TWO FACTOR ANOVA
USING BOWLING PIN FACTORY(FACTISM)
IME 435/L
DESIGN OF EXPERIMENT
YOUNG KIM
2/19/2014
IME
DEPARTMENT
CALIFORNIA
STATE POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY
Title:
Two Factors ANOVA using bowling pin factory (FACTISM)
Two Factors ANOVA using bowling pin factory (FACTISM)
Statement
of the problem:
Using statistical analysis of variance, ANOVA, using two factors out of 5, temperature and alloy, experiment will be conducted to see if any of those factor contributes to change in response.
Using statistical analysis of variance, ANOVA, using two factors out of 5, temperature and alloy, experiment will be conducted to see if any of those factor contributes to change in response.
Materials
or Tools:
FACTISM
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Words
FACTISM
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Words
Assumptions:
1. Other factors other than temperature and alloy will not have effect on response.
2. H_0 = u1 = u2 = u3 = u4 = u5, temperature has no effect on weight
H_a
, temperature does have effect on weight
1. Other factors other than temperature and alloy will not have effect on response.
2. H_0 = u1 = u2 = u3 = u4 = u5, temperature has no effect on weight
H_a
H_0 = u1 =
u2 = u3
= u4 = u5,
alloy has no effect on weight
H_a
, alloy does have effect on weight
H_a
H_0 = u1 =
u2 = u3
= u4 = u5, interaction
has no effect on weight
H_a
, interaction does have effect on weight
3. Alpha = 0.95
H_a
3. Alpha = 0.95
Procedure:
1. Collect responses from Factism by changing temperature and alloy value to 0, 25, 50, 75, 100, and 30, 35, 40, 45, 50 respectively. Repeat each trial 8 times.
2. Perform two factor ANOVA by both manual and using Megastats.
1. Collect responses from Factism by changing temperature and alloy value to 0, 25, 50, 75, 100, and 30, 35, 40, 45, 50 respectively. Repeat each trial 8 times.
2. Perform two factor ANOVA by both manual and using Megastats.
Results:
Using manual method:
Using manual method:
Performing two way ANOVA manually :
Using Megastats:
Findings &
conclusion:
Since our calculated F value for temperature is less than our critical F value, we fail to reject our null hypothesis. Our p-value from Megastat also indicates that we fail to reject our null hypothesis since 0.2743 is greater than 0.05 which is our alpha value. However, we reject null hypothesis for alloy since its calculated F value is greater than critical F value, yet, without confident since both p values are so close to each other. Finally we can confidently say that we fail to reject our null hypothesis for interaction of temperature and alloy due to greater magnitude in calculated p value from critical p value.
Since our calculated F value for temperature is less than our critical F value, we fail to reject our null hypothesis. Our p-value from Megastat also indicates that we fail to reject our null hypothesis since 0.2743 is greater than 0.05 which is our alpha value. However, we reject null hypothesis for alloy since its calculated F value is greater than critical F value, yet, without confident since both p values are so close to each other. Finally we can confidently say that we fail to reject our null hypothesis for interaction of temperature and alloy due to greater magnitude in calculated p value from critical p value.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기