/*! 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} Q33E Because of potential variability... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Because of potential variability in aging due to different castings and segments on the castings, a Latin square design with N 5 7 was used to investigate the effect of heat treatment on aging. With A 5 castings, B 5 segments, C 5 heat treatments, summary statistics include x??? 5 3815.8, oxi 2 ?? 5 297,216.90, ox?j? 2 5 297,200.64, ox??k 2 5 297,155.01, and ooxijskd 2 5 297,317.65. Obtain the ANOVA table and test at level .05 the hypothesis that heat treatment has no effect on aging.

Short Answer

Expert verified

It appears that the main effect C,the heat treatment had no effect on ranging.

Step by step solution

01

Step 1:Notations for totals and averages

Assume that two and three factor interaction effects are absent!

A Latin square design model equation is given by

\({\rm{\;where\;}}I = J = K = N{\rm{,\;}}\)

and the errors are independent and normally distributed with mean zero and variance \({\sigma ^2}\).The notations for totals and averages are

Obesrved values are denoted as x instead of big X.The notations without line over X are just the sums.

02

Step 2:Table with corresponding values

The folowing table needs to completed with corresponding values.

03

Step 3:Degrees of freedom

Sum of squares,for a Latin square experiment and the degree of freedom are given by

\(\)

With degrees of freedom respectively,

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{d{f_T} = {N^2} - 1}\\{d{f_A} = N - 1}\\{d{f_B} = N - 1}\\{d{f_C} = N - 1}\\{d{f_E} = (N - 1)(N - 2).}\end{aligned}\)

04

Step 4:Calculating SST 

The given values are

The SST is

05

Fundamental Identity

The SSA is

The SSB is

The SSC is

Fundamental Identity

\(SST = SSA + SSB + SSC + SSE.\)

By the Fundamental Identity,

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{SSE = SST - (SSA + SSB + SSC)}\\{ = 168.07 - 67.32 - 51.06 - 5.43}\\{ = 44.26}\end{aligned}\)

06

Step 6:Degrees of freedom

The degrees of freedom are

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{d{f_T} = {N^2} - 1 = 48}\\{d{f_A} = N - 1 = 6}\\{d{f_B} = N - 1 = 6}\\{d{f_C} = N - 1 = 6}\\{d{f_E} = (N - 1)(N - 2) = (7 - 1)(7 - 2) = 30}\end{aligned}\)

The mean squares are

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{MSA = \frac{1}{{d{f_A}}} \cdot SSA = \frac{1}{6} \cdot 67.32 = 11.02}\\{MSB = \frac{1}{{d{f_B}}} \cdot SSB = \frac{1}{6} \cdot 51.06 = 8.51}\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{MSC = \frac{1}{{d{f_C}}} \cdot SSC = \frac{1}{6} \cdot 5.43 = 0.91}\\{MSE = \frac{1}{{d{f_E}}} \cdot SSE = \frac{1}{{30}} \cdot 44.26 = 1.48.}\end{aligned}\)

The corresponding f values are

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{{f_A} = \frac{{MSA}}{{MSE}} = \frac{{11.02}}{{1.48}} = 7.6}\\{{f_B} = \frac{{MSB}}{{MSE}} = \frac{{8.51}}{{1.48}} = 5.8}\\{{f_C} = \frac{{MSC}}{{MSE}} = \frac{{0.91}}{{1.48}} = 0.61.}\end{aligned}\)

07

Step 7:Calculating P values

The P value can be computed using a software.

\({P_A} = P\left( {F > {f_A}} \right) = P(F > 7.6) = 0.00\)

P-value is the area under the \({F_{N - 1,(N - 1)(N - 2)}}{\rm{\;curve to the right of the test statistic value\;}}{f_A}{\rm{.\;}}\)

\({P_B} = P\left( {F > {f_B}} \right) = P(F > 5.8) = 0.00\)

P-value is the area under the \({F_{N - 1,(N - 1)(N - 2))}}{\rm{\;curve to the right of the test statistic value\;}}{f_B}{\rm{.\;}}\)

\({P_C} = P\left( {F > {f_C}} \right) = P(F > 0.61) = 0.72\)

P-value is the area under the \({F_{N - 1,(N - 1)(N - 2)}}{\rm{\;curve to the right of the test statistic value\;}}{f_C}\)

\({F_{0.05,6,30}} = 2.42\)

08

Step 8:ANOVA Table

Finally, ANOVA Table becomes

09

Step 9:Hypothesis of interests

The Hypothesis of interests are

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{{H_{0A}}:{\alpha _1} = {\alpha _2} = \ldots = {\alpha _I} = 0}&{{\rm{\;versus\;}}}&{{H_{aA}}:{\rm{\;at least one\;}}{\alpha _ - }i \ne 0}\\{{H_{0B}}:{\beta _1} = {\beta _2} = \ldots = {\beta _J} = 0}&{{\rm{\;versus\;}}}&{{H_{aB}}:{\rm{\;at least one\;}}{\beta _ - }j \ne 0}\\{{H_{0C}}:{\delta _1} = {\delta _2} = \ldots = {\delta _K} = 0}&{{\rm{\;versus\;}}}&{{H_{aC}}:{\rm{\;at least one\;}}{\delta _ - }i \ne 0}\end{aligned}\)

\({\rm{\;When testing hypotheses\;}}{H_{0A}}{\rm{\;versus\;}}{H_{aA}}\),the test statistics value is

\({f_A} = \frac{{MSA}}{{MSE}}\)

And the p-value is the area under the \({F_{N - 1,(N - 1)(N - 2)}}\)curve to the right of the test statistic value \({f_A}\)

\({\rm{\;When testing hypotheses\;}}{H_{0B}}{\rm{\;versus\;}}{H_a}{B_{{\rm{.\;}}}}\), the test statistics value is

\({f_B} = \frac{{MSB}}{{MSE}}\)

And the p-value is the area under the \({F_{N - 1,(N - 1)(N - 2)}}\) curve to the right of the test statistic value \({f_B}\)

\({\rm{\;When testing hypotheses\;}}{H_{0C}}{\rm{\;versus\;}}{H_{aC}}\), the test statistics value is

\({f_C} = \frac{{MSC}}{{MSE}}\)

And the p-value is the area under the \({F_{N - 1,(N - 1)(N - 2)}}\) curve to the right of the test statistic value \({f_C}.\)

10

It appears that the main effect C,the heat treatment had no effect on ranging.

For factor A

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{r}}{{F_{0.05,6,30}} = 2.42 < 7.6 = {f_A}}\\{{P_A} = 0.00 < 0.05 = \alpha }\end{aligned}\)

\({\rm{\;reject null hypothesis\;}}{H_{0A}}\)

\({\rm{\;at given significance level\;}}\alpha {\rm{. Factor (main effect)\;}}\)A is statiscally significant.

For factor B

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{r}}{{F_{0.05,6,30}} = 2.42 < 5.8 = {f_B}}\\{{P_B} = 0.034 < 0.05 = \alpha }\end{aligned}\)

\({\rm{\;reject null hypothesis\;}}{H_{0B}}\)

\({\rm{\;at given significance level\;}}\alpha {\rm{. Factor (main effect)\;}}\)B is statiscally significant.

For factor C

\(\begin{aligned}{*{20}{c}}{{F_{0.05,6,30}} = 2.42 > 0.91 = {f_C}}\\{{P_C} = 0.72}\end{aligned}\)

\({\rm{\;do not reject null hypothesis\;}}{H_{0C}}\)

\({\rm{\;at given significance level\;}}\alpha {\rm{. Factor (main effect)\;}}\)C is not statiscally significant.

Thus, it appears that the main effect C,the heat treatment had no effect on ranging.

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 91影视!

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

In an experiment to assess the effects of curing time (factor A ) and type of mix (factor B ) on the compressive strength of hardened cement cubes, three different curing times were used in combination with four different mixes, with three observations obtained for each of the 12 curing time-mix combinations. The resulting sums of squares were computed to be \(SSA = 30,763.0,SSB = 34,185.6,SSE = 97,436.8,\;and SST\; = 205,966.6\)

a. Construct an ANOVA table.

b. Test at level .05 the null hypothesis \({H_{0AB}}:\;all\;{\gamma _{ij}}\;'s\; = 0\) (no interaction of factors) against \({H_{0AB}}\)at least one

c. Test at level .05 the null hypothesis \({H_{0A}}:{\alpha _1} = {\alpha _2} = {\alpha _3} = 0\) (factor A main effects are absent) against \({H_{0A}}\)at least one

d. Test\({H_{0B}}:{\beta _1} = {\beta _2} = {\beta _3} = {\beta _4} = 0\;versus\;{H_{aB}}:\) at least one using a level .05 test.

e. The values of the\({\bar x_{i = \;'s }},{\bar x_{1L}} = 4010.88,{\bar x_{2L}} = 4029.10,\;and\;{\bar x_{3..}} = 3960.02\). Use Turkey鈥檚 procedure to investigate significant differences among the three curing times.

The accompanying data was obtained in an experiment to investigate whether compressive strength of concrete cylinders depends on the type of capping material used or variability in different batches (" The Effect of Type of Capping Material on the Compressive Strength of Concrete Cylinders, Proceedings ASTM, 1958: 11661186). Each number is a cell total based on K=3 observations.

An investigation of the machinability of beryllium-copper alloy using two different dielectric mediums and four different working currents resulted in the following data on material removal rate (this is a subset of the data that appeared in the article 鈥淪tatistical Analysis and Optimization Study on the Machinability of Beryllium Copper Alloy in Electro Discharge Machining,鈥 J. of Engr. Manufacture, 2012: 1847鈥1861).

a. After constructing an ANOVA table, test at level .05 both the hypothesis of no medium effect against the appropriate alternative and the hypothesis of no working current effect against the appropriate alternative.

b. Use Tukey鈥檚 procedure to investigate differences in expected material removal rate due to different working currents (Q.05,4,3 = 6.825).

The accompanying data resulted from an experiment to investigate whether yield from a certain chemical process depended either on the formulation of a particular input or on mixer speed.

A statistical computer package gave \(SS(\;Form\;) = 2253.44SS(\;Speed\;) = 230.81,\quad SS(\;Form*Speed\;) = 18.58, andSSE = 71.87\;\)

a. Does there appear to be interaction between the factors?

b. Does yield appear to depend on either formulation or speed?

c. Calculate estimates of the main effects.

d. The fitted values are\({\hat x_{ijk}} = \hat \mu + {\hat \alpha _i} + {\hat \beta _j} + {\hat \gamma _{ij}}\), and the residuals are \({x_{ijk}} - {\hat x_{ij{k^*}}}\)Verify that the residuals \(are.23, - .87,.63,4.50, - 1.20, - 3.30, - 2.03,1.97.07, - 1.10, - .30,1.40,.67, - 1.23,.57, - 3.43, - .13,\;\;and 3.57.\;\)e. Construct a normal probability plot from the residuals given in part (d). Do they \({ \in _{ijk}}\;'s\;\)appear to be normally distributed?

In an experiment to see whether the amount of coverage of light-blue interior latex paint depends either on the brand of paint or on the brand of roller used, one gallon of each of four brands of paint was applied using each of three brands of roller, resulting in the following data (number of square feet covered)


  1. Construct the ANOVA table. (Hint: The computations can be expedited by subtracting 400 (or any other convenient number) from each observation. This does not affect the final results.)
  2. State and test hypotheses appropriate for deciding whether paint brand has any effect on coverage. Use=.05.
  3. Repeat part (b) for brand of roller.
  4. Use Tukey鈥檚 method to identify significant differences among brands. Is there one brand that seems clearly preferable to the others?
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.