Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.

Successfully reported this slideshow.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

- Operations Management Project by Yoshiki Kurata, C... 1473 views
- Example of fractional factorial by Yoshiki Kurata, C... 442 views
- Project planning and control by Yoshiki Kurata, C... 840 views
- Two level factorial designs by Yoshiki Kurata, C... 1121 views
- Malcolm Baldrige Award by Yoshiki Kurata, C... 5254 views
- Mrp by Yoshiki Kurata, C... 4238 views

604 views

Published on

No Downloads

Total views

604

On SlideShare

0

From Embeds

0

Number of Embeds

1

Shares

0

Downloads

17

Comments

0

Likes

1

No embeds

No notes for slide

- 1. The Essentials of 2-Level Design of Experiments Part II: The Essentials of Fractional Factorial Designs
- 2. II.3 Screening Designs in 8 runs Aliasing for 4 Factors in 8 Runs 5 Factors in 8 runs A U-Do-It Case Study Foldover of Resolution III Designs
- 3. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Aliasing for 4 Factors in 8 Runs In an earlier exercise from II.2, four factors were studied in 8 runs by using only those runs from a 24 design for which ABCD was positive: A B C D AB AC AD BC BD CD ABC ABD ACD BCD ABCD -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
- 4. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Aliasing for 4 Factors in 8 Runs We use “I” to denote a column of ones and note that I=ABCD for this particular design DEFINITION: The set of effects whose levels are constant (either 1 or -1) in a design are design generators. E.g, the design generator for the example in II.2 with 4 factors in 8 runs is I=ABCD The alias structure for all effects can be constructed from the design generator
- 5. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Aliasing for 4 Factors in 8 Runs To construct the confounding structure, we need two simple rules: Rule 1: Any effect column multiplied by I is unchanged (E.g., AxI=A) A × I = A −1 1 −1 1 −1 1 −1 1 × 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 = −1 1 −1 1 −1 1 −1 1
- 6. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Aliasing for 4 Factors in 8 Runs _ Rule 2: Any effect multiplied by itself is equal to I (E.g., AxA=I) A × A = I −1 1 −1 1 −1 1 −1 1 × −1 1 −1 1 −1 1 −1 1 = 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
- 7. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Aliasing for 4 Factors in 8 Runs We can now construct an alias table by multiplying both sides of the design generator by any effect. E.g., for effect A, we have the steps: AxI=AxABCD A=IxBCD (Applying Rule 1 to the left and Rule 2 to the right) A=BCD (Applying Rule 1 to the right) If we do this for each effect, we find A=BCD AB=CD BD=AC ACD=B B=ACD AC=BD CD=AB BCD=A C=ABD AD=BC ABC=D ABCD=I D=ABC BC=AD ABD=C
- 8. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Aliasing for 4 Factors in 8 Runs Several of these statements are redundant. When we remove the redundant statements, we obtain the alias structure (which usually starts with the design generator): I=ABCD D=ABC A=BCD AB=CD B=ACD AC=BD C=ABD AD=BC The alias structure will be complicated for more parsimonious designs; we will add a few more guidelines for constructing alias tables later on. The alias structure will be complicated for more parsimonious designs; we will add a few more guidelines for constructing alias tables later on.
- 9. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs Suppose five two-level factors A, B, C, D, E are to be examined. If using a full factorial design, there would be 25 =32 runs, and 31 effects estimated – 5 main effects – 10 two-way interactions – 10 three-way interactions – 5 four-way interactions – 1 five-way interaction In many cases so much experimentation is impractical, and high-order interactions are probably negligible, anyway. In the rest of section II, we will ignore three-way and higher interactions!
- 10. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs An experimenter wanted to study the effect of 5 factors on corrosion rate of iron rebar* in only 8 runs by assigning D to column AB and E to column AC in the 3- factor 8-run signs table: Standard Order A B C D=AB E=AC BC ABC 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 3 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 4 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 5 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 6 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
- 11. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs For this particular design, the experimenter used only 8 runs (1/4 fraction) of a 32 run (or 25 ) design (I.e., a 25-2 design). For each of these 8 runs, D=AB and E=AC. If we multiply both sides of the first equation by D, we obtain DxD=ABxD, or I=ABD. Likewise, if we multiply both sides of E=AC by E, we obtain ExE=ACxE, or I=ACE. We can say the design is comprised of the 8 runs for which both ABD and ACE are equal to one (I=ABD=ACE).
- 12. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs There are 3 other equivalent 1/4 fractions the experimenter could have used: ABD = 1, ACE = -1 (I = ABD = -ACE) ABD = -1, ACE = 1 (I = -ABD = ACE) ABD = -1, ACE = -1 (I = -ABD = -ACE) The fraction the experimenter chose is called the principal fraction
- 13. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs I=ABD=ACE is the design generator If ABD and ACE are constant, then their interaction must be constant, too. Using Rule 2, their interaction is ABD x ACE = BCDE The first two rows of the confounding structure are provided below. Line 1: I = ABD = ACE = BCDE Line 2: AxI=AxABD=AxACE=AxBCDE A=BD=CE=ABCDE The shortest word in the design generator has three letters, so we call this a Resolution III design The shortest word in the design generator has three letters, so we call this a Resolution III design
- 14. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs U-Do-It Exercise. Complete the remaining 6 non- redundant rows of the confounding structure for the corrosion experiment. Start with the main effects and then try any two-way effects that have not yet appeared in the alias structure.
- 15. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs U-Do-It Exercise Solution. I=ABD=ACE=BCDE A=BD=CE=ABCDE B=AD=ABCE=CDE C=ABCD=AE=BDE D=AB=ACDE=BCE E=ABDE=AC=BCD BC=ACD=ABE=DE BE=ADE=ABC=CD After computing the alias structure for main effects, it may require trial and error to find the remaining rows of the alias structure After computing the alias structure for main effects, it may require trial and error to find the remaining rows of the alias structure
- 16. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs U-Do-It Exercise Solution. I=ABD=ACE=BCDE A=BD=CE B=AD C=AE D=AB E=AC BC=DE BE=CD We often exclude higher order terms from the alias structure (except for the design generator). We often exclude higher order terms from the alias structure (except for the design generator).
- 17. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs The corrosion experiment generated the following data: Standard Order Corrosion Rate A B C D E 1 2.71 -1 -1 -1 1 1 2 0.93 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 3 4.80 -1 1 -1 -1 1 4 2.53 1 1 -1 1 -1 5 4.89 -1 -1 1 1 -1 6 3.35 1 -1 1 -1 1 7 12.29 -1 1 1 -1 -1 8 9.92 1 1 1 1 1
- 18. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs Computation of Factor Effects y A+BD+ CE B+AD C+AE D+AB E+AC BC+DE BE+CD 2.71 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 0.93 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 4.80 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 2.53 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 4.89 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 3.35 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 12.29 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 9.92 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 41.42 -7.96 17.66 19.48 -1.32 .14 10.28 -.34 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5.178 -1.99 4.415 4.87 -.33 .035 2.57 -.085
- 19. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs 543210-1-2 .999 .99 .95 .80 .50 .20 .05 .01 .001 A BC+DE B C Effects Effects Plot for Corrosion Experiment The interaction is probably due to BC rather than DE The interaction is probably due to BC rather than DE
- 20. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs Factor A at its high level reduced the corrosion rate by 1.99 units Factor B and C main effects cannot be interpreted in the presence of a significant BC interaction. C 1 2 2.71 4.89 1 .93 3.35 1.82 4.12 4.80 12.29 2 2.53 9.92 3.67 11.11 B
- 21. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs -1 1 -1 1 11-1-1 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 C B BC Interaction Plot for Corrosion Experiment _ B and C at their high levels greatly increase corrosion _ B and C at their high levels greatly increase corrosion
- 22. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs U-Do-It Exercise: What is the EMR if the experimenter wishes to minimize the corrosion rate?
- 23. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs U-Do-It Exercise Solution _ A should be set high, B and C should be low and BC should be high, so our solution is: EMR=5.178+(-1.99/2)-(4.415/2)-(4.87/2)+(2.57/2) EMR=.8255
- 24. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: Five Factors in 8 Runs D and E could have been assigned to any of the last 4 columns (AB, AC, BC or ABC) in the 3-factor 8-run signs table. All of the resulting designs would be Resolution III, which means that at least one main effect would be aliased with at least one two-way effect. For a Resolution IV design (e.g., 4 factors in 8 runs) The shortest word in the design generator has 4 letters (e.g., I=ABCD for 4 factors in 8 runs) No main effects are aliased with two-way effects, but at least one two-way effect is aliased with another two-way effect What qualities would a Resolution V design have?
- 25. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Case Study A statistically-minded vegetarian* studied 5 factors that would affect the growth of alfalfa sprouts. Factors included measures such as presoak time and watering regimen. The response was biomass measured in grams after 48 hours. Factor D was assigned to the BC column and factor E was assigned to the ABC column in the 3- factor 8-run signs table. Standard Order A B C AB AC D=BC E=ABC 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 3 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 4 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 5 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 6 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
- 26. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Case Study The runs table appears below. Find the alias structure for this data and analyze the data. Standard Order Growth A B C D E 1 9.7 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 2 14.7 1 -1 -1 1 1 3 12.3 -1 1 -1 -1 1 4 12.7 1 1 -1 -1 -1 5 11.2 -1 -1 1 -1 1 6 13.1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 7 10.1 -1 1 1 1 -1 8 15.0 1 1 1 1 1
- 27. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Solution ALIAS STRUCTURE The design generator was computed as follows. Since D=BC, when we multiply each side of the equation by D, we obtain DxD=BCD or I=BCD. Also, since E=ABC, when we mulitply each side of this equation by E, we obtain I=ABCE. The interaction of BCD and ABCE will also be constant (and positive in this case), so we have I=BCDxABCE=AxBxBxCxCxDxE=ADE The design generator is I=BCD=ABCE=ADE
- 28. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Solution ALIAS STRUCTURE Working from the design generator, the remaining rows of the design structure will be: A=DE=BCE=ABCD B=CD=ACE=ABDE C=BD=ABE=ACDE D=BC=ABCDE=AE E=BCDE=ABC=AD AB=ACD=CE=BDE AC=ABD=BE=CDE The first two interaction terms we would normally try (AB and AC) had not yet appeared in the alias structure, which made the last two rows of the table easy to obtain. The first two interaction terms we would normally try (AB and AC) had not yet appeared in the alias structure, which made the last two rows of the table easy to obtain.
- 29. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Solution ALIAS STRUCTURE Eliminating higher order interactions, the alias structure is I=BCD=ABCE=ADE A=DE B=CD C=BD D=BC=AE E=AD AB=CE AC=BE Main effects are confounded with two way effects, making this a Resolution III design. Main effects are confounded with two way effects, making this a Resolution III design.
- 30. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Solution ANALYSIS--Computation of Factor Effects Grams A+DE B+CD C+BD AB+CE AC+BE D+BC+ AE E+AD 9.7 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 14.7 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 12.3 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 12.7 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 11.2 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 13.1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 10.1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 15.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 98.8 12.2 1.40 0.0 -1.60 1.40 .20 7.60 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 12.35 3.05 .35 0.0 -.40 .35 .05 1.90
- 31. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Solution ANALYSIS--Plot of Factor Effects 3210-1 99 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 1 Effect Percent A A B B C C D D E E Factor Name Not Significant Significant Effect Type A Normal Plot of the Effects (response is Growth, Alpha = .05) Lenth's PSE = 0.525
- 32. II.3 Screening Designs in Eight Runs: U-Do-It Solution ANALYSIS--Interpretation Factor A at its high level increases the yield by 3.05 grams Factor E at its high level increases the yield by 1.90 grams Both of these effects are confounded with two way interactions, but we have used the simplest possible explanation for the significant effects we observed Note: the most important result in the actual experiment was an insignificant main effect. The experimenter found that the recommended presoak time for the alfalfa seeds could be lowered from 16 hours to 4 hours with no deleterious effect on the yield--a significant time savings!

No public clipboards found for this slide

Be the first to comment