Spacing of Factor Levels in the

Unreplicated 2k Factorial Designs Unreplicated 2k Factorial Designs

• These are 2k factorial designs with one
observation at each corner of the “cube”
• An unreplicated 2k factorial design is also
sometimes called a “single replicate” of the 2k
• These designs are very widely used
• Risks…if there is only one observation at each
corner, is there a chance of unusual response
observations spoiling the results?
• Modeling “noise”? If the factors are spaced too closely, it increases the chances
that the noise will overwhelm the signal in the data
More aggressive spacing is usually best
DOX 6E Montgomery 1 DOX 6E Montgomery 2

Unreplicated 2k Factorial Designs

Example of an Unreplicated 2k Design
• Lack of replication causes potential problems in
statistical testing • A 24 factorial was used to investigate the
– Replication admits an estimate of “pure error” (a better effects of four factors on the filtration rate of a
phrase is an internal estimate of error)
– With no replication, fitting the full model results in zero
resin
degrees of freedom for error • The factors are A = temperature, B = pressure,
• Potential solutions to this problem C = mole ratio, D= stirring rate
– Pooling high-order interactions to estimate error
– Normal probability plotting of effects (Daniels, 1959) • Experiment was performed in a pilot plant
– Other methods…see text, pp. 234

DOX 6E Montgomery 3 DOX 6E Montgomery 4

The Resin Plant Experiment
The Resin Plant Experiment

DOX 6E Montgomery 5 DOX 6E Montgomery 6

Estimates of the Effects The Normal Probability Plot of Effects

DOX 6E Montgomery 7 DOX 6E Montgomery 8

The Half-Normal Probability Plot of Effects
ANOVA Summary for the Model

DOX 6E Montgomery 9 DOX 6E Montgomery 10

Model Residuals are Satisfactory

The Regression Model

DOX 6E Montgomery 11 DOX 6E Montgomery 12

Model Interpretation – Main Effects Model Interpretation – Response
and Interactions Surface Plots

With concentration at either the low or high level, high temperature and
high stirring rate results in high filtration rates
DOX 6E Montgomery 13 DOX 6E Montgomery 14

Normal Probability Plot of Effects –

The Drilling Experiment
The Drilling Experiment
Example 6-3, pg. 237

A = drill load, B = flow, C = speed, D = type of mud,

y = advance rate of the drill
DOX 6E Montgomery 15 DOX 6E Montgomery 16
 Residual Plots Residual Plots
• The residual plots indicate that there are problems
with the equality of variance assumption
• The usual approach to this problem is to employ a
transformation on the response
DE S IG N -E X PE R T P lo t R esiduals vs. Pr edicted
• Power family transformations are widely used
adv ._ ra t e
2. 8
5 625

1. 4 875

Res i du a sl
0. 1
3 125

- 0.8 2625

- 1.9 6375

1.6 9 4.7 0 7. 70 10.7 1 13. 71

P re di c e
t d

y* = y λ
• Transformations are typically performed to
– Stabilize variance
– Induce normality
– Simplify the model

DOX 6E Montgomery 17 DOX 6E Montgomery 18

The Box-Cox Method

Selecting a Transformation DE S IG N-E X P E RT P l o t Box-C ox Plot for P ower Transforms
a d v._ ra te

Lam bda
6.85 A log transformation is
• Empirical selection of lambda Cu rre n t = 1
B e st = -0 .2 3
recommended
L o w C.I. = -0 .7 9
• Prior (theoretical) knowledge or experience can Hi g h C.I. = 0 .3 2 5.40 The procedure provides a
Re co m m e n d tra n sfo rm : confidence interval on

Ln(R es idualSS)
often suggest the form of a transformation Log
(L a m b d a = 0 ) the transformation
• Analytical selection of lambda…the Box-Cox 3.95
parameter lambda

(1964) method (simultaneously estimates the If unity is included in the

2.50 confidence interval, no
model parameters and the transformation transformation would be
parameter lambda) 1.05
needed

• Box-Cox method implemented in Design-Expert -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

Lam bda

DOX 6E Montgomery 19 DOX 6E Montgomery 20

 Effect Estimates Following the
Log Transformation ANOVA Following the Log Transformation

Three main effects are

large
No indication of large
interaction effects
What happened to the
interactions?

DOX 6E Montgomery 21 DOX 6E Montgomery 22

Following the Log Transformation

The Log Advance Rate Model

• Is the log model “better”?

• We would generally prefer a simpler model
in a transformed scale to a more
complicated model in the original metric
• What happened to the interactions?
• Sometimes transformations provide insight
into the underlying mechanism

DOX 6E Montgomery 23 DOX 6E Montgomery 24

 Other Examples of Other Analysis Methods for
Unreplicated 2k Designs Unreplicated 2k Designs
• The sidewall panel experiment (Example 6-4, pg. 239) • Lenth’s method (see text, pg. 235)
– Two factors affect the mean number of defects – Analytical method for testing effects, uses an estimate
– A third factor affects variability of error formed by pooling small contrasts
– Residual plots were useful in identifying the dispersion – Some adjustment to the critical values in the original
effect method can be helpful
• The oxidation furnace experiment (Example 6-5, pg. – Probably most useful as a supplement to the normal
probability plot
242)
– Replicates versus repeat (or duplicate) observations? • Conditional inference charts (pg. 236)
– Modeling within-run variability
DOX 6E Montgomery 25 DOX 6E Montgomery 26

Addition of Center Points

yF = yC  no "curvature"
to a 2k Designs
The hypotheses are:
• Based on the idea of replicating some of the k

runs in a factorial design H 0 :  β ii = 0

i =1

• Runs at the center provide an estimate of k

H1 :  β ii ≠ 0
error and allow the experimenter to i =1

distinguish between two possible models: nF nC ( yF − yC ) 2

k k k
SS Pure Quad =
First-order model (interaction) y = β 0 +  β i xi +  β ij xi x j + ε nF + nC
i =1 i =1 j >i
k k k k This sum of squares has a
Second-order model y = β 0 +  β i xi +  β ij xi x j +  β ii xi2 + ε single degree of freedom
i =1 i =1 j >i i =1

DOX 6E Montgomery 27 DOX 6E Montgomery 28

 Example 6-6, Pg. 248 ANOVA for Example 6-6
Refer to the original experiment
shown in Table 6-10. Suppose that nC = 4
four center points are added to this
experiment, and at the points x1=x2 Usually between 3
=x3=x4=0 the four observed and 6 center points
filtration rates were 73, 75, 66, and will work well
69. The average of these four center
Design-Expert
points is 70.75, and the average of
provides the analysis,
the 16 factorial runs is 70.06.
including the F-test
Since are very similar, we suspect
for pure quadratic
that there is no strong curvature
curvature
present.

DOX 6E Montgomery 29 DOX 6E Montgomery 30

If curvature is significant, augment the design with axial runs to
create a central composite design. The CCD is a very effective
design for fitting a second-order response surface model
Practical Use of Center Points (pg. 250)
• Use current operating conditions as the center
point
• Check for “abnormal” conditions during the
time the experiment was conducted
• Check for time trends
• Use center points as the first few runs when there
is little or no information available about the
magnitude of error
• Center points and qualitative factors?

DOX 6E Montgomery 31 DOX 6E Montgomery 32

Center Points and Qualitative Factors

DOX 6E Montgomery 33