Disclosure to Promote the Right To Information

Whereas the Parliament of India has set out to provide a practical regime of right to
information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities,
in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority,
and whereas the attached publication of the Bureau of Indian Standards is of particular interest
to the public, particularly disadvantaged communities and those engaged in the pursuit of
education and knowledge, the attached public safety standard is made available to promote the
timely dissemination of this information in an accurate manner to the public.
!"#$%&# '(%)
!"# $ %& #' (")* &" +#,-.
Satyanarayan Gangaram Pitroda
Invent a New India Using Knowledge
/0)"1 &2 324 #' 5 *)6
Jawaharlal Nehru
Step Out From the Old to the New
7"#1 &" 8+9&"), 7:1 &" 8+9&")
Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan
The Right to Information, The Right to Live
!"# %& ;<" =7"#" > 72 &(: ?0)"@" #AB 7" <&*" A*
Bhart+hariN,ti-atakam
Knowledge is such a treasure which cannot be stolen
IS 2500-2 (1965): Sampling inspection procedures, Part 2:
Inspection by variables for percent defective [MSD 3:
Statistical Methods for Quality and Reliability]
IS : 2500 ( Part II ) 1965
( Reaffirmed 2001 )
Indian Standard
SAMPLING INSPECTION PROCEDURES
PART II INSPECTION BY VARIABLES FOR PERCENT DEFECTIVE
Seventh Reprint AUGUST 1998
( lncorporating Amendment No.1)
UDC 519.271.3 : 620.111 (083)
C Copyright 1996
BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS
MANAK BHAVAN. 9 BAHADUR SHAHlAfAR. MARG
NEW DELHI 110002
Gr8
June 1966


IS : 2500 ( Part II ) 1965
Indian Standard
SAMPLING INSPECTION PROCEDURES
PART II INSPECTION BY VARIABLES FOR PERCENT DEFECTIVE
Indian Iron & Steel Co Ltd, Burnpur
Precious Metals Sectional Committee, SMDC 13,
lSI
Directorate General of Inspection (Ministry or
Defence)
Italab Private Ltd, Bombay
Light Metals and Their Alloys Sectional Committee,
SMDC 10, lSI
Refractories Sectional Committee', SMDC 18,-ISI
Ministry of Railways
SHRt A. GUUA
Copper and Copper Alloys Sectional Committee,
SMOC 11. lSI
Cast Iron and Malleable Cast Iron Sectional
Committee, SMDC 9, lSI
SRRI PItEM RAJ GUPTA. Ferro Alloys Sectional Committee, 8. lSI
SHaI P. C. HAZIlA Indian Bureau of Mines (Ministry of Steel and
Mines), Nagpur
SHIll N. K. MUKHERJEE (A/tnlUde)
Saa. P. L. JAIN Steel Tubes, Pipes and Fittings Sectional Com-
mittee. SMDC 22, lSI .
SIDlI F. A. JAIDAHWALA Lead, Zinc, Tin, Antimony and Their AUoy.
Sectional Oommiuce, SMOC 12, lSI
na N. ]AYARAMAN Essen at Co, Bangalore
SHIll K. N. GuaUIlAJACHA.a. (Alternate)
SHU R.. M. KRISHNAN Foundry Sectional Committee, SMDC 17, lSI
SHU N. R.. KIUIHHASWAMY Directorate General of Ordnance Fat..tories
or Defence), Calcutta
SHIll D. K. CHAkRAVARTY (Alurnall)
SHU D. SaN
SHRI M. GUPTA
SHat D. N. ELClIJDANA
SHar S. S. HONAVAR (A/tnnau)
SIUtI J. P. PA'r&L (AltlmQu)
SHRI S. B. FIRKE
SHa1J. C. BANEIlJEE
SaRI A. K. BHA1'TACHARYA
SHRI M. N. BUIDE (.-fltmult,)
Da U. N. BHIlANY
SHRI J. N. BURMAN (AlumtllI)
DR M. K. BoSE
SHRI S. K. DunA
Methods of Sampling Sectional Committee, SMDC 4-
CIurinruua &jwlstnlin6
Da A. V. SUItHATMB The Tata Iron & Steel Co'Ltd,Januhedpur
M""bn"
Smu V. D. AOARWAL
(Conlintutl 0" PCl(2)
BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS
MANAK UI-IAVA'N, 9 BAIIADUR SHAH z.a.rAlt
NEW 1\OOU1

IS s 2500 (Part D) - 1965
(C,nti".4j'rtml /JG" I)
National Tnt House, Calcutta
Directorate General of Supplies &: Di.posaJI
(Inspection Wrought Steel Products
Sectional Committee, SMDC 5, lSI; Steel
Castings Sectional Committee, SMDC 20,
lSI; and Pig Iron Sectional Committee,
SMDC 24, lSI
()r('s and Raw Matrrials Sectional Committee,
SMDC 16, lSI
Steel Forgings Sectional Committee, SMDC 21, lSI
Methods of Chemical Analysil Sectional Com..
rruttee, SMDC 2, 151
Methods of Physical Tests Sectional Committee,
SMDC 3, lSI
Director, lSI (Ex-officro Mlmbtr)
&J1r's,,,'Uaf
Indian Statistical Institute, Calcutta
SHRI B. N. SINGH,
Assistant Director (Starisuc)
SHat S. VISWANATHAN
SHR.A.PADMANAEHAN
SHRr A. SANOAMESWARA RAO
SlllU P. I. A. NARAVANAN
Indian Non-Ferrous Metal. Manufacturen' A..-
dation, Calcutta
SHa. M. M. MOUDOILL (AltnlUJu)
SKat N. T. MATHEW Anny Headquarters
DRM. N. BHATTAcHAavA (A/lima")
SHal N. C. MITRA Government of India Mint (Ministry of Finance)
DR M. K. BOSE (Alllmall)
SHaJ S. N. MUICERjl
SHa. E. K. N. NAMBIAR
Mtm6ns
SHIUD. B. LAHla.
Da A. MATTHAI (Alima.")
SHItI N. MAJUMDAR
Stcrdary
SURI Y. K. BUAT
Extra Assistant Director (Statistics), lSI
Panel for Sampling Inspection Tables, SMDC 4 : P6
DR A. Indian Stati.lical Institute, Calcutta
2

IS I 2500 (Part D). 1965
CONTENTS
PAGE
O. FOREWORD
I. SCOPE
2. TERMINOLOGY AND SYMBOLS
3. CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE CHOICE BETWEEN THE ATTRIBUTES AND
VARfADLES INSPECTION
4. PRELIMINARIF.S TO THE SELECTION OF VARIABLES INSPECTION PLANS
4.1 Formation of Lots
4.2 Types of Single Sampling Variables Plans
4.3 Drawing of Samples
5. SELECTION OF SAMPLING PLANS
5.1 Classification of Sampling Plans
5.2 Inspection Level
5.3 Lot Acceptability
5.4 Normal, Reduced and Tightened Inspection
6. TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES ..
TABLE I SAMPLE SIZE CODE LETTERS BY INSPECTION LEVELS
AND SIZES OF LOTS
T ABLE 2 SINGLE SAMPLING VARIABLES PLANS FOR VARI-
ABII.ITY KNOWN METHOD
TABLE 3 SINGLE SAMPLING VARIABLES PLANS FOR VARIABILITV
UNKNOWN - STANDARD DEVIATION METHOD
TABLE 4 SINGl.E SAMPLING VARIABLES PLANR FOR VARIABILITY
UNKNOWN - RANGE METHOD
S
TABLE 5 THE UPPER LIMIT FOR THE VALUE OF U_ L FOR VARIA-
BILITY UNKNOWN - STANDARD DEVIATION l\'fF.THOD
R R
TABLE 6 THE UPPER LIMIT FOR THE VALUE 01" U-L OR U-L
FOR VARIADILITY UNKNOWN - RANGE 1vlETHOD
EXAMPLt:S I, 2, 3 AND 4-
ApPENDIX A SYMBOLS
ApPENDIX B FORMULJE AND TABLES FOR CONSTRUCTING SINGLE
SAMPLING AQL-L"fPD VARIABLES PLANS "'OR ONE-SIDED SPECI-
FICATION LIMITS
BO. Stipulations of the Plans (Values to be given)
B-1. Variability Known Method .. . .
B-2. Variability Unknown - Standard Deviation Method..
TABLE 7 1'1-1 VALUES OF t CORRESPONDING TO A GIVEN FRAC
'CION VARYING FROM 000 TO 099
B-3. Variability Unknown - Range Method ..
ApPENDIX C THE OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC CURVES
3
4
6
6
7
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
12
13
15
15
16
17
18
19
20
21,22
24
25
25
25
25
26
27
28

IS : 2500 ( Part II ) 1965
Indian Standard
SAMPLING INSPECTION PROCEDURES
PART II INSPECTION BY VARIABLES FOR PERCENT DEFECTIVE
o. FO R E W 0 R D
0.1 This Indian Standard was adopted by the Indian Standards Institution
on 1 October 1965, after the draft finalized by the Methods of Sampling
Sectional Committee had been approved by the Structural and Metals
Division Council.
0.2 Part I of this standard dealing with inspection by attributes and by count
of defects had been issued earlier with a view to facilitating the wide-spread
use of sampling inspection in those situations where items can be classified
as defectives or non-defectives, satisfactory or non-satisfactory. However,
this type of inspection may require comparatively larger sample size and hence
in certain situations like the determination of warp breaking strength of
cotton fabrics, it may become uneconomical due to the destructive nature or
prohibitive cost of testing. In such cases, inspection by variables, wherein
quality is measured on a continuous scale like tensile strength of steel wire,
may be more useful and economical. This standard has been prepared to
meet the growing demand for the use of sampling plans for inspection by
variables.
0.3 Further economy in sampling inspection may be obtained if the units in
the lot are quite uniform in quality as a smaller sample may then be adequate
to represent the lot. This uniformity may be achieved by controlling the
quality at the production stage itself and helpful guidance may be obtained
in this respect from IS : 3971952*.
0.4 Sometimes the quality characteristics can be inspected both by attributes
and by variables, for example, the diameter of a shaft can be checked either
by gauging or by actual measurement, In such cases, a decision has to be
made whether inspection should be by attributes or by variables. Some of
the important considerations which provide the basis for a suitable choice
have been given in 4.2.3 of IS : 1548-1960t. Howevert a more detailed
discussion of such considerations is given in 3 of this standard.
Method for statistical quality control during production by the use or control chart
(JWI mJintl).
tManual 011 buic principlet or lot sampling (nnu M1iJltI).
4

II I 2500 (Part D). 1965
0.5 This standard furnishes a collection of tables from which sampling
plans can be selected for inspection by variables. Only single sampling
plans have been given in this standard as the variables plans for double and
multiple sampling become rather complicated for practical usc. All the
plans given in this standard require the lot quality to be specified in terms
of percentage defective.
0.6 This standard is one ora series of Indian Standards relating to techniques
of statistical quality control. Other standards published so far in the series
are:
* IS : 397-1952 Method for statistical quality control during production
by the use of control chart
IS : 1548-1960 Manual on basic principia of lot sampling
IS : 2500 (Part 1)-1963 Sampling inspection tables: Part r Inspec-
tion by attributes and by count of defects
0.7 In preparing this standard. considerable assistance has been derived
from the following publications:
MIL-STD-414 Military standard sampling procedures and tables for
inspection by variables for percent defective. 1957. Department
of Defence, USA.
Bowker (A H) and Goode (II P). Sampling inspection by
variables. 1952. Ed 1. McGra'.v-Hill Book Company, Inc, New
York.
Dodge (1-1 F). A general procedure for sampling inspection by
attributes based on the AQL concept. Technical Report No. 10.
1959. Rutgers. The State University.
Ireson (W G). Sampling tables for inspection by variables. Teet-
nical Report No.7. 1952. Applied Mathematics and Statistics
Laboratory. Stanford University.
Ireson (W G) and Resnikoff (G J). Sampling tables (or vari-
ables inspection based on the range. Technical Report No. 11.
1952. Applied Mathematics and Statistic Laboratory. Stanford
University.
Rcsnikoff (0 J). A new two-sided ar ccptance region for sampling
by variables. Technical Report No.8. 1952. Applied Mathematics
and Statistics Laboratory. Stanford University.
0.8 I n reporting the result of a test or analysis, if the final value, observed
or calculated, il) 10 be rounded off, it shall be done in accordance with
IS : 2-1960t .
Slncr revised.
tRulcs for rounding olf numerical values (rtl1iJed).
5

IS , 2500 (Part D) - 1965
1. SCOPE
1.1 This standard provides tables for single sampling plans for lot-by-lot
inspection, when the inspection is done by variables, Besides, the Iormuhe
and the necessary tables for the construction of one's own single sampling
plans are also given.
2. TERMINOLOGY AND SYMBOLS
2.0 For the purpose of this standard, the following definitions shall apply.
The symbols used in this standard including those for some of the terms
defined below are explained in Appendix A.
2.1 SampliDglDspectioD - Inspection in which only a portion of a lot is
inspected with a view to making a decision about accepting or rejecting
the lot.
2.2 SampliDg Plaa - A statement of the sampling procedure and the rule
for making decisions about the lot.
2.3 Item - Ultimate unit of product or material on which inspection will
be performed.
2.4 Lot - A collection of items from which a sample is drawn and inspected
to determine its acceptability.
2.5 Lot Size (N) - Number of items in a lot.
2.6 Sample - Collection of items selected for inspection from a lot.
2.7 Sam.ple Size (n) - Number of items in a sample.
2.8 Defective - An 'item' the quality of which does not meet the specified
requirements.
2.9 Percent Defective - Hundred times the ratio of the number of
defectives to the total number of items.
2.10 Slagle SampHng Plaa -Atype of sampling plan in which the decision
to accept or reject a lot is always reached after one sample from that lot has
been inspected.
2.11 Me.. (x) - The sum of the observations divided by the number of
observations (S', also Appendix A).
2.12 Lot Staadard DeviatloD (a) - The square root of the mean of the
squares of the deviation of all the observations in a lot from their mean
(s" als Appendix A).
2.13 Sample Staadard DeviatiOD (.) - The square root of the quotient
obtained by dividing the sum of squares of deviations of the observations
from their mean by one less than the number of observations in the sample
(s" also Appendix A).
6

IS , 2500 (Part D). 1_
2.14 Ran.. (R) - The difference between the largest and the smallest
observations or test results in a sample (SI' also Appendix A).
NOTa I - lethe sample size is leu than JO, the r.nre shall be calculated for the .ample
as such. If. however. the sample size 11 10 or more (in multipln of 5), the observatioN
shall be divided into subgroups of five each by takinl them consecutively in the aame
order u obtained. The range of each subgroup .haJJ then be separately determined.
2.15 Me.. Ra.a. (ft) - The mean of a set of ranges calculated for sub-
groups of five observations in the sample (sel also Note 1 and Appendix A).
2.16 Proce Averale - The average percent defective of the products
submitted by the producer for original inspection. (Original inspection
is the first inspection for the particular quantity of product as distinguished
from the inspection of products which have been re..submitted after prior
rejection.]
2.17 Q.uality Level (AQ,L) - The maximum percent defective
that, for the purpose of sampling inspection, can be considered as a satisfac-
tory process average.
2 - When a consumer some specific value of AQL, he indicatet to the
producer that his (the consumer's) acceptance sampling plan will acceft the l1'eat majority
ofthe 10lS that the producer submits, provided the process average Ieve o(percmt defective
In lots IS not greater than the designated value of AQL. ThUl, the AQL is a
df"'lgnat,..d value of pt"rtcnt defective that the consumer indicates will be accepted mOlt
of the. lime (approximately 89 to 95 percent In this standard).
2.18 Lot Tolerce PereeDt Defective (LTPD) - The percentage of
dcfecuves in a lot that can be tolerated in only a specified proportion of lots.
2.19 Producer'. Risk - The ri!)k (chance) of rejecting lots of quality
equal to the specified AQL. The risk of rejecting lots of quality better than
the AQL will be smaller than the designated producer's risk.
2.20 CoDS1IDler'. Ri.k - The risk (chance) of accepting lots of quality
equal to the specified LTPD. The risk of accepting lots of quality worse
than the LTPD will be smaller than the designated consumer's risk.
3. CONSIDERAnONS FOR THE CHOICE BETWEEN THE
ATrRIBUTES AND VARIABLES INSPECTION
3.0 When a characteristic of an item is amenable to both attributes and
variables types of inspection, as is the case when a dimension can be either
gauged or measured, the following considerations would help in choosing
the appropriate type of inspection.
3.1 For any desired degree of protection, lesser number of items have to be
inspected for variables inspection than for attributes inspection in order
to determine the acceptability (or otherwise) of a Jot. In other words,
for the samples of the same size, inspection by variables gives a smaller risk
of accepting Jots of unacceptable quality than inspection by attributes. The
variables plans would he, therefore, ordinarily more useful and economical
in those cases where destructive or costly testing is involved.
7

IS I 2500 (Part D) .. 19&5
3.2 The measurement of an item under the variables inspection gives much
more information about the quality of the item than the attributes inspection.
Thus a container of copper naphthenate may show the copper content as 100
percent against the speCification requirement of 85 percent minimum. In
case of attributes plans the container would be simply classified as satis-
factory with respect to the copper content but the fact that the observed
value ill 1-5 percent higher than the specified minimum value will not be
utilized as such. The variables plans, on the other hand, use this additional
information in their acceptance criteria which are based on the mean and
the variation of the test results. The variables inspection would, therefore,
yield more information about the quality of the lot than attributes
inspection.
3.3 Inspection by attributes may to some extent be subjective in the sense
that an item classified as defective by one inspector may be classified as
non-defective by another or by the same at a later time. This is particularly
10 in the case of visual inspection and items of borderline quality. Inspection
by variables, on the other: hand, would require actual measurement of the
item quality and is, therefore, more objective and minimizes the possibilities
of inspection bias and error.
3.4 The attributes inspection may be generally performed either visually or
by gauging and as such the cost of inspection per item is low; on the other
hand. inspection by measurement involves more time, labour, skill and more
complicated tools, thereby making the inspection costlier.
3.5 inspection may require more record keeping and calculation
by way of computation of mean, standard deviation, etc.
3.6 Variables plans are based on the assumption that the distribution of the
quality characteristic is normal. Hence it is important that these plans arc
not used indiscriminately. In case the assumption of normality is in doubt,
it is advisable to obtain the guidance of a competent statistician to ascertain
the feasibility of application of these plans.
4. PRELlMlNAIUES TO THE SELEcrlON OF VARIABLES
INSPECTION PLANS
4.1 I'ormadoa of Lot. - A lot (see 2.4) should, as far as possible, consist
of items of single type. grade, class, size, etc, produced under relatively
uniform conditions of manufacture by a firm so that the items in the
lot are of uniform quality. In such a case, the size of the sample to be
tested in the Jot for a given protection would be small and inspection would
be economical. Furthermore, a lot should, consistent with the conditions
of homogeneity, be as large as possible so that the incidence of cost of inspec-
tion per item is minimized. A lot can be a 'stationary lot' or a 'moving lot'
subject to the convenience of stacking, access to each item in the lot and
identification. Each Jot shall be properly identifiable and each 'stationary
lot' shall be presented as far as possible, in such a way that the inspector
8

IS I 2500 (Part D). 1965
will have easy access to all parts of the lot to select at random the items
making up the sample.
4.2 Type. of Sialle SampU.K Variable. PIaD. - There are three
types of single sampling plans available in this standard for inspection by
variables. These are applicable under the following three situations:
a) Variabiliry Known - When the variability in the lot, that is, the
value of the lot standard deviation (a) is known beforehand either
from the past experience, control chart data or any other means.
b) Variability Unknown - Standard Deviation Method - When the vari-
ability in the lot is not known and is estimated from the sample
standard deviation (r).
c) Variahility Unknoum - Rang, M,thod - When the variability in
the lot is not known and is estimated from the sample range (R)
or sample mean range (R).
Each of the above sampling plans has been treated separately for the
following two categories:
I) When one-sided specification limit, that is, either an upper speci-
fication limit (U) or a lower specification limit (L) is given.
2) When two-sided specification limits, that is, both the upper and the
lower specification limits are given.
4.2.1 For the same degree of protection, the sample size is minimum
for the variability known method and maximum for the range method and,
therefore, the former is 'most economical. Moreover, from the administra..
tive and computational points of view the variability known plans are
easiest to operate as they require the calculation of mean alone, further
computations remaining the same for all the three types of plans. The
range plans come next as they require the calculation of both the mean
and the range and lastly the standard deviation plans which require the
calculations of both the mean and standard deviation, the latter being more
cumbersome to calculate than the range. Though the variability known
plans are the simplest to operate, the requirement of a priori knowledge
of variability is a stringent one.
4.3 Drawing of Samples - The sampling inspection plans included
in the standard assume that the items constituting a sample are selected
from the lot at random. Technically, a sample is said to have been selected
at random if the method of selection gives the same chance to every item
in the lot for being included in the sample. Various methods available
for collecting a random sample including the approximation methods
like systematic sampling with random start have been discussed in 5.3.2
of IS : 1548.1960.
Manual on basic principles of lot sampling (since revis,d).
9
IS r 2500 (Part D). 1965
5. SELEcrION OF SAMPLING PLANS
5.0 Selection of a sampling plan should be guided by the cost of inspection
that will be incurred and the protection desired by the producer and the
consumer. The protection provided by a sampling plan to the producer
and the consumer is described completely by its Operating Characteristic
Curve (00 Curve) which gives the probabilities of accepting (or rejecting)
lots with 'varying percentage of defectives. The steepness of the DC Curve
reflects the power of the sampling- plan to discriminate between good and
bad lots; the steeper the OC Curve, the better is its power of discrimination.
While the operating characteristic provides a complete picture of the pro-
tection afforded by the sampling plan (see 8.3.3.1 of IS : l548-1960)
in the form of a function or a curve, it docs not give a single value of the
measure of the protection. In view of this, the choice of a sampling plan
is generally made with reference to certain specified points on the DC
Curve, as for example, those associated with the Acceptable Quality Level
(AQL), Lot Tolerance Percent Defective (LTPD), etc. The AQL, LTPD
or such other values may be chosen on the basis of the previous data available
and by an agreement between the parties concerned. A comprehensive
set of sampling plans classified in terms of the AQL is given in this standard.
NOTE 3 - Each of the plan! selected from the tables given in this standard has its own
OC Curve. The plans based on the variability known, variability unknown - standard
deviation method and variability unknown - range methods corresponding to a particular
combination of a sample size code letter and the AQL value have approximately the same
DC Curve. For the variability unknown - standard deviation method, the OC Curves
are given in Appendix C. These curves would also approximately hold good for the
corresponding plans based on known variability and range methods. They can also be
utilized for reading LTPD or any other desired value associated with the OC Curve.
5.1 C1as.ificatioD of ~ l p l i n g Plans
5.1.1 A QL Plans - The comprehensive set of sampling plans classified
in terms of AQL provided in the standard includes the following:
a) Variability known plans (set Table 2 on P 16);
b) Variability unknown plans, standard deviation method (.reI Table 3
on P 17) ; and
c) Variability unknown plans, range method (se, Table 4 on P 18).
5.1.1.1 The choice ora sampling plan for a particular product requires
the decision on the quality requirements; if AQL plans are being used,
it is necessary to choose an appropriate AQL. In selecting an AQL value
a compromise may have to be struck between the quality desired and the
quality attainable. If the AQL is superior to the quality that cau be
attained under usual production conditions, an excessive amount of product
will be rejected; on the other hand, if AQL is not exacting enough, an
excessive amount of inferior products may be accepted. The value of
AQL may be specified by agreement between the parties concerned, giving
.Manual on basic principles of lot sampling (.sin" reuised),
10

IS I 2500 (Part D) - 1965
due weightage, whenever possible, to the past performance of the supplier
of the product. Sampling plans for certain nominal values of AQL ranging
from 010 to 100 percent are provided for in the Tables 2 to 4. When
the specified AQL is a particular value, other than those for which sampling
plans have been furnished a suitable value close to it and available in the
tables may be chosen subject to the agreement between the parties concerned.
5.1.2 One's Own Plans - To help the construction of one's own plans,
tables for values of factors and formulee have been given, when stipulations
arc made in terms of AQL -md LTPD values. These are the following:
a) Variability known plans;
b) Variability unknown plans, standard deviation method; and
c) Variability unknown plans, range method.
These plans have been explained in Appendix B.
5.2 1a8pectioll Level - In order to determine which of the sampling
plans given in the standard are to be used in a particular case, having
decided upon the quality requirement, it is necessary to decide upon the
'Inspection Level'. The term 'Inspection Lever is used to designate the
relative amount of inspection one is required to do. A higher inspection
level means relatively more inspection and consequently lesser risk of accept-
ing lots of quality worse than the chosen AQL. That is to say, the higher
the inspection level, the greater is the protection against acceptance of lov-
quality lots; but then the cost of inspection goes up. It may, therefore,
be necessary to strike a compromise between a large sample which gives
a reliable estimate of the lot quality and a small sample which reduces the
inspection cost. Such a compromise can be arrived at by proper selection
of the inspection level.
5.2.1 Table 1 (set P 15), which is auxiliary to Tables 2, 3 and 4 gives
five inspection levels with the sample size in code letters (see 5.2.2)
Inspection level I calls for the smallest sample size, thereby minimizing
the cost of inspection. Inspection level V gives relatively the largest
sample size, thereby lessening both the risk of accepting bad quality Iots
and rejecting good quality lots but increasing the cost of inspection, For
majority of products under normal conditions of acceptance inspection,
a reasonable compromise between the high inspection costs and tl,e ri-k
involved may be achieved by taking the sample size corresponding to the
inspection level IV.
5.2.2 Table 1 give! code letters B, 0, D, . . .. to indicate the sample
sizes under different inspection levels for varying lot sizes. It is in terms
of a code letter selected from Table 1 that a plan will be selected from Tables
2 to 4. These rode letters are known as 'sample size code letters' dMilJna!inz
as they do a particular sample size. For example, J denotes a i ~ n p c
11

II. 2500 (Pan D) -1965
of 25 for standard deviation method (s. Table 3) and 30 for ra.DF method
(s" Table 4).
5.3 Lot AceeptablUty - The acceptability of a lot of materials submitted
for inspection shall be determined by using one of the sampling plans ass0-
ciated with a specified value of AQL. Depending upon the specification
of one-sided or two-sided limits, the acceptability criteria for the three
types of sampling plans would be as given in 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3.
5.3.1 YariabiliV' Know" M,thod
5.3.1.1 For one-sided _(peci,ficati?n limits - On the basis of the AQL and
the sample size code letter chosen, the value of the sample size (n) and a
suitable factor (k
H
) shall be obtained from Table 2. The mean of the II test
results shall then be calculated and the lot shall be declared as acceptable if:
a) the value of the expression (x+k"a) <: V, when the upper speci-
fication limit (U) is given;
OR
b) the value of the expression (x-koL, when the lower speci-
fication limit is given.
5.3.1.2 For two-sidld s/JIcification limits - The lot shall be declared
as acceptable if:
a) the value of the expression <; the maximum value specified
below for the chosen AQL:
AQL (%) 010 015 025 040 065 100 150 250 400 650 1000
Upper
f _0_ 015201580-16501750184 0194 0206 0223 0243 0270 0304
o U-L
b) the value of the expression (x+k (I) <. U, and
c) the value of the expression (x-}: o)"'>L.
5.3.2 Variability Unknown - Standard Demation M,t1uHl
5.3.2.1 Fur one-sided sp.,ijication limits - On the basis of the AQL .and
the sample size code letter chosen, the value of the sample size (n) and a
suitable factor (k') shall be obtained from Table 3. The mean (x) and the
standard deviation (s) shall then be calculated from the test results and
the lot shall be declared as acceptable if:
a) the value of the expression (x+k's)< U, when the upper speci-
fication limit (U) is given;
OR
b) the value of the expression (x-k'sL, when the lower speci-
fication limit (L) is given.
12

II I 2500 (put D) 1_
5.3.2.2 Ftw IuJtl-sitIMI sl*ijietUitJlI limits - The lot shall be declared
as acceptable if:
a) the value oCthe expression <the maximum value specified
in Table 5 (Sit P 19) for the particular combination of the chosen
AQL and the sample size code leuer,
b) the value of the expression (J+k's)<U. and
c) the value of the expression (x-k'sL.
5.3.3 Unknown - Rang, Mellaotl
5.3.3.1 For otll-sitktl sPecific4lio1l limits - On the basis or the AQL and
the sample size code letter chosen, the value of the sample size (n) and a
suitable factor (k) shall be obtained from Table 4. The mean (.f) and the
range (R) if the sample size is less than 10, or the mean range (R) if the
sample size is 10 or more, shall then be calculated from the test results.
The lot shan be declared as acceptable if:
a) the value of the expression (.f+kR) or (R+kR) <: U, when the
upper specification limit (U) is given;
OR
b) the of the expression (x-kR) or (R-k'R) ;> L, when the
lc ver specification limit (L) is given.
5.3.3.2 For lwo-sidMI sJueifieali01l limits- The lot shall be declared as
acceptable if:
a) the value oCthe expression or UR. L <: the maximum value
specified in Table 6 (s" P 20) for the particular combination of
the chosen AQL and the sample code letter,
b) the value of the expression (R+kR) or (z+kR) <: U. and
c) the value of the expression (J-lcR) or (i-ill) > L.
S.t Normal, .ed.aM1 ... Tlpt..... Iupecdoa
5.4.0 When the quality or the submitted loti shows significant
it is desirable to make appropriate changes in the sampling plans. If the
quality deteriorates, it is necessary to tighten the inspection; if the
improves, it may be desirable to relax the inspection.
5....1 Nomtlll l1Uf*1itna - under a sampling plan that is in
Coree for particular product and producer is called cNormal Inspection'.
It may be continued &I long as the quality of the product submitted it better
than or equal to the chOlell AQ;L. The coDSiltency in maintaining this
13

IS I 2500 (Part D) 1965
level of quality by the producer can be ascertained either from a continuous
record of inspection data which can be used to estimate the process average
of the producer or from a knowledge of the proportion of the lots that are
not accepted. In case the quality becomes consistently better than the
stipulated AQL, 'Reduced Inspection' may be undertaken. If, however,
the quality becomes consistently worse than the chosen AQL, 'Tightened
Inspection' is to be resorted to.
5.4.2 Tightmetl InsjJtio" - Inspection shall be tightened either by
raising the inspection level, that is, by selecting a sample size code letter
higher than the one adopted for normal inspection or by employing a smaller
AQL. Since the former approach leads to an increased amount of inspec-
tion, tightening is done by using a sampling plan with an AQL smaller
than that used previously.
5.4.2.1 The following criteria shall be applied for changing from normal
to tightened inspection and vice versa:
a) If 2 out of the 5 (or less) consecutive lots have been rejected while
on normal inspection, change over to tightened inspection,
b) If, while on tightened inspection, 5 consecutive lots have been
accepted, change over to normal inspection.
5.4.2.2 From the tables given in this standard the choice of a plan for
tightened inspection shall be made in the following manner:
Retain the same sample size code letter as before but refer to an AQL
a step lower than the AQL used for normal inspection. For example,
if the AQL used for nonnal inspection is 40 percent for the code letter
K (in Tables 2, 3 or 4), the AQL to be used for tightened inspection shall
be 25 percent for the same code letter.
5.4.2.3 In certain cases such tightened insrection may lead to an
increase in the size of the sample. For example, i an AQL of 065 percent
has been used for normal inspection for the sample size code letter D, the
AQL and the code letter to be used for tightened inspection shall be 040
and E respectively.
5.4.3 IUduretl I ~ i o n - If the quality of the submitted lots is consistently
better than the AQL chosen, reduced inspection may be resorted to either
by selecting lower sample size code letter than the one used for normal
inspection or by relaxing the AQL. Since the former approach leads
to economies in inspection it is preferable, unless there is an agreement
to the contrary, to reduce inspection by changing over to a plan with a
lower sample size code letter than the one adopted for normal inspection.
5.4.3.1 The following criteria may be applied for changing over from
normal to reduced inspection and vice versa:
a) If none out of 10 consecutive lots has been rejected while on normal
inspection. change over to reduced inspection.
14

IS s 2500 (Part D) 1965
b) Ifa lot is rejected, and ifat the same time the rejected lot is preceded
by less than 10 lots accepted on reduced inspection, change over
to normal inspection.
5.4.3.2 From the tables given in this standard, the choice of a plan
for reduced inspection may be made in the following manner:
Retain the same AQL as before but refer to the sample size code
letter one step lower than that used for normal inspection. For example,
if the code letter used for normal inspection is J with an AQL of 25
percent (in Tables 2, 3 or 4), then the code letter to be wed for reduced
inspection may be H for the same AQL.
5.4.3.3 In certain cases suitable plans for reduced inspection given
in 5.4.3.2 may not be available. Reduced inspection may then be
resorted to by choosing the sample size code letter one step lower and the
AQ.L one step higher than that used for 'normal inspection. For example,
if the code letter D and the AQL of 065 percent have been used for normal
inspection, then the code letter and AQL to be used for reduced inspection
may be C and 10 percent respectively.
6. TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
TABLE 1 SAMPLE SIZE CODE LET'l'ERS BY INSPECnON LEVELS AND
SIZES 01' LOTS
LoT 81Z&
2 to 8
9 u 15
16 " 25
26 u 50
51 It 100
101 u 150
151" 300
SOl" 500
561 Jt I 000
1001 u 5000
! OOJ tI 10000
10 001 and above
(CldWI .5.2.1 muJ 5.2.2, and ~ a m p l s I, 2, 3 GIld.)
INSPECTION LaVELl
A-
Il III IV v
(S a m pI e Size Code Letters)
B B B B C
B B B B D
B B B C E
B B B D F
B B C E G
B B D F H
B C E G
J
B D F H K
C E G
J
L
D F H K M
E G
J
L M
F H K M N
15
T
t
I
I
N
G
I
.
&
&
A
a
I
P
L
P
I
O
.
,
N
I
l
Y
.
d
I
d
I
U
I
T
K
N
O
W
N
~
(
a
.
.
.
'
.
l
.
l
.
5
.
1
.
1
.
1
.
5
.
2
.
1
,
u
.
t
,
5
.
S
.
1
.
1
_
5
.
4
.
2
.
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
E
a
a
.
,
.
"
,
I
M
I
l
S
)
A
a
l
D
T
A
M
a
Q
u
A
L
I
I
T
L
a
v
a
L
S
A
w
u
S
a
a
C
a
D
a
H
S
,
.
4
-
0
0
1
0
-
0
0
0
-
1
0
.
I
S
'
)
.
2
5
C
H
O
1
0
0
0
1

'
0
2
-
5
0
6
-
3
0

I
I
'

I
I
'

j
-

J
;
-

.
-

T
T
~
~
~
~
~
~
a
2
1
-
'
1
2
1
-
2
5
2
1

0
9
2
0
-
9
1
6
S
o
-
7
S
5
S
o
-
S
7
S
D
2
1

.
2

~
2
l
'
S
S
S
1
-
1
7
3
1
0
0
1
S
0
-
8
2
5
4
0
4
6
1
a
2

o
M
2
1

8
1
,
I
.
S
1
-
.
5
6
S
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1

2
8
.
.
I
-
I
I
5
0
0
9
1
'
S
0
-
7
2
1
r
s
I
-
I
I
S
2
-
0
7
S
1
-
9
1
.
.
1

.
4
1
-
6
8
.
.
'
-
$
5
5
1
-
3
9
5
1
-
2
0
,
H
I
t
,
.
.
.
"
,
c
.
.
2
,
.
t
I
-
S
O
.
.
2
-
l
f
S
J
o
G
S
5
1
-
.
a
1

7
8
6
l
o
G
7
1
-
4
5
8
1

2
1
8
1
0
0
1
I
I
~

n
H
5
2
-
4
1
5
2
'
"

n
I
I
.
7
1

9
5
7
I
-
e
o
a
I
.
t
1

4
9
1
0
l

S
.
1
2
1

1
1
I
t
0
.
.
J

2
.
.
.
.

3
7
7
2

2
5

2
-
I
S
8
1
.
-

a
s
1
0
1

7
0
1
1
I

S
I
I
S
I
'
S
f
1
5
I
'
I
S
1
7
C
H
I
.
K
.
7
2

5
0
7
2

.
I
I

M
t
2
-
1
'
1
0
1

9
9
I
l
1
-
8
6
1
2
1

7
2
I
S
I
'
S
S
I
)
1
-
3
5
1
8
1

1
5
2
1
.
.
.
.
L

,
.

2
0
U

2
1
1
0
2

1
'
1
1
2
0
0
1
1
2
I
.
I
t
1
-
7
5
I
S
I
'
"
1
8
I
-
s
a
2
0
1
-
1
7
2
t
.
.
.
I
I

.
"
I
t
.
.
.
I
I
l
-
t
I
I
I
2

1
1
I
S
2
-
O
S
I
t
I
.
I
S
1

7
5
I
I
I

S
7
2
0
I

.
t
s
1

1
7
2
7
M
I
S
N
I
I
1
,
5
1
I
I

I
S
1
-
"
1
4
2

2
1
1
6
2
0
0
7
1
7
I
.
"
a
t
1
,
7
9
2
2
1
-
6
1
I
S
I
.
.
.
.
2
1
1
-
2
1
I
S
H
I
S
A
I
l
A
Q
L
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
u

~
d
I
e
I
I
o
d
a
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
u
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
W
I
I
e
a
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e
N
I
'
Y
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

T
A
a
a
I
I
D
I
G
I
.
a
I
A
I
I
I
I
I
J
.
.
8
f
O
~

~
1
'
0

'
.
'
,
m
J
T
Y
O
N
I
D
f
O
W
N
-
I
T
A
N
D
A
a
D
D
a
l
A
D
O
N
M
a
I
I
O
D
(
a
.
.
5
.
1
.
1
,
5
.
1
.
1
.
1
,
5
.
2
.
1
.
5
.
2
.
2
,
5
.
5
.
2
.
1
.
.
5
.
.
.
.
2
.
2
,
a
n
d
~
4
)
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
A
I
I
I
U
A
o
c
z
n
A
K
a
Q
p
.
w
n
L
a
w
:
.
S
I
D
8
I
Z
a
c
.
.
"
'
*
L
a
n
D
0
-
1
0
0
-
1
5
0
-
2
5
I
-
5
0
2

5
0
4
-
0
0
6
-
.
5
0
1
0
-
0
0
I
'
I
'
j
'
I
'
j
'
I
'
k
'
I
'
i
'
!
'
j
'
~
-
-
-
B
S
I
I
I
1
1
I
1

1
2
0
-
9
5
8
0
-
7
6
5
0
-
5
6
6
C
.
.
1
-
4
5
I
-
S
f
1
-
1
7
1

0
1
0
e
8
1
4
0
-
6
1
7
D
S
1
-
6
5
1

5
3
1
-
4
0
1
-
2
4
1
-
0
7
0
-
8
7
4
0
-
6
7
5
B
7
2

0
0
I

.
1

7
5
1

6
2
1

5
0
I

S
S
1

1
5
\
)
-
9
5
5
0
0
7
"
P
1
0
2
-
2
.
2
-
1
1
1

.
J
-
I
f
1

7
2
I
-
5
8
J

4
1
1

2
S
1
-
0
3
0
0
8
2
8
G
1
5
2
-
4
2
2
-
1
2
2

2
0
2
-
0
6
1

9
1
)
-
7
9
)
-
6
5
1
-
4
7
1

!
O
1
-
0
9
0
-
8
8
6
H
2
0
2
-
4
7
2
-
1
6
2
-
2
4
2
-
1
1
1
-
9
6
1
-
8
2
1

6
9
I
-
5
1
I

S
S
1
-
1
2
0
-
9
1
7
i
t
2
5
2

5
0
2
-
4
0
2

.
2

1
4
.
-
=
1
-
1
5
1
-
7
2
1

5
3
1

5
5
I
-
I
t
0
-
9
1
&
S
O
2
-
5
1
2
-
4
1
2

2
8
2

1
5
2
-
1

8
6
1
-
7
S
1

S
5
1
-
3
6
1

1
5
o
-
9
t
6
L
S
5
2

M
2
.
.
.
5
2
-
S
I
2

1
8
2
-
G
S
1
-
8
9
1

7
6
)

5
7
I

.
1
-
1
8
0
-
9
6
9
.
.
4
0
2

5
5
2
-
4
5
2
-
1
1
2

1
1
2
-
0
3
I

.
1

7
6
I
-
5
8
1

3
9
1
-
1
8
0
-
9
7
1
N
5
0
2
-
6
0
2

5
0
2

3
5
2

2
2
2
-
0
8
I

g
s
1

8
0
1
'
6
1
1

4
2
1
-
2
1
1
-
0
0
A
D
A
Q
J
.
.
.
.
.
.
a
r
e
i
n
p
e
n
:
e
a
t
c
I
e
I
e
e
t
i
Y
c
.
U
t
e
&
r
a
t
~
p
l
a
n
b
e
l
o
w
t
h
e
a
r
r
o
w
,
t
h
a
t
i
i
,
b
o
t
h
s
a
m
p
l
e
I
i
a
e
A
I
w
e
D
.
.
I
'
v
a
l
u
e
.
W
h
e
D
a
m
p
l
e
s
i
z
e
e
q
u
a
l
a
.
.
a
c
:
c
e
d
I
J
o
t
.
.
.
e
f
t
I
Y
U
e
m
i
D
!
b
e
J
o
e
I
b
a
I
l
b
e
i
m
p
e
c
t
e
d
.
I
Ia
~

i

.
.
C
I
a
T
.
d
U
.

f
O
a
.
V
"
.
.
I
T
Y

I
8
1
1
I
O
D
(
a
-
s
a
5
.
1
.
1
,
5
.
1
.
1
.
1
,
5
.
2
.
1
,
5
.
2
.
2
,
5
.
S
.
!
.
1
_
5
.
.
.
.
2
.
2
,
a
D
d

2
_
f
)
S
A
M
r
u
,
S
A
M
r
u
A
c
c
&
n
u
.
.
.
.
Q
p
A
U
T
Y
I
z
V
J
:
L
8
I
z
&
S
I
z
&
C
o
o
a
I
.
&
T
T
U
0

1
0
0
'
1
5
0
-
2
5
0

4
0
0
-
6
5
1

0
0
1

5
0
2

5
0
.
-
0
0
6

5
0
1
0
-
0
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
i
i
k
i
i
I
i
k
A
-
I

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
B
3
I
J
1
0
-
5
8
7
0
-
5
0
2
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
2
9
6
C
+
G
-
6
5
1
0

5
9
8
0
-
5
2
5
C
H
S
O
0
-
5
6
4
-
0
-
2
7
6
D
.
5
0

6
6
3
0
-
6
1
4
0
-
5
6
5
0
-
4
9
8
0
-
+
3
1
0
-
3
5
2
0
-
2
7
2
E
7
0
-
7
0
2
0

6
5
9
0

6
1
3
0
0
5
6
9
O
O
S
2
5
(
)
'
4
6
5
0
-
4
0
5
G
-
!
3
6
0
-
2
6
6
P
1
0
0
-
9
1
6
0
-
8
6
3
0
-
8
1
1
0
0
7
5
5
0
0
7
0
3
0

6
5
0
0
-
5
7
9
0
-
5
0
7
0
-
4
2
+
0

3
4
1
G
1
5
0

9
9
9
0
'
9
5
8
0
-
9
0
3
0
'
8
5
0
0
0
1
9
2
0
0
7
5
8
0
-
6
8
4
0
-
6
1
0
0
-
.
5
5
6
0
0
4
5
2
0
-
3
6
8
H
2
5
1

0
5
1

0
1
0
-
9
5
1
0
-
8
9
6
(
)
'
8
3
5
0
-
7
1
9
0

7
2
3
0

6
4
7
0
0
5
7
1
0
.
4
8
4
-
0

3
9
8
k
3
0
1

0
6
1
'
0
2
0
0
9
5
9
0
-
9
0
+
0
.
8
+
3
0
-
7
8
7
0
-
7
3
0
0
0
6
5
4
0
-
5
7
'
0
0
4
9
0
0

4
0
3
3
5
1

0
7
1
,
0
2
0
-
9
6
4
-
0
-
9
0
8
0

8
4
8
0
0
7
9
1
0
'
7
3
4
o
-
s
s
a
0
-
5
8
1
0
'
4
9
4
0
0
4
0
6
L
4
0
1

0
8
)

0
4
0
-
9
7
8
D
-
9
2
1
0
-
8
6
0
0

8
0
5
0

7
4
6
0
-
6
6
8
0
0
5
9
1
O
-
S
O
S
0
-
4
1
5
M
5
0
1

0
9
)
,
0
5
0
0
9
8
8
G
o
9
3
1
O

8
9
S
0
-
8
1
2
0
0
7
5
4
0
-
6
7
6
0
-
5
9
8
0
-
5
1
0
0
-
4
2
1
A
U
A
Q
L
v
a
l
u
a
a
r
e
i
n
p
e
r
c
c
D
t
d
e
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
.
U
s
e
f
i
r
s
t
s
a
m
p
l
i
D
c
p
I
a
D
b
e
l
o
w
t
h
e
a
r
r
o
w
.
t
h
a
t
.
.
.
b
o
t
h
M
I
D
p
I
e
s
i
z
e
a
s
w
e
l
l
u
l
'
v
a
l
u
e
.
W
h
e
n
s
a
m
p
l
e
a
i
&
e
e
q
u
a
l
s
0
1
'
e
x
c
e
e
d
a
l
o
t
s
i
z
e
.
C
f
I
C
f
'
J
d
e
m
i
n
t
b
e
l
o
t
t
b
a
1
l
b
e
i
D
I
p
e
c
t
e
d
.

T
d
U
t
5
T
B
I
U
P
P
D
L
D
I
I
T
.
.
.
T
I
I
B
V
A
L
O
B
O
.
u
:
:
C
f
t
)
.
V
A
-
I
A
M
J
I
T
Y
U
N
I
D
f
O
W
N
-
I
T
A
M
D
A
a
D
D
E
V
l
A
D
O
N
I
t
D
T
I
I
O
D
(
a
.
.
5
.
'
.
2
.
2
,
a
n
d
&
.
.
,
u
4
)
S
A
M
P
u
S
a
f
.
S
A
M
P
U
.
A
c
c
a
P
T
U
U
Q
u
A
L
I
T
Y
L
E
V
E
L
C
o
o
a
S
r
u
t
..&
.
,
L
a
T
n
a
0
0
1
0
(
)
.
.
1
5
0
-
2
5
(
H
(
)
0
-
6
5
1

0
0
1

5
0
2

5
0
4
-
0
0
6
-
5
0
1
0
-
0
0
B
3
0

4
3
6
0
0
4
5
3
0
-
4
7
5
8
-
5
0
2
C
4
0
-
5
3
9
0
3
5
5
o
-
S
7
4
(
)
o
m
0
-
4
5
2
0
-
4
7
2
D
5
0

2
9
+
0
-
3
0
8
(
)
'
3
2
5
O

S
4
6
0
-
3
7
2
0
0
4
0
8
0
-
4
5
2
.
.
.
U
)
E
7
0
0
2
4
2
G
-
2
5
S
0
0
2
6
6
0
-
2
8
0
0
-
2
9
5
0

3
1
8
0
-
3
4
-
5
0
-
3
8
1
0
0
4
2
5
F
1
0
0
0
2
1
4
0
-
2
2
4
0
-
2
5
5
0
0
2
4
8
0
0
2
6
1
0
-
2
7
6
0
0
2
9
8
0
0
3
2
4
0
-
3
5
9
Q
-
4
0
S
G
1
5
0
-
1
9
5
0
.
2
0
2
0
0
2
1
1
&
2
2
2
0
0
2
3
5
0
-
2
4
8
0

2
6
2
O

2
M
0
0
3
0
9
G
o
S
H
0
.
3
8
6
H
2
0
0
-
1
9
0
0
-
1
9
7
0

2
0
6
0
0
2
1
6
0
0
2
2
9
0
-
2
4
2
0
-
2
5
5
0
-
2
7
7
(
)
o
!
0
2
0
0
3
!
6
0
-
3
n
I
I
J
2
5
(
)
o
1
8
7
0
.
1
9
3
0
0
2
0
3
0
-
2
1
2
0
0
2
2
5
0

2
S
8
0
-
2
5
1
0
-
2
7
S
0
0
2
9
7
6
-
5
3
1
0
-
3
7
2
I
K
3
0
(
)
O
1
8
5
0
-
1
9
2
0

2
0
1
0
-
2
1
0
0
0
2
2
5
G
-
2
!
6
0
0
2
4
9
0
-
2
7
0

2
9
~
0
-
3
2
8
0
-
3
6
9
.
.
.
.
.
L
5
5
o
-
I
I
S
0
-
1
8
9
0
0
1
9
8
0
-
2
0
8
0
-
2
2
0
0
0
2
3
2
0
-
2
4
5
0

2
6
0
0
-
2
9
1
0

3
2
3
0

3
6
4
r
.
1
4
0
e
-
1
8
2
0
-
1
.
0
-
1
9
8
0
0
2
0
7
0
-
2
1
9
0
0
2
3
2
0
0
2
i
S
0
0
2
6
6
&
2
9
0
G
-
!
2
3
6
-
.
1
:
1
~

N
5
0
0
-
1
7
8
0
-
1
1
1
8
0
1
M
0
0
2
0
5
.
2
1
4
0
-
2
2
7
0
-
2
4
1
0
-
2
6
1
0
0
2
l
t
0
-
3
1
7
G
-
S
5
6
.
.
.
I

8
1
T
.
.
.
.
.
T
I
I
8
0
I
'
P
E
I
l
U
I
I
l
T
1
'
0
&
'
D
I
E
V
.
A
U
J
B
0
1
'
~
0
.
&
-
!
-
l
O
a
V
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
r
r
r
I
-

u
-

U
N
K
N
O
W
N
-
a
A
N
G
a
J
a
1
1
I
O
D
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C
a
.
.
5
.
3
.
3
.
2
,
a
n
d
~
f
)
I
S
A
M
P
U
S
I
Z
a
S
A
K
P
u
A
C
Q
P
T
.
u
L
&
Q
p
.
.
u
.
r
r
y
L
a
n
L
1
:
1
C
o
D
.
S
I
D
A
~
,

L
&
T
r
u
0
-
1
0
(
)
o
I
S
0
-
2
5
(
)
.
4
0
0
-
6
5
1

0
0
J
-
5
0
2

5
0
"
0
0
6
-
5
0
1
0
-
0
0
.
.
.
I
B
3
0
-
8
3
3
0

8
6
5
0
-
9
0
7
0
-
9
5
8
C
4
-
0
0
7
5
6
0
-
7
8
3
0
0
8
3
6
0
-
8
9
1
0

9
6
5
1
.
0
5
6
D
5
6
-
7
3
0
0
-
7
"
0

8
0
1
(
)
'
8
5
7
o
-
s
z
s
1

0
1
1
1

1
1
8
~Q
E
7
0
6
9
5
0
-
7
2
7
0

7
6
5
0
-
8
0
.
o

8
~
0
-
9
1
0
0
9
8
5
1

0
8
6
1

2
0
9
F
1
0
J

S
2
9
0
-
5
5
3
0
-
5
7
9
6
-
6
1
0
0
-
6
4
2
6
-
6
7
7
0
-
7
3
0
(
)
'
7
9
3
0
-
8
7
6
0
-
9
7
7
G
1
5
0
0
4
7
7
0
-
4
9
3
0
0
5
1
7
0
-
5
4
2
0
-
5
7
2
0
-
6
0
2
0
-
6
3
7
0
-
6
8
8
0
0
7
4
8
0
-
8
3
0
0
-
9
2
8
H
2
5
6
-
4
4
7
0
-
4
6
3
0
-
4
8
6
0

5
0
9
0

5
3
7
0
0
5
6
7
0
-
6
0
0
0
-
6
4
9
0
-
7
0
7
0
-
7
8
5
0
0
8
7
9
J
3
0
0
0
4
0
4
2
0
-
4
5
7
0
-
4
8
0
0
-
5
0
3
0
-
.
5
3
1
0
-
5
6
0
0
-
5
9
3
0
0
6
4
2
6
-
6
9
9
0
0
7
7
6
0
-
8
7
0
K
!
5
0
-
4
5
8
0
-
4
5
4
0
-
4
7
6
0
-
4
9
9
0
0
5
2
7
0
-
5
5
6
0

5
8
8
0
-
6
3
7
0
-
6
9
4
0
-
7
7
1
0
-
'
"
L
4
0
0
0
4
3
2
0
-
4
4
7
0
-
4
6
9
0
0
4
9
2
0

5
1
9
(
)
o
m
0
-
5
8
0
0
0
6
2
8
0
0
t
i
8
4
0
-
7
6
1
0
-
8
5
2
M
5
0
0
-
4
2
6
0
0
+
+
1
0

4
6
3
0
0
4
8
6
O
~
5

3
0

5
4
2
0

5
7
3
0
-
6
2
1
0
-
6
7
6
0
-
7
5
2
0
-
8
4
3

IS I 25GO (Pan D) .115

The specified minimum yield point for certain steel castinp is 400
kg/mm
l
. Suppose lots containing 400 items are submitted for inspectioo.
A single sampling variables plan with inspection level III and aD AQ,L
of 25 percent is adopted for the purpose of inspection. Suppose the vari-
ability (a) is known to be 10 kg/mm
l

Reference to Table I then gives the sample size code letter F corresponding
to which Table 2 shows the sample size 5 and factor i equal to 1'39.
From the lot, 5 castings shall then be selected at random and their yield
points determined. Suppose the yield points for the 5 ca,tings are
399. 407. 432 and 42'6.
The mean (x) is then found to be 417.
Also, the value of the expression (.f-ko) cernes out to be 417 -) 39 X 10
=4051. Since this value is greater than the lower specification limit
of4O'0, the lot shall be accepted.
The LTPD value associated with the above plan as read from Fig. 8
(.. P 36) is obtained as 22 percent (with the probability of acceptance
being 10 percent).
&.",pl, 2 :
i) The specified maximum resistance of a certain electrical component
is 660 ohms. Suppose lots containing 150 components are submitted for
inspection. Ifit is agreed to use inspection level IV, an AQL of'one percent ..
and single sampling variables plans Cor variability unknown (standard
deviation method), then reference to Tables I and 3 gives the sample size
10 and the factor k' equal to 172.
Suppose the resistances (in ohms) of the 10 components selected at random
from the lot are 639, 640,650, 647, 662, 637. 652. 643. 657 and 649.
Then .i=6476, and
s = + (649-647'6)I .
= .y6538=809
The valueof the expression Since
this value is greater than the maximum specification limit of 660 ohms,
the lot shall be rejected.
ii) In the above example, if it is intend-d to use the single sampling
variables plan for variability unknown (range method), then reference to
Tables 1 and 4 gives the sample size as 10 and factor k equal to 0703.
21

IS I 2500(Part D) 1965
Taking the above values of sample results, it is found that:
.i=6476
Range of tint 5
Range of Jast 5 results=657-637=20
Hence mean range (R) 23;-20 =21'5
The value of expression (x+k1() =647'6+0703 X 215 =6627. Since
this value is greater than the maximum specification limit of 660 ohms.
the lot shall be rejected.
'The LTPD value associated with the above plans can be read from Fig, 6
(see P 34). Thus lots containing approximately 19'5 percent defectives
would be accepted only 5 percent of the times by the above plans.
Exampl, 3:
The specified hardness range for certain types of spannen is 40 to 50
liRe. Lots containing 2 000 spanners are submitted for inspection. A
single sampling variables plan with inspection level V and an AQL of 40
percent is adopted. Suppose the variability (a) is known to be 2-5 HRC.
Reference to Tables 1 and 2 gives the sample size as 20 and the factor
r equal to 1-38. The upper limit for U L is obtained as 0 243 from the
values under 53.1.2.
Applying the first condition given in 5.3.1.2, we have the following:
U:'L =025 which is more than the permissible upper limit
of 0243. Hence the lot is rejected straightway without drawing the 20
items for sample inspection.
Extmf/Jle 4:
i) The specified melting range for a certain type or wax is 60 to 70C.
Lots containing 200 containers are submitted for inspection. A single
sampling variables with variability unknown (standard deviation
method) with inspection level IV and an AQL of 2'5 percent is adopted.
References to Tables I, 3 and 5 give the sample size 15, the factor k
1
equal
to ....71lnd the upper limit for equal to 0284.
Suppose the melting points for the material in 15 containers selected
at random are:
6:4,5, 660
w
sse, 68-5, 69,5, 66-5, 67,0, 62-5, 66-0, 67-5, 64-0, 69,0, 70-0,
66'0,66-5
22

IS I 2500 (Part D) - 1965
9975
Then compute mean (.i) =1"5"=66
05
and s=- /(63-5-66-5)1+ 0 0 +(66-5-665)'
V 14
J67-00
= 14=V
4
' 786 = 2-19
Applying the first condition given in 5.3.2.2, = =0-219 which
is less than the permissible limit of 0-284.
Applying the second and third conditions,
69-7 is less than the .naximum specification limit,
and is more than theminimumspeci-
fication limit.
Hence the lot shall be accepted.
ii) In the above example, if it is intended to use the single sampling
variables plan for variability unknown (range method), then reference to
Tables 1, 4 and 6 gives the sample size 15, the factor Ie. equal to 0610 and
upper limit for equal to 0688.
Taking the above values of sample results, we obtain,
Mean (x) = 66'5
Range of first 5 test results =69-5 -63-5 =6-0
Range of next 5 test results=67-S-62-5=5'0
Range of last 5 test results=70-0-64-0=6-0
- 6-0+5'0+6-0
Hence mean range (R) = 3 =5-7
Applying the first condition given in 5.3.3.2, = =057 which is
less than the permissible limit of 0688.
Applying the second and third conditions,
is equal to the maximum specification
limit,
and is greater than the minimum
specification limit.
Hence the lot shall be accepted.

IS I 2500 (Part D) 1965
APPENDIX A
(Clauses 2.1"1, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14 and 2.15)
SYMBOLS
mean; if XI' KI,' ... .x.. are the II measurements of the item in a
I th - XI+K
1
+x..
samp e, en x- n
a lot standard deviation; if KI. KI" X)I are the .Nmeasurements
of items in a lot and Xis the corresponding mean, then:
I sample standard deviation; ifx.. X., . , x.. are the II measure-
ments of items in the sample, then:
s= /(Xl-X)I+ +(X..-X)I /("1
1
+ +x,,')-M'
V (n-I) V n-l
R range; if XI. Xl' X" are the II measurements of items in a
sample, arranged in the ascending order of magnitude, then:
R=x.-xi
R mean range; if R
I
R., R,. are the ranges of 171 lUb.groups
of five observations each (so that sample size n=5 171), then:
R= RI+R
I
.. R.
m
k coefficient of R or R in the arceptance/reJection criterion for single
sampling plans by variables with variability unknown (range
method).
k' coefficient ofs in the acceptance/rejection criterion for single sampling
plans by variables with variability unknown (standard deviation
method).
k" coefficient of a in the acceptance/rejection criterion for lingle
sampling plans by variables WIth variability known.
U upper specification limit.
L lower specification limit.
<: less than or equal to.
:> greatel' thanor equal to.
24

IS I
APPENDIX B
(Clause 5.1.2)
I'ORMUlJ AND TABLES FOR CONSTRUCTING SINGLE
SAMPLING AQ.L-LTPD VAlUABLES PLANS FOR
ONE-SIDED SPECIFICATION LIMITS
B-O. STIPULATIONS OP THE PLANS (VALUES TO BE GIVEN)
III =- acceptable quality level (AQL) expressed as fraction defective
/I'. = lot tolerance percent defective (LTPD) as fraction defective
" == producer', risk (fraction)
Il =: consumer', risk (fraction)
L or U=lower or upper specification limit for item quality
I t is desired to construct single sampling variables plans such that lots
with P'l fraction defective would be accepted (1- <) times, and lots with
P'I fraction defective will be rejected (1- fJ) times. From P'I' /l.) I(. and fJ
read the corresponding' values, namely:
I , " " and I from Table 1
/J1 P'. I(,
where t. is the normal deviate exceeded with probability *.
8-1. VA1UABILITY KNOWN :METHOD
8-1.1 The acceptance criterion for this method is given as before by
(!+i-u)< U or (R-Ya);> L Where the sample (tI) and f(' have to
be found out. The values of ,. and k" which determine the desired sampling
plan uniquely are given by the following fonnulz :
8=(,:: I
I
k-"'A' -
r 1 vi"
8-2. VARIABILITY UNKNOWN-STANDARD DBVlATlON
METHOD
8-2.1 The criterion for this method is given .. before by
(z+!'s)<.U or (.i-i',,) is >L where the umple size <II> and I' have to be
25
I
I
T
.
u
L
E
7
T
I
I
B
V
A
L
U
D
0
'
,
O
O
a
l
l
B
l
P
O
N
D
l
N
G
T
O
A
G
l
V
D
I
n
A
a
n
o
N
V
A
a
U
N
G
I
n
O
.
.
.
.
T
O
U
I
(
a
.
.
8
-
0
)
,
.
.
.
.
I

~
0
-
0
0
0
-
0
1
0
-
0
2
0
-
0
3
O
e
M
o
-
o
s
0
0
0
6
G
a
0
7
o
-
o
e
0
-
0
9
S
~

.
.
.
I
0
.
0
a
t
2

3
2
6
2
-
0
5
4
1

8
8
1
1

7
5
1
1
-
6
4
5
1

5
5
5
1
-
4
7
6
1
-
4
0
5
l

S
f
I
0
0
1
1

2
8
2
1

2
2
7
1

1
7
5
1

1
2
6
1

0
8
0
1

0
3
6
O

9
!
H
0
0
9
5
f
0
-
9
1
5
0
0
8
7
8
0
-
2
(
)
'
8
4
2
0
-
8
0
6
0
0
7
7
2
0

7
3
9
0
-
7
0
6
C
H
i
7
.
o
-
M
S
0
-
6
1
5
0
0
5
8
3
0
-
5
5
3
~0

0
-
5
D
-
S
2
f
0
-
4
9
6
0
0
4
6
8
0
-
4
4
0
0
-
4
1
2
0
0
3
8
5
0
e
S
S
8
G
-
S
S
2
G
-
!
0
5
0
0
2
7
9
0
-
4
0
0
2
5
5
0
.
2
2
8
0
-
2
0
2
0
-
1
7
6
0
.
1
5
1
0
0
1
2
6
0
-
1
0
0
0
-
0
7
5
H
5
0
6
-
0
2
5
0
0
5
0

0
0
0
-
0
0
0
2
5
-
0
0
0
5
0
-
0
-
0
1
5
-
0
0
1
0
0
-
0
.
1
2
6
-
0
0
1
5
1
-
0
0
1
7
6
-
0
-
2
0
2
-
0
0
2
2
8
G
-
6
-
0
0
2
5
3
-
0
-
2
7
9
-
0
0
5
0
5
-
0
-
3
3
2
-
o
-
w
-
O
-
S
8
5
-
0
0
4
1
2
-
0
a
4
4
0
-
0
-
4
6
8
-
(
)
o
4
9
6
0
0
7
-
0

5
2
+
-
0
0
5
5
3
-
0
-
5
8
5
-
0
-
6
1
3
-
o
-
M
S
-
H
7
4
-
0
-
7
0
6
-
0
0
7
.
-
0
-
7
7
2
-
0
-
8
0
6
0
-
1
-
0
-
8
4
2
-
0
0
8
7
8
-
0
-
9
1
5
-
0
0
9
5
4
-
0
0
9
M
-
1
-
0
5
6
-
1
-
0
&
0
-
1
-
1
2
6
-
1

1
7
5
-
1
,
2
2
7
0
-
9
-
1

2
8
2
-
1

3
4
1
-
1
-
4
0
5
-
1

'
7
6
-
1

5
5
5
-
1
-
6
4
5
-
1

7
5
1
-
1
-
8
8
1
-
2

o
.
H
-
2
'
3
2
6

IS , 2500 (Pan D) 1965
found out. The values of Ie' and II which determine the desired sampling
plan uniquely are given by the following formulz :
i' '0(. 'p'. +'fJ'P'.
+'p
_( 'f(, +IIJ)I 1'1+2
11- x--
Ip'1 - tp', 2
B-3. VARIABILITY UNKNOWN... RANGE ME'J HOD
8-3.1 The acceptance criterion for this method is given as before by
(.i+1R) or (.i+kR)<U OR (.i-kR) or (x-1R);>L [R is to be calculated
if the sample size IS less than 10. In case the sample size is 10 or more,
R, based on the of five samples each is to be calculated]. The
values of" and II which determine the desired sampling plan uniquely are
obtained as given in 8-3.1.1.
B-3.1.1 The values of II and Ie' are first obtained by using the formulz
given under B-2. In case n comes out to be leu than or equal to k is
determined from k=DIe' where the values of D are given below for the
various sample sizes :
stnn/JU Sit" n
Ya/IUS of D
2 0886 2
3 0590 8
4 0...857
5 0429 9
6 0-3946
7 0-3698
8 0-351 2
9 03367
however, the value of" exceeds 9 and is not a multiple or 5, it shaU
be raised to the first higher number which is a multiple of 5 and then t
is determined from k ==04299 k',
27

IS l 2500 (Pan D) 19&5
APPENDIX C
(No" 3 undn Claus, 5.0)
TIlE OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC CURVES
Q.l. Figures 1 to 11 (s. P 29-39) give the complete set of operating charac-
teristic curves for the sampling plana based on variability unknown-
standard deviation method as given in this .tandard. These curves are
obtained by plotting the cpen:ent of 10m expected to be accepted' against
-percent defectives in submitted lots'. The curves given would also approxi-
mately hold good for the plans pertaining to the variability known and range
methods with the same sample size code letter.
c.2. For any specified value of the acceptable quality level (sel 2.17),
all the OC Curves obtained for the different sample size code letten are
given in the same ~ r Thus, there are 11 figures corresponding to the
11 values of AQL from 010 to 1000 percent specified in the standard.
The sample size code letter corresponding to any plan bas been indicated
on the relevant OC Curves in each of the figures gtven.
c.3. For any percent defective, the percentage ofloti expected to be accepted
may be read from the OC Curve corresponding to the chosen sampling
plan. A an example, for plan with the sample size code letter L
and AQL o25 percent, the relevant OC Curve is given in Fig. 8. It may
then be aeen &om thia OC Cwve that 8 percent defective lobi would be
accepted in about 27 percent of the cases for the plan under consideration.
28
29
I
N
I
t
o
-
I
-
0
1
0
l
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

1
0
.
B,
.
.
.
.
i
I
I
I
0.
.
6
0
0.
.
.
.
.
u.
.
.
S
O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

I
I
I
.
.
0
4
0
.
.
.
l
!
l
.
.
)
0
Z.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
l
O
1
0
o
3
'
5
6
7
1
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
I
)
I
I
,
I
S
I
'
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
D

F
E
C
T
I
Y
E
S
I
N
S
U
8
1
0
1
1
T
T
E
O
l
O
T
S
(
'
I
'
b
a
e
c
u
r
v
e
.
w
o
u
l
d
a
b
o
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
b
o
l
d
g
o
o
d
f
o
r
a
a
m
p
l
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
.
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
v
a
r
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
!
m
o
w
n
a
n
d
r
a
n
g
e
m
e
t
b
o
d
a
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
_
e
_
p
i
e
,
b
e
c
o
d
e
!
e
t
t
e
n
u
p
r
i
n
t
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
c
:
u
r
v
e
.
)
F
l
o
.
2
O
C
C
v
a
\
'
U
l
O
a
S
A
M
P
L
l
H
O
P
u
.
l
a
B
.
w
m
O
M
S
T
A
H
D
A
J
U
l
D
a
V
l
A
T
l
O
N
M
a
n
I
o
n
.
A
Q
,
L
&
1
5
P
a
C
I
J
I
T

IS I 2500 (Part D) 1965
31
II 2!111 (Put D) .1_
I a IRS S S a 2 R
OlldJ))Y il OJ. a J I ~ l i SolO' i/O !NJ:NtU

53

I
I.
!

i
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

E
f
E

f
l
V
E
~
I
N
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
E
D
L
O
T
S
(
1
'
b
c
I
e
C
I
I
M
l
I
w
o
u
l
d
a
1
r
o
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
h
o
l
d
g
o
o
d
(
o
r
a
a
m
p
l
i
n
f
p
l
a
o
l
h
u
e
d
O
I
l
v
a
r
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
b
o
w
D
a
D
d
,
.
.
m
c
t
b
o
d
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
_
w
n
p
l
e
a
i
z
e
c
o
d
e
!
e
t
t
e
n
.
.
p
r
i
n
t
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
C
I
I
M
l
I
)
F
l
o
.
6
O
C
C
u
a
v
u
r
o
a
S
A
M
P
L
I
J
I
O
p
L
A
I
'
Q
B
A
l
E
D
O
M
S
T
A
m
I
A
&
D
D
a
V
l
A
'
n
O
M
M
.
n
1
I
o
D
,
A
Q
.
L
1

0
0
P
u
a
o
r
r

I =
a


_III::

o
...

IS I 2500(Pan D) 1_
57
18 I 2500 (Part D) 1_
..
: ~ s s sa 2 ,
aI1.. ):):1. il 01 G3a'J4IJ SlO' JlO l N i ~
sa
... ..... . .... . ... . . . .. .. .. '. ... - .
- 11 " , .
..." , .
II 11 , til 11'" .
...... II
.. 'lit. " "
... , , .
, .
, ., I. I
., a II. a.................... ... ..
, , I _
_ 11_
.............................................................................................. .. ,. ,
, ,' - _ f') .t ,
.......... , " , I I I ,
t I I I I
, I , I I f .
II I ,.' .,. f
I I I t
.......... 0 _ _ _ 11 _
.................................................................................... .. _.,., .
, , '. 0 "' ,
_ f .
......... ' , ' ' ..
" I . 1
.................................................................................I ,
t , f II.' I
.. , .
.................................................. , I ,,' ,' ..
................................................. , 11I , ,
, , , I .., ,
, , , I
.......................................... ...... I"'.''''
I _ , I IIf I'."
, _. ", , "., *'.
... ., .
0 , _ ,. I'" "
JI ' ,
............. " _.It. I I
............. _ -", .
, _ ". I'
I 81 0 _ ,. I , t., ' '.'
I _ f .
... I ',. , _ , _ 0
.- ., ' t
, ' ..
...................... ,. 0 _ I
- I I I
........................................................................................... ' 1
........., .
..........................................., , ' '.. .. ' .
t :i=
f f E E
:: ::::::::::::;::::;::::::::::::::::1:::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::: ::::::;:
i i
IIIIilllIiIIIII1IIIi1llllilil!IIIi1llllllltlil!lilili!!IW!l:m!!ii!lilm:m If
::: ::: ::: :::: ::::::: =::=::: ::::: :: =:::::::::::: .. :::: .:::: :::::::: : ,:I: ,z:::
mmm i iwmm
!II!!IiiI!i!iiii!iIIIIiill!1111i!!!jI!!I!tiil!!:IIiii!iililliiII ii!illi!!! i!li!i!iI!
: : : : : : : : : ; : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 0,: : : : : : ::: .. : : ::::: .:: : ::: : ::: ;: : -: '::::::
j j1j j 11HiH 1immj mnm1im:ii1 t1 HWI; Hi
111111111 j1j jl mHl j lHim!m ji11lliW
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::
.; IIIIIII!I!I!llll!IlllllllllIllllllllllIlllllll!IIII!1I111!!I!I!III!!111111111111111IIIIIIiIIf! !II
t-.(..... D) ...

I
I
.J
t
t J
t I

1
..

III
,
Q. I
..
i fit
..
:lIt
fit
gilt

If!J
..
;&
..'IS
I:
i IiI
,
I
f
B
4
...
.. 1i
0 I
B
a s
0
s a s
=-
2
2
l
" ...
J8 01 OJ1)itlll SlO' jO
39
BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS
",...,......:
M8nak Shav.", 9 Behadw Shah zaw Marg, NEW DELHI 110002
TeIephon..: 323 0131, 323 3375, 323 SM02
Fa : 81 11 3234082, 91 11 3239399, 91 11 3239382
32376 17
3378862
603843
235 23 15
8329295
: Menakunalha
(Common to all
Telephone
e-n 00 32
Central L6JbonItory:
Plot No. 2019, 51. IV, Sahtbabad IrGsstr" Area, SAH'BABAD 201010
RegIonlll omc_:
Centr81 : Manak BhavBn, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Merg, NEW DELHI 110002
Eastern : 1/14 CIT Scheme VII M, V.I.P. Road, Maniktola. CALCUTTA7()()()54
Northern: sea 335-336, Sector 34-A, CHANDIGARH
Southern: C.I.T. campus. IV Cross Road, CHENNAI 600113
tWest.,n : Manakalaya, E9 Behind MaroeTelephone EXchange, AncIleri (East).
MUMBAI 400093
S,.."ch Ome.:
'PuahpM', Nurmohamed Shaikh Marg, Khanpur, AHMEDABAD 380001
Industrial Area, 1st Stage, Bangalor. - lUmkur Road,
BANGALORE 560058
Gangotr\ Compta, 5th Fk>or, Bhadbhada Road, T. T Nagar, BHOPAL
No. 62-63, Unit VI, Ganga Nagar, BHUBANESHWAR 751001
Kalaikathir BuUclngs, 670 Avinashi Road, COIMBATORE 641037
Plot No. 43, Sector 16 A, Mathura Road: FARIDABAD 121001
Savltri Complex. 116 G. T Road, GHAZIABAO 201001
5315 Ward No 29. R G Barua Road, 5th By-lane. GUWAHATI 781003
5-8-58C, L N Gupta Marg, Nampally Station Road. HYOERABAD 500001
E52, Chitaranian Marg, C-Scheme. JAIPUR 302001
117/418 a, Sarvodaya Nagar, KANPUR 208005
Seth Shawan, 2nd Roor, Behind Leela Cinema, Naval KishOr. Road,
lUCKNOW 226001
PatMputra InclJatrial Estate, PATNA 800013
T. C. No. 14/1421, University P O. Pa'ayam,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695034
NIT Ekiicing, Second Floor. Gokulpat Market, NAGPUR 440010
Institution of Engln..... ( Incia ) Buildng, 1332 Shiva;1 PUNE 41100s
S50 13 48
839 49 55
554021
40 38 27
21 01 41
8-28 88 01
8-71 19 96
54 11 37
20 10 83
372925
216816
23 89 23
26 23 05
621 17
52 51 71
323635
S". Otftce is at 5 Chowringh.. Approach, P. O. Princep Street.
CALCUTTA 700072
tSaJea Office t. at Novelty Chambers, Grant Road, MUMSAI 400007
*sales Offtoe ja at 'F' Block, Unity Suilcing, Narashimaraja Square,
BANGALORE 5S0002
27 10 85
309 85 28
222 39 71
Prtnted at N_ India Pmtlng Pr_, Khurta. india