Qhubio
    Capability Interpretation

    Cpk = 2.00: Six Sigma Capability

    3 min read Last updated

    Cpk 2.00 places the nearest specification limit at 6σ under the stated sigma estimate. Some organizations specify demanding targets for high-risk characteristics, but the applicable requirement must be verified rather than inferred from industry alone.

    The engineering question this page answers

    What kind of process actually achieves Cpk 2.00, and when does that target belong on a print?

    Decision logic

    Is the characteristic safety-critical or regulated? → high target may be justified ↓ Is Cp already ≥ 2.00? → centering is the only remaining lever ↓ Is Cp below 2.00? → variation reduction is required first (design, technology) ↓ Do not chase 2.00 by artificially widening tolerance

    Typical PPM and sigma equivalent

    • Typical PPM: ≈ 0.00099 PPM at the nearest limit; ≈ 0.00198 PPM only for a perfectly centered, two-sided process
    • Sigma equivalent:

    Typical industry requirements

    Common automotive practice uses 1.33 for established production and 1.67 for some initial or launch studies, but the controlling value is always the applicable customer-specific requirement, drawing, Control Plan, or internal standard. Do not treat these values as universal pass/fail rules.

    Engineering procedure

    1. Verify the 2.00 requirement in the CSR or design record; do not assume.
    2. Confirm Cp ceiling before setting a Cpk target — Cpk cannot exceed Cp.
    3. Run a long-window Ppk study; short-term Cpk 2.00 is easier than sustained Ppk 2.00.
    4. If achievable only in the short term, plan the SPC reaction to protect the customer.

    Typical failure modes

    • Requiring Cpk 2.00 on a characteristic with a physically bounded tolerance the process cannot deliver.
    • Reporting Cpk 2.00 on tiny samples where the confidence interval extends below 1.5.

    Engineering insight

    • Cpk 2.00 is rarely a tuning outcome; it is usually a design decision (looser tolerance or fundamentally different process).
    • Motorola's original 6σ definition assumed a 1.5σ shift, which corresponds to Cpk ≈ 1.5 long-term, not 2.00.
    • Sustaining Cpk 2.00 typically requires closed-loop control or in-process feedback, not open-loop SPC.

    When NOT to use this metric

    • Do not require 2.00 as an internal default; specify it only when risk justifies it.

    Relationship to other capability metrics

    • Cpk 2.00 ≈ 6σ ≈ 0.001 PPM at the nearest tail (no shift convention).
    • With a 1.5σ shift convention, Cpk 2.00 corresponds to ≈ 3.4 DPMO — but the shift is a modeling choice, not a fact.

    Engineering notes

    • State the shift convention (0σ vs 1.5σ) with every Cpk 2.00 result.

    Continue the investigation

    For sigma-level conversions, see Cpk to Sigma Level. For aerospace and medical context, see Aerospace Cpk Requirements and Medical Device Cpk Requirements.

    Verification checklist

    • 2.00 target justified by CSR, safety, or regulatory classification
    • Sigma-shift convention (0σ or 1.5σ) declared
    • Long-window Ppk confirms the short-term result

    Assumptions and applicability

    • Process condition: statistical stability is required.
    • Distribution assumption: approximately normal data.
    • PPM convention: nearest specification-limit tail.
    • Sigma-shift convention: no sigma shift applied.
    • Cpk alone identifies distance to the nearest specification limit; it does not determine total two-sided defects unless centering or both tail distances are known.
    • Predicted PPM is a model estimate, not a replacement for observed defect data.

    Sources and engineering references

    External engineering references used for this page. Qhubio applies these references to the practical guidance above.

    Frequently asked questions