5S Evaluation - Production

A High Score is Desirable

Process or Project Name:

Best
Sort - when in doubt, throw it out, delete or archive Practice
5
1. Only the current levels of inventory in the area is needed for the work at hand.
2. Only the necessary items to perform the work at hand are located in the area.
3. All tools, fixtures and jigs in the area are used on a regular basis.
4. All announcements are arranged in a straight and neat manner.
5. Your general impression should tell you this is the best you have seen for a manufacturing
environment.

Best
Straighten - decide and organize where to keep necessary items Practice
5
1. Machines, benches, etc. are arranged in a logical & neat fashion to promote a smooth product
flow through the work area.
2. Lines on the floor clearly mark aisles, walkways, work areas, storage locations and danger
areas.
3. Only current labeled documents and binders necessary to do the work are stored at
workstations.
4. Tools, gages and fixtures are arranged neatly and stored, kept clean and free of any risk from
damage.
5. Equipment is properly maintained and labeled. Critical points for daily maintenance checks are
clearly marked.

Best
Shine - perform a thorough cleaning Practice
5
1. All floors are clean and free of debris, oil, and dirt. Cleaning of floors is done routinely and at
appropriate predetermined intervals.
2. Routine cleaning of machines is apparent, there is no oil, chips, scrap laying on work surfaces.
Glass view windows, guards, deflectors are clean & in place.
3. All equipment in the area is cleaned on a regular basis.
4. When unexpected delays occur, operators habitually & automatically sweep floors & wipe
equipment.
5. Where applicable, FOD prevention procedures are enforced. All loose items removed before
entering FOD prevention area. Shadow boxes kept clean.

Best
Standardize - incorporate cleaning procedures into the daily work Practice
5
1. Display boards are present in each production work area and accessible to all personnel in the
area.
2. 5S audits are performed in each work area at least monthly, results are shared with all workers
and goals for new levels set with action items.
3. PPE notices are posted in every area and all employees are wearing the required PPE's.
4. It is obvious that workers who perform similar duties, use standard methods to achieve
consistent results.
5. Methods are reviewed on a regular basis, and as new methods are developed, they are quickly
documented and adopted by others.

Best
Sustain - management and leadership to motivate and sustain Practice
5
1. Employees are adequately deployed to keep equipment operating properly. A Preventive
Maintenance program is in place and functions at a high level.
2. Each area of the operation, inside and out, falls under the responsibility of a manager with 5S
auditing and assignment authority.
3. All documents and binders are clearly labeled as to their contents. Responsibility for control &
revisions is clear. Nothing is unlabeled.
4. Responsible manager/staff person visits each work area on a regular basis and provides
feedback on 5S efforts and results.
5. Disciplined controls to assure each of above items is maintained at highest level. There is a
sense of responsibility by all employees to maintain systems.
oduction
irable
ocess or Project Name:
Minimum Many
Best in the acceptable opportunities for No Activity or,
organization level improv'mt slight effort Total
4 3 2 1

Sort 0

Minimum Many
Best in the acceptable opportunities for No Activity or,
organization level improv'mt slight effort Total
4 3 2 1

Straighten 0

Minimum Many
Best in the acceptable opportunities for No Activity or,
organization level improv'mt slight effort Total
4 3 2 1

Shine 0

Minimum Many
Best in the acceptable opportunities for No Activity or,
organization level improv'mt slight effort Total
4 3 2 1
 Standardize 0

Minimum Many
Best in the acceptable opportunities for No Activity or,
organization level improv'mt slight effort Total
4 3 2 1

Sustain 0
 PROCESS
Pitch Duration

OUTSIDE SOURCE

C/T (s) C/T (s)

C/O (s) C/O (s)
Uptime (%) Uptime (%)
Yield (%) Yield (%)
Shifts Shifts

Lead Time (s)

Lead Time (s)

MAX PCS
 CUSTOMER

TAKT Time (s) PLANNING

Demand CONTROL
Frequency

C/T (s)
C/O (s)
Uptime (%)
Yield (%)

STORAGE
Quantity
Time

OUTSIDE SOURCE
 Frequency

PLANNING
CONTROL

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

LEAD
TIME (s) 0
VALUE
TIME (s) 0
 Generic Product

SUPPLIER

C/T (s) 600

C/O (s) 0
Uptime (%) 100
Yield (%) 99.3
Shifts 4

STORES
Frequency Daily Quantity
Time 6000
INSPECTION

GOODS-IN
Quantity
Time 6000

C/T (s) 600

C/O (s) 0
Uptime (%) 100
Yield (%) 100
Shifts 1

6000 6000

600 600
Generic Production Value Stream Map - Example Excel Generated VSM

PLANNING

PURCHASING

MANUFACTURING
CELL MANAGER

KITS GOODS AWAITING TEST

Quantity Quantity
Time 6000 Time 6000
KITTING ASSEMBLY TEST

C/T (s) 600 C/T (s) 600 C/T (s)

C/O (s) 0 C/O (s) 0 C/O (s)
Uptime (%) 100 Uptime (%) 100 Uptime (%)
Yield (%) 90 Yield (%) 90 Yield (%)
Shifts 1 Shifts 1 Shifts

6000 6000

600 600
 AWAITING FINAL INSPECTION FINISHED GOODS
Quantity Quantity
Time 6000 Time 6000
TEST INSPECTION SHIPPING

900 C/T (s) 300 C/T (s) 600

60 C/O (s) 0 C/O (s) 0
80 Uptime (%) 100 Uptime (%) 100
90 Yield (%) 100 Yield (%) 100
1 Shifts 1 Shifts 1

6000 6000

900 300 600

 CUSTOMER

TAKT Time (s) 600

Demand 48
Frequency Daily

Frequency Daily

Frequency Daily

LEAD
6000 TIME (s) 42000
VALUE
TIME (s) 4200
 Pugh Concept Evaluation Matrix

Evaluation Criteria

Total (+)
Total (s)
Total (-)
n Matrix

Exisiting
Process
Year Cost Benefits Net Benefits Description

Annual discount rate which

10% management wants
0 -USD 7,000 USD 0 -USD 7,000 Initial Cost of investment
1 -USD 1,500 USD 500 -USD 1,000 Returns
2 USD 0 USD 5,000 USD 5,000 Returns
3 USD 0 USD 10,000 USD 10,000 Returns
4 USD 0 USD 15,000 USD 15,000
5 USD 0 USD 15,000 USD 15,000
Totals -USD 8,500 USD 45,500 USD 37,000

NPV USD 21,177.55

IRR 63%
 System QFD

1 Color
2 Yield Strength
3 Hardness of cookie
4 Weight
5 Size
6 Thickness
7 Cost per cookie
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
 Customer Weights

Kano Type
Customer Needs
1 Good Texture 5 L
2 Generous Portions 10 L
3 Good taste 10 B
4 Low price 7 D
5 Appearance 2 B
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Raw score

Scaled
 Relative Weight

Rank

Best in Class

Requirement Benchmarking AVE

Worst in Class
Kano
Direction

Technical Requirement Units

Technical Requirement Targets

Technical Requirement USL

Technical Requirement LSL

 Project:
Date:

Technical Requirements
 9
0.117647058823529
18 Color

9
9
0.705882352941176
108 Yield Strength

3
9
0.431372549019608
66 Hardness of cookie

1
0.065359477124183
10 Weight

9
9
1 153 Size

3
0.196078431372549
30 Thickness

9
9
1 153 Cost per cookie
 20%

12%

28%

28%
3%

2%

6%
6 3 4 7 1 5 1
Yellow 1.0 g/cm

Marsh Yellow 0.8 g/cm

Orange 0.6 g/cm

B P
g/cm
1
1.1
0.9
 Project
date
Input areas are in yellow

Survey Legend
A Current product
B Competitor B
C Competitor C

nts Customer Opinion Survey

 C

A
1 Poor

A
B
2

B
A
B
A

C
3 Acceptable

B
A

C
C

4
B
C

5 Excellent
Copyright © 2005 Kevin Otto
Please freely distribute and modify, but properly reference and maintain this contact information in the sheet.
www.robuststrategy.com
kevin_n_otto@yahoo.com

http://www.kevinotto.com/RSS/templates/QFD Template.xls
Modified from a template from Design4X Inc.
RACI Matrix Template

Project Leadership Project Team Members Project Sub-Teams

Role

Role #1

Role #2

Role #3

Role #4

Role #5

Role #1

Role #2

Role #3

Role #4

Role #5

Role #1

Role #2
Project Deliverable
(or Activity)

Define Phase Activities

Measure Phase Activities

Analyze Phase Activities

Improve Phase Activities

Control Phase Activities

Instructional Notes for the RACI Matrix:

 The RACI Matrix is a powerful tool to assist in the identification of roles and
assigning of cross-functional responsibilities to a project deliverable or activity.

RACI represents: R - Responsibility, A - Accountable, C - Consulted, and I -

Informed

RACI Definitions:

Responsibility = person or role responsible for ensuring that the item is completed
Accountable = person or role responsible for actually doing or completing the
item
Consulted = person or role whose subject matter expertise is required in order to
complete the item
Informed = person or role that needs to be kept informed of the status of item
completion

Simply place an R, A, C, I or any appropriate combination in each of the

applicable roles for each activity Each Activity should have at least one
individual Accountable while there may be shared responsibilities depending on
the activity.
Role #3

Role #4
Project Sub-Teams
Role #5

Role #1

Role #2

Role #3

Role #4
External Contributors

Role #5
 Show Gantt for Actual Show Status?

█
Planned Actual %
# List of Start Dur Start Dur Done 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
1 Activties
Activity 1 1 5 1 2 0%
2 Activity 2 1 5 1 6 58%

█
███
██
█
3 Activity 3 2 4 2 5 35%
4 Activity 4 4 8 2 6 10%
5 Activity 5 4 1 3 8 0%
6 Activity 6 4 3 4 6 0%
7 Activity 7 5 4 4 3 0%
8 Activity 8 5 2 4 5 0%
9 Activity 9 5 2 4 6 0%
10 Activity 10 6 5 6 7 0%
11 Activity 11 6 1 7 8 0%
12 Activity 12 9 3 8 3 0%
13 Activity 13 9 6 8 6 0%
14 Activity 14 9 3 9 1 0%
15 Activity 15 9 4 9 4 0%
16 Activity 16 10 5 10 2 0%
17 Activity 17 11 2 10 5 0%
18 Activity 18 12 6 11 7 0%
19 Activity 19 12 1 11 5 0%
20 Activity 20 14 5 11 6 0%
21 Activity 21 14 8 11 1 0%
22 Activity 22 14 7 11 3 0%
23 Activity 23 15 4 12 8 0%
24 Activity 24 15 5 14 3 0%
25 Activity 25 15 8 14 5 0%
26 Activity 26 16 8 15 1 28%

██
27 Activity 27 17 2 15 2 60%

████
28 Activity 28 17 1 16 8 25%

█
29 Activity 29 17 5 16 3 5%
30 Activity 30 18 1 16 3 16%
31 Activity 31 18 1 17 4 3%

█
32 Activity 32 19 6 18 7 41%

█
█
█
33 Activity 33 19 6 21 5 31%

█
34 Activity 34 21 8 22 7 0%
35 Activity 35 21 1 23 3 0%
36 Activity 36 23 4 24 6 0%
37 Activity 37 24 1 24 3 0%
38 Activity 38 24 6 24 5 0%
39 Activity 39 24 7 24 8 0%
40 Activity 40 24 3 24 2 0%
 What is current week? 3

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
█
The Cause and Effect matrix is used to understand the relationship between KPIVs and KPOVs. It can help initiate
The KPIVs are inputs to vary and record, the KPOV is a response to measure. These experiments, natural or DOE,
The C&E matrix also provides the initial input to the process FMEA. Whenever a KPOV drifts out of specification, th
When that happens, the CE matrix should have listed whatever the "Cause" was, as a KPIV going out of specificatio

Cause and Effect Matrix

Customer
Importance
Customer Rank 10 5 3

1 2 3 4
Delivery

Delivery
Packagi

Defects
Process Hours

Cost
ng
Step KPIV

Delivery
1 Step 1 9 1 1
allocation time

2 Delivery units 5 9 9
Process Steps & Key Process Input Variables

3 Step 2 # Resources 1 9 9
4 Experience 1 9 5
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Reverse Total 0 0 0 0
Reverse Score 0 0 0 0
Reverse Rank 1 1 1 1

35 25 30

$2 $5
50 00
Target

2
LSL

$1
00
USL

0
 Please freely distribute and modify, but properly reference and

POVs. It can help initiate experimental investigations.

periments, natural or DOE, can be analyzed.
rifts out of specification, that is an "Effect".
IV going out of specification.

Key Process Output Variables

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

0
0
1
 © 2005 Kevin Otto
kevin_n_otto@yahoo.com www.kevinotto.com
nd modify, but properly reference and maintain this contact information in the sheet.
http://www.kevinotto.com/RSS/templates/C&E Matrix.xls

15

Rank Rating Total

2 98

1 122
3 82
4 70
 GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET
VARIABLE DATA RESULTS
Part Number Gage Name Appraiser A

Part Name Gage Number Appraiser B

Characteristic Specification Gage Type Appraiser C

9 11
Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed
3 10 3

APPRAISER/ PART AVERAGE

TRIAL # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. A 1 10.00 9.90 9.80 9.70 9.80 9.90 10.00 10.10 10.20 10.30 9.970
2 2 10.00 9.95 9.84 9.60 9.75 9.80 9.90 10.20 10.20 10.15 9.939
3 3 10.00 9.90 9.80 9.70 9.80 9.90 10.00 10.10 10.20 10.30 9.970
4 AVE 10.00 9.92 9.81 9.67 9.78 9.87 9.97 10.13 10.20 10.25 xa= 9.960
5 R 0.00 0.05 0.04 0.10 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.15 ra= 0.069
6. B 1 9.90 9.10 9.70 9.65 9.76 9.80 9.95 10.05 10.18 10.20 9.829
7 2 9.00 9.10 9.75 9.50 9.90 9.90 9.90 10.20 10.22 10.30 9.777
8 3 9.70 9.15 9.80 9.70 9.80 9.90 9.80 10.10 10.15 10.10 9.820
9 AVE 9.53 9.12 9.75 9.62 9.82 9.87 9.88 10.12 10.18 10.20 xb= 9.809
10 R 0.90 0.05 0.10 0.20 0.14 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.07 0.20 rb= 0.206
11. C 1 10.20 9.20 9.90 9.60 9.70 9.80 9.95 9.95 10.10 10.20 9.860
12 2 10.10 9.30 9.95 9.55 9.80 9.80 9.90 9.90 10.10 10.20 9.860
13 3 10.05 9.30 9.60 9.70 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 10.15 10.10 9.810
14 AVE 10.12 9.27 9.82 9.62 9.77 9.80 9.88 9.88 10.12 10.17 xc= 9.843
15 R 0.15 0.10 0.35 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.10 rc= 0.130
16. PART X= 9.871
AVERAGE 9.88 9.43 9.79 9.63 9.79 9.84 9.91 10.04 10.17 10.21 Rp= 0.772
17 (ra + rb + rc) / (# OF APPRAISERS) = R= 0.135
18 xDIFF = (Max x - Min x) = xDIFF= 0.151
19 * UCLR = R x D4 = APPRAISER B C OUT OF CONTROL UCLR= 0.348

* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials. UCLR represents the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are

beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or
discard values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations.

Notes:
 GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET
VARIABLE DATA RESULTS
Part Number Gage Name Appraiser A

Part Name Gage Number Appraiser B

Characteristic Gage Type Appraiser C

Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed

3 10 3

Measurement Unit Analysis % Tolerance (Tol)

Repeatability - Equipment Variation (EV)
EV = R x K1 Trials K1 % EV = 100 (EV/Tol)
= 0.135 x 0.5907 2 0.8865 = 100(0.080/2.000)
= 0.080 3 0.5907 = 3.99
Reproducibility - Appraiser Variation (AV)
AV = {(xDIFF x K2)2 - (EV2/nr)}1/2 % AV = 100 (AV/Tol)
= {(0.151 x 0.5236)^2 - (0.080 ^2/(10 x 3))}^1/2 = 100(0.078/2.000)
= 0.078 = 3.89
Appraisers 2 3
n = parts r = trials K2 0.7087 0.5236
Repeatability & Reproducibility (GRR) % GRR = 100 (GRR/Tol)
GRR = 2
{(EV + AV )} 2 1/2
Parts K3 = 100(0.111/2.000)
= {(0.080^2 + 0.078^2)}^1/2 2 0.7087 = 5.57
= 0.111 3 0.5236 Gage system O.K
Part Variation (PV) 4 0.4464
PV = RP x K 3 5 0.4032 % PV = 100 (PV/Tol)
= 0.772 x 0.3145 6 0.3745 = 100(0.243/2.000)
= 0.243 7 0.3534 = 12.14
Tolerance (Tol) 8 0.3378
Tol = Upper - Lower 9 0.3247 ndc = 1.41(PV/GRR)
= 2.00 10 0.3145 = 1.41(0.243/0.111)
= 2.000 = 3
Gage discrimination low

For information on the theory and constants used in the form see MSA Reference Manual, Third edition.
 GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET
VARIABLE DATA RESULTS
Part Number Gage Name Appraiser A

Part Name Gage Number Appraiser B

Characteristic Specification Gage Type Appraiser C

Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed

APPRAISER/ PART AVERAGE

TRIAL # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. A 1
2 2
3 3
4 AVE xa=
5 R ra=
6. B 1
7 2
8 3
9 AVE xb=
10 R rb=
11. C 1
12 2
13 3
14 AVE xc=
15 R rc=
16. PART X=
AVERAGE Rp=
17 (ra + rb + rc) / (# OF APPRAISERS) = R=
18 xDIFF = (Max x - Min x) = xDIFF=
19 * UCLR = R x D4 = UCLR=

* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials. UCLR represents the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are

beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or
discard values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations.

Notes:
 GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET
VARIABLE DATA RESULTS
Part Number Gage Name Appraiser A

Part Name Gage Number Appraiser B

Characteristic Gage Type Appraiser C

Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed

Measurement Unit Analysis % Tolerance (Tol)

Repeatability - Equipment Variation (EV)
EV = R x K1 Trials K1 % EV = 100 (EV/Tol)
= 2 0.8865 =
= 3 0.5907 =
Reproducibility - Appraiser Variation (AV)
AV = {(xDIFF x K2)2 - (EV2/nr)}1/2 % AV = 100 (AV/Tol)
= =
= =
Appraisers 2 3
n = parts r = trials K2 0.7087 0.5236
Repeatability & Reproducibility (GRR) % GRR = 100 (GRR/Tol)
GRR = 2
{(EV + AV )} 2 1/2
Parts K3 =
= 2 0.7087 =
= 3 0.5236
Part Variation (PV) 4 0.4464
PV = RP x K 3 5 0.4032 % PV = 100 (PV/Tol)
= 6 0.3745 =
= 7 0.3534 =
Tolerance (Tol) 8 0.3378
Tol = Upper - Lower 9 0.3247 ndc = 1.41(PV/GRR)
= 0.00 10 0.3145 =
= 0.000 = 3
Gage discrimination low

For information on the theory and constants used in the form see MSA Reference Manual, Third edition.
 Master Appraiser Op1_Trial Within Op1 with Op2_ Op2_
Test Samples Rating 1 Op1_ Trial 2 Op1 standard Trial1 Trial 2
1 Okay Okay Okay 1 1 Okay Defective
2 Okay Okay Defective 0 0 Defective Okay
3 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
4 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
5 Okay Okay Defective 0 0 Okay Okay
6 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
7 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
8 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
9 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
10 Okay Okay Okay 1 1 Okay Okay
11 Okay Okay Defective 0 0 Okay Okay
12 Okay Okay Okay 1 1 Defective Defective
13 Defective Okay Okay 1 0 Defective Defective
14 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
15 Okay Okay Okay 1 1 Okay Okay
16 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
17 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
18 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
19 Defective Defective Defective 1 1 Defective Defective
20 Okay Okay Okay 1 1 Okay Okay
# Matched 17 16
# Inspected 20 20
% Agree 85.00% 80.00%
Within Op2 with Between Ops All Ops vs
Op2 standard Match Standard
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 0 0
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 1 0 0
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
18 17 15 14
20 20 20 20
90.00% 85.00% 75.00% 70.00%
 Confidence Level (Power) 95% Confidence Factors
Confidence Interval 0.05 Percent
Population (if known) 700 80%
85%
Attribute Data 90%
Percent defects (50%) 50% 95%
Sample Size (Unknown Population) 384 96%
Sample Size for Known Population 248 97%
98%
Variable Data 99%
Standard Deviation ([High-Low]/6) 0.167 Defaults
Sample Size (Unknown Population) 43 0.05
Sample Size for Known Population 41 50%
0.167
 Confidence Factors
Z
1.28 Variable Data Example From Juran QC Handbook pg 23.
1.44 Sampling to determine battery life
1.64 Estimate must be within 2 hours (confidence interval) of tru
1.96 Standard Deviation = 10.0 hours
2.06 95% confidence level
2.17 n= 96
2.33
2.58 Example 2 - Determine Average Part Length
Most production between 2.009 (low) and 2.027 (high) inch
Confidence Interval (desired width) Estimate Stdev as (2.027-2.009)/6 = .003 inches
Percent defects (Attribute - 50%) Confidence interval = +/- 0.001
Standard Deviation ([High-Low]/6) n=35
Juran QC Handbook pg 23.50

s (confidence interval) of true mean

ge Part Length
9 (low) and 2.027 (high) inches
)/6 = .003 inches
Enter process sigma level, compute PPM
Process Sigma Level -> 6
PPM 3.4
Percent 0.00034%

Enter percent, compute PPM and process sigma level

If the percent is less than 1, you must use the

percent sign after the number (e.g., 0.01%)
Percent -> 0.00034%
PPM 3.4
Process Sigma Level 6.0

Enter DPMO, compute process sigma level

DPMO -> 21900.0
Process Sigma Level 3.5
% Polyster Observed Tensile Strength Totals (yi)
15 7 7 15 11 9 49
20 12 17 12 18 18 77
25 14 18 18 19 19 88
30 19 25 22 19 23 108
35 7 10 11 15 11 54

Total 376
141376
The Squares Table

49 49 225 121 81
144 289 144 324 324
196 324 324 361 361
361 625 484 361 529
49 100 121 225 121

Sum of Sum of Squares 6292

Average of Squared totals 5655.04
Total Sum of Squares 636.96

Sum of Total Squares 30654

Division factor 0.2
Average of Squared totals 5655.04
Sum of Squares for
treatments 475.76

Sum of Squares for Error 161.2

Average (yibar)
9.8
15.4
17.6
21.6
10.8

15.04 Average
5655.04

2.866081402016
 Degrees of Mean
Source of Variation Sum of Squares Freedom Squares Fo Fcrit Status
Polyster Weight % 475.56 4 118.89 14.75062 2.866081 Reject Null
Error 161.2 20 8.06
Total 636.76