/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 39 In an experiment to assess the e... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

In an experiment to assess the effect of the angle of pull on the force required to cause separation in electrical connectors, four different angles (factor \(A\) ) were used and each of a sample of five connectors (factor \(B\) ) was pulled once at each angle ("A Mixed Model Factorial Experiment in Testing Electrical Connectors," Indust. Qual. Control, 1960: 12-16). The data appears in the accompanying table. $$ \begin{array}{cc|ccccc} & & {\boldsymbol{B}} \\ & & \mathbf{1} & \mathbf{2} & \mathbf{3} & \mathbf{4} & \mathbf{5} \\ \hline & \mathbf{0}^{\circ} & 45.3 & 42.2 & 39.6 & 36.8 & 45.8 \\ \mathbf{A} & \mathbf{2}^{\circ} & 44.1 & 44.1 & 38.4 & 38.0 & 47.2 \\ & \mathbf{4}^{\circ} & 42.7 & 42.7 & 42.6 & 42.2 & 48.9 \\ & \mathbf{6}^{\circ} & 43.5 & 45.8 & 47.9 & 37.9 & 56.4 \\ \hline \end{array} $$ Does the data suggest that true average separation force is affected by the angle of pull? State and test the appropriate hypotheses at level \(.01\) by first constructing an ANOVA table (SST \(=396.13, \mathrm{SSA}=58.16\), and \(\mathrm{SSB}=246.97\) ).

Short Answer

Expert verified
The angle does not significantly affect the force at the 0.01 level.

Step by step solution

01

Setup Hypotheses

To determine if the angle affects the separation force, we set up the null hypothesis \( H_0 \): No effect of angle on force, and the alternative hypothesis \( H_a \): Angle affects force.
02

Determine the Degrees of Freedom

For factor A (angle), degrees of freedom \(df_A=n_A-1=3\). B (connectors), \(df_B=n_B-1=4\). Error term, \(df_E=(n_A-1)\times(n_B-1)=12\). Total degrees of freedom, \(df_T=n_A\times n_B - 1=19\).
03

Calculate Mean Squares

Mean square for factor A, \(MSA=\frac{SSA}{df_A}=\frac{58.16}{3}=19.39\). For factor B, \(MSB=\frac{SSB}{df_B}=\frac{246.97}{4}=61.7425\). For errors, \(SSE=SST-SSA-SSB=91.00\) and \(MSE=\frac{SSE}{df_E}=\frac{91.00}{12}=7.5833\).
04

Compute F-values

The F-value for factor A is \(F_A=\frac{MSA}{MSE}=\frac{19.39}{7.5833}\approx2.55\). The corresponding p-value must be evaluated using an F-distribution table (or software), with \(df_A=3\) and \(df_E=12\).
05

Compare F-value with Critical Value

The critical value at \(\alpha=0.01\) for \(df_A=3\) and \(df_E=12\) is approximately 5.95 (from F-distribution tables). Since \(F_A\approx2.55 < 5.95\), we fail to reject the null hypothesis \(H_0\).
06

Conclusion

Since the F-value for factor A (2.55) is below the critical value, there is insufficient evidence to claim the angle significantly affects the separation force at the 0.01 significance level.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis testing is a core component of inferential statistics, which allows us to make decisions or inferences about population parameters based on sample data. In the context of ANOVA (Analysis of Variance), we examine whether different groups (in this case, different angles) have different effects.

To start, we need to set up two contrasting hypotheses:
  • The null hypothesis (\(H_0\)): This states that there is no effect or difference. For the exercise, it implies the angle of the pull does not affect the separation force.
  • The alternative hypothesis (\(H_a\)): This suggests there is a significant difference or effect. Here, it states that the angle does indeed affect the force needed.
At a given significance level (often denoted by \(\alpha\)), usually 0.01 or 0.05, we determine if the observed data provides enough evidence to reject \(H_0\). This is done by calculating test statistics, comparing them to critical values, or analyzing p-values.
Degrees of Freedom
Degrees of freedom (df) are a crucial concept in statistics, especially in ANOVA, as they define the number of independent values or quantities which can be assigned to a statistical distribution. They are necessary to calculate mean squares and other statistics.

In the exercise, we have:
  • For factor A (angles): \(df_A = n_A - 1 = 3\), where \(n_A\) is the number of levels of the angle factor.
  • For factor B (connectors): \(df_B = n_B - 1 = 4\), with \(n_B\) being the number of connector samples.
  • Error term: \(df_E = (n_A - 1) \times (n_B - 1) = 12\), accounting for the interaction between the levels.
  • Total degrees of freedom: A combination of everything, \(df_T = n_A \times n_B - 1 = 19\).
Understanding how to allocate df in ANOVA is key because it determines how variability is partitioned among different sources.
F-distribution
The F-distribution is a probability distribution used in ANOVA to compare variances among groups, helping us detect differences in means when multiple groups are involved. It is skewed-right and defined by two types of degrees of freedom: those from the numerator and the denominator.

In an ANOVA test, as in this exercise, we compute F-values, which are ratios of variances. For example, for factor A, the F-value is calculated using: \(F_A = \frac{MSA}{MSE}\), where \(MSA\) is the mean square for factor A, and \(MSE\) is the mean square error.

By comparing this F-value to a critical value from an F-distribution table, we can decide whether to reject the null hypothesis. The critical value corresponds to our set significance level and the specific degrees of freedom for the test. If our F-value is greater than this critical value, it indicates significant variability attributable to our factor of interest.
Mean Square
Mean square is an important calculation in ANOVA, as it represents the variance estimate for a factor or an error term. It is derived by dividing the sum of squares (SS) by the corresponding degrees of freedom. There are three main mean squares in ANOVA:

  • Mean square for factor A (\(MSA\)): Measures variability due to the factor, in this case, the angle of pull. In the exercise, \(MSA = \frac{SSA}{df_A} = \frac{58.16}{3} = 19.39\).
  • Mean square for factor B (\(MSB\)): Reflects variance across different samples, calculated as \(MSB = \frac{SSB}{df_B}\).
  • Mean square error (\(MSE\)): Accounts for variation not explained by the factors, \(MSE = \frac{SSE}{df_E} = \frac{91.00}{12} = 7.5833\).
These mean squares help calculate F-values, assessing if observed variances between group means are greater than would be expected by chance.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Four different coatings are being considered for corrosion protection of metal pipe. The pipe will be buried in three different types of soil. To investigate whether the amount of corrosion depends either on the coating or on the type of soil, 12 pieces of pipe are selected. Each piece is coated with one of the four coatings and buried in one of the three types of soil for a fixed time, after which the amount of corrosion (depth of maximum pits, in \(.0001\) in.) is determined. The depths are shown in this table: $$ \begin{aligned} &\text { Soil Type (B) }\\\ &\begin{array}{l|lll} & \mathbf{1} & \mathbf{2} & \mathbf{3} \\ \hline \mathbf{1} & 64 & 49 & 50 \\ \mathbf{2} & 53 & 51 & 48 \\ \mathbf{3} & 47 & 45 & 50 \\ \mathbf{4} & 51 & 43 & 52 \\ \hline \end{array} \end{aligned} $$ a. Assuming the validity of the additive model, carry out the ANOVA analysis using an ANOVA table to see whether the amount of corrosion depends on either the type of coating used or the type of soil. Use \(\alpha=.05\). b. Compute \(\hat{\mu}, \hat{\alpha}_{1}, \hat{\alpha}_{2}, \hat{\alpha}_{3}, \hat{\alpha}_{4}, \hat{\beta}_{1}, \hat{\beta}_{2}\), and \(\hat{\beta}_{3}\)

The article "Towards Improving the Properties of Plaster Moulds and Castings" (J. Engrg. Manuf., 1991: 265-269) describes several ANOVAs carried out to study how the amount of carbon fiber and sand additions affect various characteristics of the molding process. Here we give data on casting hardness and on wet-mold strength. $$ \begin{array}{llll} \hline \begin{array}{l} \text { Sand } \\ \begin{array}{l} \text { Addition } \\ (\%) \end{array} & \begin{array}{l} \text { Carbon } \\ \text { Fiber } \\ \text { Addition } \\ (\%) \end{array} & & \begin{array}{l} \text { Casting } \\ \text { Hardness } \end{array} & \begin{array}{l} \text { Wet- } \\ \text { Mold } \\ \text { Strength } \end{array} \\ \hline 0 & 0 & 61.0 & 34.0 \\ 0 & 0 & 63.0 & 16.0 \\ 15 & 0 & 67.0 & 36.0 \\ 15 & 0 & 69.0 & 19.0 \\ 30 & 0 & 65.0 & 28.0 \\ 30 & 0 & 74.0 & 17.0 \\ 0 & .25 & 69.0 & 49.0 \\ 0 & .25 & 69.0 & 48.0 \\ 15 & .25 & 69.0 & 43.0 \\ 15 & .25 & 74.0 & 29.0 \\ 30 & .25 & 74.0 & 31.0 \\ 30 & .25 & 72.0 & 24.0 \\ 0 & .50 & 67.0 & 55.0 \\ 0 & .50 & 69.0 & 60.0 \\ 15 & .50 & 69.0 & 45.0 \\ 15 & .50 & 74.0 & 43.0 \\ 30 & .50 & 74.0 & 22.0 \\ 30 & .50 & 74.0 & 48.0 \end{array} \end{array} $$ a. An ANOVA for wet-mold strength gives SSSand \(=705\), SSFiber \(=1278\), SSE \(=843\), and SST \(=3105 .\) Test for the presence of any effects using \(\alpha=.05\). b. Carry out an ANOVA on the casting hardness observations using \(\alpha=.05\). c. Make an interaction plot with sand percentage on the horizontal axis, and discuss the results of part (b) in terms of what the plot shows.

Six samples of each of four types of cereal grain grown in a certain region were analyzed to determine thiamin content, resulting in the following data \((\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{g})\) : \(\begin{array}{lllllll}\text { Wheat } & 5.2 & 4.5 & 6.0 & 6.1 & 6.7 & 5.8 \\\ \text { Barley } & 6.5 & 8.0 & 6.1 & 7.5 & 5.9 & 5.6 \\ \text { Maize } & 5.8 & 4.7 & 6.4 & 4.9 & 6.0 & 5.2 \\ \text { Oats } & 8.3 & 6.1 & 7.8 & 7.0 & 5.5 & 7.2\end{array}\) a. Check the ANOVA assumptions with a normal probability plot and a test for equal variances. b. Test to see if at least two of the grains differ with respect to true average thiamin content. Use an \(\alpha=.05\) test based on the \(P\)-value method.

Samples of six different brands of diet/imitation margarine were analyzed to determine the level of physiologically active polyunsaturated fatty acids (PAPFUA, in percentages), resulting in the following data: \(\begin{array}{llllll}\text { Imperial } & 14.1 & 13.6 & 14.4 & 14.3 & \\\ \text { Parkay } & 12.8 & 12.5 & 13.4 & 13.0 & 12.3 \\ \text { Blue Bonnet } & 13.5 & 13.4 & 14.1 & 14.3 & \\ \text { Chiffon } & 13.2 & 12.7 & 12.6 & 13.9 & \\ \text { Mazola } & 16.8 & 17.2 & 16.4 & 17.3 & 18.0 \\ \text { Fleischmann's } & 18.1 & 17.2 & 18.7 & 18.4 & \end{array}\) (The preceding numbers are fictitious, but the sample means agree with data reported in the January 1975 issue of Consumer Reports.) a. Use ANOVA to test for differences among the true average PAPFUA percentages for the different brands. b. Compute CIs for all \(\left(\mu_{i}-\mu_{j}\right)\) 's. c. Mazola and Fleischmann's are corn-based, whereas the others are soybean- based. Compute a CI for $$ \frac{\mu_{1}+\mu_{2}+\mu_{3}+\mu_{4}}{4}-\frac{\mu_{5}+\mu_{6}}{2} $$

The strength of concrete used in commercial construction tends to vary from one batch to another. Consequently, small test cylinders of concrete sampled from a batch are "cured" for periods up to about 28 days in temperature- and moisture-controlled environments before strength measurements are made. Concrete is then "bought and sold on the basis of strength test cylinders" (ASTM C 31 Standard Test Method for Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in the Field). The accompanying data resulted from an experiment carried out to compare three different curing methods with respect to compressive strength (MPa). Analyze this data. $$ \begin{array}{lccc} \hline \text { Batch } & \text { Method A } & \text { Method B } & \text { Method C } \\ \hline 1 & 30.7 & 33.7 & 30.5 \\ 2 & 29.1 & 30.6 & 32.6 \\ 3 & 30.0 & 32.2 & 30.5 \\ 4 & 31.9 & 34.6 & 33.5 \\ 5 & 30.5 & 33.0 & 32.4 \\ 6 & 26.9 & 29.3 & 27.8 \\ 7 & 28.2 & 28.4 & 30.7 \\ 8 & 32.4 & 32.4 & 33.6 \\ 9 & 26.6 & 29.5 & 29.2 \\ 10 & 28.6 & 29.4 & 33.2 \end{array} $$

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.