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
without 100% inspection, then use of a correlated variables approach (for example,
coupons or process metrics) is recommended. See ARP9013/4 paragraph 6.2.
- 23 -
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

SAE ARP9013
A.5 GUIDELINE FOR 3.7 NONCONFORMANCES IN THE SAMPLE:
Nonconformities from design tolerance discovered in the sample may indicate that even
larger deviations exist in the unchecked production. As part of further analysis, the
rejected lot or batch may be screened for the rejected characteristic(s) to separate the
conforming product from product deemed nonconforming. Material review procedures
may further require screening of any characteristic determined to be suspect due to its
correlation with the one(s) rejected.
A.5.1 C=0 Sampling:
Some customers and regulatory agencies require C=0 plans where acceptance
sampling is permitted. A C=0 plan satisfies the requirements of this recommended
practice as a replacement for a C>0 plan only when it includes a quality parameter
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
meeting the requirements of 3.3, and the customer is protected at least as well under
the C=0 plan (for example, by an equivalent AOQL or RQL).
There are equivalent C=0 sampling plans that have been mathematically derived and
may be used as a replacement for ANSI/ASQC Z1.4. One example that is acceptable
for use in complying with this recommended practice is Squeglia1 where C>0 plans of
ANSI/ASQC Z1.4 are replaced with C=0 plans. Other examples are found in
ARP9013/1.
A.5.2 Secondary Tolerances When The Chosen Standard Requires C>0 Sampling:
If a drawing, specification, or other design requirement calls for an acceptance number

greater than zero, secondary limits outside the original limits may be used to generate
an equivalent C=0 sampling plan. This satisfies C=0 requirements only if individual
units of product falling between the original and secondary limits can be classified as
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
conforming. This condition generally happens when the original limits were made
narrower for cost or appearance reasons than would have been necessary for
function. The following approach may be used to generate an equivalent C=0
sampling plan. The basic concept tests at C=0 to a larger tolerance band while
continuing the C>0 acceptance sampling plan for the tighter tolerance. See Figure A1.
1
N. L. Squeglia, Zero Acceptance Number Sampling Plans, Fourth Edition, (Milwaukee, 1994), p. 3.

- 24 -
SAE ARP9013
Secondary, less restrictive tolerance with C = 0 sampling plan
Original, more restricted tolerance

with C > 0 sampling plan
Se
Or
Se
Or
No
c
ig
c
on
ig
on
in
mi
in
da
al
da
al
na
ry
ry
u
lo
pp
l
lo
up
we
er
we
pe
r
r
r
FIGURE A1 - Secondary Tolerances
A.5.2.1 The responsible design engineer performs or approves setting the secondary limits
based on customer requirements for the part in question. So, for example, if the
engineer determines that the secondary, C=0 tolerance can be 50% larger than the
original, C>0 tolerance, then secondary lower and upper limits are established which
are each 25% less restrictive than the original limits. Units of product that have
feature measurements between an original limit and the corresponding secondary
limit are classed as conforming if there are fewer of them than the acceptance
number in the standard table. There are two ways to reject a lot. If the number
measuring outside the original limits exceeds the acceptance number in the C>0
sampling plan, then all units outside the original tolerances are deemed
nonconforming and the lot is rejected. If the lot has any units with measurements
outside of the secondary limits, then the lot is rejected.
A.5.2.2 If the tolerance for the subject feature is only a lower limit, then the secondary limit is
established that is 75% of that lower limit. For example, strength has a lower
specification limit of 48 ksi, so the secondary limit is established at 36 ksi.
A.5.2.3 If the tolerance for the subject feature is only an upper limit, then the secondary limit
is established that is 125% of that upper limit. For example, contamination in a
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
processing tank has an upper limit of 20 ppm, so the secondary limit is established at
25 ppm.
A.5.3 Reduced, Continuous, or Skip-Lot Sampling:
When the sampling is continuous or skip-lot (see ARP9013/4), or when the sampling
uses reduced sampling levels that are less than would be required under isolated lot
sampling (see ARP9013/1), then the sampling plan may accommodate adequate
retrievability of product. Production rates and frequencies of inspection may be linked
so that if nonconforming product is found, any product needing to be inspected may be
retrieved.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 25 -
SAE ARP9013
A.6 GUIDELINES FOR 3.8 STATISTICAL PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE PLANS AND

RECORDS:
The documentation of the sampling plan may or may not explicitly describe the
characteristics it covers.
A.6.1 Statistical Product Acceptance Plans:
It is recommended that each statistical product acceptance plan record and maintain
the following information:
a. Procedure from which the sampling plan or process control plan is derived.
b. Characteristics or family of characteristics for which this plan applies.
c. Quality parameter.
d. Acceptance criteria (may be included by reference).
e. Instructions on the use of the plan.
f. Procedure used to disposition rejected lots.
g. Date the statistical acceptance plan is effective.
and, as applicable:
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
h. Switching rules, as applicable that are in use (may be included by reference).
i. Any sampling tables used (may be included by reference).
A.6.2 Acceptance Records:
It is recommended that results of statistical acceptance procedures be recorded and

maintained according to governing quality instructions to assure traceability, evidence
of inspection status, and for verification by audit. It is recommended that acceptance
records show the following results:
a. Product unit identifier, typically a part number.
b. Date the inspection is performed.
c. Population identification (e.g., lot number, production order, purchase order, date
codes, etc.)

- 26 -
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
SAE ARP9013
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
A.6.2 (Continued):
d. Lot size or time frame, as applicable.
e. Sample size.
f. The values, measurements, or quantities that were used to make accept/reject

decisions along with the corresponding critical values.
g. Accept/reject indication for the lot
The following information is also suggested for inclusion in the acceptance records:
Information about the specific characteristic(s) being evaluated such as tolerances,

limits, or other engineering requirements relevant to the accept/reject decision.
Indicator of the amount of inspection currently required if there are any switching
rules, such as N (normal), R (reduced) or T (tightened) for lot sampling, or level 0,
level 1, etc., for continuous sampling.
Number of nonconformities or nonconformances in the sample using attribute data,
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
or the calculated value used to assess the lot using variable data.
NOTE: Since many customers and some regulatory agencies require C=0 sampling,
the information for the last two elements of A.6.2 (that is, f. and g.) may be
combined.
A.7 GUIDELINE FOR 3.9 ALTERNATE STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES FOR PRODUCT

ACCEPTANCE:
Statistical techniques other than those stated in this recommended practice may be
developed and used. Customers may require prior written approval before such
techniques are implemented. The validity of statistical techniques can be verified by
developing simulations to demonstrate performances, and this is recommended for new
and specialized procedures such as those identified as special strategies.

- 27 -
SAE ARP9013
A.8 GUIDELINE FOR 4.2 ASSIGNING RESPONSIBILITIES:
This includes defining those who evaluate and introduce new statistical product
acceptance methods; those in the organization who are responsible for creating,
maintaining, and approving statistical product acceptance procedures and plans; those
who perform the quality level assignments; those who select the various categories or
classifications of features; those who are permitted to perform statistical acceptance
procedures, those authorized to discontinue the use of statistical product acceptance.
Caution may be exercised to prevent conflicts of interest, where the acceptance
decisions made would have bearing on the personal interests of the decision maker.
A.9 GUIDELINE FOR 4.3 ASSIGNING WHERE APPLIED:
Documenting all statistical techniques applied for product acceptance in an

organizations facility may be in quality procedures, engineering or work instructions.
A.10 GUIDELINE FOR 4.4 ESTABLISHING A TRAINING PROGRAM:
Criteria for refresher training and internal audit may also be defined.
A.11 GUIDELINE FOR 4.6 MONITORING PERFORMANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS:
Procedures may also define the processes used to monitor other indications of inferior
quality, including the evaluation and control of measurement system variability.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 28 -
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
SAE ARP9013
APPENDIX B
GUIDELINES FOR 4.1 ASSIGNING QUALITY PARAMETERS AND STATISTICAL
TECHNIQUES FOR PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE
The guidelines in this appendix are considered nonmandatory and not subject to compliance
audits, but are intended as an aid to the organization for better understanding of requirements,
planning, and implementation of statistical product acceptance methods. The authorship of this
recommended practice believes that following these recommendations to the extent possible
will enhance the success of statistical applications that affect, improve, and maintain product
quality.
B.1 Some representative examples of how to correctly assign quality levels are
recommended to be included in the procedures. Showing examples in the
organizations procedure of how to correctly assign quality levels may be used to remove
any ambiguity in the assignment of quality levels. This may take the form of
classification of characteristics, quality parameters, lists of inspection characteristics, or
checklists, etc. Showing how quality parameters are determined is also suggested for
inclusion in the procedure or instruction. Several quality parameters may be appropriate
in order to cover the various products, features, and processes at the organizations
facility. Characteristics and parts may be grouped in the documentation if they have
identical performance measures and criteria.
B.2 INITIAL RELIABILITY REQUIREMENT (IRR) QUALITY PARAMETER:
Figure B1 is an example of IRR quality parameters, for illustrative purposes only,

historically used by the Engineering and Reliability disciplines for various product and
process feature types in aerospace manufacturing. This recommends some minimum
values for selected aerospace applications. Engineers, quality departments, or
customers may specify values that are different than these values. Other forms and
formats to display this or any other assigned quality parameters in the organizations
documented procedure(s) may be used.
NOTE: The examples in Figure B1 are not complete and may not be used to bypass
any Engineering requirement. For sampling per ARP9013/1, the specification
giving the product (e.g., dimensional) requirements may often stipulate its own
quality parameter, but if it is silent, then it is recommended that the minimum
probability of conformance be met by assigning an ERP equal to the
complement of the table value (ERP = 1 - minimum probability of conformance).
For sampling per ARP9013/2 or ARP9013/4, it is recommended that the
minimum probability of conformance be met by assigning an AOQL or an EOQ //^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
equal to the complement of the table value (for example, AOQL = 1 - minimum
probability of conformance). For the techniques of ARP9013/3, it is
recommended that all product be verified unless the total frequency of special
cause and common cause nonconformances is again less than the complement
of the minimum probability of conformance.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 29 -
SAE ARP9013
Examples of
Part, Process, Characteristic, or Mechanical Requirements Probability of Conformance
Parts:
Machined parts (general features, except as noted under 97%
Mechanical Characteristics below)
Conductivity 99.2%
Hardness 99.2%
Composite part 95%
Cable form 98%
Connector assemblies 99%
Printed circuit boards 97%
Conformance of PCB configuration 99%
Processes:
Sheet metal fabrication 95%
Receiving inspection of standards 97%
NDT (where permitted) 98.78%
Paint, alodine, anodize and plating 90% for appearance;
92% for all others (adhesion,
application, thickness, etc.)
Electrical wire wrap 98%
Cleanliness test for PCBs 97%
Mechanical Characteristics:
Fastener hole diameter tolerances .001 or less. 99.2%
Fastener hole diameter tolerances between .0011 and .0030; 98%
finish on wet installation/coating, location on non-locating holes of
.010 linear or .028 diametral tolerance, all threads.
Fastener hole diameters tolerances .0031, location on non- 92%
locating holes of > .010 linear or .028 diametral tolerance
Formed holes in sheet metal 90%
Locating Hole locations 95%
Dim. Total Tolerance Range .004 inches other than machined 99.2%
parts or sheet metal
Joggle depth in sheet metal 92% for tolerances of .010 or less;
90% for greater tolerances
Thickness with tolerance of .005 or less 97% for machined parts;
92% for sheet metal
Thickness with tolerance of greater than .005 92% for machined parts;
90% for sheet metal
Linear dim. tolerance .010 inches 97% machined parts;
92% sheet metal
Linear dim. tolerance greater than .010 inches 92% machined parts;
90% sheet metal
Radii Total Tolerance Range less than .020 inches 97% for machined parts;
92% for sheet metal;
99.2% all other applications
Radii Total Tolerance Range greater than .020 inches 92% for machined parts;
90% for sheet metal
Angle Total Tolerance Range less than or equal to 0.5 degree 97% for machined parts;
92% for sheet metal;
99.2% all other applications
FIGURE B1 - Examples of Probability of Conformance Values

Assigned by Feature and Tolerance
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 30 -
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
SAE ARP9013
Examples of
Part, Process, Characteristic, or Mechanical Requirements
Probability of Conformance
Angle Total Tolerance Range greater than 0.5 degree 92% for machined parts;
90% for sheet metal
Concentricity, non-controlled contours, diameter or fillet radius 92% for machined parts;
tolerances greater than .010, flatness / straightness, 90% for sheet metal
parallelism, perpendicularity, and profile
Controlled contour (Master Dimension Definition [MDD], Master 97% for machined parts;
Dimension Surface [MDS]), diameter or fillet radius tolerances 92% for sheet metal
less than or equal to .010
Surface Finish Waviness 99.2%
Surface Finish Roughness (Ra) less than or equal to 20 99.2% for applications other than
microinches machined parts or sheet metal
Surface Finish Roughness (Ra) less than 32 microinches 97% for machined parts;
92% for sheet metal
Surface Finish Roughness (Ra) greater than or equal to 32 92% for machined parts;
microinches 90% for sheet metal
Flatness Carbon Face Seals using optical flats 99.2%
Threaded parts:
Internal Profile Preload Locking 99.2%
Straight screw threads total tolerance on pitch diameter 99.2%
AN & MS parts or MH electrical connectors 97.1%
All other thread applications/characteristics 99.2%
Gears and Splines (all characteristics) 99.2%
Dimensions with only maximum or minimum values which directly 99.2%
control material thickness of weldments, castings, or forgings;
and at least one surface is machined
Absence of magnetism (ferrous parts) 99.2%
Spring rate (when specified by Engineering) 99.2%
FIGURE B1 - Examples of Probability of Conformance Values (Continued)
B.3 ASSIGNED BY FEATURE AND TOLERANCE:
The organization may choose to list all the features or characteristic types they produce
and assign quality parameters to each in an expanded version of the example above in
their procedure.
B.4 See Appendix C for an editorial discussion on the relationship between quality
parameters and reliability.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 31 -
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
SAE ARP9013
APPENDIX C
DISCUSSION ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF QUALITY PARAMETERS TO RELIABILITY
The guidelines and discussion in this appendix are considered nonmandatory and not subject to
compliance audits, but are intended as an aid to the organization for better understanding of
requirements, planning, and implementation of statistical product acceptance methods. The
authorship of this recommended practice believes that following these recommendations to the
extent possible will enhance the success of statistical applications that affect, improve, and
maintain product quality.
C.1 INTRODUCTION:
Reliability is a regulatory, contractual, and even an ethical requirement. Reliability,

however, is not an absolute. There is no finite limit to how much the reliability of
aerospace products could be increased, in terms of mean time to failure (MTTF), if there
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
were no tradeoffs to make; but there are tradeoffs that have to be made. If costs go too
high for a commercial airplane, people are forced to drive long distances instead of
flying, so they expose themselves to an order of magnitude greater danger. If schedule
goes too long, then they dont have the airplanes to fly in. Similar tradeoffs exist for
military and space applications reliability is always a quantitative requirement, a
number and not an absolute, but it is a number that absolutely shall be met.
The definition of reliability is the probability of a specified unit of product performing

specified functions under specified conditions for a specified period of time. The unit of
product that regulators, contract officers, and ethicists care about is the actual
aerospace product, the one made by imperfect people using imperfect materials and
tools and processes, and inspected by other imperfect people using imperfect inspection
tools and processes. Somehow the reliability of the delivered units of product are still
required to meet stringent requirements.
However, the equations and the accelerated life testing on which reliability engineering
depends are very often based on 100% conforming parts, materials and processes.
Many artifacts exposed to shake and bake testing are built from carefully screened
components, components screened much more completely than the ones expected to
be used in regular production. It takes an extra effort to make the equations of the
reliability models include any potential for nonconformance, and there is always the
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
question of how to do that. Are nonconforming components treated as being close to
the limits, maybe just outside by a standard deviation or two? Or may they be treated as
missing altogether (as is often done in the case of fasteners)?

- 32 -
SAE ARP9013
C.1 (Continued):
The specifying of a minimum probability of conformance is often a useful way to resolve

this. If the component or material is significant to the reliability of the end item and 100%
inspection is not practical, the design function may choose to specify a minimum
probability of conformance in the reliability model. This may not make the computations
easy, but it may make them possible. A key equation is:
Prob (it works) = [Prob (it works given it conforms) Prob (it conforms)] +
[Prob (it works given it does not conform) Prob (it does not conform)]
Conventional reliability handbooks and tables give the first factor on the right, the Prob (it
works given it conforms). That is because the testing is performed only on parts and
products that have been screened more carefully than what is used in regular
production. However, the customers interests in reliability are strictly on the left side of
the equation.
It should be noted that the probability of nonconformance for a product coming out of a
stable process is the sum of the probability that it was nonconforming and not inspected
(something less than the AOQL) and the probability that it was nonconforming, was
inspected, and was still passed as conforming (process quality times type 2 inspection
error). It is generally conservative for use in the equation above to estimate the
probability of conformance as 1-(AOQL+ measurement consumer risk), when the feature
in question is measured. Measurement consumer risk is typically modeled as 0.8%
when the ratio between product tolerance and measurement uncertainty is 4:1, and
calibration services correct any measurement biases during the calibration process.
Where measurement biases cannot be corrected, the organization may verify by other
means that any residual measurement bias does not create risk in excess of the quality
parameter for the customers by hiding nonconforming portions of the product
distribution.
It is sometimes helpful for motivational reasons to use the term reliability in naming and
prescribing this minimum probability of conformance. This can be explained by applying
the definition of reliability at the specified period of time t= 0, meaning at the time the
product is accepted by its quality acceptance activity and therefore begins its individual
life cycle. The probability of a specified unit of product meeting the requirements that
are specified at t=0 in its life cycle is a probability of conformance, and therefore a
minimum probability of conformance may be termed an initial or inspection-point
reliability requirement. Some specifications reduce this to the acronym IRR. //^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 33 -
SAE ARP9013
C.2 HISTORICAL SOLUTIONS:
The discipline of quality engineering has developed a range of quality parameters (see
3.3, A.2, and B.2) that are motivated by different processes and different customer
applications, but which all connect in some way to this minimum probability of
conformance.
C.2.1 The AQL has been the most common quality parameter, and the least connected to
the minimum probability of conformance, because it was originally invented to protect
against false rejection of adequate quality lots rather than against true escapes. When
an engineer specified an AQL, it assured that relatively few lots with that level of
quality would be rejected. During World War II, when this parameter was invented, the
delay of manufactured war goods due to a false rejection was likely to mean a loss of
life for the associated armed forces. However, since most product requirements were
not critical, a few true escapes did not often cause loss of life.
It was understandable during World War II that the inventers of AQL would focus on
something so far removed from minimum probability of conformance, but even at that
they did make sure the connection to minimum probability of conforming product was
not forgotten. The military standard contained tables of AOQL and LQ factors
associated with each AQL and lot size, and those quality parameters related directly to
the minimum probability of conformance.
C.2.2 The AOQL has been another very common quality parameter, and it expresses 1
minus the minimum probability of conformance over a long run process operating at
the most escape-prone level of quality. The AOQL is the highest average fraction
nonconforming (or if used for a Poisson process, the highest average number of
nonconformities per standard volume of production) that could get through the
sampling plan. Quality either better or worse than the most escape-prone level of
quality would only improve the minimum probability of conformance for accepted
product because rejections led to higher amount of inspection and replacement of
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
nonconforming product.
Like the AQL, there are limitations on the AOQL as a parameter that need to be
correctly managed when using the AOQL to achieve a minimum probability of
conformance. First, the AOQL is a long-run parameter; so short production runs may
temporarily produce worse probability of conformance among accepted product.
Engineering interests may call for augmenting the AOQL with short run controls such
as the ERP, LQ or RQL for large lot production or the ARL for single unit or small lot
production. Second, the AOQL is a worst-case parameter, so the real probability of
conformance is always better than 1 minus AOQL unless the quality level is precisely
at that most escape-prone rate. Manufacturing interests may call for augmenting the
AOQ curve with empirical knowledge of the frequency with which they operate at each
quality level, expressing the result as an EOQ.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

- 34 -
SAE ARP9013
C.2.2 (Continued):
Unlike the AQL, which has no real meaning outside the production of moderate to
large lots, the AOQL works equally well with large lot production as with production of
small lots and single unit production as advocated under kanban and just-in-time (JIT)
operations.
//^:^^#^~^^"^@"^"^:$~@@^"#:$@:#:^^^^""~::^""^:#^^@":*\\
C.2.3 Occasionally a quality engineer has chosen to meet a minimum probability of

conformance by assigning a short run continuous sampling plan with a corresponding
short-run AOQL, as approximated in CSP-F (see ARP9013/4 Appendix A), or a short
run lot sampling plan with a corresponding short-run POQL. These are more
technically demanding, but more accurate for short runs.
C.3 RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS:
In each case, the quality parameter is a probability of nonconformance, and it is the

complement (1 minus the quality parameter, hence a probability of conformance) that is
useful in reliability modeling. Without specific engineering instructions otherwise, it is
generally good practice to estimate the minimum probability of conformance of product
accepted through a sampling plan as being 1 minus AOQL for continuous sampling or 1
minus ERP for lot sampling. The other parameters may be used whenever they are
statistically valid, appropriate for use, and satisfy the corresponding engineering
requirements. If the design function stipulates a minimum probability of conformance,
such as an IRR, it is the responsibility of the quality function to treat this as any other
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
design requirement affecting product reliability.

- 35 -

Sampling

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sampling

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

AEROSPACE ARP9013

RECOMMENDED Issued 2005-10

Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements

To assure customer satisfaction, aerospace industry organizations shall produce, and

customers having varying quality expectations and requirements.

Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)

This recommended practices series of documents establishes the general requirements

Copyright SAE International

2.1 Applicable Documents ................................................................................................... 4

3. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................ 16

3.1 Trained Personnel........................................................................................................ 16

4. REQUIRED CONTENT FOR DOCUMENTED PROCEDURES ........................................ 19

APPENDIX A GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL

APPENDIX B GUIDELINES FOR 4.1 ASSIGNING QUALITY PARAMETERS AND

Copyright SAE International

Provided by IHS under license with SAE

1.2 Field of Application:

This recommended practice is applicable when invoked in a purchasing contract or

If desired to sample a series of lots without using ARP9013/1, ARP9013/2, or ARP9013/3,

2.1 Applicable Documents:

Copyright SAE International

ARP9013/1 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Isolated Lot

ARP9013/2 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Attribute or

ARP9013/3 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Process

ARP9013/4 Statistical Product Acceptance Requirements Using Continuous

AS9100 Quality Management Systems - Aerospace - Requirements

AS9103 Variation Management of Key Characteristics

ANSI/ASQC B1 Guide for Quality Control Charts

ANSI/ASQC B2 Control Chart Method of Analyzing Data

ANSI/ASQC B3 Control Chart Method of Controlling Quality During Production

ANSI/ASQC Q3 Sampling Procedures and Tables for Inspection of Isolated Lots by

ANSI/ASQC S1 An Attribute Skip-Lot Sampling Program

ANSI/ASQC Z1.4 Sampling Procedures and Tables for Inspection by Attributes

Copyright SAE International

MIL-STD-1235 Single and Multi-Level Continuous Sampling Procedures and Table

2.2 Related Publications:

Braverman, Jerome D., Fundamentals of Statistical Quality Control, New Jersey:

Copyright SAE International

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL): The maximum percentage or proportion of

considered satisfactory as a process average. See 3.3 and Appendix A.

ACCEPTANCE SAMPLING: Inspection in which decisions are made to accept or not

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (ANOVA): An arithmetic process developed for the purpose of

ATTRIBUTE DATA: Qualitative data that counts the presence or absence of a

Copyright SAE International

b(n, k; p) is the probability of k nonconforming items in n trials

n is the fixed number of Bernoulli trials

k is the number of nonconforming units in n trials

p is the probability of a nonconforming unit and (1-p) is the probability of a conforming

BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION: In the literature of statistics, the binomial as a probability

P (d) is the probability of a defect (the defect rate)

n is the number of representative observations of the process, no defects observed

Copyright SAE International

COMBINATIONS: The number of distinct groupings of m distinct objects taken i at a time,

CONFORMANCE: When a characteristic of a product or process meets its requirements.

Fulfillment of specified requirements. Also called Conformity.

CONTINUOUS ACCEPTANCE SAMPLING: Inspection intended for application on

CONTINUOUS MANUFACTURING PROCESS: A combination of manufacturing methods

CRITICAL CHARACTERISTIC: A characteristic designated by the design authority,

DEFECT: Non-fulfillment of a requirement related to an intended or a specified use. A

Copyright SAE International

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY (GAGE R&R): A study used to

HOMOGENEOUS PROCESS: A process where there is a repetitive production running

HYPERGEOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION: Applies whenever one is computing the probability

x = 0, 1, 2, ..., min. (M, n)