DOE

© All Rights Reserved

5 views

DOE

© All Rights Reserved

- Judging Tips 2012
- ANOVA Literature Review
- Unit 3 Question Paper Jan 2011
- Grading Rubric
- the-progress-board.pdf
- copy of science fair project experiment self-assessment 1
- about frostig and art
- Fall Lab Newsletter
- Outline
- Bookmark
- final paper
- 643 data analysis plan
- lesson 6 rubric
- gantt chart capstone project
- Experimental Research 3.1
- work packet 2014-2015
- insulator experiment
- lesson1-what is balance final
- science rubric
- hidden

You are on page 1of 6

K. Sundararajan 3

Design of experiments (DOE) is a systematic method to determine the relationship between factors affecting a

process and the output of that process. In other words, it is used to find cause-and-effect relationships. This

information is needed to manage process inputs in order to optimize the output.

An understanding of DOE first requires knowledge of some statistical tools and experimentation concepts.

Although a DOE can be analyzed in many software programs, it is important for practitioners to understand basic

DOE concepts for proper application.

The most commonly used terms in the DOE methodology include: controllable and uncontrollable input factors,

responses, hypothesis testing, blocking, replication and interaction.

Controllable input factors, or x factors, are those input parameters that can be modified in an experiment

or process. For example, in cooking rice, these factors include the quantity and quality of the rice and the

quantity of water used for boiling.

Uncontrollable input factors are those parameters that cannot be changed. In the rice-cooking example,

this may be the temperature in the kitchen. These factors need to be recognized to understand how they may

affect the response.

Responses, or output measures, are the elements of the process outcome that gage the desired effect.

In the cooking example, the taste and texture of the rice are the responses.

The controllable input factors can be modified to optimize the output. The relationship between the factors and

responses is shown in Figure 1.

Hypothesis testing helps determine the significant factors using statistical methods. There are two

possibilities in a hypothesis statement: the null and the alternative. The null hypothesis is valid if the status quo is

true. The alternative hypothesis is true if the status quo is not valid. Testing is done at a level of significance,

which is based on a probability.

Blocking and replication: Blocking is an experimental technique to avoid any unwanted variations in the

input or experimental process. For example, an experiment may be conducted with the same equipment to avoid

any equipment variations. Practitioners also replicate experiments, performing the same combination run more

than once, in order to get an estimate for the amount of random error that could be part of the process.

Interaction: When an experiment has three or more variables, an interaction is a situation in which the

The comparison of two or more levels in a factor can be done using an F-test. This compares the variance of the

means of different factor levels with the individual variances, using this equation:

F = ns2Y-bar / s2pooled

where:

n = the sample size

s2Y-bar = the variance of the means, which is calculated by dividing the sum of variances of the individual means by

the degrees of freedom

s2pooled = pooled variance, or the average of the individual variances

This is similar to the signal-to-noise ratio used in electronics. If the value of F (the test statistic) is greater than the

F-critical value, it means there is a significant difference between the levels, or one level is giving a response that

is different from the others. Caution is also needed to ensure that s2pooled is kept to a minimum, as it is the noise or

error term. If the F value is high, the probability (p-value) will fall below 0.05, indicating that there is a significant

difference between levels. The value of 0.05 is a typical accepted risk value.

If F = 1, it means the factor has no effect.

As an example of a one-factor experiment, data from an incoming shipment of a product is given in Table 1.

Table 1: Incoming Shipment Data

Lot

Data

61, 61, 57, 56, 60, 52, 62, 59, 62, 67, 55, 56, 52, 60, 59, 59, 60, 59, 49, 42, 55, 67, 53, 66, 60

56, 56, 61, 67, 58, 63, 56, 60, 55, 46, 62, 65, 63, 59, 60, 60, 59, 60, 65, 65, 62, 51, 62, 52, 58

62, 62, 72, 63, 51, 65, 62, 59, 62, 63, 68, 64, 67, 60, 59, 59, 61, 58, 65, 64, 70, 63, 68, 62, 61

70, 70, 50, 68, 71, 65, 70, 73, 70, 69, 64, 68, 65, 72, 73, 75, 72, 75, 64, 69, 60, 68, 66, 69, 72

When a practitioner completes an analysis of variance (ANOVA), the following results are obtained:

Table 2: ANOVA Summary

Groups

Count

Sum

Average

Variance

25

1,449

57.96

31.54

25

1,483

59.32

23.14333

25

1,570

62.80

18.5

25

1,708

68.32

27.64333

Source of Variation

SS

df

MS

p-value

F-crit

Between groups

1,601.16

533.72

21.17376

1.31 x 10-10

2.699394

ANOVA

Within groups

2,419.84

96

Total

4,021

99

25.20667

Statistical software can provide hypothesis testing and give the actual value of F. If the value is below the critical F

value, a value based on the accepted risk, then the null hypothesis is not rejected. Otherwise, the null hypothesis

is rejected to confirm that there is a relationship between the factor and the response. Table 2 shows that the F is

high, so there is a significant variation in the data. The practitioner can conclude that there is a difference in the

lot means.

This is the most important design for experimentation. It is used in most experiments because it is simple,

versatile and can be used for many factors. In this design, the factors are varied at two levels low and high.

Two-level designs have many advantages. Two are:

1.

2.

For an example of a two-level factorial design, consider the cake-baking process. Three factors are studied: the

brand of flour, the temperature of baking and the baking time. The associated lows and highs of these factors are

listed in Table 3.

Table 3: Cake-baking Factors and Their Associated Levels

Factor

Name

Units

Flour brand

Cost

Cheap

Costly

Time

Minutes

10

15

Temperature

Degrees (C)

70

80

The output responses considered are taste and crust formation. Taste was determined by a panel of experts,

who rated the cake on a scale of 1 (worst) to 10 (best). The ratings were averaged and multiplied by 10. Crust

formation is measured by the weight of the crust, the lower the better.

The experiment design, with the responses, is shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Settings of Input Factors and the Resulting Responses

Run Order

A: Brand

B: Time (min)

C: Temp. (C)

Costly(+)

10(-)

70(-)

75

0.3

Cheap(-)

15(+)

70(-)

71

0.7

Cheap(-)

10(-)

80(+)

81

1.2

Costly(+)

15(+)

70(-)

80

0.7

Costly(+)

10(-)

80(+)

77

0.9

Costly(+)

15(+)

80(+)

32

0.3

Cheap(-)

15(+)

80(+)

42

0.5

Cheap(-)

10(-)

70(-)

74

3.1

Analysis of the results is shown in Table 5. Figures 2 through 4 show the average taste scores for each factor as it

changes from low to high levels. Figures 5 through 7 are interaction plots; they show the effect of the combined

manipulation of the factors.

Table 5: ANOVA Table for the Taste Response

Factor

df

SS

MS

Effect

Contrast

F-crit at 1%

Brand

2.0

2.0

0.0816

-1

-4.00

0.82

16.47

Time

840.5

840.5

34.306

-20.5

-82.00

0.11

Brand x time

0.5

0.5

0.0204

0.5

2.00

0.91

Temp

578.0

578.0

23.592

-17

-68.00

0.13

Brand x temp

72.0

72.0

2.9388

-6

-24.00

0.34

Time x temp

924.5

924.5

37.735

-21.5

-86.00

0.10

24.5

24.5

-3.5

-14.00

0.50

Error

24.5

24.5

Total

2442.0

Figure 2: Average Taste Scores for Low and High Flour Brand Levels

Figure 3: Average Taste Scores for Low and High Bake Time (Minutes) Levels

Figure 4: Average Taste Scores for Low and High Baking Temperature (C) Levels

From reading an F table, the critical F value at 1 percent is 16.47. As the actual value of F for time and

temperature exceed this value (time is at 34.306 and temperature is 23.592), its possible to conclude that both of

them have a significant effect on the taste of the product. This is also evident from Figures 3 and 4, where the line

is steep for the variation of these two factors. Figure 7 also shows that when the temperature is high, the taste

sharply decreases with time (as charring takes place).

Table 6: ANOVA Table for the Crust Response

Factor

df

SS

MS

Effect

Contrast

F-crit at 1%

Brand

1.4

1.4

1.4938

-0.825

-3.30

16.47

Time

1.4

1.4

1.4938

-0.825

-3.30

Brand x time

1.1

1.1

1.1536

0.725

2.90

Temp

0.5

0.5

0.4952

-0.475

-1.90

Brand x temp

0.7

0.7

0.7257

0.575

2.30

Time x temp

0.1

0.1

0.0672

0.175

0.70

0.9

0.9

-0.675

-2.70

Error

0.9

0.9

Total

5.9

In this case the actual F value for the three factors (brand, time and temperature) are below the critical F value for

1 percent (16.47). This shows that these are not significant factors for the crust formation in the cake. If further

optimization of the crust formation is needed, then other factors, such as the quantity of ingredients in the cake

(eggs, sugar and so on), should be checked.

Design of experiments is a powerful tool in Six Sigma to manage the significant input factors in order to optimize

the desired output. Factorial experiments are versatile because many factors can be modified and studied at

once. The following resources can be helpful in learning more about DOEs:

1.

DOE Simplified Practical Tools for Effective Experimentation (Productivity Inc., 2000)

2.

- Judging Tips 2012Uploaded bymissgingerbread
- ANOVA Literature ReviewUploaded bybetmydarl
- Unit 3 Question Paper Jan 2011Uploaded byPensbyPsy
- Grading RubricUploaded byozy4492
- the-progress-board.pdfUploaded byJorgePichita
- copy of science fair project experiment self-assessment 1Uploaded byapi-446029466
- about frostig and artUploaded byMadalina Moldovan
- Fall Lab NewsletterUploaded bylauraannmims
- OutlineUploaded byZakiah Zaki
- final paperUploaded byapi-284414375
- 643 data analysis planUploaded byapi-329054769
- Experimental Research 3.1Uploaded byJims Cudinyerah
- lesson 6 rubricUploaded byapi-354324776
- work packet 2014-2015Uploaded byapi-259699851
- lesson1-what is balance finalUploaded byapi-239321343
- science rubricUploaded byapi-253415948
- gantt chart capstone projectUploaded byapi-296708165
- BookmarkUploaded byThessa Angela Mandap
- hiddenUploaded byapi-273072381
- insulator experimentUploaded byapi-295355929
- Math ReflectionUploaded byBogus Account
- Lab Report Writing GuidelinesUploaded byMohommad Yawari
- Rafiq1.pptUploaded byNitin Lomte
- junior symposium proposalUploaded byapi-341970858
- february calendar read onlyUploaded byapi-350620791
- Research Findings Chapter 6Uploaded byAndrew Lerario
- solving the problem rubricUploaded byapi-386230182
- Ads or PtionUploaded byMira Fazzira
- Uj Iap Bio StoriesUploaded bylanosity
- PROJECT_TASK_BDA_20603_SEM_1_20162017Uploaded byIzzah 'Atirah

- Ect 01 Treasure Chest Six SigmaUploaded byMapycha
- A Study on Factors Affecting Implementation of TQM in Education SectorUploaded byPujitha Garapati
- CHAPTER 2 (2)Uploaded byPujitha Garapati
- CHAPTER 1Uploaded byPujitha Garapati
- Marketing Services - Chap012Uploaded byArjun Nanda
- Education and Training November 2016Uploaded byPujitha Garapati
- Strategicanalysisofsony 150325081151 Conversion Gate01Uploaded byPujitha Garapati
- DMAIC Approach.pptxUploaded byPujitha Garapati
- Netflix PresentationUploaded byshadynader
- Technical Call Center Optimization - Case Study IIIUploaded byPujitha Garapati
- Under Coating MinimumsUploaded byPujitha Garapati
- Accelerator and Super MultiplierUploaded byPujitha Garapati
- Amara Raja Annual Report 2016Uploaded byPujitha Garapati

- LSAT June 2017 Interpretive-guideUploaded byBill Clawges
- ch05.pdfUploaded byPandhu
- Test Validity and ReliabilityUploaded byjes74
- STA220_Final_2012S.pdfUploaded byexamkiller
- 2015-CL-P2-15Uploaded byPcEng
- Analysis of VarianceUploaded byjerzone88
- 06_Ambiguity Values of the Philippine Thematic Apperception Test.pdfUploaded byAaron John Siy
- JEE Main 2019 April 8 Answer Key Paper 1 Forenoon SessionUploaded byKrish
- 1. Course Plan and AssignmentUploaded byMohd Suhaimi
- Delphi Technique- A ReviewUploaded byWesam Salah Aloolo
- Format English UPSR 2016Uploaded bySomasundaram Somano
- Sampling.pptxUploaded byFahad Mushtaq
- STLCUploaded byJyothi Ampally
- Statistics-and-Probability-STAT-112-Grade11-Week-11-20Leb.docxUploaded byRenan Miranda
- Prism Course ManualUploaded byFelix Ezomo
- ch13AUploaded byJosh Kemp
- UNIT 2 research method in psychology IGNOU BAUploaded byashish1981
- SET (General) - Assam (North East States) 2013 (Key Only)Uploaded byasha
- Research DesignUploaded byNiyati Barot
- mathematics mttc resultsUploaded byapi-73812371
- The Selection of Research DesignUploaded bydianamilenacelis
- Supervisory Coaching BehaviorUploaded bystudent_ucp_lhr
- Communication ResearchUploaded bynekusakuraba
- Marketing Research IntroductionUploaded byBalaji N
- brmUploaded byumangwar
- An A-Z of applied linguistics research methods.pdfUploaded byimtinan
- Statistics HciUploaded bysaxycb
- Chapter 2Uploaded byjanny
- Q Testing and StatisticsUploaded bySanka De Silva
- Hypothesis 2Uploaded byNaam Ji Jules