DOE Course Part 14
DOE Course Part 14
DOE Course Part 14
Multi-Factored Experiments
Advanced Designs
-Hard to Change FactorsSplit-Plot Design and Analysis
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
Hard-to-Change Factors
Assume that a factor can be varied , with great difficulty,
in an experimental setup (such as a pilot plant), although it
cannot be freely varied during normal operating
conditions.
Assume further that each of two factors has two levels and
the design is to have a factorial structure, and it is
imperative that the number of changes of the hard-tochange factor be minimized.
We can minimize the number of level changes of one
factor simply by keeping the level constant in pairs of
consecutive runs. That is, either the high level is used on
consecutive runs and then the low level on the next two
runs, or the reverse.
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
DOE Course
DOE Course
DOE Course
The size of the experimental unit is not the same for all
experimental factors.
Did you apply one factor to a larger unit or group of units
involving combinations of the other factors?
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
DOE Course
DOE Course
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
10
yij i WP j ij SP
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
11
4 k 2
2 1 02
N
Whereas subplot factors and their interactions have a variance
of:
4 2
0
N
Here the subscript 1 and 0 denote the whole plot and subplot,
respectively.
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
12
Example
Assume that factor A is a hard-to-change factor and factor
B is not hard to change, with the experiment such that
material (e.g. a board) is divided into two pieces and the
two levels of factor A applied to the two pieces, one level
to each piece.
Then the pieces are further subdivided and each of the two
levels of factor B and applied to the subdivided pieces.
Three pieces of the original length (e.g. three full boards)
are used.
The data will be analyzed assuming a fully randomized
design like a regular 22 design, and then correctly using a
split-plot design.
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
13
B
-1
+1
-1
+1
2.5
2.7
2.3
2.7
Observations
2.4
2.6
2.3
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.4
2.8
L. M. Lye
DF
1
1
1
8
11
SS
0.000833
0.187500
0.067500
0.053333
0.309167
MS
F
0.000833
0.12
0.187500 28.12
0.067500 10.12
0.006667
DOE Course
P
0.733
0.001
0.013
14
The proper analysis of the data as having come from a splitplot design is not easily achieved.
Most DOE software cannot handle split-plot design directly.
Design-Expert can handle some types of split-plot design but
it must be done manually.
However, statistical packages can be tricked into performing
the correct analysis by assuming a nested model and forcing
a nested model analysis.
Minitabs General Linear Model routine can do the analysis
if the data are set up properly.
Best papers to read are: Kowalski and Potcner (2003), Kevin
Potcner and Kowalski (2004), Bisgaard, Fuller, and Barrios
(1995). You can download these from the course website.
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
15
Seq SS
0.000833
0.023333
0.187500
0.067500
0.030000
0.309167
L. M. Lye
Seq MS
F
P
0.000833
0.14 0.725
0.005833
*
*
WP error term
0.187500 25.00 0.007
0.067500
9.00 0.040 3 times higher than CRD
0.007500 subplot error term
DOE Course
16
DOE Course
17
DOE Course
18
DOE Course
19
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
20
Summary
When it is not convenient or not economical to do a
completely randomize experiment due to one or more
hard-to-change factors, we have a restricted randomization
case.
A common and often used approach is a split plot
experiment which has a whole plot group of effects and a
subplot group of effects leading to two error terms in the
ANOVA or two half-normal plots for the unreplicated case.
If not analyzed properly, significant subplot effects may be
masked by the larger whole plot errors thus giving the
wrong conclusions and wrong model.
It is thus crucial that you know exactly how the experiment
was carried out in practice.
L. M. Lye
DOE Course
21