Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 67 views

    Desingn of Experiments ch07

    Uploaded by

    kannappanrajendran
    The document discusses blocking in factorial experiments. It explains that in a blocked factorial design, the error term represents the interaction between treatment factors and blocks. It also discusses how to modify prediction equations to account for block effects. Finally, it emphasizes the importance of run order and blocking, even when no obvious nuisance factors are present, to avoid aliasing effects if the entire experiment cannot be completed as planned. Running experiments in blocks helps ensure meaningful results can still be obtained even if a block is lost.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Desingn of Experiments ch07

    Uploaded by

    kannappanrajendran
    67 views5 pages
    The document discusses blocking in factorial experiments. It explains that in a blocked factorial design, the error term represents the interaction between treatment factors and blocks. It also discusses how to modify prediction equations to account for block effects. Finally, it emphasizes the importance of run order and blocking, even when no obvious nuisance factors are present, to avoid aliasing effects if the entire experiment cannot be completed as planned. Running experiments in blocks helps ensure meaningful results can still be obtained even if a block is lost.

    Original Title

    Desingn Of Experiments ch07

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses blocking in factorial experiments. It explains that in a blocked factorial design, the error term represents the interaction between treatment factors and blocks. It also discusses how to modify prediction equations to account for block effects. Finally, it emphasizes the importance of run order and blocking, even when no obvious nuisance factors are present, to avoid aliasing effects if the entire experiment cannot be completed as planned. Running experiments in blocks helps ensure meaningful results can still be obtained even if a block is lost.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    67 views5 pages

    Desingn of Experiments ch07

    Uploaded by

    kannappanrajendran
    The document discusses blocking in factorial experiments. It explains that in a blocked factorial design, the error term represents the interaction between treatment factors and blocks. It also discusses how to modify prediction equations to account for block effects. Finally, it emphasizes the importance of run order and blocking, even when no obvious nuisance factors are present, to avoid aliasing effects if the entire experiment cannot be completed as planned. Running experiments in blocks helps ensure meaningful results can still be obtained even if a block is lost.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 5

    Chapter 7.

    Supplemental Text Material

    S7-1. The Error Term in a Blocked Design


    Just as in any randomized complete block design, when we run a replicated factorial
    experiment in blocks we are assuming that there is no interaction between treatments and
    blocks. In the RCBD with a single design factor (Chapter 4) the error term is actually the
    interaction between treatments and blocks. This is also the case in a factorial design. To
    illustrate, consider the ANOVA in Table 7-2 of the textbook. The design is a 22 factorial
    run in three complete blocks. Each block corresponds to a replicate of the experiment.
    There are six degrees of freedom for error. Two of those degrees of freedom are the
    interaction between blocks and factor A, two degrees of freedom are the interaction
    between blocks and factor B, and two degrees of freedom are the interaction between
    blocks and the AB interaction. In order for the error term here to truly represent random
    error, we must assume that blocks and the design factors do not interact.

    S7-2. The Prediction Equation for a Blocked Design


    Consider the prediction equation for the 24 factorial in two blocks with ABCD
    confounded from in Example 7-2. Since blocking does not impact the effect estimates
    from this experiment, the equation would be exactly the same as the one obtained from
    the unblocked design, Example 6-2. This prediction equation is
    y = 70.06 + 10.8125x1 + 4.9375x3 + 7.3125x4 − 9.0625x1 x3 + 8.3125x1 x4
    This equation would be used to predict future observations where we had no knowledge
    of the block effect. However, in the experiment just completed we know that there is a
    strong block effect, in fact the block effect was computed as
    block effect = yblock 1 − yblock 2 = −18.625
    This means that the difference in average response between the two blocks is –18.625.
    We should compensate for this in the prediction equation if we want to obtain the correct
    fitted values for block 1 and block 2. Defining a separate block effect for each block
    does this, where block1 effect = −9.3125 and block 2 effect = 9.3125 . These block effects
    would be added to the intercept in the prediction equation for each block. Thus the
    prediction equations are
    yblock1 = 70.06 + block1 effect + 10.8125x1 + 4.9375x3 + 7.3125x4 − 9.0625x1 x3 + 8.3125x1 x4
    = 70.06 + ( −9.3125) + 10.8125x1 + 4.9375x3 + 7.3125x4 − 9.0625x1 x3 + 8.3125x1 x4
    = 60.7475 + 10.8125x1 + 4.9375x3 + 7.3125x4 − 9.0625x1 x3 + 8.3125x1 x4
    and
    yblock2 = 70.06 + block 2 effect + 10.8125x1 + 4.9375x3 + 7.3125x4 − 9.0625x1 x3 + 8.3125x1 x4
    = 70.06 + (9.3125) + 10.8125x1 + 4.9375x3 + 7.3125x4 − 9.0625x1 x3 + 8.3125x1 x4
    = 79.3725 + 10.8125x1 + 4.9375x3 + 7.3125x4 − 9.0625x1 x3 + 8.3125x1 x4
    S7-3. Run Order is Important
    Blocking is really all about experimental run order. Specifically, we run an experiment in
    blocks to provide protection against the effects of a known and controllable nuisance
    factor(s). However, in many experimental situations, it is a good idea to conduct the
    experiment in blocks, even though there is no obvious nuisance factor present. This is
    particularly important when in takes several time periods (days, shifts, weeks, etc.) to run
    the experiment.
    To illustrate, suppose that we are conducting a single replicate of a 24 factorial design.
    The experiment is shown in run order is shown in Table 2. Now suppose that misfortune
    strikes the experimenter, and after the first eight trials have been performed it becomes
    impossible to complete the experiment. Is there any useful experimental design that can
    be formed from the first eight runs?

    Table 2. A 24 Factorial Experiment


    Std Order Run Order Block Factor A Factor B Factor C Factor D

    2 1 Block 1 1 -1 -1 -1
    12 2 Block 1 1 1 -1 1
    10 3 Block 1 1 -1 -1 1
    15 4 Block 1 -1 1 1 1
    14 5 Block 1 1 -1 1 1
    4 6 Block 1 1 1 -1 -1
    7 7 Block 1 -1 1 1 -1
    3 8 Block 1 -1 1 -1 -1
    5 9 Block 1 -1 -1 1 -1
    8 10 Block 1 1 1 1 -1
    11 11 Block 1 -1 1 -1 1
    16 12 Block 1 1 1 1 1
    1 13 Block 1 -1 -1 -1 -1
    9 14 Block 1 -1 -1 -1 1
    6 15 Block 1 1 -1 1 -1
    13 16 Block 1 -1 -1 1 1

    It turns out that in this case, the answer to that question is “no”. Now some analysis can
    of course be performed, but it would basically consist of fitting a regression model to the
    response data from the first 8 trials. Suppose that we fit a regression model containing an
    intercept term and the four main effects. When things have gone wrong it is usually a
    good idea to focus on simple objectives, making use of the data that are available. It
    turns out that in that model we would actually be obtaining estimates of

    [Intercept] = Intercept - AB + CD - ABCD


    [A] = A + AB - BC - ABC + ACD - BCD
    [B] = B + AB - BC - ABC
    [C] = C - ABC + ACD - BCD
    [D] = D - ABD - ACD + BCD

    Now suppose we feel comfortable in ignoring the three-factor and four-factor interaction
    effects. However, even with these assumptions, our intercept term is “clouded” or
    “confused” with two of the two-factor interactions, and the main effects of factors A and
    B are “confused” with the other two-factor interactions. In the next chapter, we will refer
    to the phenomena being observed here as aliasing of effects (its proper name). The
    supplemental notes for Chapter 8 present a general method for deriving the aliases for the
    factor effects. The Design-Expert software package can also be used to generate the
    aliases by employing the Design Evaluation feature. Notice that in our example, not
    completeing the experiment as originally planned has really disturbed the interpretation
    of the results.
    Suppose that instead of completely randomizing all 16 runs, the experimenter had set this
    24 design up in two blocks of 8 runs each, selecting in the usual way the ABCD
    interaction to be confounded with blocks. Now if only the first 8 runs can be performed,
    then it turns out that the estimates of the intercept and main factor effects from these 8
    runs are

    [Intercept] = Intercept
    [A] = A + BCD
    [B] = B + ACD
    [C] = C + ABD
    [D] = D + ABC

    If we assume that the three-factor interactions are negligible, then we have reliable
    estimates of all four main effects from the first 8 runs. The reason for this is that each
    block of this design forms a one-half fraction of the 24 factorial, and this fraction allows
    estimation of the four main effects free of any two-factor interaction aliasing. This
    specific design (the one-half fraction of the 24) will be discussed in considerable detail in
    Chapter 8.
    This illustration points out the importance of thinking carefully about run order, even
    when the experimenter is not obviously concerned about nuisance variables and blocking.
    Remember:

    If something can go wrong when conducting an experiment, it probably will.


    A prudent experimenter designs his or her experiment with this in mind.
    Generally, if a 2k factorial design is constructed in two blocks, and one of the blocks is
    lost, ruined, or never run, the 2 k / 2 = 2 k −1 runs that remain will always form a one-half
    fraction of the original design. It is almost always possible to learn something useful
    from such an experiment.
    To take this general idea a bit further, suppose that we had originally set up the 16-run 24
    factorial experiment in four blocks of four runs each. The design that we would obtain
    using the standard methods from this chapter in the text gives the experiment in Table 3.
    Now suppose that for some reason we can only run the first 8 trials of this experiment. It
    is easy to verify that the first 8 trials in Table 3 do not form one of the usual 8-run blocks
    produced by confounding the ABCD interaction with blocks. Therefore, the first 8 runs
    in Table 3 are not a “standard” one-half fraction of the 24.
    A logical question is “what can we do with these 8 runs?” Suppose, as before, that the
    experimenter elects to concentrate on estimating the main effects. If we use only the first
    eight runs from Table 3 and concentrate on estimating only the four main effects, it turns
    out what we really are estimating is

    [Intercept] = Intercept - ACD


    [A] = A - CD
    [B] = B - ABCD
    [C] = C - AD
    [D] = D - AC

    Once again, even assuming that all interactions beyond order two are negligible, our main
    effect estimates are aliased with two-factor interactions.

    Table 3. A 24 Factorial Experiment in Four Blocks


    Std Order Run Order Block Factor A Factor B Factor C Factor D

    10 1 Block 1 1 -1 -1 1
    15 2 Block 1 -1 1 1 1
    3 3 Block 1 -1 1 -1 -1
    6 4 Block 1 1 -1 1 -1
    12 5 Block 2 1 1 -1 1
    8 6 Block 2 1 1 1 -1
    13 7 Block 2 -1 -1 1 1
    1 8 Block 2 -1 -1 -1 -1
    11 9 Block 3 -1 1 -1 1
    2 10 Block 3 1 -1 -1 -1
    7 11 Block 3 -1 1 1 -1
    14 12 Block 3 1 -1 1 1
    16 13 Block 4 1 1 1 1
    5 14 Block 4 -1 -1 1 -1
    9 15 Block 4 -1 -1 -1 1
    4 16 Block 4 1 1 -1 -1
    If we were able to obtain 12 of the original 16 runs (that is, the first three blocks of Table
    3), then we can estimate

    [Intercept] = Intercept - 0.333 * AB - 0.333 * ACD - 0.333 * BCD


    [A] = A - ABCD
    [B] = B - ABCD
    [C] = C - ABC
    [D] = D - ABD
    [AC] = AC - ABD
    [AD] = AD - ABC
    [BC] = BC - ABD
    [BD] = BD - ABC
    [CD] = CD – ABCD

    If we can ignore three- and four-factor interactions, then we can obtain good estimates of
    all four main effects and five of the six two-factor interactions. Once again, setting up
    and running the experiment in blocks has proven to be a good idea, even though no
    nuisance factor was anticipated. Finally, we note that it is possible to assemble three of
    the four blocks from Table 3 to obtain a 12-run experiment that is slightly better than the
    one illustrated above. This would actually be called a 3/4th fraction of the 24, an irregular
    fractional factorial. These designs are mentioned briefly in the Chapter 8 exercises.

    You might also like