Results of process capability analysis of meat cutting processes
| Meat cut/customer type | Process capability analysis results |
|---|---|
| Gluteus medius tails | The process is not capable (Cpk <1.3) |
| A | Outlier observed A customer specification – however, it was the most conforming specification, with only 16% non-conforming in the USL |
| B | Non-conforming at both the upper and lower specification limits |
| C | Non-conforming at the lower specification limit at 84 and 88%, respectively |
| D | Non-conforming at the lower specification limit at 84 and 88%, respectively |
| E | 20% outside specifications |
| Meat cut/customer type | Process capability analysis results |
|---|---|
| Gluteus medius tails | The process is not capable (Cpk <1.3) |
| A | Outlier observed A customer specification – however, it was the most conforming specification, with only 16% non-conforming in the USL |
| B | Non-conforming at both the upper and lower specification limits |
| C | Non-conforming at the lower specification limit at 84 and 88%, respectively |
| D | Non-conforming at the lower specification limit at 84 and 88%, respectively |
| E | 20% outside specifications |
| Longissimus dorsi backstrap | Process capability analysis |
|---|---|
| A | Outliers – 100% non-conforming with the specification requirements |
| B | Non-conforming |
| C | 20% were non-conforming within the specifications left skewed of the target (i.e. the non-conforming longissimus dorsi were found towards the lower limit (LSL) |
| D | Outliers -present Non-conforming |
| E | 20% were non-conforming within the specifications -Right skewed of the target (i.e. that non-conforming were found towards the upper specification limit (USL)) |
| Longissimus dorsi backstrap | Process capability analysis |
|---|---|
| A | Outliers – 100% non-conforming with the specification requirements |
| B | Non-conforming |
| C | 20% were non-conforming within the specifications left skewed of the target (i.e. the non-conforming longissimus dorsi were found towards the lower limit (LSL) |
| D | Outliers -present Non-conforming |
| E | 20% were non-conforming within the specifications -Right skewed of the target (i.e. that non-conforming were found towards the upper specification limit (USL)) |
| Longissimus dorsi tails | Process capability analysis |
|---|---|
| A | Customers A & D were most capable with greater Cpk and Ppk values |
| B | Capable: limited over trimming |
| C | 100% non-conforming, where the results fell largely below the lower specification limit. No over-trimming |
| D | Customers A & D were most capable with greater Cpk and Ppk values |
| E | Over-trimmed by almost half the spec requirements |
| Longissimus dorsi tails | Process capability analysis |
|---|---|
| A | Customers A & D were most capable with greater Cpk and Ppk values |
| B | Capable: limited over trimming |
| C | 100% non-conforming, where the results fell largely below the lower specification limit. No over-trimming |
| D | Customers A & D were most capable with greater Cpk and Ppk values |
| E | Over-trimmed by almost half the spec requirements |
Source(s): Authors’ own
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.