Robust chocolate bars are better

Taguchi Methods (or Quality Engineering

or Robust Design)
Focus is on reducing variability of response to maximize
robustness, generally achieved through Orthogonal Array
Experiments

Historical Perspective
George E. P. Box (born 1919)
was a student of R. A. Fisher.
He made several advances to
Fishers work in DOE theory
and statistics. The founding
chair of the University of
Wisconsins Department of
Statistics, Box was appointed
the R. A. Fisher Professor of
Statistics at UW in 1971.

QE Overview
Objective of this Lecture:
To explore the basic ideas of two-level factorial design of experiments (DOE) and
the connection of QE to statistical process control (SPC)
Key Points:
DOE can help uncover significant variables and interactions among variables.
SPC can help uncover process shifts.
Quality engineering tools help the investigator to discover a path for process
improvement.

Typical QE Applications
In manufacturing improve performance of a manufacturing
process.
In process development improve yields, reduce variability and
cost.
In design evaluation and comparison of basic configurations,
materials and parameters.
The method is called Taguchi Methods.
The key tool is DOE (Design of Experiment).

C. R. Rao
Youd know Rao from his Cramer-Rao
Inequality. Rao is recognized
worldwide as a pioneer of modern
multivariate theory and as one of the
worlds top statisticians, with
distinctions as a mathematician,
researcher, scientist and teacher.
Taught Taguchi. Author of 14 books
and over 300 papers.

Genichi Taguchi
An engineer who developed an
approach (now called Taguchi
Methods) involving statistically
planned experiments to reduce
variation in quality. Learned DOE from
Professor Rao. In 1960s he applied his
learning in Japan. In 1980s he
introduced his ideas to US and AT&T.

What are Taguchis Contributions?

Quality Engineering Philosophy Targets and Loss functions

Methodology System, Parameter, Tolerance design steps
Experiment Design Use of Orthogonal arrays
Analysis Use Signal-to-Noise ratios (S/N ratios)

Conventional DOE focuses only on Average Response

FACTOR
D (Driver)
B (Beverage)
O (Ball)

LOW (-)
regular
beer
3-piece

HIGH (+)
oversized
water
balanta

-++
-+-

++-

Avg
Response

67

79

61

75

65

60

77

87

QE focuses on Variability of Response

---

+-+

Standard D
Order

--+

+++

D
+-1

77

61
B

87

75

65

60
O

67

79
D

The Taguchi Loss Function and the

typically assumed Loss to the Customer

Taguchis Quality Philosophy

Taguchis view

Loss = k(P T)2

Not 0 if within specs and
1 if outside

On target production is
more important than
producing within Specs

Conventional view

Taguchis key contribution is Robust

Design
Definition:
Robust Design A Design that results in products or
services that can function over a broad range of
usage and environmental conditions.

Taguchis Product Design Approach

has 3 steps
System Design
Choose the sub-systems, mechanisms, form of the prototype develop the basic
design. This is similar to conventional engineering design.
Parameter Design
Optimize the system design so that it improves quality (robustness) and reduces cost.
Tolerance Design
Study the tradeoffs that must be made and determine what tolerances and grades of
materials are acceptable.

Parameter Design (the Robust Design

step)
Optimize the settings of the design parameters to minimize its sensitivity to
noise ROBUSTNESS.
By highlighting robustness as a key quality requirement, Taguchi really
opened a whole area that previously had been talked about only by a few
very applied people.
His methodology is heavily dependent on design of experiments like Fishers
and Boxs methods, but the difference he made was that for response he
looked at not only the mean but also the variance of performance.

Robust Design How it is done

Design Parameters (D)
Target
Performance

Product/Process

Actual
Performance (P)

Noise Factors (N), Internal & External

Identify Product/Process Design Parameters that:

Have significant/little influence on performance
Minimize performance variation due to noise factors
Minimize the processing cost

Methodology: Design of Experiments (DOE)

Examples: Chocolate mix, Ina Tile Co., Sony TV

Taguchis Experimental Factors Parameter

design step identifies and optimizes the
Design Factors
Control Factors Design factors that are to be set at optimal levels to improve
quality and reduce sensitivity to noise
- Size of parts, type of material, Value of resistors etc.
Noise Factors Factors that represent the noise that is expected in production or
in actual use of the product
- Dimensional variation
- Operating Temperature
Adjustment Factor Affects the mean but not the variance of a response
- Deposition time in silicon wafer fabrication
Signal Factors Set by the user communicate desires of the user
- Position of the gas pedal

Several different types of Experimental plans

(design) are available to the design engineer
Factorial, Fractional, Central Cuboid etc.
Taguchi used Orthogonal Designs
C

Center

Screening

Factorial Orthogonal

FF
Fractional
Factorial

Focus: Handle many factors

Output: List of important Factors, Best Settings, Good design

Full Factorial Array Example: The 23 (8-trial) array

A

B
Response
C

Array Columns

Full Factorial Factor

Assignments to
Experimental Array
Columns. Such
experiments can find
all Main and two- and
three-factor
interactions.
C

-AB

-ABC

-BC

-AC

Taguchis Orthogonal Experimental Plan 7

Factors (A, B, C, D, E, F and G) may potentially
influence the production of defective tiles
Table 1 Orthogonal plan used by Ina Tile company to reduce production of defective tiles
Process
Variable

Fraction of tiles found defective

Expt #1

A1 B1 C1

D1

E1 F1

G1

16/100

A1 B1 C1

D2

E2 F2

G2

17/100

A1 B2 C2

D1

E1 F2

G2

12/100

A1 B2 C2

D2

E2 F1

G1

6/100

A2 B1 C2

D1

E2 F1

G2

6/100

A2 B1 C2

D2

E1 F2

G1

68/100

A2 B2 C1

D1

E2 F2

G1

42/100

A2 B2 C1

D2

E1 F1

G2

26/100

Calculation of Factor Effects

Table 2: Summary of
Estimated Variable
Effects

Variable Level

% Defective

A1

12.75

A2

35.50

B1

26.75

B2

21.50

C1

25.25

C2

23.00

D1

19.00

29.25

E1

30.50

E2

17.75

F1

13.50

F2

31.75

G1

33.00

G2

15.25

Main Effects of Process Factors on %

Defects in Tiles
Figure 2: Influence of changing process conditions observed on defective tile production

% Defective

Factor Effects on Response

(% of Defective Tiles)
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5

A1

B2

C1

D2

E1

Process Factor Settings

F2

G1

Alternative Design Notations for Orthogonal

Arrays
Std
Order

Fishers Original
X1

X2

X3

Yates

Group Theory

Taguchi

X1

X2

X3

ab

ac

bc

abc

Taguchis OA-based Experimental

Design Matrix Notation
Number of Factors

L N (2k)
Total Number of Runs
Number of Levels per Factor

Linear Graphs for the L8 Array

Linear graphs guide assignment of factors to L8 columns

1
5

3
2

3
4

7
6

Main effects are assigned to columns at nodes in the graph.

Interactions are assigned to the columns on the lines.

5
4

Some Orthogonal Array Designs

Classical

23

Taguchi

26-3

24

23-1 L3

L12
L18

27-1 L8

25

215-11 L36

27-1

L27

See Montgomery (1997), Design and Analysis of Experiments, page 631

Taguchi Orthogonal Array Tables

2-level (fractional factorial) arrays: L4(23). L8(27). L16(215). L32(231). L64(263)
2-level arrays: L12(211) (Plackett-Burman Design)
3-level arrays: L9(34). L27(33). L81(340)

4-level arrays: L16(45). L64(421)

5-level arrays: L25(56)

Mixed-level arrays: L15(21 X 37), L32(21 X 49), L50(21 X 511)

Comments on Taguchi Arrays

Taguchi designs are large screening designs

Assumes most interactions are small and those that arent are known
ahead of time
Taguchi claims that it is possible to eliminate interactions either by
correctly specifying the response and design factors or by using a sliding
setting approach to those factor levels.
Doesnt guarantee that we get highest resolution design.

Instead of designing the experiment to investigate potential interactions,

Taguchi prefers to use three-level factors to estimate curvature.

Taguchis Robust Design Experiments

Taguchi advocated using
inner and outer array designs
to take into account noise
factors (outer) and design
factors (inner)

E1
E2

Design factors: I 1, I 2, I 3
Noise factors: E 1 and E 2
Objective: Maximize
response while minimizing its
variance

I3

I2

I1

Example: Robust Design OAs of Starter Motor Parameter Design

Outer array: Battery voltage, ambient temperature
Replicates

Starter Torque

E1

-1

-1

Output

Output

E2

-1

-1

Mean

Std. Dev.

f1

f2

f3

-1

-1

-1

75

86

67

98

81.5

13.5

-1

-1

87

78

56

91

78.0

15.6

-1

-1

77

89

78

63.0

37.1

-1

95

65

77

95

83.0

14.7

-1

-1

78

78

59

94

77.3

14.3

-1

56

79

67

94

74.0

16.3

-1

79

80

66

85

77.5

8.1

71

80

73

95

79.8

10.9

Inner array: Armature turns, gage of wire, content of alloy

S/N Ratios are Maximized

To maximize robustness, when Target performance is the best,Taguchi uses the signalto-noise ratio

2
= 10log( 2 )

When response is to be maximized, Taguchi uses

= 10log(

1/2
)

When response is to be minimized, Taguchi uses

= 10log(

2
)

25
20
15
10

25
20
15
10

% Defective

% Defective

% Defective

Taguchi Analysis of Motor Design Data

A1

A1

B2 C1
D2
Inner Array Factor Settings

B2 C1
D2
Inner Array Factor Settings
0.0015
0.001
0.0005
0

Robustness is maximized
when S/N ratio is
maximized
Design (inner array) factor
settings that maximize S/N
ration are:
I1 (turns) = - 1
I2 (gage) = + 1
I3 (ferric %) = - 1
Note: This system is not
additive => Results are
approximatey OK.

A1

B2

C1

D2

Inner Array Factor Settings

Epilogue
Designers should embrace Taguchis philosophy of quality engineering. It makes
very good sense.
Note, however, that a key weakness of Taguchi method is its assumption of a main
factor only (or additive model) Taguchi ignores interactions
Therefore, rather than use inner outer arrays, we may use more efficient and
exact methods that are no more difficult to learn and apply to carry Taguchis
robust design philosophy into practice
You may use any of the various experimental and optimization techniques available
in the literature such as multiple regression/RSM to develop robust designs.
An example of such extension is shown in next slides.

Multiobjective Robust Design by

Metaheuristic Methods
Tapan P. Bagchi & Madhu Ranjan Kumar (1993)

Sensitivity Analysis vs. Robust Design

Practice common in conventional engineering design: sensitivity
analysis (SA).
SA finds likely changes expected in the designs performance
due to uncontrollable factors.
For designs too sensitive, one uses the worst-case scenario to
plan for the unexpected.
However, worst-case projections often unnecessary: a robust
design can greatly reduce off-target performance (Taguchi,
1986)

Chocolates Hot or Cold!

Molten Five Star bars

on store shelves in
Bombay and
Singapore; Gooey
hands and dirty
dresses

Design and Noise Factors Both Impact

Response
Noise

Design
Factor A

Product

Design
Factor B

Variable
Response

The Empirical Framework for

Progressing Knowledge

Weather Psychology

Economy

Engineering

Medicine

Chemistry

Electronics

The Taguchi Experiments

Taguchi advocated using
inner and outer
Orthogonal array designs
Objective: Maximize
satisfaction while
minimizing its variance

Robust Design search by GA

GA replaces inner array
Outer array replaced by Monte Carlo
Objective: Keep response on target
while minimizing its variance

Electronic Filter Interfacing a Strain

Gage Transducer with a Galvanometer

The Two Responses to be Made Robust

targets

D=

2 + 3 + 3.
2 2 + . 3. .

= 6.84 hz

||
[ 2 + + 3 + 3]

= 3.0 inches

=> Two constraints leave one design parameter free

Variance of c Estimated

Variance of
c

R3 Values

Variance of D Estimated

Variance
of D

R3 Values

Original Taguchi Method is Ineffective

Here!
Note that the filter design problem cannot be tackled using
Taguchis two-step procedure.
Effects of R2, R3 and C on c (or even D) are not separable
(additive).
Further, one-response-at-a-time optimization does not produce
Pareto-optimal designs.
The two plots did produce two best robust designs, but none
is globally optimum.

Genetic Coding of the Problem

Decision Variable

Chromosome buidler

R2

010010010

R3

100010011

001101010

Population size kept constant through survival of the

fittest. Progenies produced through reproduction,
mating by crossover, and mutation of some parent
chromosomes. GA parameterized by DOE.
Nondominated Sorting Multiobjective GA used.

The Nondominated
Sorting Multiobjective
GA produces Paretooptimal solutions

NSGA Output: Pareto-optimal Robust

Designs

Variance
of D

Sample Numerical Results

R3

R2

C (farad)

Avg (Hz)

Var

Avg (D)
(in)

Var (D)

311.78881

22.43919

0.000462

6.841476

0.08788

3.00349

0.0112

156.2765

157.7785

0.000434

6.844165

0.09586

3.00323

0.0105

306.0652

25.66875

0.000458

6.841552

0.08803

3.00347

0.0111

195.026

111.5562

0.000426

6.8434

0.09281

3.00325

0.0105

225.7759

82.24873

0.000426

6.842843

0.09110

3.00328

0.0106

195.1129

111.4653

0.000424

6.843399

0.09280

3.00325

0.0105

299.6366

29.40162

0.000454

6.841641

0.08821

3.00345

0.0111

References
Taguchi, G., Introduction to Quality Engineering, APO, Tokyo, 1986.
Pieset, J. and Singhal, K., Tolerance Analysis and Design, Elsevier, 1980.
Phadke, M.S., Quality Engineering and Robust Design, Prentice-Hall 1989.
Bagchi, Tapan P., Taguchi Methods Explained. Practical Steps to Robust Design, PrenticeHall (India), 1983.
Filippone, J., Using Taguchi Methods to Apply to the Axioms of Design, Robot, Computer
Integrated Manufacturing 6(2) 1989 133 142
Bagchi, Tapan P., Kumar, Mahdu Ranjan, Multiple-Criteria Robust Design of Electronic
Devices, J of Electronic Manufacturing 3, 1993, 31- 38.
Montgomery, Douglas C., Design and Analysis Experiments 3rd Edition Wiley, 1993.
Bagchi, Tapna P., Templeton, J.G.C. ,Multiple-criteria Robust Design using Constrained
Optimization, J. Design and Manufacturing, 4, 1994, 21 30.
Myers, J., Carter, Jr. W. H., Response Surface Techniques for Dual Response Systems,
Technometrics, 26, 1973, 301 317.
Khattree, Ravindra, Robust Parameter Design: A Response Surface Approach, J. Quality
Technology, 1996, 28 (2) 187 195.
Voss, Stetan, Metaheuristics: The State of the Art, In Local Search for Planning and
Scheduling, Alexander Nareyek (ed) Springer, 2001.
Goldberg, G. E., Genetic Algonrithm on Search. Optimization and Machine Learning,
Addison-Wesley, 1989, 147 215.