Experimental Design and Analysis of

Variance
Part B
Industrial Statistics with
Minitab.pdf
EX.
14Strength.MTW
14Hardness.MTW

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 1

 Chapter 13, Part B
Experimental Design and Analysis of Variance

Randomized Block Design

Factorial Experiments

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 2

 Randomized Block Design

Experimental units are the objects of interest in the

experiment.
A completely randomized design is an experimental
design in which the treatments are randomly
assigned to the experimental units.
If the experimental units are heterogeneous, blocking
can be used to form homogeneous groups, resulting
in a randomized block design.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 3

 Randomized Block Design

ANOVA Procedure
For a randomized block design the sum of squares
total (SST) is partitioned into three groups: sum of
squares due to treatments, sum of squares due to
blocks, and sum of squares due to error.

SST = SSTR + SSBL + SSE

The total degrees of freedom, nT - 1, are partitioned

such that k - 1 degrees of freedom go to treatments,
b - 1 go to blocks, and (k - 1)(b - 1) go to the error term.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 4

 Randomized Block Design

ANOVA Table

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean p-

Variation Squares Freedom Square F Value

SSTR MSTR
Treatments SSTR k-1 MSTR
k-1 MSE

Blocks SSBL b-1 SSBL

MSBL
b -1
SSE
Error SSE (k 1)(b 1) MSE
( k 1)(b 1)

Total SST nT - 1

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 5

 Randomized Block Design

Example: Crescent Oil Co.

Crescent Oil has developed three
new blends of gasoline and must
decide which blend or blends to
produce and distribute. A study
of the miles per gallon ratings of the
three blends is being conducted to determine if the
mean ratings are the same for the three blends.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 6

 Randomized Block Design

Example: Crescent Oil Co.

Five automobiles have been
tested using each of the three
gasoline blends and the miles
per gallon ratings are shown on
the next slide.

Factor . . . Gasoline blend

Treatments . . . Blend X, Blend Y, Blend Z
Blocks . . . Automobiles
Response variable . . . Miles per gallon

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 7

 Randomized Block Design

Type of Gasoline (Treatment)

Automobile Block
(Block) Blend X Blend Y Blend Z Means
1 31 30 30 30.333
2 30 29 29 29.333
3 29 29 28 28.667
4 33 31 29 31.000
5 26 25 26 25.667

Treatment
Means 29.8 28.8 28.4

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 8

 Randomized Block Design

Mean Square Due to Treatments

The overall sample mean is 29. Thus,
SSTR = 5[(29.8 - 29)2 + (28.8 - 29)2 + (28.4 - 29)2] = 5.2
MSTR = 5.2/(3 - 1) = 2.6
Mean Square Due to Blocks
SSBL = 3[(30.333 - 29)2 + . . . + (25.667 - 29)2] = 51.33
MSBL = 51.33/(5 - 1) = 12.8
Mean Square Due to Error
SSE = 62 - 5.2 - 51.33 = 5.47
MSE = 5.47/[(3 - 1)(5 - 1)] = .68

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 9

 Randomized Block Design

ANOVA Table

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F p-Value

Treatments 5.20 2 2.60 3.82 .07

Blocks 51.33 4 12.80
Error 5.47 8 .68

Total 62.00 14

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 10

 Randomized Block Design

Rejection Rule
p-Value Approach: Reject H0 if p-value < .05
Critical Value Approach: Reject H0 if F > 4.46
For = .05, F.05 = 4.46
(2 d.f. numerator and 8 d.f. denominator)

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 11

 Randomized Block Design

Test Statistic
F = MSTR/MSE = 2.6/.68 = 3.82
Conclusion
The p-value is greater than .05 (where F = 4.46)
and less than .10 (where F = 3.11). (Excel provides
a p-value of .07). Therefore, we cannot reject H0.
There is insufficient evidence to conclude that
the miles per gallon ratings differ for the three
gasoline blends.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 12

 Factorial Experiments

In some experiments we want to draw conclusions

about more than one variable or factor.
Factorial experiments and their corresponding
ANOVA computations are valuable designs when
simultaneous conclusions about two or more factors
are required.
The term factorial is used because the experimental
conditions include all possible combinations of the
factors.
For example, for a levels of factor A and b levels of
factor B, the experiment will involve collecting data
on ab treatment combinations.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 13

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

ANOVA Procedure
The ANOVA procedure for the two-factor factorial
experiment is similar to the completely randomized
experiment and the randomized block experiment.
We again partition the sum of squares total (SST)
into its sources.
SST = SSA + SSB + SSAB + SSE

The total degrees of freedom, nT - 1, are partitioned

such that (a 1) d.f go to Factor A, (b 1) d.f go to
Factor B, (a 1)(b 1) d.f. go to Interaction, and
ab(r 1) go to Error.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 14

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean p-

Variation Squares Freedom Square F Value
SSA MSA
Factor A SSA a-1 MSA
a-1 MSE
SSB MSB
Factor B SSB b-1 MSB
b -1 MSE
SSAB MSAB
Interaction SSAB (a 1)(b 1) MSAB
( a 1)(b 1) MSE
SSE
Error SSE ab (r 1) MSE
ab(r 1)

Total SST nT - 1

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 15

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Step 1 Compute the total sum of squares

a b r
SST = ( xijk x )2
i 1 j 1 k 1

Step 2 Compute the sum of squares for factor A

a
SSA = br ( xi . x )2
i 1

Step 3 Compute the sum of squares for factor B

b
SSB = ar ( x . j x )2
j 1

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 16

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Step 4 Compute the sum of squares for interaction

a b
SSAB = r ( xij xi . x . j x )2
i 1 j 1

Step 5 Compute the sum of squares due to error

SSE = SST SSA SSB - SSAB

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 17

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Example: State of Ohio Wage Survey

A survey was conducted of hourly wages
for a sample of workers in two industries
at three locations in Ohio. Part of the
purpose of the survey was to
determine if differences exist
in both industry type and
location. The sample data are shown
on the next slide.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 18

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Example: State of Ohio Wage Survey

Industry Cincinnati Cleveland Columbus

I $12.10 $11.80 $12.90
I 11.80 11.20 12.70
I 12.10 12.00 12.20
II 12.40 12.60 13.00
II 12.50 12.00 12.10
II 12.00 12.50 12.70

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 19

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Factors
Factor A: Industry Type (2 levels)
Factor B: Location (3 levels)
Replications
Each experimental condition is repeated 3 times

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 20

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

ANOVA Table

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F p-Value

Factor A .50 1 .50 4.19 .06

Factor B 1.12 2 .56 4.69 .03
Interaction .37 2 .19 1.55 .25
Error 1.43 12 .12

Total 3.42 17

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 21

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Conclusions Using the Critical Value Approach

Industries: F = 4.19 < F = 4.75
Mean wages do not differ by industry type.
Locations: F = 4.69 > F = 3.89
Mean wages differ by location.
Interaction: F = 1.55 < F = 3.89
Interaction is not significant.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 22

 Two-Factor Factorial Experiment

Conclusions Using the p-Value Approach

Industries: p-value = .06 > = .05
Mean wages do not differ by industry type.
Locations: p-value = .03 < = .05
Mean wages differ by location.
Interaction: p-value = .25 > = .05
Interaction is not significant.

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 23

 End of Chapter 13, Part B

2011 South-Western/Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved Slide 24