Experimental Design .1.

Improve a process by increasing performance

Establish Statistical control
Improving an existing product/Developing new
product
Factor: A variable that is changed, and results
observed
Level: A value that is assigned to change the
factor

Experimental Design .2.

Treatment condition (TC): The set of

conditions for a test in an experiment
OA: Simplified method of putting together
the TC, so that design is balanced. Factors
can be analyzed singly/combination
Interaction: Two or more factors produce a
result that is different than their separate
effect

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
ONE FACTOR AT A TIME
Treatment
conditions

Factors/ Levels

Response

NF

1
1
1
1
2
1

1
1
1
1
1
2

y0
yA
yB
yC
yD
yNF

1
2
3
4
5
NTC

1
2
1
1
1
1

1
1
2
1
1
1

1
1
1
2
1
1

FACTORS

L1

L2

Speed (m/s)

25

35

Pressure (Pa)

50

75

Time (min)

10

Treatment
condition

Speed

Pressure

Time

Response

(1) 25

(1) 50

(1) 5

2.8

(2) 35

(1) 50

(1) 5

3.4

(1) 25

(2) 75

(1) 5

4.6

(1) 25

(1) 50

(2) 10

3.7

ES = yS y0 = 3.4-2.8 =0.6; EP = yP y0 = 4.6-2.8 =1.8;

ET = yT y0 = 3.7-2.8 =0.9

One-At-A-Time
Speed
(m/s)

Pressure
(Pa)

Time
(Min)

Response

1(25)

1(50)

1(5)

2.8

2(35)

1(50)

1(5)

3.4

1(25)

2(75)

1(5)

4.6

1(25)

1(50)

2(10)

3.7

e s = y s -y o = 3.4-2.8=0.6
e p = y p - y o = 4.6-2.8= 1.8
e t = y t - y o = 3.7-2.8 = 0.9

Run

Water

Pruning

Phosph.

Result

-1

-1

-1

5.6

-1

10.9

-1

9.7

-1

8.2

OUTPUT
=X1 + X2F1 +X3F2 + X4F3= 8.6+0.35F1+0.95F2+1.7F3
X1 = Average of 4 run results
X2 = Coefficient for first factor (F1)
X3 = Coefficient for second factor (F2)
X4 = Coefficient for third factor (F3)

5.6 + 10.9 + 9.7 + 8.2

X3=
X 1 =
= 8.6
4

5.6 10.9 + 9.7 + 8.2

X2=
= 0.35
4

0.95

X4= 1.70

Example 2: Customer
satisfaction in a Restaurant

Various factors involved

F1:Degree of friendliness
F2:Menu delivery
F3:Bill accuracy
F4:Problem resolution

DEGREE OF
FRIENDLINESS
MENU DELIVERY
PROMPTNESS
BILLING
ACCURACY
PROBLEM
RESOLUTION
EFFECTIVENESS

Low (-1)

High(+1)

Average

Excellent

1 min

5 min

75%

95%

Average

Excellent

Experiment

F1:Degree of
Friendliness

F2:Menu
delivery

F3:Bill
accuracy

Avg/Excel

5 min/ 1
min

75%/95%

-1

-1

F4:Proble
m
resolution
Avg/Excel

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

Customer satisfaction
on a scale of 1 to 10
2.8

Average

5min

75%

Average

Excel

5min

75%

Excel

3.9

Average

1min

75%

Average

3.5

Excel

1min

75%

Excel

5.6

Average

5min

95%

Excel

3.2

Excel

5min

95%

Average

5.0

Average

1min

95%

Average

4.7

Excel

1min

95%

Excel

7.0

Average= 4.47

Experiment

Factor
A

Factor
B

Factor
C

Response

-1

-1

-1

Y1

-1

-1

Y2

-1

-1

Y3

-1

Y4

-1

-1

Y5

-1

Y6

-1

Y7

Y8

Effect of
Factors
A

y5 + y 6 + y 7 + y8 y1 + y 2 + y3 + y 4

4
4

y3 + y 4 + y 7 + y8 y1 + y 2 + y5 + y 6

4
4

y 2 + y 4 + y 6 + y8 y1 + y3 + y5 + y 7

4
4

Average
satisfaction
at
LOW level
(-1)

Average
satisfaction
at HIGH
level
(1)

Difference

Slope

Friendliness

3.6

5.4

1.8

0.9

Menu
Delivery

5.2

3.7

-1.5

-0.75

Accuracy

4.0

5.0

1.0

0.50

Resolution

4.4

4.5

0.1

0.05

Satisfaction (Y) = 4.47+ 0.9*Friendliness 0.75*Menu del +

0.50*Accuracy + 0.05*problem resolution.

Satisfaction = 4.47+0.90*Friendliness-0.75*Promptness+
0.50*Accuracy+0.05*problem Resolution effectiveness
Slope = ?
Friendliness
Low=(2.8+3.5+3.2+4.7)/4=3.55
High=(3.9+5.6+5+7)/4=5.375
Slope = (5.375-3.55)/1-(-1)=1.825/2
=0.9125

S
A
T
I
S
F 8
A
C 6
T
I 4
O
N 2
75%

% Correctly produced bills

95%

Performance satisfaction function

Example : Iron Casting

Trial
No.

Respo
nse

A1

B1

C1

D1

E1

F1

G1

89

A1

B1

C1

D2

E2

F2

G2

55

A1

B2

C2

D1

E1

F2

G2

38

A1

B2

C2

D2

E2

F1

G1

44

A2

B1

C2

D1

E2

F1

G2

83

A2

B1

C2

D2

E1

F2

G1

16

A2

B2

C1

D1

E2

F2

G1

66

A2

B2

C1

D2

E1

F1

G2

55

Factors

Level
1

Level
2

Sand Compact

55mm

49mm

Iron Temp

RT

Chill

Clay Addition

6.5lb

16lb

Mould Hardness

Low

High

Time

4 min

17 min

Seacone addition

6.7 lb

15 lb

Sand Addition

150 lb

Level
1*
Level 2

56.5

60.8

66.3

69.0

49.5

67.8

53.8

55.0

50.8

45.3

42.5

62.0

43.8

57.8

1.5

10.0

21.0

26.5

12.5

24.0

4.0

*Level 1 =(89+55+38+44)/4 = 226/4=56.5

/2= 13.25, T=55.3
Maximum difference = 26.5 =
Any difference 13.25 is Significant i.e. D2, F2, & C2
=T- (T- D2)+ (T- F2)- (T-C2)= 55.8- (55.8-42.5)+(55.8-43.8)(55.8-45.3)= 20%

Example 3: TILE Making Experiment

Expt 1

No. of

defective

tiles

A1

B1

C1

D1

E1

F1

G1

16

A1

B1

C1

D2

E2

F2

G2

17

A1

B2

C2

D1

E1

F2

G2

12

A1

B2

C2

D2

E2

F1

G1

06

A2

B1

C2

D1

E2

F1

G2

06

A2

B1

C2

D2

E1

F2

G1

68

A2

B2

C1

D1

E2

F2

G1

42

A2

B2

C1

D2

E1

F1

G2

26

Total Defective
Defective
A1

51

12.75

A2

142

35.50

B1

107

26.75

B2

86

21.50

C1

101

25.25

C2

92

23.00

D1

76

19.00

D2

11.7

29.25

E1

122

30.50

E2

71

17.75

F1

54

13.50

F2

139

34.75

G1

132

33.00

C
%Defective
%Defective

Factors

36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

Graphic Display of Factors on

% Defectives

Orthogonal Arrays

If there are N options or factors, the full optimization

space contains 2N combinations.
This space is called a full factorial design.
A fractional factorial design is a subset of the full
factorial design.
An Orthogonal Array (OA) or Taguchi design is a wellknown approach to fractional factorial designs.
An OA allows us to determine the effect of a factor in
the presence of other factors using a reduced space.

Definition of
Orthogonal Arrays

OA is N x k matrix of zeroes and ones.

The columns are interpreted as options.
Each row defines a compiler setting.
An OA has the property that two arbitrary
columns contain the patterns
00011011

equally often.
Each option Oi is turned on and off equally
often.
If Oi is turned on, then each other option Oj is
turned on and off equally often.

Orthogonal Array (Example)

000000000000000
101010101010101
011001100110011
110011001100110
000111100001111
101101001011010
011110000111100
110100101101001
000000011111111
101010110101010
011001111001100
110011010011001
000111111110000
101101010100101
011110011000011
110100110010110

Response Table
Obs. Freq.

+1

-1

+1

-1

+1

-1

Y1

Y1

Y1

Y1

Y2

Y2

Y2

Y2

Y3

Y3

Y3

Y3

y4

y4

Y4

Y4

Y5

Y5

Y5

Y5

Y6

Y6

Y6

Y6

Y7

Y7

Y7

Y7

Y8

y8

y8

Y8

No. of
data
values

Average

A1

A2

B1

B2

C1

C2

Est. main
effect

A1-A2

B1-B2

C1-C2

Expt.

P1

Q1

R1

S1

P1

Q2

R2

S2

P1

Q3

R3

S3

P2

Q1

R2

S3

P2

Q2

R3

S1

P2

Q3

R1

S2

P3

Q1

R3

S2

P3

Q2

R1

S3

P3

Q3

R2

S1

MODEL Y= +Pi+Qj+Rk+Si+, where is Error

Total experiments to be conducted= 3x3=9 (Fraction of 81)

4 Factors
Exp.

Response

P1

Q1

R1

S1

Y1

P1

Q2

R2

S2

Y2

P1

Q3

R3

S3

Y3

P2

Q1

R2

S3

Y4

P2

Q2

R3

S1

Y5

P2

Q3

R1

S2

Y6

P3

Q1

R3

S2

Y7

P3

Q2

R1

S3

Y8

P3

Q3

R2

S1

Y9

Observed
Response

1
1
1
1
-1
-1
-1
-1

1
1
-1
-1
1
1
-1
-1

1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1

Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8

1= High and 1=Low

Orthogonal Array (OA 8 )

TC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2

2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2

3
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1

4
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

5
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1

6
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1

7
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
2

L 8 Array

No.

COLUMN NUMBER
3
4
5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2

1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2

1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1

3
2

1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1

7
4

1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1

1
2
2
1
2
1
1
2