4 Surface Roughness
EXAMPLE 14-4 Surface Roughness
Consider the surface roughness experiment originally de-
and the sum of squares for A is found using Equation 14-15:
scribed in Example 14-2. This is a 2 3 factorial design in the
1Contrast A 2 1272
factors feed rate (A), depth of cut (B), and tool angle (C ), with
SS A
k n 45.5625 2 replicates. Table 14-16 presents the observed surface n 2 182
roughness data.
It is easy to verify that the other effects are
The effect of A, for example, is
A AB 1.375
Examining the magnitude of the effects clearly shows that
feed rate (factor A) is dominant, followed by depth of cut (B)
JWCL232_c14_551-636.qxd 11610 9:56 AM Page 582
CHAPTER 14 DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS WITH SEVERAL FACTORS
Table 14-16 Surface Roughness Data for Example 14-4
Treatment
Design Factors
Surface
Combinations
A B C Roughness Totals
and the AB interaction, although the interaction effect is rela-
freedom, giving the total 3 in the column headed “DF.’’ The
tively small. The analysis of variance, summarized in Table
column headed “Seq S’ (an abbreviation for sequential sum
14-17, confirms our interpretation of the effect estimates.
of squares) reports how much the model sum of squares in-
Minitab will analyze 2 k factorial designs. The output
creases when each group of terms is added to a model that
from the Minitab DOE (Design of Experiments) module for
contains the terms listed above the groups. The first number in
this experiment is shown in Table 14-18. The upper portion of
the “Seq S’ column presents the model sum of squares for
the table displays the effect estimates and regression coeffi-
fitting a model having only the three main effects. The row la-
cients for each factorial effect. However, the t-statistic com-
beled “2-Way Interactions’’ refers to AB, AC, and BC, and the
puted from Equation 14-18 is reported for each effect instead
sequential sum of squares reported here is the increase in the
of the F-statistic used in Table 14-17. To illustrate, for the
model sum of squares if the interaction terms are added to a
main effect of feed Minitab reports t
4.32 (with eight
model containing only the main effects. Similarly, the sequen-
degrees of freedom), and t 2 2
18.66, which is
tial sum of squares for the three-way interaction is the increase
approximately equal to the F-ratio for feed reported in Table
in the model sum of squares that results from adding the term
14-17 (F 18.69). This F-ratio has one numerator and eight
ABC to a model containing all other effects.
denominator degrees of freedom.
The column headed “Adj S’ (an abbreviation for ad-
The lower panel of the Minitab output in Table 14-18 is
justed sum of squares) reports how much the model sum of
an analysis of variance summary focusing on the types of
squares increases when each group of terms is added to a
terms in the model. A regression model approach is used in the
model that contains all the other terms. Now since any 2 k de-
presentation. You might find it helpful to review Section 12-2.2,
sign with an equal number of replicates in each cell is an
particularly the material on the partial F-test. The row entitled
orthogonal design, the adjusted sum of squares will equal the se-
“main effects’’ under source refers to the three main
quential sum of squares. Therefore, the F-tests for each row in
effects feed, depth, and angle, each having a single degree of
the Minitab analysis of variance table are testing the significance
Table 14-17 Analysis of Variance for the Surface Finish Experiment
Source of
Degrees of
Variation
Sum of Squares
Freedom
Mean Square
f 0 P-Value
A 45.5625
B 10.5625
C 3.0625
AB 7.5625
AC 0.0625
BC 1.5625
ABC
Error
Total
JWCL232_c14_551-636.qxd 11610 9:56 AM Page 583
14-5 2 k FACTORIAL DESIGNS
Table 14-18 Minitab Analysis for Example 14-4 Estimated Effects and Coefficients for Roughness Term
Effect
Coef
StDev Coef
Analysis of Variance for Roughness Source
Main Effects
2-Way Interactions
3-Way Interactions
Residual Error
Pure Error
of each group of terms (main effects, two-factor interactions,
that feed rate and depth of cut have large main effects, and
and three-factor interactions) as if they were the last terms to
there may be some mild interaction between these two factors.
be included in the model. Clearly, only the main effect terms are
Therefore, the Minitab output is in agreement with the results
significant. The t-tests on the individual factor effects indicate
given previously.