DOE (Fractional Factorial Design-Revised)

Design of Experiment
(Fractional Factorial Design)

Fractional Factorial Design
Learning Objectives
 Understand the Need for Fractional Factorial
Design
 Screening Design
 Blocking
 Characteristics of Fractional Factorial

 AliasRelationships
 Design Resolutions
 Additional Topics
 Foldover Designs
 Saturated Designs
2
Supplier Six Sigma Modular Training
Screening Designs
At the beginning of investigations, it is quite common to have
a long list of factors as potentially important influences on the
response under study.
As the number of factors in a 2k factorial design increases,
the number of runs required increases exponentially !
Factors Runs Required
1000
4 16
800
5 32
Runs Required
600
6 64
400
7 128
200
8 256
0
9 512 0 2 4 6 8 10
Factors
10 1024 3
Screening Designs
A screening design is an experimental design
whose purpose is to distinguish influential factors
from non-influential factors, as efficiently as
possible.
A fractional factorial design is typically used for
this screening purpose, and comprises a subset of
the runs of a full factorial design.
4
Warm up Example
For a certain process, there are 3 factors of
potential interest.
A 23 factorial design (8 runs) would have been a

suitable experimental design.
However, resources of time and cost permit only

4 runs.
5
Warm up Example
Which of the four runs would
you choose?
X2
+
X3
– –
X1
– +
6
Warm up Example
X2 X2
X3 X3
X1 X1
X1=-1 X1X2=1
Why wouldn’t you choose these runs?

7
Warm up Example
X2
X3
X1
X1X2X3=+1
Why choose this one? What do I lose?

8
Warm up Example
“No such thing

as a free lunch!”
9
3-1
2 Fractional Factorial Design
 Relationship between X3 and X1X2, between
X2 and X1X3, between X1 and X2X3?
Run X1 X2 X3 X1X2 X1X3 X2X3
2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1
3 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1
5 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1
Can I choose 1, 4 6 and

7 for my half fractional
factorial design?
10
Example 1- 2 4-1
Fractional
A little more complicated example:

 Determine the effect of bake time, bake
temperature, water content and material
batches on the breaking strength of a ceramic
material.
 Due to cost issue, you can only perform 8
runs to study an otherwise 24 (16 runs)
factorial design.
11
Example 1- 2 4-1
Fractional
Consider the 24 factorial design:
Two possible sets of 8 runs:

Run X1 X2 X3 X4 X1X2 X1X3 X1X4 X2X3 X2X4 X3X4 X1X2X3 X1X2X4 X1X3X4 X2X3X4 X1X2X3X4
1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 a) the set where
2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1
3 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1
X1X2X3X4 = 1
4 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 1
5 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 -1
6 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 1 b) the set where
7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1
8 1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1
9 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1
X1X2X3X4 = -1
10 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1
11 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1
12 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1
13 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1
14 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1
15 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 -1
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
12
Example 1- 2 4-1
Fractional
 The set of 8 runs for which X1X2X3X4 = 1 is shown below:
1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1
2 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1
3 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1
4 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 1
5 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1
6 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 1
7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
 It can be seen that the pattern of levels for factor X 4 is identical to

the pattern of levels for the interaction X 1X2X3.
 In fact, for this design the pattern of levels for every individual
factor and interaction is identical to one other individual factor or
interaction.
13

The design in example 1 is called a 24-1 fractional factorial
design, where
2 = number of levels for each factor
4 = number of factors
1 = degree of fractionation of the corresponding
full factorial design (in this case 2-1 = ½ of
the corresponding 24 factorial design)
The general notation for a 2-level fractional factorial

design is 2k-p, where
2 = number of levels for each factor
k = number of factors
p = degree of fractionation, or number of
generators
14
Alias Relationships
As mentioned earlier, the pattern of levels for
factor X4 in Example is identical to the pattern
of levels for the interaction X1X2X3.
X4 and X1X2X3 are called aliases of each other.
An alias is an individual factor or interaction

whose pattern of levels in an experiment is
identical to that of another factor or interaction.
15
Alias Relationships
In a fractional factorial design, every individual factor and
interaction has an alias.
The calculated effect of any factor or interaction is an

estimate of the sum of the effects of the aliased variables,
e.g. the calculated effect of X4 (or of X1X2X3) is an estimate
of the sum of the effects of X4 and X1X2X3.
The effect of the factor X4 is said to be confounded with the

effect of the X1X2X3 interaction.
16
Example 2
For the 24-1 fractional factorial design in example 1, determine the
alias for each factor and interaction.
1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1
2 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1
3 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1
4 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 1
5 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1
6 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 1
7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Note : X4 = X1 X2 X3 , i.e. X4 is generated from X1 X2 X3
17
Example 2
From X4 = X1 X2 X3
Multiply both sides by X4, X4 X 4 = X1 X2 X3 X4

I = X1 X2 X3 X4 (1)
(Note : Xk Xk = I  1)
Multiply both sides of (1) by X1, X1 = X1 X1 X2 X3 X4

= X2 X3 X4

= X1 X3 X4

= X1 X2 X4
18
Design Resolution
Fractional factorial designs can be classified by their
resolution.
Resolution III designs are those for which no individual factor is aliased
with another individual factor, but all individual factors are aliased with at
least one 2-factor interaction.
Resolution IV designs are those for which no individual factor is aliased

with another individual factor or with any 2-factor interaction, but all 2-
factor interaction are aliased with another 2-factor interaction, and all
individual factors are aliased with a 3-factor interaction.
Resolution V designs are those for which no individual factor or 2-factor

interaction is aliased with any other individual factor or 2-factor
interaction, but at least one 2-factor interaction is aliased with a 3-factor
interaction, and at least one individual factor is aliased with a 4-factor
interaction.
19
Design Resolutions
The resolution of a 2-level fractional factorial design is the
smallest sum of the orders of aliased effects.
Resolution Smallest Sum of Orders of Aliased Effects
III 1+2
IV 1+3 , 2+2
V 1+4 , 2+3
The resolution of a fractional factorial design is often included

as a subscript in the designation of the design, e.g. 2
design.
4-1
IV
Where possible, avoid Resolution-III (RIII) designs.
20
Fractional Factorial Design-Exercise

Typical Scenario
 You are interested in studying the production process of a chemical
product in which a catalytic reaction converts substrate into a final
product.
 Your team have narrowed the list of potential influences
down to 5 factors:
 Feed Rate [10, 15]
 Catalyst [A, B]
 Agitation [100, 120]
 Temperature [140F, 180F]
 Concentration [3, 6]
 Your goal is to maximize the percentage of substrate consumed in
a reaction. Since you are in the process of are setting up the line,
you can afford to run 16 runs only.
21
DOE-Road Map for Fractional Factorial Design

State problem in “English” State problem in “English”
Establish objective Study effect of ……on……
Translate into Statistical Design of Experiments Translate into Statistical Design of Experiments
Identify Factors, levels & the response 25-1 design, Feed R, catalyst, Agitation, Temp, Conc
Create Factorial Design Create Factorial Design

Select type of Design Full or Fraction, ½ Factorial Design, 25-1 design
Factors,center points, replicates,blocks 1 Replicate, no block
Run the Experiment Run the Experiment

Data Tabulation Data Tabulation
Analyze Factorial Design Full Factorial Fractional Analyze Factorial Design

-Pareto chart, Factorial plot DOE Factorial DOE -Pareto chart, Factorial plot
Interpretation, Conclusion With Interpretation, Conclusion With

Engineering Knowledge & Statistics Engineering Knowledge & Statistics
State practical implications State practical implications

in “English” in “English”
22
½ Fractional Factorial Design - Exercise

Create the ½ Factorial Design.
State practical problem in “English”
 Stat > DOE>Factorial> Create
Study effect of ……on……
Factorial Design
Translate into Statistical Design of Experiments 25-1 design,

Feed R, catalyst, Agitation, Temp, Conc
1 3
Create Factorial Design
½ Factorial Design, 25-1 design
1 Replicate, no block
2
Run the Experiment
Data Tabulation
 Select 5
factors,
Analyze Factorial Design
-Pareto chart, Factorial plot
 Verify the
Design
available
Interpretation, Conclusion  Select the
With Engg. Knowledge & Statistics
½ fraction
State practical implications in “English”

23

Create the ½ Factorial
Design.
 Stat >
DOE>Factorial>
Create Factorial
Design
 5 factors, 16 runs is ½
fraction Design.
 Resolution V
24

 Did you get the same Output as this ?
 ½ Fraction
Design; 25-1
results in 16
runs.
 Run order is
same as Std
order! Why !
25

 Your teams have run the experiment and collected the response on all
the treatments.
 A Percentage React column was created to record the experiment
results.
 Open MiniTab
file:
REACT.mpj
 Analyze the
result.
 Stat >>DOE
>> Factorial
>> Analyze
Factorial
Design
 Report your
observations
26

 Design Generators
 The fact that Factor E is put into the design space of ABCD, is
shown in the Session window by the following notation:
Alias Structure
 Design Generators: E = ABCD
I + ABCDE
Factors: 5 Base Design: 5, 16 Resolution: V A + BCDE
Runs: 16 Replicates: 1 Fraction: 1/2 B + ACDE
Blocks: none Center pts (total): 0 C + ABDE
D + ABCE
E + ABCD
Design Generators: E = ABCD
AB + CDE
AC + BDE
 Resolution V designs AD + BCE
AE + BCD
 Any effect you see for any two-way interaction BC + ADE
is confounded with a three way interaction. BD + ACE

BE + ACD
Hence, the design resolution is V. CD + ABE
CE + ABD
DE + ABC
27

Alias Structure
 Identity statement and confounding
I + ABCDE
 The Session window also displays the alias or
confounding structure of the design.
A + BCDE  The Key to the confounding or alias pattern for the whole
B + ACDE design is given in the identify statement:
C + ABDE  I + ABCDE
D + ABCE
E + ABCD
 I represents the square of any term. For example, A2
AB + CDE or B2 or (AB)2, etc.
AC + BDE
 To determine the confounding for a term, simply
AD + BCE
AE + BCD
substitute the squared term of interest for the I, then
BC + ADE divide the entire statement by the term.
BD + ACE
 Example, BC is confounded with
BE + ACD
CD + ABE  ((BC)2+ ABCD)/ (BC) = BC +ADE
CE + ABD  Therefore, BC and ADE are confounded with each other. This
DE + ABC means that any effect attributed to the B*C interaction cannot
be separated from any effect caused by the A*D*E
interaction. 28
½ Fractional Factorial Design - Normal

Probability Plot
Both the normal probability plot and the Pareto chart of the
effects display:
 Standardized effects(t-value) when the model is not saturated (error
term present)
 Unstandardized effects(actual values) when the model is saturated.
 Notice that you can use the 2 effects
Pareto
Normal Chart of
Probability theofEffects
Plot the Effects plots to identify active effects when you
(response is Percent, Alpha = .10)
have a saturated model. In a saturated
B B
A: Feedrate model, MSE cannot be estimated
B: Catalyst
D C: Agitatio because there are no DF for error. In
D: Temp
BD D
E: Conc this case, you cannot use the ANOVA
1
DE BD
table in the Session window to
Normal Score
CE
E
determine whether or not the effects
0A are significant.
BC
AB
 When you cannot estimate MSE,
MINITAB uses a method described by
-1BE
AE E R.V.Lenth to find the pseudo std error
AD of the effects. The line drawn on the
DE
AC
Pareto chart and the labeling of
CD
C
-10 0 10 20 significant effects on the normal
Effect probability plot are based of this
0 10 20 Pseudo Std Error.
29
½ Fractional Factorial Design - Session

Window [ANOVA]
Estimated Effects and Coefficients for Percent (coded units)
Why no p-value ?
Term Effect Coef
Constant 65.250  Not enough of DF. Is it
Feedrate -2.000 -1.000 caused by No replicate ?
Catalyst 20.500 10.250
Agitatio 0.000 0.000
 Do we need to re-run the
Temp 12.250 6.125
whole DOE with replicate
Conc -6.250 -3.125
before we can analyze the
Feedrate*Catalyst 1.500 0.750
data ?
Feedrate*Agitatio 0.500 0.250
Feedrate*Temp -0.750 -0.375
Feedrate*Conc 1.250 0.625
Catalyst*Agitatio 1.500 0.750
Catalyst*Temp 10.750 5.375 Answer:
Catalyst*Conc 1.250 0.625
 The lack of observations to
Agitatio*Temp 0.250 0.125
have error DF. You have
Agitatio*Conc 2.250 1.125
only 15 DF, You do not
Temp*Conc -9.500 -4.750
have enough information
Analysis of Variance for Percent (coded units)
(row of data) to estimate
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P
more than 15 things.
Main Effects 5 2453.5 2453.5 490.70 * * Therefore, it is not possible
2-Way Interactions 10 877.5 877.5 87.75 * * to obtain the SSE
Residual Error 0 0.0 0.0 0.00
Total 15 3331.0
30
½ Fractional Factorial Design - Reduced
Model Effects  Stat > DOE>Factorial> Create Factorial Design

Reduced model Effects  Select Percent Reacted as Response.
 Click Terms.
 The effects plots from the reduced  Select the terms B: Catalyst, D: Temp, E:
model indicate that all of the remaining terms in the model are significant.
 Notice that MINITAB re-labels the graphs for reduced model
 Catalyst, which was factor B in the full model, is now factor A.
 Temp, which was factor D in the full model, is now factor B.
 Conc, which was factor E in full model, is now factor C.
Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects Normal Probability Plot of the Standardized Effects
(response is Percent, Alpha = .10) (response is Percent, Alpha = .10)
A: Catalyst A: Catalyst
B: Temp A B: Temp
A C: Conc 1 C: Conc
Normal Score
B
0 AB
AB
BC
-1
BC
C
-5 0 5 10 15
Standardized Effect
0 5 10 15
31
½ Fractional Factorial Design

Assessing Lack of Fit
 The analysis of variance table in the Session window shows that main
effects and two-way interactions are significant.(Both p-values are Zero)
Estimated Effects and Coefficients for Percent (coded units) Verifying model Fit
Term Effect Coef SE Coef T P
Constant 65.250 0.6626 98.47 0.000
 The lack of fit test
Catalyst 20.500 10.250 0.6626 15.47 0.000
shows no
Temp 12.250 6.125 0.6626 9.24 0.000
significant lack of
Conc -6.250 -3.125 0.6626 -4.72 0.001
fit in the model
Catalyst*Temp 10.750 5.375 0.6626 8.11 0.000
(P=0.647). Both
Temp*Conc -9.500 -4.750 0.6626 -7.17 0.000
the graphical and
numerical output
indicate that you
Analysis of Variance for Percent (coded units)
have found a
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P
good model for
Main Effects 3 2437.50 2437.50 812.500 115.66 0.000
the relationship
2-Way Interactions 2 823.25 823.25 411.625 58.59 0.000
between the
Residual Error 10 70.25 70.25 7.025
factors and
Lack of Fit 2 7.25 7.25 3.625 0.46 0.647
percent reactions
Pure Error 8 63.00 63.00 7.875
Total 15 3331.00
32
½ Fractional Factorial Design - Residuals

Storage of Fits and Residuals for Residual analysis
 Click on Storage
 Check the Fits and
Residuals Boxes.
 Click OK to go back to
the Analyze Factorial
Design menu
33

Residual Analysis
Stat > Regression>Factorial> Residuals Plots
Select FITS, RESI 1into the Fits and Residuals
Box
Click OK
Residual Model Diagnostics

Normal Plot of Residuals I Chart of Residuals
6 10
5 UCL=7.225 Residual plots
4
3
The residual plots show the model is
Residual
Residual
2
1
0
0 Mean=3.02E-14
adequate.
-1
-2  The Normal Probability Plot of
LCL=-7.225
-3
-4
Residuals is close enough to a
-10
-2 -1 0 1 2 0 5 10 15
straight line to assume that the
Normal Score Observation Number errors are normal.
Histogram of Residuals Residuals vs. Fits

 The Residuals Versus Order
4 6 Plot does not show any sign of
5 trends in the errors due to the
4
3 3 order of the experiment runs.
Frequency
Residual
2
2 1  The random pattern in the
0
-1 Residuals Versus the Fitted
1
-2 Value plot, indicates that the
-3
0 -4 errors have constant variance
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 45 55 65 75 85 95
Residual Fit
34

Checking the assumptions about the residuals
Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
(response is Percent) (response is Percent)
2 6
5
4
1
3
Normal Score
Residual
2
0 1
-1
-1
-2
-3
-2 -4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Residual Observation Order
Residuals Versus the Fitted Values Residual plots

(response is Percent)
The residual plots show the model is adequate.
6
5  The Normal Probability Plot of Residuals is

4 close enough to a straight line to assume that
3 the errors are normal.
Residual
1
 The Residuals Versus Order Plot does not
0 show any sign of trends in the errors due to the
-1 order of the experiment runs.
-2
 The random pattern in the Residuals Versus
-3
-4
the Fitted Value plot, indicates that the errors
45 55 65 75 85 95 have constant variance
Fitted Value
35
½ Fractional Factorial Design - Plots

 Main Effect Plot What can conclude from the
 Stat>DOE>Factorial>Factorial Plots plot:
 Check the Box on the Main Effect Plot.  Catalyst B produces a higher
 Click Setup, select the response, term average percent reaction than
selection Catalyst A.
Main Effects Plot (data means) for Percent Reac  On average, Temperature of
180oF is better than 140oF.
75
 Lower concentration produces
a higher percent reaction.
70
These main effects, however,

Percent Reac
65
can be misleading in the
60
presence of active
55
interactions so it is important
Catalyst Temp Conc
to look at the interaction plot
and cube plot.
36

 Interaction Plot What can conclude from the plots:
 Stat>DOE>Factorial>Factorial  The Catalyst by Temp interaction is
Plots
significant indicating that the amount
 Check the Box on the
of substrate converted to final product
Interaction Plot.
 Click
when using Catalyst B is dependent
Setup, select the
response, term selection on the temperature of the substrate.
When temp. is 140oC, the Catalyst
has little impact on the percent
Interaction Plot (data means) for Percent Reac reaction. However, at a Temp. of
90 180oF, the percent reaction is much
Catalyst higher for Catalyst B.
B 70
A
 The Catalyst by Conc. Interaction is
50
90 not significant. Notice the two parallel
Temp lines.
180 70
140
 The Temp. by Conc. Interaction is
50
significant. Observed at low conc.
Conc
3%, the mean percent reaction is
higher when Temp. is 180oC. When
at high conc.6%, temp makes
virtually no difference.
37

 Cube Plot What can conclude from the
 Stat>DOE>Factorial>Factorial Plots plots:
 Check the Box on the Cube Plot.  Finally, the cube plot clearly
 Click Setup, select the response, term shows that you obtain the
selection highest conversion of
Cube Plot (data means) for Percent Reac substrate to final product
using Catalyst B, Temp
180oF and 3% conc.
47.0 80.0
64.5 94.0
 The 94% average at this
180
combination of settings is
Temp 55.5 66.0
6
much higher than any other
Conc alternative among the
53.0 62.0
140
A B
3
experimental treatments
Catalyst
you have observed.
38
½ Fractional Factorial Design – Interpretation

State practical problem in “English”
 Recall what you have done so far:
Study effect of ……on……
 5 Factors 2 level Design; 25 = 32 runs.
 Utilize ½ Fraction Design; 25-1 =16
Translate into Statistical Design of Experiments 25-1 design, runs[Treatment Level]
Feed R, catalyst, Agitation, Temp, Conc
 Out of 5 Factors, only 3 factors are
significant:
Create Factorial Design  Catalyst, Temp, Conc.
½ Factorial Design, 25-1 design  Percent Reacted = -88.37-33.75*Catalyst
2 Replicates, no block +1.02*Temp +23.25*Conc
+0.27*Catalyst*Temp –0.16*Temp*Conc
Run the Experiment
Data Tabulation
What is the possible direction for further

Analyze Factorial Design experimentation:
-Pareto chart, Factorial plot
 A possibility for future experimentation is to
use Catalyst B, which is clearly better, and
Interpretation, Conclusion continue to experiment with new settings of
With Engg. Knowledge & Statistics
Temp. & Conc. with values close to 180oF and
3%
State practical implications in “English”
39
Factorial Design-Exercise on Center points

Scenario
 You are interested in maximizing a catalytic reaction. You decide to
use Catalyst B form the previous experiment and vary the significant
factors Temp. Conc.
 From previous experiment, the optimum is close to the settings of
180oF and 3% Concentration.
 To determine if a quadratic model is necessary to describe the
relationship between temperature, Concentration and percent
reaction near the Maximum. Open React2.MPJ
 Catalyst [A, B]
 Agitation[100, 120]
 Temperature[170oF, 190oF]
 Concentration [2, 4]
 Your goal is to maximize the percentage of substrate consumed in

a reaction. You can afford to run 1 replicate only.
40
Foldover Designs
When the confirmation runs from a RIII design differ
substantially from their prediction, the experimenter may
de-alias the 2-way interactions from the main effects by
means of a foldover design.
A foldover design is a 2-level fractional factorial design
in which the pattern of factor levels are reversed from
that in a preceding 2-level fractional factorial design.
A RIII fractional factorial design in combination with its
foldover design creates a RIV design.
41
Foldover Designs
3-1
 The foldover design matrix for a 2 III design is
given below:
Run X1 X2 X3
1 -1 -1 1
2 1 -1 -1
3 -1 1 -1
4 1 1 1
5 1 1 -1
6 -1 1 1
Foldover Design
7 1 -1 1
8 -1 -1 -1
42
Example 4
7-4
 A 2 III design was performed with the following
results:
Run X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 Response
1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 38.4
2 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 47.7
3 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 36.4
4 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 51.0
5 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 48.6
6 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 11.2
7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 38.7
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8.7
43
Example 4
 MiniTab’s Stat  DOE  Create Factorial
Design
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
44
Example 4
 Create Factorial Design  Designs
(1)
(2)
45
Example 4
 Create Factorial Design  Designs 
Generators
46
Example 4
 Create Factorial Design  Options . . .
47
Example 4
Alias Structure:
X1 = X2X5 = X3X6 = X4X7
X2 = X1X5 = X3X7 = X4X6
X3 = X1X6 = X2X7 = X4X5
X4 = X1X7 = X2X6 = X3X5 (=
X1X2X3)
X5 = X1X2 = X3X4 = X6X7
X6 = X1X3 = X2X4 = X5X7
X7 = X1X4 = X2X3 = X5X6
(Interactions involving more than 2 factors ignored)

48
Example 4
Ignoring interactions involving more than 2 factors,
Estimate of (X1 + X2X5 + X3X6 + X4X7) = - 5.4
Estimate of (X4 + X3X5 + X2X6 + X1X7 = 1.6
Estimate of (X5 + X1X2 + X3X4 + X6X7) = -11.4
Estimate of (X6 + X1X3 + X2X4 + X5X7) = -1.7
Estimate of (X7 + X2X3 + X1X4 + X5X6) = 0.26
Sample mean of the 8 measured responses = 35.1
49
Example 4
4
Possible interpretations: 0
X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 Factor
Calculated Effect
a) X1, X3 and X6 are significant -4
b) X1, X3 and X13 are significant -8
c) X1, X6 and X16 are significant -12
d) X3, X6 and X36 are significant

e) other less obvious
interpretations are also possible
50
Example 4A
Design
51
Example 4A
 Create Factorial Design  Options . . .
(1)
(2)
52
Example 4A
7-4
 The 2 III foldover design yielded the following
results:
Run X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 Response
1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 36.7
2 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 35.0
3 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 56.4
4 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 31.9
5 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 17.8
6 -1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 29.0
7 1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 12.6
8 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 37.6
53
Example 4A
Alias Structure:
X1 = -X2X5 = -X3X6 = -X4X7
X2 = -X1X5 = -X3X7 = -X4X6
X3 = -X1X6 = -X2X7 = -X4X5
X4 = -X3X5 = -X2X6 = -X1X7
X5 = -X1X2 = -X3X4 = -X6X7
X6 = -X1X3 = -X2X4 = -X5X7
X7 = -X2X3 = -X1X4 = -X5X6
(Interactions involving more than 2 factors ignored)
54
Example 4A
Ignoring interactions involving more than 2 factors,
Estimate of (X1 - X2X5 - X3X6 - X4X7) = - 1.3
Estimate of (X3 - X1X6 - X2X7 - X4X5) = 7.9
Estimate of (X4 - X3X5 - X2X6 - X1X7 = - 4.6
Sample mean of the 8 measured responses = 32.1
55
Example 4A
Estimate of X1 = ½[-5.4 + (-1.3)] = - 3.344
Estimate of X2 = ½[-1.4 + (-2.5)] = - 1.944
Estimate of X3 = ½[-8.3 + 7.9] = - 0.206
Estimate of X4 = ½[0.3 + (-4.6)] = - 2.156
Estimate of X5 = ½[1.6 + 1.1] = 1.356
Estimate of X6 = ½[-11.4 + (-7.8)]= - 9.606
Estimate of X7 = ½[-1.7 + 1.7] = - 0.031
Sample mean of the 16 measured responses
= ½[35.1 + 32.1] = 33.606
56
Example 4A
Estimate of X2X5 + X3X6 + X4X7 = ½[-5.4 - (-1.3)] = -

2.094
Estimate of X1X5 + X3X7 + X4X6 = ½[-1.4 - (-2.5)] =
0.556
Estimate of X1X6 + X2X7 + X4X5 = ½[-8.3 - 7.9] = - 8.081
Estimate of X3X5 + X2X6 + X1X7 = ½[0.3 - (-4.6)] =
2.419
Estimate of X1X2 + X3X4 + X6X7 = ½[1.6 - 1.1] = 0.231
Estimate of X1X3 + X2X4 + X5X7 = ½[-11.4 - (-7.8)] = -
1.806
Estimate of X2X3 + X1X4 + X5X6 = ½[-1.7 - 1.7] = - 1.681
57
Example 4A
 MiniTab’s Stat  DOE  Analyze Factorial
Design
58
Example 4A
MiniTab’s Session Window (1A)
Fractional Factorial Fit
Estimated Effects and Coefficients for Response (coded units)
Term Effect Coef StDev Coef T P

Constant 33.606 1.481 22.69 0.028
A -6.687 -3.344 1.481 -2.26 0.265
B -3.887 -1.944 1.481 -1.31 0.415
C -0.413 -0.206 1.481 -0.14 0.912
D -4.313 -2.156 1.481 -1.46 0.383
E 2.712 1.356 1.481 0.92 0.528
F -19.213 -9.606 1.481 -6.49 0.097
G -0.062 -0.031 1.481 -0.02 0.987
59
Example 4A
MiniTab’s Session Window (1B)
Term Effect Coef StDev Coef T P

A*B 0.463 0.231 1.481 0.16 0.901
A*C -3.613 -1.806 1.481 -1.22 0.437
A*D -3.362 -1.681 1.481 -1.14 0.460
A*E 1.113 0.556 1.481 0.38 0.771
A*F -16.162 -8.081 1.481 -5.46 0.115
A*G 4.837 2.419 1.481 1.63 0.350
B*E -4.188 -2.094 1.481 -1.41 0.392
60
Example 4A
MiniTab’s Session Window (2)
Alias Structure (up to order 3)
A + B*C*D + B*F*G + C*E*G + D*E*F
B + A*C*D + A*F*G + C*E*F + D*E*G
C + A*B*D + A*E*G + B*E*F + D*F*G
D + A*B*C + A*E*F + B*E*G + C*F*G
E + A*C*G + A*D*F + B*C*F + B*D*G
F + A*B*G + A*D*E + B*C*E + C*D*G
G + A*B*F + A*C*E + B*D*E + C*D*F
A*B + C*D + F*G
A*C + B*D + E*G
A*D + B*C + E*F
A*E + C*G + D*F
A*F + B*G + D*E
A*G + B*F + C*E
B*E + C*F + D*G
61
Example 4A
Design
62
Example 4A
Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects

(response is Response, Alpha = .10)
F
AF
A
AG
D
BE
B
AC
AD
E
AE
AB
C
G
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
63
Example 4A
Normal Probability Plot of the Standardized Effects

1
Normal Score
A
-1
AF
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2
Standardized Effect
64
Example 4A
Significant effects : X6 = - 9.606

X1X6 + X2X7 + X4X5 = - 8.081
X1 = - 3.344
Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects
Most plausible interpretation :
F
AF
X1 , X6 and X1X6
50
A
AG
40
D
X1 = Low BE
30 B
Effect
AC
AD
20
E
AE
10 X1 = High AB
C
G
0
X6 = Low X6 = High 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
65
Foldover Designs
 While a RIII fractional factorial design in
combination with its foldover design creates a
RIV design, it is not possible to
 To create a RV design from a RIII design in
combination with its foldover design.
 To create a RV design from a RIV design in
combination with its foldover design
66
Saturated Designs
A saturated design is an experimental design in which the

effects of a specified number of factors are investigated
using the minimum number of runs.
The minimum practical number of runs for k factors is k+1.
Saturated designs are intended to evaluate main effects

only.But remember it has alias.
67
Saturated Designs
For saturated designs with no replicate, there are
no degrees of freedom for error. Hence ANOVA
for significance of factors is not possible.
The significance of the factors’ effect may be

assessed through
Pareto
Normal Probability Plot
68
Example 5
 Identify the significant factors for the 2 7-4
experiment below:
Factors Response
Run
A B C D E F G Y
1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 18
2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 20
3 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 12
4 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 10
5 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 12
6 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 14
7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 19
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 21
69
Example 5
Design
(1)
(2)
70
Example 5
 Create Factorial Design  Designs
71
Example 5
Design
72
Example 5
MiniTab’s Session Window
Term Effect Coef

Constant 15.7500
A 1.0000 0.5000
B -0.5000 -0.2500
C 1.5000 0.7500
D -1.0000 -0.5000
E 1.0000 0.5000
F 7.5000 3.7500
G 1.0000 0.5000
73
Example 5
Design
74
Example 5
Pareto Chart of the Effects

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
75
Example 5
Normal Probability Plot of the Effects

1.5
F
1.0
0.5
Normal Score
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
0 4 8
Effect
76
Example 5
 MiniTab’s Stat  DOE  Factorial Plots
(1) (2)
77
Example 5
 Factorial Plots  Setup
78
Example 5
Main Effects Plot
-1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1
19.8750
17.8125
Response
15.7500
13.6875
11.6250
A B C D E F G
79
End of Topic
What question do you have?
80

DOE (Fractional Factorial Design-Revised)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DOE (Fractional Factorial Design-Revised)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Experiment

(Fractional Factorial Design)

 Characteristics of Fractional Factorial

A 23 factorial design (8 runs) would have been a

However, resources of time and cost permit only

Why wouldn’t you choose these runs?

Why choose this one? What do I lose?

“No such thing

Can I choose 1, 4 6 and

A little more complicated example:

Two possible sets of 8 runs:

 It can be seen that the pattern of levels for factor X 4 is identical to

Fractional Factorial Design

The general notation for a 2-level fractional factorial

X4 and X1X2X3 are called aliases of each other.

An alias is an individual factor or interaction

The calculated effect of any factor or interaction is an

The effect of the factor X4 is said to be confounded with the

Note : X4 = X1 X2 X3 , i.e. X4 is generated from X1 X2 X3

Multiply both sides by X4, X4 X 4 = X1 X2 X3 X4

Multiply both sides of (1) by X1, X1 = X1 X1 X2 X3 X4

Multiply both sides of (1) by X2, X2 = X1 X2 X2 X3 X4

Multiply both sides of (1) by X3, X3 = X1 X2 X3 X3 X4

Resolution IV designs are those for which no individual factor is aliased

Resolution V designs are those for which no individual factor or 2-factor

The resolution of a fractional factorial design is often included

Fractional Factorial Design-Exercise

DOE-Road Map for Fractional Factorial Design

Create Factorial Design Create Factorial Design

Run the Experiment Run the Experiment

Analyze Factorial Design Full Factorial Fractional Analyze Factorial Design

Interpretation, Conclusion With Interpretation, Conclusion With

State practical implications State practical implications

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Exercise

Translate into Statistical Design of Experiments 25-1 design,

State practical implications in “English”

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Exercise

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Exercise

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Exercise

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Exercise

is confounded with a three way interaction. BD + ACE

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Exercise

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Normal

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Session

Model Effects  Stat > DOE>Factorial> Create Factorial Design

½ Fractional Factorial Design

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Residuals

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Residuals

Residual Model Diagnostics

Histogram of Residuals Residuals vs. Fits

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Residuals

Residuals Versus the Fitted Values Residual plots

5  The Normal Probability Plot of Residuals is

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Plots

These main effects, however,

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Plots

½ Fractional Factorial Design - Plots

½ Fractional Factorial Design – Interpretation

What is the possible direction for further

Factorial Design-Exercise on Center points

 Your goal is to maximize the percentage of substrate consumed in

(Interactions involving more than 2 factors ignored)

b) X1, X3 and X13 are significant -8