Author
Listed:
- E. Mønness
- M. J. Linsley
- I. E. Garzon
Abstract
Full factorial designs of a significant size are very rarely performed in industry due to the number of trials involved and unavailable time and resources. The data in this paper were obtained from a six‐factor full factorial (26) designed experiment that was conducted to determine the optimum operating conditions for a steel milling operation. Fractional‐factorial designs 2 III6–3 (one‐eighth) and 2 IV6–2 (one‐fourth, using a fold‐over from the one‐eighth) are compared with the full 26 design. Four of the 2 III6–3 are de‐aliased by adding four more runs. In addition, two 12‐run Plackett–Burman experiments and their combination into a fold‐over 24‐run experiment are considered. Many of the one‐eighth fractional‐factorial designs reveal some significant effects, but the size of the estimates varies much due to aliasing. Adding four more runs improves the estimation considerably. The one‐quarter fraction designs yield satisfactory results, compared to the full factorial, if the ‘correct’ parameterization is assumed. The Plackett–Burman experiments, estimating all main effects, always perform worse than the equivalent regular designs (which have fewer runs). When considering a reduced model many of the different designs are more or less identical. The paper provides empirical evidence for managers and engineers that the choice of an experimental design is very important and highlights how designs of a minimal size may not always result in productive findings. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Suggested Citation
E. Mønness & M. J. Linsley & I. E. Garzon, 2007.
"Comparing different fractions of a factorial design: a metal cutting case study,"
Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 117-128, March.
Handle:
RePEc:wly:apsmbi:v:23:y:2007:i:2:p:117-128
DOI: 10.1002/asmb.641
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:apsmbi:v:23:y:2007:i:2:p:117-128. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1526-4025 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.