Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

134361-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Based on findings of previous studies, there was speculation that two well-known experimental design software packages, JMP and Design Expert, produced varying power outputs given the same design and user inputs. For context and scope, another popular experimental design software package, Minitab® Statistical Software version 17, was added to the

Based on findings of previous studies, there was speculation that two well-known experimental design software packages, JMP and Design Expert, produced varying power outputs given the same design and user inputs. For context and scope, another popular experimental design software package, Minitab® Statistical Software version 17, was added to the comparison. The study compared multiple test cases run on the three software packages with a focus on 2k and 3K factorial design and adjusting the standard deviation effect size, number of categorical factors, levels, number of factors, and replicates. All six cases were run on all three programs and were attempted to be run at one, two, and three replicates each. There was an issue at the one replicate stage, however—Minitab does not allow for only one replicate full factorial designs and Design Expert will not provide power outputs for only one replicate unless there are three or more factors. From the analysis of these results, it was concluded that the differences between JMP 13 and Design Expert 10 were well within the margin of error and likely caused by rounding. The differences between JMP 13, Design Expert 10, and Minitab 17 on the other hand indicated a fundamental difference in the way Minitab addressed power calculation compared to the latest versions of JMP and Design Expert. This was found to be likely a cause of Minitab’s dummy variable coding as its default instead of the orthogonal coding default of the other two. Although dummy variable and orthogonal coding for factorial designs do not show a difference in results, the methods affect the overall power calculations. All three programs can be adjusted to use either method of coding, but the exact instructions for how are difficult to find and thus a follow-up guide on changing the coding for factorial variables would improve this issue.

ContributorsArmstrong, Julia Robin (Author) / McCarville, Daniel R. (Thesis director) / Montgomery, Douglas (Committee member) / Industrial, Systems (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
132730-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Woodland/Alloy Casting, Inc. is an aluminum foundry known for providing high-quality molds to their customers in industries such as aviation, electrical, defense, and nuclear power. However, as the company has grown larger during the past three years, they have begun to struggle with the on-time delivery of their orders. Woodland

Woodland/Alloy Casting, Inc. is an aluminum foundry known for providing high-quality molds to their customers in industries such as aviation, electrical, defense, and nuclear power. However, as the company has grown larger during the past three years, they have begun to struggle with the on-time delivery of their orders. Woodland prides itself on their high-grade process that includes core processing, the molding process, cleaning process, and heat-treat process. To create each mold, it has to flow through each part of the system flawlessly. Throughout this process, significant bottlenecks occur that limit the number of molds leaving the system. To combat this issue, this project uses a simulation of the foundry to test how best to schedule their work to optimize the use of their resources. Simulation can be an effective tool when testing for improvements in systems where making changes to the physical system is too expensive. ARENA is a simulation tool that allows for manipulation of resources and process while also allowing both random and selected schedules to be run through the foundry’s production process. By using an ARENA simulation to test different scheduling techniques, the risk of missing production runs is minimized during the experimental period so that many different options can be tested to see how they will affect the production line. In this project, several feasible scheduling techniques are compared in simulation to determine which schedules allow for the highest number of molds to be completed.
ContributorsAdams, Danielle Renee (Author) / Pavlic, Theodore (Thesis director) / Montgomery, Douglas (Committee member) / Industrial, Systems & Operations Engineering Prgm (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05