The Elsmar Cove Forum DoE and ANOVA - 4 factor and 3 levels Taguchi design with 2 replicates
 Forum User Name Keep Me Logged In Password
 Register Photo Albums Blogs FAQ Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 Elsmar Cove Forum Sidebar @import url(http://www.google.com/cse/api/branding.css); Custom Search Monitor the Elsmar Forum Monitor New Forum Posts Follow Marc & Elsmar Elsmar Cove Groups Sponsor Links Donate and \$ Contributor Forum Access Sponsored Links Courtesy Quick Links Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge: Howard'sInternational Quality Services Atul'sSymphony Technologies Marcelo Antunes'SQR Consulting Bob Doering'sCorrect SPC - Precision Machining NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers Quality Digest Portal IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology ASQ - American Society for Quality

#9
2nd December 2009, 12:19 PM
 Statistical Steven Statistician   Registration Date: May 2005 Location: New Jersey Age: 48 Posts: 932 Thanks Given to Others: 206 Thanked 328 Times in 230 Posts Karma Power: 134 Karma: 4069
Re: DoE and ANOVA - 4 factor and 3 levels Taguchi design with 2 replicates

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by Allattar Correction. Taguchi is not the best approach for analysing interactions. ANOVA is the right approach to the analysis. You would be better off with a standard factorial design here, with 2 levels per factor I think. Unless you have a specific reason why you need 3 levels per factor. If you are fitting only linearity and you have numeric inputs you do not need 3 levels on each factor. You can use a centre points instead to check for curvature.
Just to add to your excellent response, if you have a four factor, two level study, the full factorial would be 16 runs. A 1/2 fraction would 8 runs. So you can run a single run at the center point.
__________________
Steven Walfish
 Thank You to Statistical Steven for your informative Post and/or Attachment!

#10
2nd December 2009, 08:48 PM
 Miner Forum Moderator   Registration Date: Apr 2002 Location: Greater Milwaukee area, Wisconsin Posts: 3,104 Thanks Given to Others: 555 Thanked 1,715 Times in 1,100 Posts Blog Entries: 13 Karma Power: 389 Karma: 16623
Re: DoE and ANOVA

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by Statistical Steven Miner - I believe if you use a column of your Taguchi array for the interaction it would have to be the correct column where the interaction is confounded. Typically when this occurs you are not reducing the run total enough to justify its use. For example, assuming the OP was interested in only one ogf the interactions therefore reduced it to a three factor, 3 level design. This is just a 1/3 fractional factorial, so no need to use the Tachugi array per se. Though, I agree it can be done, I have never seen it applied successfully.
You are correct about reserving the column where the confounding occurs. I did not claim that it was efficient, but in my earlier days when Taguchi was new, I have successfully used the approach many times. Now I have learned to do the same things in a more efficient manner.

For example, Box has shown how the inner and outer array approach can be done more efficiently using a Split-plot design. We learn new things. It does not make the old way wrong, just less efficient.

Before computers made the calculations easy, Taguchi's approach was great, because the math was easy. I date back to those days. I had to perform the calculations by hand for years before getting one of the first IBM PCs (pre-XT). That was his intent.
__________________
"A fool can learn from his own experiences; the wise learn from the experience of others." - Democritus, 460-370 B.C.
 Thank You to Miner for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
#11
2nd December 2009, 10:19 PM
 Statistical Steven Statistician   Registration Date: May 2005 Location: New Jersey Age: 48 Posts: 932 Thanks Given to Others: 206 Thanked 328 Times in 230 Posts Karma Power: 134 Karma: 4069
Re: DoE and ANOVA

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by Miner You are correct about reserving the column where the confounding occurs. I did not claim that it was efficient, but in my earlier days when Taguchi was new, I have successfully used the approach many times. Now I have learned to do the same things in a more efficient manner. For example, Box has shown how the inner and outer array approach can be done more efficiently using a Split-plot design. We learn new things. It does not make the old way wrong, just less efficient. Before computers made the calculations easy, Taguchi's approach was great, because the math was easy. I date back to those days. I had to perform the calculations by hand for years before getting one of the first IBM PCs (pre-XT). That was his intent.
I still have the Taguchi workbooks with the different arrays and hand calculations. I am just surprised with software such as JMP and Minitab, we still have people trying to use methods that are not just inefficient, but sometimes the wrong application.
__________________
Steven Walfish
#12
3rd December 2009, 03:57 AM
 Allattar Appreciated Member   Registration Date: Jan 2008 Location: UK Posts: 225 Thanks Given to Others: 15 Thanked 163 Times in 107 Posts Karma Power: 50 Karma: 3350
Re: DoE and ANOVA

I find Steven that it has to do with the Buzzword effect. Meeting lots of different people from different industries when someone mentions the word Taguchi I get a shiver down my spine.

These may be unfair generalisation so please correct me if you see otherwise.

If someone I meet says they have tried a Taguchi design they have used it becuase someone else told them that DOE is fantastic and to use taguchi.
There experience of DOE is only from what someone else told them and all they heard is Taguchi gave them good results.
They end up not using an outer array, they use a few levels on factors becuase they can, or becuase of checking for curvature.
Taguchi is used becuase they get lots of factors, with lots of levels with very few runs, again ignoring that they need an outer array, and ignoring the DF needed to find interactions.

Its also highly likely that they just pick a design and haven't checked on the diagrams to help place columns to find interactions if any are allowed.

Then I get asked why dont the results work very well.

I have met a few guys who knew what they where doing with Taguchi, and that always makes me feel better Problem is I find is as I mentioned above Taguchi is believed to be DOE.

I always try and urge anyone thinking about a Taguchi design to really really read up on them as in my opinion the hardest part of creating a Taguchi design is understanding how to place the factors, why you would use the different design types, and the importance of that outer array.
 Thank You to Allattar for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
#13
3rd December 2009, 09:24 AM
 Statistical Steven Statistician   Registration Date: May 2005 Location: New Jersey Age: 48 Posts: 932 Thanks Given to Others: 206 Thanked 328 Times in 230 Posts Karma Power: 134 Karma: 4069
Re: DoE and ANOVA

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by Allattar I find Steven that it has to do with the Buzzword effect. Meeting lots of different people from different industries when someone mentions the word Taguchi I get a shiver down my spine. Taguchi is used becuase they get lots of factors, with lots of levels with very few runs, again ignoring that they need an outer array, and ignoring the DF needed to find interactions.
Have they tried a Plackett-Burman? The real appeal to Taguchi is the "over-saturation" of the model. I should not bash it, I just do not use it
__________________
Steven Walfish
#14
20th May 2012, 01:29 PM
 amandeep007 Shy Poster (1 to 5 Posts)   Registration Date: May 2012 Posts: 1 Thanks Given to Others: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Karma Power: 5 Karma: 10
Re: DoE and ANOVA - 4 factor and 3 levels Taguchi design with 2 replicates

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by Statistical Steven Just to add to your excellent response, if you have a four factor, two level study, the full factorial would be 16 runs. A 1/2 fraction would 8 runs. So you can run a single run at the center point.
sir i am using taguchi L9 array with 4 parametrs and 3 levels
can we working use 4 parametrs in L9 array on please suggest me sir i am very confused with it
#15
20th May 2012, 06:22 PM
 Miner Forum Moderator   Registration Date: Apr 2002 Location: Greater Milwaukee area, Wisconsin Posts: 3,104 Thanks Given to Others: 555 Thanked 1,715 Times in 1,100 Posts Blog Entries: 13 Karma Power: 389 Karma: 16623
Re: DoE and ANOVA - 4 factor and 3 levels Taguchi design with 2 replicates

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by amandeep007 sir i am using taguchi L9 array with 4 parametrs and 3 levels can we working use 4 parametrs in L9 array on please suggest me sir i am very confused with it
The L9 Taguchi orthogonal array will handle a maximum of 4 factors (parameters) at three levels each.

Be aware that the L9 is a resolution III design. This means that all of the main effects are confounded (aliased) with two-way interactions. This means that if you seem to have a significant factor, it may not actually be the factor, but may be its confounding interactions instead. The L9 is only suitable for use as a screening design. The results must ALWAYS be confirmed with a follow-up experiment.

If you are concerned with detecting curvature, you could run a 2^3 full factorial plus one center point for 9 experimental runs. This will not only detect any curvature, but will eliminate all confounding.
__________________
"A fool can learn from his own experiences; the wise learn from the experience of others." - Democritus, 460-370 B.C.

Last edited by Miner; 22nd May 2012 at 10:16 PM. Reason: typo
 Thanks to Miner for your informative Post and/or Attachment!

 The Elsmar Cove Forum DoE and ANOVA - 4 factor and 3 levels Taguchi design with 2 replicates

 Bookmarks

 Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)

 Forum Posting Settings You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules

 Similar Discussion Threads Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote Mike S. Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 2 9th November 2011 09:43 AM lekerz Using Minitab Software 12 3rd September 2011 01:09 PM Prototype Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 7 29th April 2011 06:43 AM mayor Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 3 21st August 2008 08:58 AM sriram_govi Design and Development - Process and Product 4 10th October 2007 07:27 PM

The time now is 07:30 AM. All times are GMT -4.