Chapter 3 Design of Experiments

INTRODUCTION Design of Experiments (DOE) is a commonly used technique in analyzing experimental data resulting in the optimization of processes parameters. It is an empirical statistical modeling technique employed for multiple regression analysis using quantitative data obtained from properly designed experiments to solve multivariate equations simultaneously. It is a formal structured technique for studying any situation that involves a response that varies as a function of one or more independent variables and commonly used to address complex problems where more than one variable may affect a response and two or more variables may interact with each other. It can provide the answers to specific questions about the behavior of a system, using the optimum number of experimental observations. The design of experiment is a procedure of selecting number of trials and conditions running them, essential and sufficient for solving a problem that has been set with the required precision. The advantages of designs of experiments are summarized as follows: Numbers of trials are significantly reduced. Identification of important decision variables, which control and Optimal setting of the parameters can be found out.

improve the performance of the product or process.

Experimental design is a strategy to gather empirical knowledge, i.e. knowledge based on the analysis of experimental data. Building a design means, carefully choosing a small number of experiments that are to be performed under controlled conditions. There are four interrelated steps in building a design: 1. Design an objective, i.e. effect of process variables or find optimal parameters. 2. Define the process variables that will be controlled during experimentation and their working range.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN TECHNIQUE APPLIED A two level factorial design of (23=8) eight trials was selected for determining the effect of three independent direct welding parameters. The selection of two level factorial design helps in reducing experimental runs to the minimum possible. 3.3.1 Critical process control variables Tool rotation speed, welding speed and tilt angle were identified as critical variables for carrying out the experimental work and to find their effect on the mechanical properties (tensile strength, impact strength and micro hardness). All remaining variables were kept constant. 3.3.2 Selection of two levels of welding variables Upper and lower levels of the direct welding parameters were carefully selected by carrying out the trial runs so as to maintain defect free welding. The direct and indirect parameters except under consideration were kept constant. The upper level was coded as (+1) and lower level as (-1) or simply (+) and (-). Xj= Where, Xj, Xjn and Xjo are coded, natural and basic value of the parameters respectively. J j and j are the variation and number of parameters respectively. The units, symbols used and limits of welding parameters are given in the following Development of design matrix The design matrix developed to conduct the eight trials runs of 23 factorial design as given in Table 3.2. The parameters from X1 to X3 were represented by subscripts 1 to 3. The signs under the columns 1, 2 and 3 were arranged in standard Yates order.

(1)

Design matrix S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 F + + + + R + + + + + + + + -

SELECTION OF MATHMATICAL MODEL Assuming a linear relationship in the first instance and taking into account all the possible two factors interaction and confounded interaction, it could be written as: Y =bo+b1F+b2R+b3+b12FR + b13F + b23R DEVELOPMENT OF MODEL Development of the model was done by the method of regression. Analysis of variance methodand students t test were used to check adequacy and significance of the model. XjiYi Evaluation of the coefficients The regression coefficients of the selected model were calculated using Equation 3. This is based on the method of least squares. (2)

bj= Where, Xji = Value of a factor or interaction in coded form XjiYi.

(3)

Yi = Average value of response parameter. N K = Number of observations. = Number of coefficients of the model.

Table 3.3: Coefficients of model S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Coefficients b0 b1 b2 b3 b12 b13 b23 Due to Combined effect of all parameters Welding speed Tool rotation speed Tilt angle Interaction of F and R Interaction of F and Interaction of R and

Table 3.4: Design matrix for calculating the values of coefficients b0 b1 R +1 +1 1 +1 +1 1 +1 +1 +1 1 1 +1 1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 b2 F +1 +1 b3 +1 +1 b12 FR +1 -1 b13 F +1 -1 b23 R +1 +1

+1 1 +1 +1 1 Development of model

+1 1 1

+1 1 1 1

-1 -1 +1

+1 -1 +1

-1 +1 +1

The models could be developed by putting the values of the regression coefficients in Equation 2, given below; Y = b0 +b1R +b2F +b3d +b12 FR +b13 F +b23 R

adequacy of the developed model The adequacy of developed models was checked using analysis of variance technique. As per this technique, if the calculated value of F-ratio of the model developed does not exceed the standard tabulated value of F-ratio for the desired level of confidence (say 95%), then the developed model may be considered adequate within the confidence limit. The F-ratio of the model were compared with the corresponding F-ratio from the standard table 8.4, [30] and it was found that the model is adequate within 95% level of confidence, thus justifying the use of assumed polynomials. The procedure for calculating F ratio is given below. The variance of optimization parameter (S2y) was determined. It can be calculated with Equation 4:

S2y=

(4)

Where, Y2 = (Yiq Ym) 2 Ym = Arithmetical mean of repetitions (response in the repetitions).

Yiq = Value of response in a repetitions trial. N = Number of observations. i= Number of trials. q= Number of repetitions. Further, the variance of adequacy, also called as residual variance was determined by using following Equation 5:

S2ad= Where, S2ad = Variance of adequacy. ym = Observed/Measured response. yp = Estimated/Predicted value of response (obtained from model). f = N-(K+1) (Degree of freedom). K = Number of independently controllable variables. The ratio of variance of adequacy of optimization parameter gives Fisher ratio [30]:

(5)

F-ratio=

(6)

The F-values, obtained and denoted as (Fm) were compared with the table value as (Ft). It was found that the model was adequate at 95% level of significance thus justifying the use of the assumed polynomial. Checking the significance of coefficients of model

The statistical significance of the coefficient can be tested by applying t test. The level of significance of a particular parameter can be determined by the magnitude of the t value associated with it. Higher the value of t, the more significant it becomes. t values were calculated using Equation 7 as follows:

t= (7) Where, bj = absolute value of coefficients.

Sbj = standard deviation of coefficients.

Sbj =

Calculated t values were compared with the t-table value and statistically insignificant terms of the model were dropped. The values of t from the standard table for eight degree of freedom and 95% confidence level is 2.306. Coefficients having calculated t value less than or equal to t value from standard Table 8.6, [30] for eight degree of freedom and 95% confidence level, are the members of reference distribution i.e. due to the intrinsic variations of the experimentation and hence, they cannot be significant. FINAL MODEL Final model could be developed after dropping insignificant coefficients.