DOE 5.1class Notes

1
TLC, DOE 10104

2
TLC, DOE 10104
Audience
611 Whitby Lane
Brentwood, CA 94513
1-925-285-1847
drlittle@dr-tom.com
www.dr-tom.com
This course is designed for those individuals directly working
on product and process development to characterize, optimize
and control product and process performance.
Presentation of course materials is designed for 16 hours of
instruction.
Prerequisites:
Engineering Statistics and Data Analysis is recommended
Software:
JMP 5.1

3
TLC, DOE 10104
Topic Page Number

Section I Introduction to DOE and robust design principles 6
Section II Experimental preparation 49
Section III Full factorial designs 71
Section IV Screening designs 124
Section V Taguchi designs (optional) 149
Section VI Custom designs 167
Section VII Optimization designs 204
Section VIII Mixture designs (optional) 219

DOE Table of Contents
4
TLC, DOE 10104
Upon completion of the course the participants will be able to:
1. Apply the principles of robust design
2. Design experiments appropriate for the information of interest
3. Use and apply the structures of orthogonal arrays for industrial
problem solving
4. Assure the experimental design is efficient
5. Use regression techniques in order to analyze the results and
make process/product improvements
6. Use JMP software to design and analyze experiments

Course Content
5
TLC, DOE 10104
Section I
Introduction to DOE and robust design principles
Experimental preparation
Full factorial designs
Screening designs
Taguchi designs (optional)
Custom designs
Optimization designs
Mixture designs (optional)
6
TLC, DOE 10104
To improve process and design centering and design margins
Performance optimization
Improve product and process robustness
Establish valid design targets, transfer functions and sensitivity budgets
For new equipment characterization and qualification
Developing new process recipes
Problem solving
Variation reduction and performance enhancement
Yield improvement and defect reduction
When processes and systems are complex

DOE is typically the best approach to achieve breakthroughs in
parameter design for new products and processes
General Use of DOE
7
TLC, DOE 10104
Ad-Hoc Data Analysis Versus DOE
Ad-Hoc
Results data from the product
and process
Goal was to make all the
products the same
Problem is some of the parts
are not yielding
Poor range of the Xs
Some correlation of the Xs
Results are often muddy and
the signal is weak
Structured Experiments
Results data from the product
and process
Goal was to make the product
differently to learn what are
the effects
Experiment is typically off-line
The range of the Xs is
purposefully manipulated
Zero or near zero correlation
of the Xs
Results are often clear and
the signal is strong
8
TLC, DOE 10104
Experimental Process
1. Define the problem and goals
2. Brainstorm factors, experimental levels and responses
3. Design the experiment using JMP

a) Experimental matrix
b) Sampling plan
c) Error control plan
4. Run experiment, collect data
5. Analyze data, fit model and optimize the response
6. Validate the solution and implement the improvement
9
TLC, DOE 10104
Factor (X, Input)
A feature in the design or process which influences a resulting quality
characteristic. Cost and time of the experiment is largely a function of the
number of factors in the study. An X can be nominal or continuous.
Response (Y, Output)
A measurable quality characteristic of the product. A Y can be either nominal or
continuous.
Level (Settings for each X)
Parameter settings for the experiment. Typical designs have 2-3 levels during
characterization, 4-5 during optimization. The number of categorical levels are
as many as are considered useful.

Language of DOE
Process or Process or
Product Product
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Response 1
Response 2
Response 3
Xs
Ys
Product Responses
Process or Process or
Product Product
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Response 1
Response 2
Response 3
Xs
Ys
Product Responses
10
TLC, DOE 10104
Constant
Factors
Are held fixed
during the
experiment
Experimental
Factors
Are changed
during the
experiment
Covariate
Factors
Factors that
cannot be
controlled;
however may
influence the
response
All constant factor
effects during the
experiment are
considered to be
zero. Single
machine, single
operator, one
material lot etc.
(error control).
The goal of the
experiment is to
characterize all
experimental
factors.
Experimental
factors are
continuous,
categorical or
mixture.
Covariate factors
must be measurable
to be useful. The
two types of
covariates are insitu
and fixed covariates.
JMP only refers to
fixed covariates
during design.
More on Factors
Effects of blocking
factors are removed
from the results as not
to mix in with the
estimation of other
factors. (error control)
Blocking
Factors
Factors included
to control for
potential sources
of error
11
TLC, DOE 10104
Custom Design JMP Factor Definition
Select DOE,
Custom Design,
Factors, Add
Factor to see the
factor types in
designing an
experiment.
Once factors are
defined they can
be saved by
selecting
Custom Design,
Save Factors.
12
TLC, DOE 10104
Bigger is Better Smaller is Better
One-sided upper specification limit only
USL
One-sided - lower specification limit only
LSL
Two-sided specifications
LSL USL
Target is Best
Three Types Of Responses
Unacceptable Good
Good Unacceptable Unacceptable Good Unacceptable
What are some Company examples of each of these?
0
13
TLC, DOE 10104
Defining Responses in JMP
Select Add Response when
adding responses to an
experiment.
Once responses are defined they
can be saved by selecting Custom
Design, Save Responses.
Goals are defined:
Maximize (Lower Limit only)
Match Target (Upper and Lower)
Minimize (Upper Limit only)

14
TLC, DOE 10104
Linear
Effects
Only 2 levels are
required. Linear
effects are about
70% + of all
effects.
Interaction
Effects
Two or more factors
are required.
Interactions are
found in most
systems.
Interactions are
about 10-20% of all
effects.
Quadratic
Effects
Three or more
levels are required.
Non linear effects
are common.
Curvature effects
are about 5-15% of
all effects.
Linear, Interaction & Quadratic Effects
15
TLC, DOE 10104
Factor & Response Examples
In Class Exercise: 5 Min

Pre-Experimental Design
Experiment Name:
Date:
Experimental Problem, Objectives and Goals: Experimenter(s):
Do the following:
1. Open the file Factor Response Matrix.xls
2. Select a product, process or test condition for characterization or
improvement
3. Define the problem for the experiment
4. Determine the objectives of the experiment
5. Determine the goals of the experiment (maximize, minimize or hit
some target)

16
TLC, DOE 10104
Responses:
Output: 1000 ft/hr or >
Dia.: 2.54 .03
Cracks: < 10 per hour
Factors:
Speed: 200-100 rpm
Temperature: 300-250
Time: 10-5 minutes
Pressure: 30-15 psi
Manufacture of Extruded Plastic Rod
DOE simulation
17
TLC, DOE 10104
20 Trials to Solve the Problem
Run Speed Temperature Time Pressure Output Diameter Cracks
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
In Class Exercise: 45 Min
Factors Responses
18
TLC, DOE 10104
Best Guess and Tweak
One Factor at a Time
All Combinations of all Factors
DOE
a structured development strategy for product/process
engineering in order to characterize, optimize and control the
product with minimal waste. This is accomplished by
experimenting with many factors at the same time.
Commonly Used Development Methods

19
TLC, DOE 10104
System Design: is the selection of the general
technology and or approach for the design or process

Parameter Design: is the selection of the targets for the
design or process. For the design they are product design
targets, for the process they are process parameter
targets.

Tolerance Design: is the allowable deviation or limits
from the target parameter. Bigger is better, smaller is
better or target is best.
System, Parameter & Tolerance Design
Dr. Genichi Taguchi: All development/design can
be broken down into the following:
20
TLC, DOE 10104
Customer Requirements
Performance
Requirements
System Design (Trade Studies)
Parameter Design (DOE)
Tolerance Design (DOE)
Design
& Process
Qualified?

(DPPM & C
pk
)
Yes
No
Control Product & Process
(SPC)
Process Capability Data
Characterize, Optimize, & Control
Deliver to Customer
Systematic Product Development and Improvement
21
TLC, DOE 10104
PLAN Activity Time Importance
Statement of Objectives 10 % 70%
Organization of Support Team
Background Research
Selection of the Factors and Levels
DO Design and Run the Experiments 65% 10%
CHECK Modeling, Analysis, and Validation 20% 15%
ACT Optimization 5% 5%

Begin With the End in Mind
Identification of the right factors and right levels are critical for
achieving optimal results out of the experimentation process
22
TLC, DOE 10104
GOAL:
Ensure every design point and process operation is
Robust with respect to its intended function.
ROBUST:
Insensitive to product or process variation. A robust
product/process continues to provide high quality results
even when variation is present.
Robust Design
23
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Quadratic Loss Function
Loss = k(o
2
+ (x-T)
2
)

$
Loss
LSL
USL
Taguchi quadratic loss function is a good conceptual model for improving
robustness. We need the right targets and right tolerances in order to
minimize all losses in cost and performance. Quality is not a step function.
Dollar loss (K)
includes:
Yield loss
Quality incidents
Customer loss
Consumer loss
Reliability loss
Product recalls
Customer sat.
Market share loss
Example is a target is best loss
function. There are also smaller
is better and bigger is better
functions as well.
24
TLC, DOE 10104
1. Design in Margin
2. Achieve Target
3. Minimize Variability
4. Characterize and Minimize Noise Effects
5. Design to the Flats
6. Use Parameter Combinations
7. Optimize Designs and Processes
8. Use Interactions to Tune Out Sensitivities
8 Robust Design Principles
25
TLC, DOE 10104
Typical design margins are
15% greater than worst case
100
100
100 lb.
rated
No
Margin
100 Base
100 WC
+ 30 Margin
230 lb.

1. Design in Margin
System design is the primary focus for margin improvement;
material selection, product design, capital equipment, etc.
26
TLC, DOE 10104
GOAL: x = Target
1.5o Shifts in
the mean are
common
during production
Runs.
Keeping the product on
target (not just within
specification) is often the
quickest and most simple
way to make improvements
in production yields and
minimizes loss. This is
particularly true for multi-step
operations.

LSL USL
TARGET
LSL USL
TARGET
2. Achieve Target
27
TLC, DOE 10104
Non-Robust Robust
Process Process

Even when changes in the average occur the
product is still within customer specifications
3. Minimize Variation
28
TLC, DOE 10104
Variation Reduction Methods
DFM Simplify product designs and follow design rules for
a highly manufacturable product
Design of Experiments Improved targets, run conditions & controls
SPC Minimize over and under control errors
Correct Capital Equipment Determine if process is capable, reengineer, retool
or capitalize if incapable
Buy better components Reduced assembly defects and improved products
POV/COV/REML studies Locate source of variation and make improvements
Supplier Qualification Allow only qualified parts into the assembly
MSA Eliminate or reduce gauge/tester error from
the production system
Standardized work Clean, organized, ESD free, methods of work
29
TLC, DOE 10104
Noise
Factors in the
environment that effect
the product
characteristics of
interest
30
TLC, DOE 10104
Process or
Product
R
a
w

M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l

M
a
c
h
i
n
e

O
p
e
r
a
t
o
r

H
u
m
i
d
i
t
y

E
S
D

T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Response 1
Response 2
Response 3
Internal Noise (Factors or Covariates)
External Noise
(Factors or Covariates)
P
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
s

Xs
Xs
Xs
Ys
Consider using the internal and
external noise Xs as factors
during your experiments. Then
determine how to minimize their
influence based on sensitivities.
Design
parameters,
Materials and
Machine Settings
Product Responses
31
TLC, DOE 10104
Factor A
Temperature

Volume
5. Design to the Flats
Must include the quadratic term in
the experiment and model in order to
estimate curvature
32
TLC, DOE 10104
Use parameter combinations to reduce
variation and place response on-target
Low Setting of A High Setting of A
Off-Target
Low Variation

On-Target
High Variation
33
TLC, DOE 10104
High Setting of Factor A
Off-Target
Low Variation

On-Target
Low Variation
x shift due to Factor B
Design or process characterization must be complete
before an engineer can use this method
34
TLC, DOE 10104
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Tons
Shoveled
per Man
per Day
21.5 lb. optimum shovel
load for any material
Old Way New Way
No. of laborers 500 140
Tons per man per day 16 59
Earnings per man per day $1.15 $1.88
Cost per Ton .07 .03
600 workers & 15
different shovel
geometries were
used
Shovel Load

7. Optimize
35
TLC, DOE 10104
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2
Bond
Strength
(lbs)
Cure Time (sec.)
Customer
Requirement
7. Optimize
How does optimizing improve product robustness?
36
TLC, DOE 10104
Interaction
Profiles
49
34
49
34
Speed
115
111.25
107.5
103.75
100
30
26.25
22.5
18.75
15
Temperature
T
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s

T
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s

8. Use Interactions to Tune Out Sensitivities
Interactions can be used to tune the design or process
to the flattest most robust condition.
What speed setting will cause the change in temperature to
have little to no affect on thickness?
37
TLC, DOE 10104
Class III Class IV
Affects only the Does not affect
average the response
Class I Class II
Affects both the Affects the standard
average and standard deviation only
deviation
Types of Factor Influence
How would these
look if displayed as
scatter diagrams?
38
TLC, DOE 10104
Replicates are multiple runs and or measurements at identical test
conditions. Experimental replicates are an excellent way to gather
information concerning process and product variation.
3 to 5 replicates of the test condition are typically sufficient to
characterize the mean and standard deviation.
In order to determine factor class, replicates must be used in the
experiment and the Y response is summarized into mean and standard
deviation from the replicated experimental raw data for each treatment
combination.
Between unit (independent) replicates are much more expensive and
highly desirable. Between unit replicates require additional units run at
the same settings. (between replicates will add 3-5X the cost)
Within unit (dependent) replicates are inexpensive and very valuable.
Within unit replicates are multiple measurements taken on the same unit.
Within unit replicates are sometimes referred to as pseudo replicates.
Replicates
39
TLC, DOE 10104
1. Experimental Design
2. Statistical Tests and Analysis
No amount of statistical manipulation will correct for
poorly planned and conducted experimentation
Good designs will result in good interpretation of the
results
Experimental Design and Statistical Tests
40
TLC, DOE 10104
Test Validity
Test appropriate for the measure
Tests the condition of interest
Valid test results are considered to
be true
Test Repeatability
Same results time-after-time
Can a test be repeatable and not valid?
Test Validity
Patterned silicon substrates are expensive, un-patterned glass
substrates are cheap. Which substrate should you select for the
experiment?
41
TLC, DOE 10104
Internal Validity
Results are valid within the test
The effects we see are real
Results are not confounded
DOE is excellent for internal validity

External Validity
Results can be generalized and repeatable
Given similar conditions (materials, machines, etc.) we
will see similar results
Threats to Validity
42
TLC, DOE 10104
1. Unknown Events
2. Systematic Change
3. Measurement Error
4. Lost Tests
5. Identification
6. Test Reaction
7. Selection
8. Regression
9. Outliers & Data Entry Errors

Threats to Internal Validity
43
TLC, DOE 10104
1. Unknown Events
An event occurs during the experiment that has an
effect. The effect of the event is confused with another
factor.

2. Systematic Change
Some systematic change occurs in the system during
the experiment. The systematic change is confused with
another factor.

3. Measurement Error
Problems with accuracy, linearity, repeatability,
reproducibility, and stability of measurement. The
measurement errors are mistaken for factor effects.

44
TLC, DOE 10104
4. Lost Tests
Missing data does not allow for proper analysis of the
data and false conclusions are drawn.

5. Identification
Test results are misidentified or not identified at all.
The link between results and the test conditions are
corrupted. This is the #1 error in large experiments.

6. Test Reaction
The parts and or materials change as a direct result of
measurement.
45
TLC, DOE 10104
7. Selection
Inappropriately selected, nonrepresentative materials
are used for experimentation.

8. Regression
Extreme cases are confused with factor effects.
Upon further examination the results return to the
mean.

9. Outliers & Data Entry Errors
Nonrepresentative results are confused with factor
effects.
46
TLC, DOE 10104
Multifactor Experimental Designs are True Experiments
True experiments control for the 9 threats to internal validity
by design. Even if these problems occur they will not
impact the experimental results to any great degree.
True Experiments
47
TLC, DOE 10104
Randomization assures the threats to internal
validity are minimized.
If its hard to randomize a factor
What can be done?
Randomization
minimizes any
systematic
effects during
the experiment
Randomization
48
TLC, DOE 10104
Factor A Response Problem 1 Problem 2 Problem 3
- 10 10 5 0
- 10 10 5 5
- 10 10 5 0
- 10 10 5 5
+ 20 10 0 0
+ 20 10 0 5
+ 20 10 0 0
+ 20 10 0 5
Full Effect 10
Randomization Exercise
49
TLC, DOE 10104
Section II
Screening designs
Custom designs
50
TLC, DOE 10104
Objectives
Defined
Formalize the
Experimental
Team
Select the
Responses for
the Experiment
Detailed
Review of the
Product and or
Process
Conduct a Brief
Literature
Review*
Brainstorm
Factors*
Matrix of
Factors and
Responses
Factors and
Levels Selected
Design
Experimental
Matrix
Measurement
Instruments
Capable?
Are Costs
Acceptable to
Management?
Has Potential
Variation been
Minimized?
Begin
Experiments
Experimental Preparation
51
TLC, DOE 10104
Team leader (as needed)
Internal and external product and process experts
Equipment and or material suppliers
Operators and technical staff
Statistical support
Measurement and lab personnel
Consultants
Define problem, objectives, goals and study questions
Define Problem, Objective and Technical Team
52
TLC, DOE 10104
As many responses as practical should be selected for the
experiment, relatively speaking responses are cheap factors are
expensive
x and s should be determined for every response
If the Y variable is defect data a ranking scale should be developed
to evaluate quality (1 bad, 2 poor, 3 fair, 4 good, 5 excellent)
Is the metrology/inspection method well defined and capable?
(MSA, GR&R)
If inspection is used use only one inspector
Select Responses to Measure
53
TLC, DOE 10104
Exercise: Factor Response Matrix (Ys)
In Class Exercise: 10 Min.
Do the following:
1. Use the DOE factor/response matrix to identify all Ys in the experiment
2. Determine the goal, specification limits and %GR&R for each Y
3. Weight each Y relative to one another for importance (relative to 1)
Responses (Y)
Goal (Max, Min, Target) Maximize Min. Match Target
USL
Target
LSL
% GR&R
Responses (Y)
Response 1 Reponse 2 Reponse 3 Reponse 4 Reponse 5 Reponse 6 Reponse 7
Importance (weight)
Factors (X) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
54
TLC, DOE 10104
Identify All Experimental Factors (Xs)
Continuous Xs
Independent factors measured along a continuous scale
and values between the factor settings are meaningful

Categorical (Nominal) Xs
Variables that are set at discrete values and values between
the factor settings are not meaningful

Mixture Xs
Dependent experimental factors used in gas, fluid or
formulation experiments (must be 3+ factors to use)
55
TLC, DOE 10104
Controlling Experimental Error Xs

Hold Factors Constant Xs
Single lot of material, single operator, single machine, single tester
or measurement instrument etc. Restrict possible sources of
variation during the experiment.

Randomize the Runs
For all other unforeseeable problems, randomize to spread out any
potential concentrated effects. Randomize as often as is practical.

Blocking Xs (Noise Factors)
Include a blocking factor in the experiment to control a potential
source of variation. Multiple batches, lots, machines, days, tools..
etc. Blocking is done where you expect variation to interfere with
your experimental results. Blocking factors are added to the
experimental design.

56
TLC, DOE 10104
Covariate Xs to Understand Noise Factors

Fixed Covariate Xs (Noise Factors)

Fixed covariates are measured prior to the experiment and
included as a factor when designing the experiment. Material
properties are the most common. Fixed covariates are
uncontrollable by the experimenter and can be included as
part of the experiment through random assignment.

Insitu Covariate Xs (Noise Factors)

Factors which may influence the performance of the product
or process are measured during the experiment and afterward
included in the model to determine any effects. insitu
covariates are not controllable by the experimenter and are
likely to have influence on the response and can be measured
during the experiment. They are not part of the design they
are a part of the analysis.

57
TLC, DOE 10104
You Need to Believe:
Others have experienced your problems
You can benefit by doing your homework
The problem may be solved

Sources:
Internet Search
Standards: ASTM, MIL STD, etc.
Trade Associations
Journal Articles
Conference Proceedings
Books
Engineering and Scientific Databases
Review the Literature to Determine the Xs
58
TLC, DOE 10104
Brainstorm the Factors to Determine the Xs
A cause and effect diagram is a good approach to organizing factor
relationships
Def ects in circuit board
Inspection
Measurement Test coverage
Inspector
Solder process
Splatter Flux
Chain speed
Temperature
Setup
Control
Wave pump
Height
Flow
Raw card
Short circuit Shroud
Moisture context
Time
Temperature
Components
Missing f romreel
Vendor
Setup
Wrong part
Functional f ailure
Component insertion
Wrong component Missing component
Crimp
Alignment
Operator
Autoposition
Cause and Effect Diagram
59
TLC, DOE 10104
Examine the Factor Flow Relationships
Critical Variable (X)
Response (Y)
For multi-step processes examine the process flow and
sequence to determine the factors to be included in the
experiment
60
TLC, DOE 10104
*9=Strong 6=Moderate 3=Weak 0=No Relationship
Responses
Factors
# Solder Solder Paste
Defects Volume Height
Screen Tension
Board Offset
Paste Viscosity
Stencil Thickness
Pressure
Speed
Blade Angle
3*
6
9
6
9
6
0

3
9
9
9
9
6
3

3
9
9
6
9
6
3

9
24
27
21
27
18
6

39 45 42
Total
Total
Response / Factor Matrix
61
TLC, DOE 10104
2-3 levels for all continuous factors
Center at current design/process if possible
Open up the range, see the effect
Conduct pre-experiments
Minimum of 6o from the current process mean
For categorical factors the number of levels are as many as
desired by the experimenter; however, as additional
categories are added the cost increases
Determining Levels
62
TLC, DOE 10104
Strength
Small Range
No Effect
Concentration
Large Range
Clear Effect
Open the Range, See The Effect
63
TLC, DOE 10104
-6o -5o -4o -3o -2o -1o 0 1o 2o 3o 4o 5o 6o
LOW MIDPOINT HIGH
Min. Recommended Distance for the Range of X
Variability in the Factor (X)
64
TLC, DOE 10104
If unsure of levels, run a few
pre-experiments to find an
operating range, then begin
the experiment
The Value of Pre-Experiments
65
TLC, DOE 10104
Estimate Experimental Costs
Material costs
Machine time
Indirect labor hours
Direct labor hours
Measurement time and costs
Lab or vendor related costs
Based on these costs what is the maximum number of
experiments that are considered acceptable to management?

66
TLC, DOE 10104
Exercise: Factor Response Matrix (Xs)
Do the following:
1. Based on the Ys brainstorm all potential Xs for the experiment
2. Determine the relationship between the Xs and the Ys (0,3,6,9)
3. Select the critical factors to be included in the experiment and color
code them
4. Determine the type of factor based on the guidelines
5. Determine the levels for each selected factor
6. Based on cost estimates what are the maximum number of
experiments considered acceptable by management?
Importance (weight) Experimental Levels*
Factor Types
Factors (X) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Totals* High Center Low
Factor 1 9 9
Factor 2 6 6
Factor 3 3 3
Factor 4 0 0
Factor 5 0
Factor 6 0
Factor 7 0
Factor 8 0
Factor 9 0
Factor 10 0
Factor 11 0
Factor 12 0
Factor 13 0
67
TLC, DOE 10104
Clear Representative Sampling Plan
Representative Sampling
Make sure you have an appropriate measurement technology and a
sampling plan that properly represents the mean and sigma from the
process.
You must know something about the variability patterns in the process or
product to determine the sampling plan.

68
TLC, DOE 10104
Example, Etch Depth Data.JMP

1. How should the
samples be taken?
2. What is independent and what is dependent?
3. Why are the lots shifting so much how do I minimize the lot effect
during experimentation?
4. What is the experimental unit is it a lot, wafer or die?
5. How does the product or process change over time?
Lot&Random
Wafer&Random
Location&Random
Residual
Total
Random Ef fect
3.6528337
0.969812
0.112789
Var Ratio
47412.046
12587.698
1463.9473
12979.525
74443.216
Var Component
36335.827
5277.9859
1431.1996
Std Error
15998.115
6377.1029
404.62176
95% Lower
514649.27
35491.455
50293.091
95% Upper
63.689
16.909
1.967
17.435
100.000
Pct of Total
-2 LogLikelihood = 1590.1372
REML Variance Component Estimates
E
t
c
h

D
e
p
t
h
4000
4100
4200
4300
4400
4500
4600
4700
4800
4900
5000
5100
5200
1 2 3 4 5
Lot
Oneway Analysis of Etch Depth By Lot
E
t
c
h

D
e
p
t
h
4000
4100
4200
4300
4400
4500
4600
4700
4800
4900
5000
5100
5200
1 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2 20
21
22
23
24
25
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Wafer
Oneway Analysis of Etch Depth By Wafer
E
t
c
h

D
e
p
t
h
4000
4100
4200
4300
4400
4500
4600
4700
4800
4900
5000
5100
5200
1 2 3 4 5
Location
Oneway Analysis of Etch Depth By Location
Fit Y by X Group
69
TLC, DOE 10104
One More View
Remember all of the variation in this example is occurring
without any purposeful change in any of the X variables.
E
t
c
h

D
e
p
t
h
4000
4100
4200
4300
4400
4500
4600
4700
4800
4900
5000
5100
5200
12345123451234512345123451234512345123451234512345123451234512345123451234512345123451234512345123451234512345123451234512345
Location
1 2 3 4 5 10 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Waf er
1 2 3 4 5
Lot
Variability Chart for Etch Depth
70
TLC, DOE 10104
Based on your training do the following:

1) What constitutes the experimental unit for your study?

2) Are variation patterns and percentages known about the product or
process under consideration? Has a variation (REML) study been done
on the process?

3) Where on the device or unit will you take your measurements?

4) How many units per treatment combination will you require? (between
unit replicates)

5) How many measurements per unit will you take? (within unit replicates)

Exercise: Sampling Plan
71
TLC, DOE 10104
Section III
Screening designs
Custom designs
72
TLC, DOE 10104
Process of Experimentation
Complete knowledge
Optimization 1-3 factor
studies, complex fits possible
Characterization 3-8 factor
studies, response surface
method (RSM) linear, 2 factor
interactions and quadratics
effects
Screening 6-20 factor studies,
typically linear effects only.
Used when understanding of
the product or process is low.
You need to know where you are on the knowledge scale to determine the
experimental approach appropriate for your problem.
100%
80%+
75%+

50%+

0%
73
TLC, DOE 10104
OneWay ANOVA Screening Characterization Optimization
2+ levels of
one factor,
or 2+
factors at a
fixed level
with
multiple
runs per
condition

6-20 factors,
linear effects
and some two
factor
interactions, in
the smallest
number of
experiments
Fractional
factorial,
supersaturated
and Taguchi
designs
3-8 factors, linear
effects, two factor
interactions and
quadratic effects
Full factorial
designs, fractional
factorial designs,
D-optimal and
I-optimal custom
designs (RSM)
1-3 factors, linear
effects, two factor
interactions and
complex
polynomials
CCD and
Box-Behnkin
Designs

Type of Experiments
74
TLC, DOE 10104
Full Factorial 2 to n factors (typically used for 2-4 factors only)
Screening Designs (Fractional Factorial)
Resolution III Designs Linear effects only
Resolution IV Designs Linear effects and some two factor interactions
Resolution V+ Designs Linear effects and all two factor interactions
Supersaturated designs Custom design based on user requirements
Custom Designs
D-optimal Corner weighted designs, user defined terms
I-optimal designs (RSM) Center weighted designs, user defined terms
Screening and Characterization Designs
75
TLC, DOE 10104
A class of designs that use k factors at 2 levels
t = n
k

Where:
t = the number of tests
n = number of levels
k = number of factors
t = 2
3
= 8 tests
How many tests for
2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 factors
Two Level Full Factorial Design Structure
76
TLC, DOE 10104
Some Full Factorial Designs 2
k
Four Factor
Full Factorial 2
4
Standard
Order
A B C D
1. 1 - - - -
2. a + - - -
3. b - + - -
4. ab + + - -
5. c - - + -
6. ac + - + -
7. bc - + + -
8. abc + + + -
9. d - - - +
10. ad + - - +
11. bd - + - +
12. abd + + - +
13. cd - - + +
14. acd + - + +
15. bcd - + + +
16. abcd + + + +
Three Factor
Full Factorial 2
3
Standard
Order
A B C
1. 1 - - -
2. a + - -
3. b - + -
4. ab + + -
5. c - - +
6. ac + - +
7. bc - + +
8. abc + + +

Two Factor
Full Factorial 2
2
Standard
Order
A B
1. 1 - -
2. a + -
3. b - +
4. ab + +

77
TLC, DOE 10104
A B C
t Solder Type Blade Angle Lift-Off Speed
l - - -
a + - -
b - + -
ab + + -
c - - +
ac + - +
bc - + +
abc + + +
Construct a 16=2
4
array
Measured
Effects
The key to
analysis is
the column
Independent Sensors
78
TLC, DOE 10104
Solder Type (a)
Lift-Off Speed (c)
Blade
Angle (b)
1
c
bc
abc
ab
a
ac
b
Solder Type (a)
L
i
f
t
-
o
f
f

S
p
e
e
d

(
c
)

The structure of the
experiment allows for
the independent
assessment of each
factor effect
simultaneously
Full Factorial Designs
79
TLC, DOE 10104
b
1
c
bc
abc
ab
a
ac
b
L
i
f
t
-
O
f
f

S
p
e
e
d

(
c
)

1
c
bc abc
ab
a
ac
b
Solder Type (a)
1
c
bc
abc
ab
a
ac
Linear Effects
- Low level
+ High level
b
80
TLC, DOE 10104
b
1
c
bc
abc
ab
a
ac
b
1
c
bc
abc
ab
a
ac
b
BC Interaction
1
c
bc abc
ab
a
ac
AC Interaction
AB Interaction
Seeing the Interactions
- Alternate signs
+ Same signs
81
TLC, DOE 10104
Full Factorial Example
Problem:
A company wishes to install new and improved screen
printers for a new automated line. The Engineers are not
sure which Xs influence the Ys. A 3-4 factor DOE was
suggested. A cause and effect matrix was done on the
process and the critical factors and responses are as
follows:
Critical Ys (Responses)
Paste Height x
Past Height s
Critical Xs (Factors) Type of Factor
Solder Type Categorical
Blade Angle Continuous
Lift-off Speed Continuous

82
TLC, DOE 10104
High = 90, Low = 45 Degrees
+
A B C
Run Standard
Solder
Type
Blade
Angle
Lift-Off
Speed
Paste
Height
x
2 l - - -
4 a + - -
1 b - + -
6 ab + + -
7 c - - +
3 ac + - +
8 bc - + +
5 abc + +
Solder Type High = Indium, Low = Fluxor
Blade Angle
Lift-Off Speed
Response
Paste Height (mean and sigma) Mils
High = 5, Low = 1 Seconds
1. Run the
experiment
and measure
the results

5 measures were
taken per board
and the mean and
sigma recorded
Analysis Of Factorial Designs
Factor Levels Unit
Paste
Height
s
8.8 0.22
6.0 0.11
8.9 0.15
6.2 0.28
7.8 0.64
9.0 0.45
7.9 0.31
7.3 0.53
83
TLC, DOE 10104
2. Use the columns to compute each factor effect
Solder Type (a)
+ -
6.0 8.8
6.2 8.9
9.0 7.8
7.3 7.9
7.125 8.35
Full Effect
-1.225
Average
Full Effect = Average high - Average Low

Compute the influence of Blade Angle
and Speed on the average paste height

Compute the Linear Term
A
Solder
Type
Paste
Height
x
- 8.8
+ 6.0
- 8.9
+ 6.2
- 7.8
+ 9.0
- 7.9
+ 7.3
84
TLC, DOE 10104
Analysis
Only
AB AC BC
+ + +
- - +
- + -
+ - -
+ - -
- + -
- - +
Experimentation
A B C
Solder Type Blade Angle Lift-Off Speed
- - -
+ - -
- + -
+ + -
- - +
+ - +
- + +
+ + + + + +
3. Compute the 2 factor interactions
Paste
Height
x
8.8 0.22
6.0 0.11
8.9 0.15
6.2 0.28
7.8 0.64
9.0 0.45
7.9 0.31
7.3 0.53
Paste
Height
s
Find the Interactions
85
TLC, DOE 10104
Using the new columns compute the interactions
Average
Solder Type x Lift-Off Speed
AC Interaction
+ -
8.8 6.0
8.9 6.2
9.0 7.8
7.3 7.9
8.5 6.975
Full Effect
1.525
AC
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
Paste
Height
x
8.8
6.0
8.9
6.2
7.8
9.0
7.9
7.3
Compute the AB and BC interaction

Compute the Interaction Terms
86
TLC, DOE 10104
Solder Type (A)
- +
Low High
8.8 6.0
- 8.9 6.2
Lift Off Speed (C)
Low Average 8.85 Average 6.1
+ 7.8 9.0
High 7.9 7.3
Average 7.85 Average 8.15
Experimentation
A B C
Solder Type Blade Angle
Lift-Off
Speed
- - -
+ - -
- + -
+ + -
- - +
+ - +
- + +
+ + +
Paste
Height
x
8.8
6.0
8.9
6.2
7.8
9.0
7.9
7.3
Construction of an Isoplot
87
TLC, DOE 10104
Interaction of Solder Type and Lift-off Speed
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
Fluxor Indium Solder Type
P
a
s
t
e

H
e
i
g
h
t

Speed -
Speed +
Solder Type
Speed - Speed +
Fluxor 8.85 7.85
Indium 6.10 8.15
Graph the Isoplots for AB & BC interactions In Class Exercise: 10 Min.
Seeing the Interaction
88
TLC, DOE 10104
y= |
o
+|
1
x
1
+|
2
x
2
+|
3
x
3
+
|
12
x
1
x
2
+|
13
x
1
x
3
+|
23
x
2
x
3
+
|
11
x
1
2
+|
22
x
2
2
+|
33
x
3
2

Where:
|
n
= Coefficient or (full effect/2)
x
n
= -1 to +1 (coded)
When modeling categorical effects in JMP:

Average
Linear
2 Factor Interactions
Quadratic
The General Model Equation
89
TLC, DOE 10104
6.75
3.375
0.00
-1 0 +1
x
n
=(X-Midpoint)
Range
Coefficient = Full Effect
2
y = Average + Coefficient (x
n
)

Lift-off Speed = 1 - 5
Constructing a Model
.5 = (4 - 3)
2
90
TLC, DOE 10104
Predicted (model) Actual (real world) = Residuals
Examine large residuals and remove where appropriate
Solder Type Blade Angle Lift-off Speed Paste Height Ave Model Residual
Checking the Model Using Residuals
1 45 1 8.8 8.5625 -0.2375
2 45 1 6 6.2375 0.2375
1 90 1 8.9 9.1375 0.2375
2 90 1 6.2 5.9625 -0.2375
1 45 5 7.8 8.0375 0.2375
2 45 5 9 8.7625 -0.2375
1 90 5 7.9 7.6625 -0.2375
2 90 5 7.3 7.5375 0.2375
Our expectations for residuals is they are random normal
about the model fit and show no pattern or trends.
91
TLC, DOE 10104
t test for Significance
Estimate Standard Error t value p value
Solder Type[Fluxor] 0.6125 0.2375 2.5789 0.2355
Blade Angle(45,90) -0.1625 0.2375 -0.6842 0.6180
Lift-off Speed(1,5) 0.2625 0.2375 1.1053 0.4682
Solder Type[Fluxor]*Blade Angle(45,90) 0.2125 0.2375 0.8947 0.5353
Solder Type[Fluxor]*Lift-off Speed(1,5) -0.7625 0.2375 -3.2105 0.1922
Blade Angle(45,90)*Lift-off Speed(1,5) -0.2375 0.2375 -1.0000 0.5000
Where:
Estimate = Coefficient (Signal)
Standard Error = Root Mean Square Error / Sqrt(number of experiments) (Noise)
t value = Number of standard errors of effect = Coefficient/standard Error
p value = Probability of getting an effect of that size or greater by random chance alone.
Compare to .05.

92
TLC, DOE 10104
p value
-6s
x
-5s
x
-4s
x
-3s
x
-2s
x
-1s
x
0 1s
x
2s
x
3s
x
4s
x
5s
x
6s
x
p value = probability of getting an effect of that size or greater by
random chance alone. Area under the curve >ltl
in Excel = tdist(abs(t),df,tails) for Solder Type
= tdist(abs(2.5789),1,2)=.2355
t is the number of standard errors the mean is
shifted away from center
2.5789 -2.5789
93
TLC, DOE 10104
RSquare

RSquare whole model = SS
model
/SS
total
Proportion of change in the response that
can be predicted by knowing the model.
Proportion of the explained variation.
RSquare Adj = correction to Rsquare for
the number of parameters used in the
model. As the number of parameters
increases RSquare also increases.
RSquare Adj corrects for this problem to
help determine if the model is indeed better.
Use RSquare Adj and not RSquare.
Root Mean Square Error estimates the
standard deviation of the unexplained or
residual variation and is the sqrt(MS
error
)
94
TLC, DOE 10104
ANOVA
Analysis of Variance tests the whole model for
statistical significance
Source is explained variation (model terms) and
unexplained variation (error)
Model is the number of terms in the equation. In this
case there six terms being estimated; 3 linear terms and
3 interaction terms.
Error is the unexplained variation
DF degrees of freedom = (n-1) in this case there are 8
experiments and DF = 7, 6 model terms and 1 error
term.
Sum of Squares (SS) E(X-x)
2
squared deviation from
average (SS
model
is variation induced by factor effects)
Mean Square = SS/df (similar to the variance)
F Ratio = MS
model
/MS
error
(Signal/Noise)
Prob > F (p value) = area under the curve greater
than F. Significant models have a value of .05 or less
95
TLC, DOE 10104
1. Complete Pre-DOE activities
2. Determine responses and goals
3. Determine factors and levels
4. Design experiment
5. Collect data and enter results
6. Examine correlation of Xs
7. Select model terms and examine effects
8. Check the model using residuals
9. Refine the model (ps .05)
10. Analyze interactions
11. Using the model, find the solution
12. Validate solution
Review the Steps, Use the Computer
96
TLC, DOE 10104
1. Complete Pre-DOE
activities
2. Determine responses and
goals
3. Determine factors and
levels
4. Design experiment

Select DOE, Full
Factorial Design
Full Factorial Designs in JMP
97
TLC, DOE 10104
Define all responses and
factors for the experiment.
Make sure to define goals,
limits and values.
Select Continuous or
Categorical to add Factors
to the experiment. Then
define the Factors and levels
for the experiment. Once
complete select Continue.
Leave the run order
Randomize or sort the table
if desired and add Center
Points and Replicates as
needed.
4. Design Experiment
98
TLC, DOE 10104
DOE Design Tip
Center Points
Check for nonlinear effects
Reduce prediction error
Estimate pure error
Test for lack of fit
Used as a control throughout
the experiment
-1
-0. 5
0
0.5
1
1.5
-1
-0. 5
0
0.5
1
1.5
-1
-0. 5
0
0.5
1
1.5
X1
-1 -0. 5 0 . 5 1 1.5
X2
-1 -0. 5 0 . 5 1 1.5
X3
-1 -0. 5 0 . 5 1 1.5
Scatterplot Matrix
Center points are typically considered
optional and are nice to have if the cost
of experimentation is not prohibitive.
99
TLC, DOE 10104
Full Factorial Designs in JMP
Modify your design
choices and then
select Make Table.
In most cases full
factorial designs
are only
appropriate for 2, 3
and 4 factor
experiments.
When the number
of factors rises
above 5 select
Screening or
Custom Design.
100
TLC, DOE 10104
5. Enter the Results
Enter the data associated with each experiment. Be careful
to maintain traceability of experimental run conditions to the
collected data. In general raw data should be entered into
JMP. If mean and stdev of replicates are desired use the
Summary table command. Check the newly entered Y
variable data using a histogram and outlier boxplot to make
sure no data entry errors have occurred.
101
TLC, DOE 10104
6. Examine the Correlation of Xs
Select Multivariate to examine multiple correlations
simultaneously. If Xs are correlated they will not be able to
independently isolate the factor effect on the response. DOE by
design assures there is little to no correlation among the Xs. This
step is most useful to examine experiments you may be analyzing
that were designed by engineers or customers.
102
TLC, DOE 10104
Only continuous factors and responses
can be added. Select the column
responses and factors and enter them
as Y,Columns and then select OK.
Examine Correlation of Xs
103
TLC, DOE 10104
We can see from the example
the factors for the experiment are
completely uncorrelated and
therefore should have no
problem in isolating any effects
associated with the factor.
r = 0.00
If Xs were correlated to any great
degree (>.5) then the
experiment was not designed
correctly and should be redone.
Examine Correlation of Xs
104
TLC, DOE 10104
Outlier Analysis
Select, Analyze,
Multivariate, Outlier
Analysis.
Check Outlier Analysis
for any outliers in the
data prior to analysis.
Mark and color possible
outliers prior to analysis.
If the point is above the
blue line it is a possible
outlier.

105
TLC, DOE 10104
7. Examine Effects
Select Analyze, Fit Model to analyze the
experiment. Fit model is for analysis and
modeling of multiple Xs and multiple Ys.
106
TLC, DOE 10104
Select Terms for the Model
Select the terms for
the model then
Run Model
Ys
Xs
Because the
experiment was
designed in JMP it
remembers based
on the design what
model terms can
be included in the
analysis.
107
TLC, DOE 10104
Examine p values. Prob>ltl
is the probability of getting
an effect of that size by
random chance alone. We
want p values to be < than
.05 to be considered for the
model. RSquare looks
good, ANOVA p value is bad
and the individual term p
values are not significant.
Look for
outliers
in the
actual by
predicted
plot
108
TLC, DOE 10104
Other Views of the Effect Sizes
I nt ercept
Solder Type[ Fluxor]
Blade Angle(45, 90)
Lif t -of f Speed(1, 5)
Solder Type[ Fluxor] *Blade Angle
Solder Type[ Fluxor] *Lif t -of f Speed
Blade Angle*Lif t-of f Speed
Term
7.7375
0.6125
-0.1625
0.2625
0.2125
-0.7625
-0.2375
Est imat e
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
St d Error
32. 58
2. 58
-0. 68
1. 11
0. 89
-3. 21
-1. 00
t Rat io
0.0195
0.2355
0.6180
0.4682
0.5353
0.1922
0.5000
Prob>| t|
Parameter Estimates
Solder Type
Blade Angle(45, 90)
Solder Type*Blade Angle
Solder Type*Lif t-of f Speed
Source
1
1
1
1
1
1
Nparm
1
1
1
1
1
1
DF
3. 0012500
0. 2112500
0. 5512500
0. 3612500
4. 6512500
0. 4512500
Sum of Squares
6. 6510
0. 4681
1. 2216
0. 8006
10. 3075
1. 0000
F Ratio
0. 2355
0. 6180
0. 4682
0. 5353
0. 1922
0. 5000
Prob > F
Effect Tests
Parameter Estimates
provides the calculated
coefficient used in the
model and a t test for
each effect in the model.

Effect Tests are the
statistical F tests for each
factor effect. If the X is
categorical you will want
to look at the effect tests
and not the parameter
estimates to determine if
the variable is statistically
significant.
109
TLC, DOE 10104
Graphical Views of Effects
Nominal f act ors expanded to all levels
I nt ercept
Solder Type[ Fluxor]
Solder Type[ Indium]
Blade Angle(45, 90)
Solder Type[ Fluxor] *Blade Angle
Solder Type[ Indium]*Blade Angle
Solder Type[ Fluxor] *Lif t-of f Speed
Solder Type[ Indium]*Lif t -of f Speed
Term
7.7375
0.6125
-0.6125
-0.1625
0.2625
0.2125
-0.2125
-0.7625
0.7625
-0.2375
Scaled Estimate
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
0. 2375
St d Error
32. 58
2.58
-2.58
-0.68
1.11
0.89
-0.89
-3.21
3.21
-1.00
t Rat io
0.0195
0.2355
0.2355
0.6180
0.4682
0.5353
0.5353
0.1922
0.1922
0.5000
Prob>| t|
Scaled Estimates
Solder Type[Fluxor]*Lift-of f Speed
Solder Type[Fluxor]
Lif t-of f Speed(1,5)
Solder Type[Fluxor]*Blade Angle
Blade Angle(45,90)
Term
-0.7625000
0.6125000
0.2625000
-0.2375000
0.2125000
-0.1625000
Estimate
Pareto Plot of Estimates
110
TLC, DOE 10104
8. Check Model with Residuals
Select Row Diagnostics, Actual by Predicted,
Residual by Predicted and Residual by Row
QC Check for the Model
Ideally the residual plot should indicate no pattern or large outliers
Patterns typically indicate a better model needs to be fit to the data
Trends in Residual by Row indicate an unexplained systematic variable
5
6
7
8
9
10
P
a
s
t
e

H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e

A
c
t
u
a
l
5 6 7 8 9 10
Paste Height -Ave Predict ed P=0. 3924
RSq=0. 95 RMSE=0. 6718
Actual by Predicted Plot
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
P
a
s
t
e

H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e

R
e
s
i
d
u
a
l
5 6 7 8 9 10
Paste Height-Ave Predicted
Residual by Predicted Plot
-0.3
-0.1
0.1
0.3
R
e
s
i
d
u
a
l
. 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
Row Number
Residual by Row Plot
111
TLC, DOE 10104
Start with the least
probable interactions first
(highest p value). No
linear term can be
deleted until all
interactions or quadratics
have been removed. Take
out one term then rerun
the model and continue
until all terms have a p
value of <.1.
Backwards stepwise
regression technique

9. Refine the Model
112
TLC, DOE 10104
Removed factors return to the error
term and improve the degrees of
freedom for error.
Now we are finished. RSquare Adj
looks is higher, the whole model
ANOVA is significant and p values for
the individual terms are significant.
Notice we still keep Lift-off Speed
because it interacts with Solder type.
Two schools of thought on model
refinement
1) Because it is a DOE no
refinement is required
2) Refinement is always good to
learn what are significant effects
113
TLC, DOE 10104
Leverage Plots
Leverage is change in the residuals due to the inclusion, or exclusion of
the factor. Slope indicates sensitivity to the response. Higher the
slope, the greater the sensitivity.
6
7
8
9
P
a
s
t
e

H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e

L
e
v
e
r
a
g
e

R
e
s
i
d
u
a
l
s
7.00 7.25 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.25 8.50
Solder Type Lev erage, P=0.0463
Leverage Plot
Fluxor
I ndium
Level
8. 3500000
7. 1250000
Least Sq Mean
0.30362395
0.30362395
St d Error
8. 35000
7. 12500
Mean
Least Squares Means Table
P
a
s
t
e

H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e
L
S

M
e
a
n
s
5
6
7
8
9
10
Fluxor I ndium
Solder Type
LS Means Plot
Solder Type
6
7
8
9
P
a
s
t
e

H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e

L
e
v
e
r
a
g
e

R
e
s
i
d
u
a
l
s
-1. 5 -1. 0 -0. 5 . 0 . 5 1.0 1.5
Lif t -of f Speed(1, 5) Leverage, P=0.2886
Leverage Plot
Lift-off Speed(1,5)
6
7
8
9
10
P
a
s
t
e

H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e

L
e
v
e
r
a
g
e

R
e
s
i
d
u
a
l
s
6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0
Solder Type*Lif t-of f Speed Leverage,
P=0.0238
Leverage Plot
Solder Type*Lift-off Speed
114
TLC, DOE 10104
Analyze Factor Interactions
Begin the analysis of the Interactions
by selecting Factor Profiling, and
Interaction Plots.
5
6
7
8
9
10
P
a
s
t
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e
5
6
7
8
9
10
P
a
s
t
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e
Solder Type
1
5
Fluxor Indium
Fluxor
Indium
Lif t-of f
Speed
1 2 3 4 5
S
o
l
d
e
r

T
y
p
e
L
i
f
t
-
o
f
f

S
p
e
e
d
Interaction Profiles
Remember an interaction
is a measure of twist in
the response plane. The
greater the crossing, the
greater the interaction.
115
TLC, DOE 10104
Using the Model, Find the Solution
Once the model has been refined use the model to solve the
problem. Select Factor Profiling, Profiler.
116
TLC, DOE 10104
Select Desirability
Functions to define
improvement goals.
double click on the
Desirability graph to
define the goal
Minimize, Maximize
or Match Target.
117
TLC, DOE 10104
Select Prediction Profiler,
Maximize Desirability to solve
for the target. If the model does
not converge do it again.
Examine the results and further manipulate the model until you have found
the solution. Use double Click on the X axis to further control the Prediction
Profiler X settings.
118
TLC, DOE 10104
Now that we have a solution, we need to validate it to
see if what we predict will in fact occur. Typically
validation runs are 20 to 30 independent trials at the
new settings. The mean estimates of any validation
runs should be with the 95% CI of the estimated
means.
P
a
s
t
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
-
A
v
e
10.0422
4.90782
6.999989
0.8492
D
e
s
i
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
1
0
1
Solder Type
F
l
u
x
o
r
I
n
d
i
u
m
Lif t -of f
Speed
1 5
2.75608
Desirability
0 1
Prediction Profiler
119
TLC, DOE 10104
Using the Model Equation
Use the model equation for other
optimization and tolerance studies
120
TLC, DOE 10104
What About Sigma?
Start again by placing
all the terms in the
model and fitting
sigma. Then put
together a model that
simultaneously solves
for both the mean and
sigma.
No model refinement
is possible for
multiple Ys.
121
TLC, DOE 10104
DOE Exercise: Design and Analysis of a Full Factorial
Use the data from the DOE (next slide)
1) Design the full factorial experiment in JMP
2) Open the file containing the data
3) Analyze the data using the tools in JMP
4) Determine the best solution
Goals: Maximize Output > 1000
Minimize Cracks < 10
Match Target = 2.54
122
TLC, DOE 10104
4 Factor 2
4
Design
Speed Temperature Time Pressure Output Diameter Cracks
100 250 5 15 1078 2.422 14.4
200 250 5 15 1649 2.381 20.1
100 300 5 15 912 2.665 11.3
200 300 5 15 1476 1.645 15.4
100 250 10 15 779 2.458 5.9
200 250 10 15 1385 2.433 10.7
100 300 10 15 933 2.572 6.5
200 300 10 15 1480 2.538 11.9
100 250 5 30 1096 2.43 6.8
200 250 5 30 1598 2.395 12
100 300 5 30 892 2.587 3.2
200 300 5 30 1507 2.562 8.9
100 250 10 30 791 2.597 9.6
200 250 10 30 1370 2.58 14.6
100 300 10 30 861 2.617 11.3
200 300 10 30 1503 2.593 17.4
Once your experiment has been designed open and analyze
the file: Simulation full factorial.jmp
123
TLC, DOE 10104
Section IV
Screening designs
Custom designs
124
TLC, DOE 10104
The Idea of Screening Designs
Many possible Xs
Critical few
significant Xs
Screening
Experiment
125
TLC, DOE 10104
1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Factor
k 2
k
"Linear" Interactions Interactions Interactions Interactions Interactions
3 8 3 3 1
4 16 4 6 4 1
5 32 5 10 10 5 1
6 64 6 15 20 15 6 1
7 128 7 21 35 35 21 7
8 256 8 28 56 70 56 28
9 512 9 36 84 126 126 84
10 1024 10 45 120 210 252 210
Wasted Resources
Fractional Factorial
126
TLC, DOE 10104
Fractional Factorials
A fraction of the original full factorial design:

2
k-p

Where:
k = number of factors
p = fraction of the original design
p=1=1/2 p=2=1/4 p=3=1/8

How many experiments are there in the following fractional
factorial designs?

2
5-1
2
6-1
2
8-2
127
TLC, DOE 10104
Aliasing
Full Factorial (linear and interactions)

A B C AB BC AC
1 - - - + + +
2 + - - - + -
3 - + - - - +
4 + + - + - -
5 - - + + - -
6 + - + - - +
7 - + + - + -
8 + + + + + +

Fractional Factorial (linear effects only) fraction 2
3-1

A B C AB BC AC
1 - - + + - -
2 + - - - + -
3 - + - - - +
4 + + + + + +

Full Factorial 2
2

A B AB=C
1 - - +
2 + - -
3 - + -

4 + + +
128
TLC, DOE 10104
Visualization of Fractional Factorial Structure
Left Side to
Right Side (X
2
)
Top to
Bottom (X
3
)
Orthogonal views
of a fraction of
a full factorial
design
Front to
Back (X
1
)
129
TLC, DOE 10104
Adding Factors by Stealing Interaction Columns
Three Factor
Full Factorial 2
3
A B C ABC
1. - - - -
2. + - - +
3. - + - +
4. + + - -
5. - - + +
6. + - + -
7. - + + -
8. + + + +

Four Factor
Fractional Factorial 2
4-1
A B C D=ABC
1. - - - -
2. + - - +
3. - + - +
4. + + - -
5. - - + +
6. + - + -
7. - + + -
8. + + + +

In this example D=ABC interaction. Aliasing means the factor
effects have been added together and are inseparable. Since
ABC interaction is expected to have a value of zero we believe in
any analysis will see the effect of D only.
130
TLC, DOE 10104
1 test for each linear effect
1 test for each interaction effect
1 test for each quadratic effect
+ 1 test for computing the average
~ Total number required

For fractional factorials it is the
smallest full factorial the tests will fit
within.

So. How Many Tests Will I Need
If one wants to experiment
with 7 factors and all
associated two factor
interactions how many runs
will it take?
7 linear terms
21 two factor interactions
1 for the average
29 runs
What's the smallest full
factorial design that can fit
29 runs
2
5
or 32 runs
Fractional factorial design
2
7-2
131
TLC, DOE 10104
Resolution of the Fractional Factorial Design
Resolution:
III Main effects (linear) are not aliased with each other,
all two factor interactions are aliased with linear
effects. (Caution)
IV No main effect is aliased with any two factor
interaction; however, some 2 factor interactions are
aliased with each other
V+ No main effect nor two factor interactions are
aliased with each other

132
TLC, DOE 10104
Recommended Designs
for Fractional Factorials
Number of Factors Design/Resolution Number of Runs
3 2
3-1
III 4
2
3
Full Factorial 8
4 2
4-1
IV 8
2
4
Full Factorial 16
5 2
5-2
III 8
2
5-1
V 16
2
5
Full Factorial 32
6 2
6-3
III 8
2
6-2
IV 16
2
6-1
VI 32
2
6
Full Factorial 64
7 2
7-4
III 8
2
7-3
IV 16
2
7-2
IV 32
2
7-1
VII 64
2
7
Full Factorial 128

133
TLC, DOE 10104
Select DOE,
Screening
Design from
the JMP
Starter Menu

Screening Designs in JMP
134
TLC, DOE 10104
Define the Factors and Responses
Select Load Responses and
Load Factors and the associated
files Water Screening
Responses.jmp and Water
Screening Factors.jmp.
For this experiment we are only
interested in linear effects. So
which design should be
selected?
135
TLC, DOE 10104
Selecting Catalog Screening Designs
Choices are:
8 Resolution 3 Design 2
6-3
16 Resolution 4 Design 2
6-2

32 Resolution 5+ Design 2
6-1
64 Full factorial Design 2
6
Lets assume we want to
be careful and desire at
least a resolution 4 or 2
6-2

fractional factorial design

136
TLC, DOE 10104
Evaluating Screening Designs
Change Generating Rules
Allows the experimenter to
select the interaction columns
to be used for aliasing effects
Aliasing of Effects
Allows the experimenter the
ability to examine the aliasing
patterns in the experiment.
Assuming all that is wanted are
linear main effect calculations,
this design will be fine.
137
TLC, DOE 10104
Blocking in Fractional Factorials
AB AC
+ + +
- - +
- + -
+ - -
+ - -
- + -
- - +
A B C

- - -
+ - -
- + -
+ + -
- - +
+ - +
- + +
+ + + + + +
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
Block 1
+
+
+
+

Block 2
-
-
-
-
In this example the block is confounded with ABC interaction, a
very low risk problem and the blocking factor is brought in for error
control.
BC Block=ABC
Experiment Analysis Only Experiment
138
TLC, DOE 10104
Blocking
Blocking is a method for removal of
unwanted effects from the
experiment. In most cases we can
determine potential sources of
variation and block for their effects.
Examples may include multiple
machines in the experiment, day,
shift, tester, tool, vendor, lot or
batch of materials.
In full and fractional factorial
designs blocking factors can be
typically added without adding
more runs to the experiment
Block size is the number of runs
per block. 2
6-2
has 2 blocks of size
8 or 4 blocks of size 4.
139
TLC, DOE 10104
Analysis of Screening Experiment
Open Water Screening.jmp. Begin the analysis with Analyze, Fit Model.
Make sure you have examined the data for outliers prior to analysis.
140
TLC, DOE 10104
Selecting Model Terms
Notice JMP adds all
model terms that can be
estimated including all of
the aliased model effects
that can be separated
from other model effects.
141
TLC, DOE 10104
Analysis of Effects
I nt ercept
Temperat ure(75,90)
Cat alyst(0.45, 0.95)
Filter t ype[Fiber]
Hold-up (min)(1,2)
pH(6.8, 7. 2)
Water source[ Cit y well]
Temperat ure*Cat alyst
Temperat ure*Filter t ype[Fiber]
Temperat ure*Hold-up (min)
Temperat ure*pH
Temperat ure*Water source[ Cit y well]
Cat alyst*Filt er type[Fiber]
Cat alyst*Hold-up (min)
Term
3. 80625
-0. 20625
0. 31875
0. 91875
0. 19375
0. 75625
1. 31875
-0. 56875
0. 10625
0. 38125
0. 39375
0. 13125
-0. 11875
-0. 34375
Est imat e
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
0.296134
St d Error
12. 85
-0. 70
1. 08
3. 10
0. 65
2. 55
4. 45
-1. 92
0. 36
1. 29
1. 33
0. 44
-0. 40
-1. 16
t Rat io
0.0060
0.5582
0.3944
0.0901
0.5801
0.1252
0.0469
0.1948
0.7541
0.3268
0.3150
0.7009
0.7272
0.3655
Prob>| t|
Parameter Estimates
Temperat ure(75,90)
Cat alyst(0.45, 0.95)
Filter t ype
Hold-up (min)(1,2)
pH(6.8, 7. 2)
Water source
Temperat ure*Cat alyst = pH*Water source
Temperat ure*Filter t ype = Hold-up (min)*Wat er source
Temperat ure*Hold-up (min) = Filter t ype*Wat er source
Temperat ure*pH = Cat alyst *Water source
Temperat ure*Water source = Cat alyst *pH = Filt er type*Hold-up (min)
Cat alyst*Filt er type = Hold-up (min)*pH
Cat alyst*Hold-up (min) = Filt er type*pH
Source
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Nparm
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DF
0. 680625
1. 625625
13. 505625
0. 600625
9. 150625
27. 825625
5. 175625
0. 180625
2. 325625
2. 480625
0. 275625
0. 225625
1. 890625
Sum of Squares
0. 4851
1. 1586
9. 6254
0. 4281
6. 5216
19. 8312
3. 6886
0. 1287
1. 6575
1. 7679
0. 1964
0. 1608
1. 3474
F Ratio
0. 5582
0. 3944
0. 0901
0. 5801
0. 1252
0. 0469
0. 1948
0. 7541
0. 3268
0. 3150
0. 7009
0. 7272
0. 3655
Prob > F
Effect Tests
Currently we do not have a significant model due to a small
number of samples estimating error. We need model refinement.
142
TLC, DOE 10104
Profiler and Model Refinement
0
2
4
6
8
10
F
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

R
a
t
e

(
m
i
n
.
)

A
c
t
u
a
l
0 2 4 6 8 10
Filtration Rat e (min.) Predict ed P=0.0009
RSq=0. 73 RMSE=1.2338
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Root Mean Square Error
Mean of Response
Observations (or Sum Wgts)
0.734288
0.667861
1.233812
3. 80625
16
Summary of Fit
Model
Error
C. Tot al
Source
3
12
15
DF
50. 481875
18. 267500
68. 749375
Sum of Squares
16. 8273
1. 5223
Mean Square
11. 0539
F Ratio
0. 0009
Prob > F
Analysis of Variance
F
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
R
a
t
e

(
m
i
n
.
)
10
-0.5316
0.8125
1.3441
D
e
s
i
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
1
0
0.993346
Filter type
F
i
b
e
r
M
e
s
h
pH
6
.
8
7
.
2
6.8
Water
source
C
i
t
y

w
e
l
l
L
o
c
a
l

s
o
u
r
c
e
Desirability
0 1
Prediction Profiler
143
TLC, DOE 10104
Augment Design
Augmenting
Supports sequential experimentation
Expands and enhances your initial design
Allows for the learning to take place with fewer runs and then lower risk
by adding addition effects in the model for a more complete look at the
problem
144
TLC, DOE 10104
Augment Choices
Group New Runs into Separate Block?
Replicate
Add Centerpoints
Fold Over
Add Axial
Augment, additional higher order effects,
and interaction terms
145
TLC, DOE 10104
Fold Over Designs and Axial Points
Fold over designs remove confounding between
two-factor interactions and main effects
Use fold over feature after low resolution (III)
experiments to remove aliasing of the two factor
interactions and main effects
Axial points add levels outside of the range of
experimentation and aids optimization efforts

146
TLC, DOE 10104
D-optimal or I-optimal Augmentation

Add specific effects to the model, such as interaction and
quadratic effects
Find new optimal test runs
Group runs into separate blocks
Optimally block new runs with respect to original runs
147
TLC, DOE 10104
Augment Example
Select DOE, Augment
Design, select factors and
responses.
148
TLC, DOE 10104
Augmentation Example
In this experiment we want to
correctly analyze the interaction
effects and block for other possible
changes between experiments
149
TLC, DOE 10104
Section V
Screening designs
Custom designs
Inner Array
(Signal Factors)
Controllable
Outer Array
(Noise Factors)
Uncontrollable
Measures at Inner
and Outer Array
Combinations
150
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Philosophy
Design products and processes to be robust to environmental
conditions, inconsistent operations, and component variation
Taguchi Ideas
Use DOE for parameter and tolerance design
Reduce variability within specifications
Quadratic loss function, L(y)=k(s
2
+(x-T)
2
)

Good philosophy; however there are some limitations with
the Taguchi approach to experimentation

151
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi DOE Design Approach
Identify 2 or 3 level controllable factors
Inner array of design points
Identify 2 level uncontrollable factors
Outer array of design points
Join designs together (crossed array)
Run and replicate inner array points over each outer array
point
This approach actually produces no true between unit
replicates unless additional replicates are added
152
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Designs
Based on first order designs
Full Factorial, Fractional Factorial and Plackett-Burman designs
Replicate design for controllable (signal) factors over changes in
uncontrollable (noise) factors
Signal factors effects are estimated and noise factor effects are not
estimated (why not?)
Plot means and signal-to-noise ratios
Choose the best settings (Pick the winner)
All factors are treated
as categorical
Inner Array
(Signal Factors)
Controllable
Outer Array
(Noise Factors)
Uncontrollable

Measures at Inner
and Outer Array
Combinations
153
TLC, DOE 10104
Using JMP to Design and Analyze Taguchi Experiments
L8 (2
3
) Full Factorial Inner
Array and (2
2
) Outer Array
L4 (2
3-1
) Fractional
Factorial Inner Array and
(2
2
) Outer Array
Notice in Taguchi designs all
factors are treated as nominal
(difficult to optimize, pick
the winner)
Inner array * Outer array *
replicates = number of runs
154
TLC, DOE 10104
Understanding the Table Output
Yield -- = Yield measurement using M1, Mary
Yield ++=Yield measurement using M2, Fred
These types of designs tend to generate a large number of
experimental units and increases experimental costs compared to
other alternatives
Notice randomization
of the matrix is not an
option
155
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Data Analysis
For each inner array design point
estimate the mean
estimate the the signal-to-noise ratio (SN).
Plot the mean and SN (separately) versus the controllable factor levels
Choose the conditions that produce the desired mean and the maximum SN
156
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Signal-to-Noise Ratio
Derived from the quadratic loss function
Combine mean and standard deviation into single metric
Transform into decibel scale
Three kinds
Target is best (SN
T
)
Larger is better (SN
L
)
Smaller is better (SN
S
)
157
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi SN Formulas
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
=
=
n
i
i S
n
i
i
L
T
y
n
SN
y n
SN
S
y
SN
1
2
10
1
2
10
2
2
10
1
log 10
1 1
log 10
log 10
JMP will select the correct SN ratio when the factor goals are defined
Tends to be correlated to the
standard deviation
Correlates to the mean
Correlates to the mean
Better to optimize on the Mean and Stdev as separate Ys than to
use the SN ratio
158
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Analysis Example
Open Taguchi Array L8.jmp for analysis. Examine the
design structure, the way the Y data is summarized:
mean, SN Ratio and standard deviation.
Mean

SN
L
Ratio

Stdev
159
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Example As Is Analysis
Select Analyze, Fit Model.
Notice the noise factors are
not part of the analysis and
therefore their effects are
not determined (if any).
160
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Example As Is Analysis
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
M
e
a
n

Y
i
e
l
d

A
c
t
u
a
l
93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Mean Yield Predicted P=0.1316 RSq=1. 00
RMSE=0.3536
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Mean of Response
0.995042
0.965293
0.353553
95.90625
8
Summary of Fit
Model
Error
C. Tot al
Source
6
1
7
DF
25. 085938
0. 125000
25. 210938
Sum of Squares
4. 18099
0. 12500
Mean Square
33. 4479
F Ratio
0. 1316
Prob > F
39.5
39.6
39.7
39.8
39.9
S
N

R
a
t
i
o

Y
i
e
l
d

A
c
t
u
a
l
39.5 39.6 39.7 39.8 39.9
SN Rat io Yield Predicted P=0. 1321
RSq=1. 00 RMSE=0.0321
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Mean of Response
0.995001
0. 96501
0.032113
39.63389
8
Summary of Fit
Model
Error
C. Tot al
Source
6
1
7
DF
0.20528103
0.00103127
0.20631230
Sum of Squares
0.034214
0.001031
Mean Square
33. 1761
F Ratio
0. 1321
Prob > F
Mean Yield SN
L
Yield
M
e
a
n

Y
ie
ld
102.327
89.9228
98.125
4.2022
S
N

R
a
t
io
Y
ie
l
d
40.2161
39.0915
39.83436
0.3817
D
e
s
ir
a
b
ili
t
y
1
0
0.641042
Temp
2
5
0
3
0
0
Pressure
1
5
3
0
Speed
1
0
0
2
0
0
Desirability
0 1
Prediction Profiler
Notice the SN ratio
and the mean are
highly correlated for
the SN
L
case.
161
TLC, DOE 10104
SN
L
, Mean and Standard Deviation Correlations
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
S
t
d

D
e
v

Y
i
e
l
d
39.5 39.6 39.7 39.8 39.9
SN Rat io Yield
Linear Fit
Fit Mean
St d Dev Yield = -19. 43921 + 0. 5190302 SN Ratio Yield
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Mean of Response
Observations (or Sum Wgt s)
0.036074
-0. 12458
0.497516
1.131976
8
Summary of Fit
Model
Error
C. Tot al
Source
1
6
7
DF
0. 0555790
1. 4851349
1. 5407138
Sum of Squares
0.055579
0.247522
Mean Square
0. 2245
F Ratio
0. 6524
Prob > F
I nt ercept
SN Rat io Yield
Term
-19. 43921
0.5190302
Est imat e
43.41253
1.095329
St d Error
-0. 45
0. 47
t Rat io
0.6700
0.6524
Prob>| t|
Parameter Estimates
Linear Fit
Bivariate Fit of Std Dev Yield By SN Ratio Yield
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
S
t
d

D
e
v

Y
i
e
l
d
93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Mean Yield
Linear Fit
Fit Mean
St d Dev Yield = -3. 550964 + 0.0488283 Mean Yield
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Mean of Response
Observ at ions (or Sum Wgts)
0.039013
-0. 12115
0.496757
1.131976
8
Summary of Fit
Model
Error
C. Tot al
Source
1
6
7
DF
0. 0601080
1. 4806058
1. 5407138
Sum of Squares
0.060108
0.246768
Mean Square
0. 2436
F Ratio
0. 6392
Prob > F
I nt ercept
Mean Yield
Term
-3. 550964
0.0488283
Est imat e
9.490102
0.098935
St d Error
-0. 37
0. 49
t Rat io
0.7211
0.6392
Prob>| t|
Parameter Estimates
Linear Fit
Bivariate Fit of Std Dev Yield By Mean Yield
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
M
e
a
n

Y
i
e
l
d
39.5 39.6 39.7 39.8 39.9
SN Rat io Yield
Linear Fit
Fit Mean
Mean Yield = -342. 2022 + 11. 053882 SN Ratio Yield
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Mean of Response
Observ at ions (or Sum Wgts)
0.999921
0.999908
0.018191
95.90625
8
Summary of Fit
Model
Error
C. Tot al
Source
1
6
7
DF
25. 208952
0. 001985
25. 210938
Sum of Squares
25. 2090
0. 0003
Mean Square
76181. 04
F Ratio
<. 0001
Prob > F
I nt ercept
SN Rat io Yield
Term
-342. 2022
11.053882
Est imat e
1. 58731
0.040049
St d Error
-215. 6
276.01
t Rat io
<.0001
<.0001
Prob>| t|
Parameter Estimates
Linear Fit
Bivariate Fit of Mean Yield By SN Ratio Yield
Use Fit Y by X to examine the correlation of the Y terms
162
TLC, DOE 10104
Taguchi Example Improved Analysis
Open Taguchi L8 Modified.jmp.
Select Analyze, Fit Model and add
all factors and two factor
interactions using Macro, Factorial
to Degree.
163
TLC, DOE 10104
Predicting Yields with All Significant Terms
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
Y
i
e
l
d

A
c
t
u
a
l
92 94 96 98 100
Yield Predict ed P<. 0001 RSq=0.93
RMSE=0.6626
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Mean of Response
0.932324
0.900097
0.662562
95.90625
32
Summary of Fit
Model
Error
C. Tot al
Source
10
21
31
DF
127. 00000
9.21875
136. 21875
Sum of Squares
12. 7000
0. 4390
Mean Square
28. 9302
F Ratio
<. 0001
Prob > F
Temp
Pressure
Speed
Operator
Machine
Temp*Speed
Temp*Operator
Temp*Machine
Pressure*Speed
Operator*Machine
Source
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Nparm
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DF
94.531250
0.500000
0.781250
16.531250
2.531250
2.531250
2.531250
2.531250
2.000000
2.531250
Sum of Squares
215.3390
1.1390
1.7797
37.6576
5.7661
5.7661
5.7661
5.7661
4.5559
5.7661
F Ratio
<.0001
0.2980
0.1965
<.0001
0.0257
0.0257
0.0257
0.0257
0.0448
0.0257
Prob > F
Effect Tests
Y
i
e
l
d
100.214
92
99.40625
0.8078
D
e
s
i
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y 1
0
0.909895
Temp
2
5
0
3
0
0
250
Pressure
1
5
3
0
15
Speed
1
0
0
2
0
0
200
Operator
F
r
e
d
M
a
r
y
Machine
M
1
M
2
Desirability
0 1
Prediction Profiler
All of the noise is correctly accounted for in this example
164
TLC, DOE 10104
Limitations of Taguchi Designs
Interactions are active but often aliased
Model interpolation is not exploited to find better settings than
actually tested
SN ineffective in identifying dispersion effects
Formula confounds location and dispersion effects, not a very
good idea
With the bad news comes the good news, Taguchi experiments
are far better than no experimentation and are founded on
technically correct full and fractional factorial designs, the major
issues with Taguchi are less on design and more on analysis.
An improvement to Taguchi style signal to noise modeling can
be done by using the mean and standard deviation of the
replicates as individual Ys
165
TLC, DOE 10104
Section VI
Screening designs
Custom designs
166
TLC, DOE 10104
Characteristics of Custom Designs
Custom designs
Have the most flexibility of all design choices
Can be used in situations not suitable for classic designs
Can be used for routine factor screening, response optimization,
and mixture problems
167
TLC, DOE 10104
Generality of Custom Designs
Custom designs can be generated for
Categorical factors with any number of levels
Continuous factors (any number)
Blocks with user-specified number of runs
Mixture ingredients
Covariates (fixed)
Inequality constraints on factors
User-specified models
Models where the number of runs is greater than or equal the
number of terms in the model
Models where the number of runs is less than the number of terms
in the model
168
TLC, DOE 10104
Custom Design Generation
The advantages:
Does not use factorial combinations avoids large and inefficient
designs
Does not require a candidate set of design points avoids long
iterations
Provides a flexible approach to most problems
Enables the user to specify the factors, model, and size
You cannot expect every real problem to follow the simple pattern
portrayed in book examples
The simple, tidy sequence of screen-optimize-confirm may restrict
the path that is dictated by your problem or directed by your data
and early findings
Experimental stages are often not clearly delineated; there usually
is some overlap

169
TLC, DOE 10104
Custom Design Benefits
The benefits include:
Any kind of factor: continuous, categorical, mixture, blocking,
covariate, constant
Any number of levels
Any number, combination of factors, levels
Any combination of effects in model
Any number of runs
Irregular experimental region
Treats the engineer or scientist as a customer when designing the
experiment
170
TLC, DOE 10104
D-optimal and I-optimal Designs
Open demoCoordinateExchange.jsl script to visualize the difference
between D-optimal and I-optimal designs. This script also
demonstrates the general coordinate exchange approached used by
JMP in generating the experimental matrix for custom designs.
Developed by Bradley Jones, SAS
D-Optimal designs are generated
when two level and interaction
designs are requested. D-Optimal
designs emphasize the corners of
the design space and improve
coefficient estimation.
I-Optimal designs are generated
when RSM designs are requested.
I-Optimal designs emphasize the
center of the design space and
improve the variance estimation
across the range of the experiment.
171
TLC, DOE 10104
Select DOE,
Custom
Design from
the JMP
Starter Menu

Custom Designs in JMP
172
TLC, DOE 10104
Add, the responses, Goals
and Limits, then add the
number of factors you need for
the experiment and define the
Name and Values (levels)
then select Continue
Y response importance is
evenly weighted unless
specified. Importance is a
relative weighting factor.
The values for the Xs are Max
and Min values only level
setting occurs in the model
specification.

Notice the range of factor
types that can be used in the
experiment.

173
TLC, DOE 10104
Select the factors to be
used in the experiment then
select RSM for response
surface model.

This will give you a list of all
the linear terms, the
quadratic terms, and all two
factor interaction terms.

You can then add or
subtract terms that you
consider appropriate and
you will see the impact on
the sample size at the
bottom.


174
TLC, DOE 10104
Understanding Custom Design Options
Main Effects
Linear terms in the model
Interactions
Any or all two factor+ interactions
RSM (Response Surface
Methodology)
All main effects, two factor
interactions and quadratic terms
Cross
Any combination of power and
interaction terms
Power (2=3 levels etc.)
Any level of a continuous X variable,
supports 3-6 levels
175
TLC, DOE 10104
Design Generation
Minimum
Generates the smallest DOE
possible with all effects in the
model estimable and no df
allocated for error (saturated design)
Default
Full factorial design increments the model terms fit within (4, 8, 16, 32 etc)
Compromise
Compromise is a second suggestion that is more conservative than the
Default. Its value is generally between Default and Grid.
Grid
Full factorial design, for this example 3
4
User Specified
Any number of runs above the minimum design, a good rule of thumb is to
make sure the design has at least two runs over minimum.
176
TLC, DOE 10104
Select User
Defined 17, Make
Design. The next
step is to evaluate
the design and
make sure it has the
properties you want.


177
TLC, DOE 10104
Variance Prediction Profiler
Prediction Variance Profiler
is used to determine the
relative variability in the
response depending on the
DOE design. Add additional
samples and the variance
goes down. Values of greater
than 1 are undesirable.
Modify the design to 20 runs
and see what happens to the
predicted variance. Is best
used to compare alternative
designs. Notice the variance
is lowest at the center and
higher at the tails (I-Optimal
design).
178
TLC, DOE 10104
Prediction Variance Surface
Provides a more complete view of the effect of sample size on the
predicted variance of the DOE structure. More points in the corners will
cause the predicted variance to go down.
179
TLC, DOE 10104
Now lets
evaluate the
correlation of
the Xs to see
if this is an
acceptable
design.
Select
Analyze,
Multivariate
Methods,
Multivariate
Evaluation of Custom Designs in JMP

180
TLC, DOE 10104
Looks good no r values
above .1 or 10%
The custom design tool
allowed for more information
in less number or runs. This
design allows for the
estimation of all linear
effects, two factor
interactions and curvature.
Open Extrusion
Experiment RSM.jmp and
complete the analysis of a
this 16 run custom design.
Evaluation of Custom Designs
181
TLC, DOE 10104
Analysis of Custom Design
O
u
t
p
u
t
1638
812
1376.795
18.695
D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
2.661
2.38294
2.540232
0.0234
C
r
a
c
k
s
17.7
1.00719
3.754238
0.9347
D
e
s
i
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
1
0
0.80278
Speed
1
0
0
2
0
0
162.211
Temp
2
5
0
3
0
0
289.385
Time
5
1
0
5
Pressure
1
5
3
0
25.8441
Desirability
0 1
Prediction Profiler
182
TLC, DOE 10104
Interaction Plots
800
1200
1600
O
u
t
p
u
t
800
1200
1600
O
u
t
p
u
t
800
1200
1600
O
u
t
p
u
t
800
1200
1600
O
u
t
p
u
t
Speed
250
300
5
10
15
30
100 150 200
100
200
Temp
5
10
15
30
250 270 290 310
100
200
250
300
Time
15 30
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
100
200
250
300
5
10
Pressure
15 20 25 30
S
p
e
e
d
T
e
m
p
T
i
m
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
2.35
2.45
2.55
2.65
D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
2.35
2.45
2.55
2.65
D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
2.35
2.45
2.55
2.65
D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
2.35
2.45
2.55
2.65
D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
Speed
250
300
5
10
15
30
100 150 200
100
200
Temp
5
10
15
30
250 270 290 310
100
200
250
300
Time
15
30
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
100
200
250
300
5
10
Pressure
15 20 25 30
S
p
e
e
d
T
e
m
p
T
i
m
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
0
5
10
15
20
C
r
a
c
k
s
0
5
10
15
20
C
r
a
c
k
s
0
5
10
15
20
C
r
a
c
k
s
0
5
10
15
20
C
r
a
c
k
s
Speed
250
300
5
10
15
30
100 150 200
100
200
Temp
5
10
15
30
250 270 290 310
100
200
250
300
Time
15
30
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
100
200
250
300
5
10
Pressure
15 20 25 30
S
p
e
e
d
T
e
m
p
T
i m
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
Select
Interaction
Profiler to see
all two factor
interactions
183
TLC, DOE 10104
Surface Plots
Use Surface
Plots for
visualization and
presentation of
model effects
and sensitivities
184
TLC, DOE 10104
Supersaturated Designs
Supersaturated designs are those
designs that have more model effects
than the number of experimental runs.
Necessary
Must be in the design and must be
estimable
If Possible
Are estimable as long as the number of
significant terms in the model are less than
the experimental sample size. The larger
the experiment the more probable
experimental terms will not be significant.
Open Custom Design and select 16
factors, make four of them Necessary and
the balance of them If Possible. Set User
Specified to 14 runs. Notice minimum is
now 5.
185
TLC, DOE 10104
Supersaturated Designs
Although the correlation of the X variables are generally higher than
desirable (0 is the goal) it does not prevent us from running the
experiment and analyzing the response variables. Maximum
correlation of the factors is .4 or r
2
=16%
186
TLC, DOE 10104
The Pareto Principle
Based on the Pareto
principle we do not
expect all factors to
have an effect. This
is particularly true
when running
screening
experiments.
Simulate the
following responses,
then use forward
stepwise to find the
effects, remove all
effects less than one
and then fit the
model and examine
the Scaled
Estimates.
187
TLC, DOE 10104
Design Tips for Blocking in Custom Designs
There are two approaches for specification of blocking in JMP
Method 1 Block Size Unknown
1. Define all factors and responses
2. Determine the size of the experiment with all model terms
3. Determine the blocking variable and the sample size for each block
then tell JMP the block size for the smallest group and label the
blocks accordingly
Method 2 Known Block Size
1. Define all factors and responses
2. Determine the blocking variable and the sample size for each block
3. Determine the size of the experimental and all model terms
4. JMP will correctly define the number of blocks required, then label
each block

188
TLC, DOE 10104
Blocking Exercise
Design an experiment for the following conditions, use a Custom
Design

Exercise: Method 2 Block Size Known:
5 Continuous Factors
Parts from the experiment come from multiple lots with 6 parts to the lot.
You are worried the lot effect could influence the response. You want to
model all linear terms only. Assuming you block for the lot, design the
experiment. What would be size of the experiment if you ignored the lot
effect?
189
TLC, DOE 10104
Blocking Analysis
Open Blocked for Tester.jmp
190
TLC, DOE 10104
Blocking Analysis
Conclusion, blocking for tester
isolated a 4.5% yield effect.
If the F value for the blocked
variable is >1 then blocking
improved the experiment if F is
<1 then there was no value in
blocking for the factor of
concern.
I nt ercept
Power(150,210)
Temperature(250,275)
Pressure(750, 1000)
Power*Power
Power*Temperature
Temperature*Temperature
Power*Pressure
Temperature*Pressure
Pressure*Pressure
Tester[1]
Term
82. 53125
10. 05
0.55
-0.25
1. 46875
0.3125
-12. 53125
-1.0625
-0.6875
-0. 03125
2.25
Est imat e
0.917005
0.427639
0.427639
0.427639
0.917005
0.478115
0.917005
0.478115
0.478115
0.917005
0.361421
St d Error
90. 00
23. 50
1. 29
-0. 58
1. 60
0. 65
-13. 67
-2. 22
-1. 44
-0. 03
6. 23
t Rat io
<.0001
<.0001
0.2547
0.5842
0.1701
0.5422
<.0001
0.0769
0.2100
0.9741
0.0016
Prob>| t|
Parameter Estimates
Power(150,210)
Temperature(250,275)
Pressure(750, 1000)
Power*Power
Power*Temperature
Temperature*Temperature
Power*Pressure
Temperature*Pressure
Pressure*Pressure
Tester
Source
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Nparm
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DF
1154. 3143
3. 4571
0. 7143
5. 3617
0. 8929
390.2937
10. 3214
4. 3214
0. 0024
81. 0000
Sum of Squares
552.3035
1. 6541
0. 3418
2. 5654
0. 4272
186.7434
4. 9385
2. 0677
0. 0012
38. 7560
F Ratio
<. 0001
0. 2547
0. 5842
0. 1701
0. 5422
<. 0001
0. 0769
0. 2100
0. 9741
0. 0016
Prob > F
Effect Tests
Y
i
e
l
d
100.928
59
97.50958
3.1259
D
e
s
i
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y 1
0
0.938989
Power
1
5
0
2
1
0
210
Temperature
2
5
0
2
7
5
263.123
Pressure
7
5
0
1
0
0
0
761.439
Tester
1 2
Desirability
0 1
Prediction Profiler
191
TLC, DOE 10104
Fixed Covariates as Part of the Experiment
1. Design experiment without covariate and
determine number of runs required +1 for the
covariate + n for any additional model terms
associated with the covariate
2. Measure the materials or parts prior to
inclusion in the experiment. Place the data
in a column with the correct number of
samples measured.
3. Add the covariate to the experiment and
finish the design
4. If more than one covariate needs to be
added, add the one that you believe is the
most likely to influence the Ys

Open Material Density.jmp

192
TLC, DOE 10104
Fixed Covariates
Design the experiment and
determine the number of runs
required.
Then pull the factor and data into
the experiment.
JMP will make the covariate
orthogonal to the rest of the
experiment.
193
TLC, DOE 10104
Use Multivariate to Examine the Matrix
Notice JMP using the
coordinate exchange
method was able to
position the covariate as
to minimize the correlation
of the covariate to other
factors
194
TLC, DOE 10104
Fix Covariate Analysis
Open and analyze Factory
Simulation with Fixed
Covariate.jmp
O
u
t
p
u
t
1649
779
1205.107
20.52
D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
2.665
2.381
2.528952
0.0034
C
r
a
c
k
s
19.1
2.9
7.882989
0.3563
Speed
1
0
0
2
0
0
150
Temperature
2
5
0
3
0
0
275
Time
5
1
0
7.5
Pressure
1
5
3
0
22.5
Mat erial
Densit y
2
0
2
9
24.5
Prediction Profiler
195
TLC, DOE 10104
Covariates During the Experiment
Measure the uncontrolled
covariate during the
experiment. Examples
may be temperature,
pressure, time, ph, force,
ESD, etc.
Notice under Method:
REML appears. (residual
maximum likelihood)
Add the covariate column
to the JMP table and add
the covariate to the
analysis when fitting a
model. Use the red
attribute triangle and set
the covariate to random.
Bounce Data with Covariate.JMP
196
TLC, DOE 10104
Insitu Covariate Analysis
Examining the REML
analysis shows ~23% of
the unexplained variation
(noise) can be explained
as due to temperature
variation. Further
examination shows the
effect of temperature to
be non significant
(p>.05). Temperature is
not an important
variable across the
range examined in the
experiment.
Temperature&Random
Residual
Total
Random Ef fect
0.3025457
Var Ratio
0.9293855
3.0718852
4.0012708
Var Component
2.4976207
Std Error
0.1062835
95% Lower
7.6557e10
95% Upper
23.227
76.773
100.000
Pct of Total
-2 LogLikelihood = 37.729433
REML Variance Component Estimates
Continuous f actors centered by mean, scaled by range/2
Intercept
Silica(0.7,1.7)&RS
Silane(40,60)&RS
Sulf ur(1.8,2.8)&RS
Silane*Silica
Sulf ur*Silica
Sulf ur*Silane
Silica*Silica
Silane*Silane
Sulf ur*Sulfur
Temperature&Random
Term
396.35001
-40.17122
10.694971
-26.52375
0.2121657
114.68487
46.397893
26.225782
-0.172111
-35.45995
-1.109198
Scaled Estimate
1.053412
0.62087
0.670137
0.685788
0.957818
0.889878
0.885028
0.940521
0.978076
0.912738
0.927792
Std Error
376.25
-64.70
15.96
-38.68
0.22
128.88
52.43
27.88
-0.18
-38.85
-1.20
t Ratio
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
0.8355
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
0.8689
<.0001
0.2979
Prob>| t|
Scaled Estimates
S
t
r
e
t
c
h
570
260
396.35
2.9247
Silica
0
.
7
1
.
7
1.2
Silane
4
0
6
0
50
Sulf ur
1
.
8
2
.
8
2.3
Temperature
1
3
9
1
4
2
140.593
Prediction Profiler
197
TLC, DOE 10104
Mixture Factors
Open the Etch Mixture.JMP file
and analyze the data. Note how
the profiler keeps the mixtures
organized during the analysis and
modeling.

198
TLC, DOE 10104
Mixture Analysis
Notice the mixture relationship
is still maintained
199
TLC, DOE 10104
Setting Experimental Constraints in JMP
Factor constraints are set in the following way:
1. Determine the levels of the factor settings in the
experimental units without respect to a constraint.
2. Determine the linear multiplier for each of the
factor setting (1=1*X, 2=2*X, -1=-1*X).
3. If a constraint is set to zero for a factor, JMP will
ignore its settings and set no constraint.
4. Setting a constraint to one for a factor will include
its setting with no additional linear scaling and set
a constraint per the conditions indicated at the
bottom.
5. After the multiplier has been defined, determine the
boundaries of the constraint by specifying less than
or equal or greater than or equal to a specified
value.
6. The user-defined value at the bottom of the
constraint is the sum of the constraints times the
factor settings (y=X1*C1+X2*C2 Xn*Cn).
7. After Make Design is selected, JMP will apply the
constraint to the generation of the DOE matrix.
200
TLC, DOE 10104
DOE Exercise Designing the Experiment
Using the factors and levels from your
brainstorming session, design the appropriate DOE
to characterize the process or product.

1) Use JMP to design your experiment
2) Use the custom design generator to create your DOE
matrix
3) Be prepared to share your results
201
TLC, DOE 10104
Section I
Design and Analysis of Experiments (DOE)

Content
Screening designs
Custom designs
Tools
JMP
202
TLC, DOE 10104
Section VII
Screening designs
Custom designs
203
TLC, DOE 10104
Optimization Strategy
Once characterization has been done we are now ready to
consider optimization experiments when the data indicates
there is more improvement to be made
For factors which show little to no interaction they can be
optimized one factor at a time using a Oneway five level
design, or the Path of Steepest Assent method can be used
for two factors.
When factors interact they must be considered simultaneously
using a two factor Central Composite Design (CCD) or Box
Bhenken type design (5 level).
Local optimums are determined this way
204
TLC, DOE 10104
A design is rotatable if the variance of the predicted values is
the same at equal distances from the center of the design. By
adding the additional points the design is 5 level.
Properties of a CCD
Full
Factorial
Design
Rotatable
CCD RSM
Design
205
TLC, DOE 10104
Orthogonal
Center point
Orthogonal & Rotatable
Star or
Axial
points
Factorial
Points
Face
Centered
points
Options in a CCD Design
206
TLC, DOE 10104
2 Factor CCD
207
TLC, DOE 10104
3 Factor Box-Bhenken
3 Factor CCD
Box Bhenken versus CCD
Design both experiments using the Response Surface feature in
the DOE menu. Use the spin plot graph to examine the
experimental space.
208
TLC, DOE 10104
Yield Example
3 Factor CCD Yield.jmp
Follow our analysis
procedure and fit an
appropriate model.
209
TLC, DOE 10104
Using the Contour Profiler
Once we have
the model we can
use the Profiler
and Contour
Profiler to locate
the local
optimum. This
method makes it
easy to see
changes in the
response surface.
210
TLC, DOE 10104
Path of steepest assent uses
a 2x2 orthogonal design to
compute a vector pointing at
the steepest slope possible
from the data. Once the line
is known steps are taken to
move to the optimum.
Once at the local optimum a
CCD can be used to
determine if there is still
benefit to moving in another
direction.
Path of Steepest Assent
211
TLC, DOE 10104
Linear Model moving up the slope
y=|
o
+|
1
X
1
+|
2
X
2
+e
Quadratic Model near the top
y=|
o
+ |
1
X
1
+|
2
X
2
+ |
11
X
1
+|
22
X
2
+e
2
2
^
^
Two Model Equations
212
TLC, DOE 10104
2x2 full factorials are used to
determine the first order
linear model and steps are
taken until the response fails
to show improvement.
A new first order model is
then developed and the path
of steepest ascent is followed
until the first order model no
longer fits.
2X2 Design to Begin
213
TLC, DOE 10104
Response Process Yield
Factors Reaction Time (A) 30 - 40 Minutes
Temperature (B) 150 -160F

2x2 Full Factorial
Factor A Factor B Response
Time Temperature Yield
30 150 39.3
30 160 40.0
40 150 40.9
40 160 41.5

Procedure and Example
Path of Steepest Yield.jmp
214
TLC, DOE 10104
Terms of the Model:

y=|
o
+|
1
X
1
+|
2
X
2
+e

y=40.425+0.775X
1
+.325X
2
+0.05

X
i
=(X-Midpoint/1/2 Range) or (+1 to -1)

y=40.425+0.775((X-35)/5)+.325((X-155)/5)+0.05

^
^
^
Compute the Model
215
TLC, DOE 10104
y=40.425+0.775((X
1
-35)/5)+.325((X
2
-155)/5)+0.05

1. Determine a step size in one of the process variables say A X
1
.
Typically the factor which determines the step size is the one we know
the most about and or the largest coefficient. Begin with a coded step
size of 1 for A X
1
.

2. The coded step size for the second factor is a ratio of the first if we
wish to move up the slope in the most efficient manner.

3. Convert the coded steps into the factor steps by doing the following:
A Reaction time = AX
1
*1/2 original experiment A =1*5= 5
A Temperature = AX
2
*1/2 original experiment A =.42*5= 2

A
A
X
X
2
2
1 1
0 325
0 775 1
0 42 = = =
|
| ( / )
.
( . / )
.
Determining the Step Size
216
TLC, DOE 10104
Steps Factor Settings Response
Time Temp. Yield
Origin 35 155 GO
1 40 157 41.0
2 45 159 42.9
3 50 161 47.1
4 55 163 49.7
5 60 165 53.8
6 65 167 59.9
7 70 169 65.0
8 75 171 70.4
9 80 173 77.6
10 85 175 80.3
11 90 177 76.2
12 95 179 75.1
13 100 181 73.9
STOP
Move Up the Slope
Three in a row lower or higher than the optimal
setting indicates a local optimum
217
TLC, DOE 10104
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Steps
Y
i
e
l
d

Local Optimum
Looking for the Local Optimum
13
218
TLC, DOE 10104
Section VIII
Screening designs
Custom designs
219
TLC, DOE 10104
Factorial Designs
Each factor is free to vary independently of
all other factors
Experiments are arranged in square
orthogonal designs
Common designs are Full Factorial,
Fractional Factorial and D-optimal designs
RSM designs are used to characterize linear,
interaction and quadratic effects. Common
Designs are Box-Behnken and Central
Composite
220
TLC, DOE 10104
Each factor is not independent
Factors are a combination of fluids, gases
or ingredients which make up unity
Experiments are primarily Simplex or
triangular
Regression modeling still applies to the
analysis of mixture designs
Formulation of solids, fluids and gases in a
constant volume require mixture designs

Mixture Designs
221
TLC, DOE 10104
Mixture Designs
With mixtures it is impossible to vary one factor
independently of all the others. When you
change the amount of one ingredient, the
proportion of one or more of the other ingredients
must also change to make up the total.

This simple fact has a profound effect on every
aspect of experimentation with mixtures: the
factor space, the design properties, model and
the interpretation of the results.

222
TLC, DOE 10104
Two Factor Mixture Experiments and Pure Blends
Experimental points fall
along a straight line
The extremes of the line
are the Pure Blends of
the mixture
X
1
and X
2
are correlated
0
1
X
1
1
X
2
X
1
+ X
2
= 1
223
TLC, DOE 10104
Two Factor Mixture Experiments
You are not required to
experiment only with pure blends.
Add additional levels to determine
optimal performance.

The ratio of the two Xs
becomes the independent
factor in the experiment
0
1
X
1
1
X
2
X
1
+ X
2
= 1
224
TLC, DOE 10104
If Only Two Mixture Factors Treat Them as One
When conducting mixture experiments with only two factors treat them
as if they are a single factor
Gas 1 Gas 2 Ratio
1 75 25 3.0
2 50 50 1.0
3 25 75 0.3
4 25 75 0.3
5 75 25 3.0
6 25 75 0.3
7 75 25 3.0
8 50 50 1.0
9 50 50 1.0
225
TLC, DOE 10104
Simplex Designs
Because the proportions sum to
one, the feasible region for a
mixture takes the form of a
simplex.

Consider three factors in a 3
dimensional plot. The plane where
the sum of the three factors add to
one is a triangle-shaped slice.
0
1
1
1
X
2
X
1
X
3
X
1
+ X
2
+ X
3
= 1
226
TLC, DOE 10104
Mixture Designs in JMP

Begin designing
mixture
experiments by
selecting Mixture
Design from the
DOE menu.
227
TLC, DOE 10104
Simplex Lattice Designs
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X1
X3
228
TLC, DOE 10104
Definition of the Simplex Lattice Design
The simplex lattice design is a space-filling design that creates
a triangular grid of experiments
Uses (q,m) designation to define the simplex lattice design.
Where q is the number of factors and m is the number of levels.
Consists of points defined by the following coordinate settings:
the proportions assumed by each component take the m+1
equally spaced values from 0 to 1, X
i
= 0/m, 1/m, 2/m, , q/m
All possible combinations (mixtures) of the proportions are
created from this equation

229
TLC, DOE 10104
Simplex Lattice Design Example
Simplex lattice design (3,3)
3 factors at three levels + zero
0/m, 1/m, 2/m, 3/m
0/3 = 0, 1/3 = .33, 2/3 = .67, 3/3 = 1
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 0.33 0.67
0 0.67 0.33
0 1 0
0.33 0 0.67
0.33 0.33 0.33
0.33 0.67 0
0.67 0 0.33
0.67 0.33 0
1 0 0
230
TLC, DOE 10104
Fitting Capability
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X1
X3
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X1
X3
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X3
X1
Linear Quadratic Cubic
(3,1) (3,2) (3,3)
one level two levels three levels
Depending on the number of levels Simplex Lattice designs support
the characterization of linear effects and higher order polynomials
231
TLC, DOE 10104
Number of Experiments for Lattice Designs
Number of Levels (m)
Number (2) (3) (4)
of Factors (q) Quadratic Cubic Quartic
(3) 6 10 15
(4) 10 20 35
(5) 15 35 70
(6) 21 56 126

(q+m-1)!
m!(q-1)!
232
TLC, DOE 10104
Simplex Lattice: (3,2) Design
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X3
X1
(3,2)

6 Experiment Matrix
Pure Blends
Binary Blends
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 0.5 0.5
0 1 0
0.5 0 0.5
0.5 0.5 0
1 0 0
233
TLC, DOE 10104
(3,3)

10 Experiment Matrix
. 2
. 2
. 2
. 4
. 4
. 4
. 6
. 6
. 6
. 8
. 8
. 8
X2
X1
X3
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 0.33 0.67
0 0.67 0.33
0 1 0
0.33 0 0.67
0.33 0.33 0.33
0.33 0.67 0
0.67 0 0.33
0.67 0.33 0
1 0 0
234
TLC, DOE 10104
(3,4)

. 2
. 2
. 2
. 4
. 4
. 4
. 6
. 6
. 6
. 8
. 8
. 8
X2
X1
X3
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 0.25 0.75
0 0.5 0.5
0 0.75 0.25
0 1 0
0.25 0 0.75
0.25 0.25 0.5
0.25 0.5 0.25
0.25 0.75 0
0.5 0 0.5
0.5 0.25 0.25
0.5 0.5 0
0.75 0 0.25
0.75 0.25 0
1 0 0
235
TLC, DOE 10104
(3,5)


Open and analyze Simplex Lattice.jmp
. 2
. 2
. 2
. 4
. 4
. 4
. 6
. 6
. 6
. 8
. 8
. 8
X2
X1
X3
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 0.2 0.8
0 0.4 0.6
0 0.6 0.4
0 0.8 0.2
0 1 0
0.2 0 0.8
0.2 0.2 0.6
0.2 0.4 0.4
0.2 0.6 0.2
0.2 0.8 0
0.4 0 0.6
0.4 0.2 0.4
0.4 0.4 0.2
0.4 0.6 0
0.6 0 0.4
0.6 0.2 0.2
0.6 0.4 0
0.8 0 0.2
0.8 0.2 0
1 0 0
236
TLC, DOE 10104
Fitting Mixture Designs
When fitting a model for
mixture designs, you must take
into account that all the factors
add up to a constant, and thus
a traditional full linear model
will not be fully estimable
Suppress the intercept
Include all the linear main-
effect terms
Exclude all the squared terms
(X1*X1)
Include all the cross terms
(X1*X2)
Coefficients on the cross terms
indicate the curvature across
each edge of the factor space

237
TLC, DOE 10104
Simplex Centroid Designs
238
TLC, DOE 10104
Definition of Simplex Centroid Designs
A Simplex Centroid design of degree K with nf factors

K is the number of equal blends of the mixture components in
addition to one
+ a center point
All one factor
All combinations of two factors at equal levels
All combinations of three factors at equal levels and so on up
to K factors at a time combined at K equal levels
A center point run with equal amounts of all the ingredients is
always included

239
TLC, DOE 10104
Simplex Centroid Designs nf=3, K=1
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 1 0
0.33 0.33 0.33
1 0 0
240
TLC, DOE 10104
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 0.5 0.5
0 1 0
0.33 0.33 0.33
0.5 0 0.5
0.5 0.5 0
1 0 0
241
TLC, DOE 10104
X1 X2 X3
0 0 1
0 0.5 0.5
0 1 0
0.33 0.33 0.33
0.33 0.33 0.33
0.5 0 0.5
0.5 0.5 0
1 0 0
242
TLC, DOE 10104
X1 X2 X3 X4
0 0 0 1
0 0 0.5 0.5
0 0 1 0
0 0.33 0.33 0.33
0 0.5 0 0.5
0 0.5 0.5 0
0 1 0 0
0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
0.33 0 0.33 0.33
0.33 0.33 0 0.33
0.33 0.33 0.33 0
0.5 0 0 0.5
0.5 0 0.5 0
0.5 0.5 0 0
1 0 0 0
Open and
analyze
Simplex
Centroid.jmp
243
TLC, DOE 10104
Extreme Vertices Designs
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X1
X3
Ternary Plot
244
TLC, DOE 10104
Want Something other than a Grid?

The extreme vertices design finds the corners (vertices) of a
factor space constrained by limits specified by the
experimenter for one or more of the factors

The property that the factors must be non-negative and must
add up to 1, is the basic mixture constraint that makes a
triangular-shaped region

Extreme Vertices are more flexible for the designs you want
245
TLC, DOE 10104
Definition of Extreme Vertices Designs
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X1
X3
Ternary Plot
Define the region as a set of vectors and
vertices across the design region.
Additional limits are usually in the form of
range constraints, upper bounds, and
lower bounds on the factor values.
Find the vertices of the simplex
Add the midpoints of the edges
Add the averages of the vertices to the
specified degree

246
TLC, DOE 10104
Extreme Vertices Only, No Constraint, Degree 2
X
1
>.1
X
1
<.5
X
2
>.1
X
2
<.7
X
3
>0
X
3
<.7
X
2
<.7
X
1
<.5
X
1
>.1
X
3
>0
X
3
<.7
X
2
>.1
247
TLC, DOE 10104
Linear Constraints
248
TLC, DOE 10104
Adding Linear Constraints
Sometimes other ingredients need
range constraints that confine their
values to be greater than a lower bound
or less than an upper bound.

Range constraints chop off parts of the
triangular-shaped (simplex) region to
make additional vertices. It is also
possible to have a linear constraint,
which defines a linear combination of
factors to be greater or smaller than
some constant.

249
TLC, DOE 10104
Add Additional Linear Constraints
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.4
.6
.6
.6
.8
.8
.8
X2
X1
X3
Ternary Plot
X
1
<.4
X
2
<.7
X
1
<.5
X
1
>.1
X
3
>0
X
3
<.7
X
2
>.1
X
2
<.7
X
1
<.5
X
1
>.1
X
3
>0
X
3
<.7
X
2
>.1
Open and analyze Extreme Vertices.jmp
250
TLC, DOE 10104
DOE Books:
D.C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments. (New York: NY, John Wiley & Sons, 1996).
G.E. Box, J.S. Hunter & W.G. Hunter, Statistics for Experimenters: An Introduction to Design, Data
Analysis, and Model Building (New York: NY, John Wiley & Sons 1978).
Web Sites:
Thomas A. Little Consulting at www.dr-tom.com
Software: SAS JMP contact SAS Institute at www.jmp.com

611 Whitby Lane
Brentwood, CA 94513
1-925-285-1847
drlittle@dr-tom.com

References & Resources
Use of any of the materials contained in these course notes requires the express permission of Thomas A. Little Consulting
Thomas A. Little Consulting, 611 Whitby Lane, Brentwood, CA 94513, September 20, 2003

DOE 5.1class Notes

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

DOE 5.1class Notes

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

1

TLC, DOE 10104

Potrebbero piacerti anche