iSixSigma

Chris Seider

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 1,980 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #244460

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Yes, the power of statistics is to use RANDOM sampling to get population mean estimates and see if you can shift those estimates after process changes.  Yes, it could be the same for variation.

    0
    #243389

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    It shouldn’t be any different.  There are losses to attack.

    1
    #243330

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    OEE is a great tool but not easy to “measure” if loss capturing isn’t credible.

    I’ve helped many clients improve 10% output on poorly performing lines by finding either 1) easy to tackle significant loss buckets or 2) just providing instant feedback (even if just hourly) of how production is occurring so management and supervision has a chance to react.

     

    0
    #243282

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Consider what you mean by target of 100%.

    Your control chart would be great if no losses were assumed and the theoretical output was included–not planned output.

    0
    #243281

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Planned shutdown times should ONLY include times where no one was employed to run the line.  Routine maintenance and operator maintenance are still losses.

     

    All calendar time should be included except for unscheduled run time for lack of orders or normal unscheduled time that isn’t manned.

     

    Your scenario would have 24 hours in the denominator for availability.

    0
    #243212

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    do you have a problem statement and a metric chart(s) that the project champion agrees are measures of success?

    0
    #243098

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Have you been to any tournament lately for kids? :)    All clear up here for this bud in Dallas but let’s hope recovery goes well for those souls impacted.  I shop SOMETIMES at the Home Depot that got destroyed at Forest Ave in Dallas.  That store manager that got everyone out and closed the store deserves a medal.

    https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Raw-Tornado-Damage-Over-Dallas-Neighborhoods_Dallas-Fort-Worth-563563952.html

    0
    #243096

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell  let’s hope the Astros do well.

    0
    #243095

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I hope certification includes project completions.  If that’s the highest pareto of reason, look at the potential causes for project delay/deaths.

    0
    #242304

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell I had to look up the acronym.

    Maybe the safety guy ought to know that acronyms can be a source of misunderstanding leading to accidents. :)

    2
    #241945

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @asqcqe@juno.com  Did you really state you’d tell the customer you wouldn’t help them out and give them a stupid phrase of “but my process is in control”.    Have you considered that something downstream of your process is impacting the product OR that variation appeared outside of your typical subgrouping that you’ve designed your control charts around.

    I guess you’ve never acted as the company rep when having to investigate an issue with your product/service.

    1
    #241944

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I’d suggest you get to the root of why the subgroup size of sampling might change.  It sounds like they know of variation and rework may be occurring.

    a few thoughts..

    0
    #241943

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    oh my….what a silly exam question.

    Please know that there are a lot more analysis tools available and for them to mention “weaker” ones like Fishbone and 5-why (which are actually VERY related) is a shame.

    0
    #241937

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Did you have enough gap between your levels for A and B?  This (too small of change in X’s) can cause small enough difference in your Y such that you can’t get statistical confidence.

    0
    #241483

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    a remote area…. was this necessary on the pareto of areas to tackle?

     

    IF it’s used sometimes…as hinted by your post–consider the economics and effort for removal and reinstalling.

    0
    #241481

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Have you checked this website?

    0
    #241480

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    You’ll be using a different set of skill sets.

    Go for it!  Do your passion.

    1
    #241478

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I hope you mean Cpk>1.33  :)

     

    A pass fail test and using a sample of 8.  Just say no and convert the attribute test to a variable value test.

     

    Why not use SPC as designed and not do SPC on a Cpk value on 8 parts (the imprecision of the s.d. enough is to make this kind of ridiculous in my mind).  Just do SPC as designed and work to raise the average to get parts to get your process capability greater than 1.33.  You’ll have to balance the financial impact of getting too far above the minimum spec but that would be the value of doing SPC on your Xbar chart–cause action if the 8 part average is too high or one of the other Shewhart rules you use.

    • This reply was modified 3 months, 2 weeks ago by Chris Seider.
    0
    #241341

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    See if you can get some “credible” projections on energy savings from the high speed door closer vendor rep and then use a subset of @venerablebede ‘s analysis.

    This may save some work but of course @venerablebede full technique will work.

    0
    #241198

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Interesting query.

    Have you put together a mathematical model to help answer your questions and @mike-carnell has given you a hint to an approach.

     

    keep in mind you’re making lots of assumptions…would you be using an Xbar chart–if so I’d doubt your CL’s would be as you’ve concluded.

    1
    #241031

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Just ask yourself why are you wanting to do this?

    I would caution you against putting spec limits on SPC charts BECAUSE if you’re using SPC as an active tool to control the process (or why else put them in the “field”), then you have to be wary that the nuance of an XBAR vs I chart will be lost by most “operators”.

    Once they learn one way, they will think it works that way for all charts.  I’d hate to think someone down the road said, hey yea we let that batch of toilet paper rolls out because the Xbar was greater than the lower spec limit.  Jack in printing told me about his charts and said if his point was within the spec limits all is good.  …Never mind that Jack was using an I-MR chart…..the confusion isn’t worth it–in my opinion.

    If you’re wanting to add spec limits to your SPC charts you’re using for data gathering or analysis–it’s less impactful.

     

    My two cents….that and 5 bucks MIGHT get you a venti Latte at Starbucks.  :)

    0
    #241030

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I’d be too conservative to put a control chart out with out of control actions based on 2 or 3 subgroups.

    Remember, the estimation of standard deviation improves with the number of observations so the estimated s.d. even using Rbar.

    If you are using just a few points for “analysis”, go ahead although I doubt you’ll learn much.  I just never have any process use SPC unless I expect actions or documentation when the process shows “out of control”.

    0
    #241018

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    You’re much closer to the process than me BUT if there’s no integrity issue with the shrink wrapped pallets, then consider how to get rid of the stops by moving the relative positions of the eyes as a PARTIAL solution.

     

    0
    #240887

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    you hold parts to a Cp/Cpk standard?  Not specs?…..I find this confusing

     

    I apologize if I’m having a brain freeze.

    0
    #240880

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell you have such fast internet…took me 0.71 seconds

    stay cool!

    0
    #240867

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Did you check the help section of Minitab?  Pretty good info there but I wonder why not just use their awesome tools?

    0
    #240695

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @BayanKamal fyi…your idea/question is NOT rarely asked.   Follow the advice of all above, including my previous post LOL, and you’ll proceed well.

    0
    #240693

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I’m suspecting they were asking you to do SPC on your X’s or Y’s and see if you can find special cause indications which could be “a change in the process”.

    However, capability analysis and histograms and run charts can tell you lots of hints of where to maybe look.

    Best of luck

    • This reply was modified 4 months, 2 weeks ago by Chris Seider.
    0
    #240585

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    yes, just keep it simple…. hear null hypothesis and you should hear “equal” and the hypothesis is the statistical measure is equal to something else.

    even for a regression…the coefficients are equal to zero for the null hypothesis which means no regression exists

     

    1
    #240454

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @Darth

    Yes, I’ve seen some advocate the 6S and I’m always safety focused and that was how my last location was able to justify some changes that coincidentally improved the process but we never used 6S.

    It’s almost the same with those who insist that there are now 8 wastes including “not using talent”.   I guess “TIM WOOD” isn’t good enough and we need a cute “DOWNTIME”?  changing over processing to extra processing. :)

    Hard to argue about but it’s just a point for argument from those who want to add new letters rather than focus on basics.

    I’ve seen someone argue somewhere, maybe in some isixsigma string, that improvement can always be improved.

    0
    #240452

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Nice to see a post @Darth :)

     

    0
    #240404

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Another bad test example?

     

    Your total bad looks fine assuming the Z scores are correct.

     

    I don’t understand your last paragraph. You have more defective on the lower side than on the upper side so you’d expect to have more than the normal distribution of 31.7% defective since you produce a higher defect rate on the lower side.  Draw the normal curve, place the specs and darken the defective areas.  Then do the same for dark areas for +/- 1 s.d. out of spec–which has more.

    0
    #240403

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell  LOL about reading on the 3S….how about those doing “5S” without understanding how the process is supposed to work before doing a 5S event?

    0
    #240368

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    respectfully, @Ddelisle find another service for LSS preparations.  Horrible questions they seem to have per what i’ve seen recently.

    0
    #240346

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Are bots coming up with these questions or someone without basic math skills?  Crazy.

    0
    #240268

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Discussion ensues better if you post the question and state the reasoning for the answer and then you can get neat feedback.

    Welcome to the forum.

    0
    #240221

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    One can be utilized but not productive. I’d be open to learning/hearing why this has merit.

    It’s sort of like a production line being “up/running” but only running at 10% of capacity–it’s utilized but not productive.

    0
    #240186

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    You will need to invest the time/money if truly want to understand your gage’s variation relative to the process and specification range.

    However, you can get away with just doing 2 independent measurements by each of your 3 operators if you do the 10 parts–it’s a long discussion why this CAN be done in cases for expensive and time consuming gage studies but it is at the cost of precision of gage variation knowledge so I’m not saying do it all the time.

    1
    #240183

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Why would you do such a thing?

    You’re forgetting you aren’t able to discern impact of operator or region of “spec range” impacting measurements with your proposal.

    0
    #240021

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Non normality (bi-modal) is rarely caused by the gage but go ahead and perform a gage R&R. You realize the graphs shown don’t discuss process capability. You may be chasing your tail about a problem that doesn’t exist depending on if the specs are real and where they are.

    I’d encourage you to use your process map to get other X’s and gather them simultaneously and use the 6S process to help solve the problem–do you have a problem in process capability?

    0
    #240020

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    You’ve just described a gage R&R. go for it and see what the folks are suggesting–the gage is not precise.

    0
    #239877

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    if you look at the formulas as you’ve written…..their relationship as you’ve indicated is inversed and a simple factor difference. However, Cg isn’t as commonly used and the 0.2 is a choice in some circles.

    The P/T ratio is simpler because you know the ratio of the gage to the tolerance and ideal is 0.1 or less.

    0
    #239854

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    If you have lots of weeks of data for every year….consider a dot plot (or box plot) and you could do an ongoing run chart on the same display for a feedback loop.

    0
    #239853

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @michaelcyger you and your team is always an example of customer service and response!

    1
    #239723

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @joelsmith Small world….I was a chemical engineering student also and first learned THE HARD WAY about DOE’s with Box, Hunter, and Hunter. Where was Minitab back then?…oh wait, we were lucky to have IBM XT’s and Mac’s!

    I was going to edit my “personal history” but isixsigma sets a limit on when I can edit or max number of edits? @michaelcyger :)

    1
    #239721

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Yea, I heard it got even better ratings than GoT! LOL.. @michaelcyger

    • This reply was modified 6 months, 1 week ago by Chris Seider.
    1
    #239717

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    My career began selling car washes, oil, and waxes at the Shell Oil Station. Then finishing college as a chemical engineer allowed me to ironically work at a Shell Oil refinery in Louisiana where I implemented process controls to integrate with process optimizers.

    Next, I had the awesome opportunity to be the project manager for the instrumentation and controls for an entirely new green field latex plant in WI. This is when I first begain to use Minitab @jennatlas! I then became the process control/process engineer for the facility where our first batch made was fully in spec! I then began to get my formal Six Sigma training as a BB by primarily Gary Cone and then moved to our Ohio headquarters to be the division’s MBB and went through more formal training as a MBB under the tutelage of Jim Lambert our OPEX VP and Gary Gone. We then trained many waves of BB and GB and I recruited outside candidates from customers and suppliers who offset any of our direct expenses and certified them after going through the same training and mentoring. I then got disappointed I didn’t get accepted internally for my ideal job so then made a career mistake and got lured away to revamp Champion and GB training for another locally based company in NE Ohio and that ended soon after they got what they initially asked from me.

    Then I moved to North Texas and was hired to be a Six Sigma trained guy who could implement TPM at a local aseptic packaging plant. We got 2 awards/certifications from JIPM and my next move was turned down by myself–I didn’t want to go to Singapore for personal reasons. This allowed me to truly understand how Lean and Six Sigma truly are integrated as Lean Six Sigma.

    Then I had the most fabulous opportunities with @MikeCarnell and went to do material development, training, mentoring, and some projects for clients initially in South Africa but then for other clients in North America, Asia, and AUS/NZ region. I got to see the “only” plant for various products such as Triscuits and Vegemite. This happened for many years and then for personal reasons went to work for a neat chemical plant that had many new processes for me to learn.

    Initially, I was brought in to debottleneck the plant and we increased lbs produced by 100% within one year while partnering with safety to reduce operator efforts and reduce accidents and was enjoying myself to be working on such a well managed team. At the chemical plant, I led the division’s efforts and set up standards for OEE reporting since we were starting TPM and I had much experience in this from past efforts. Focus changed with management changes above me so I left that facility for family issues and now just occasionally do consulting.

    Enough about me…what about you?

    Thanks again to Mike and Gary for the growth…and I don’t mean just my belt size LOL.

    • This reply was modified 6 months, 1 week ago by Chris Seider.
    • This reply was modified 6 months, 1 week ago by Chris Seider.
    • This reply was modified 6 months, 1 week ago by Chris Seider.
    • This reply was modified 6 months, 1 week ago by Michael Cyger. Reason: Requested by cseider
    2
    #239715

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @michaelcyger did you see the Chernobyl series yet on HBO?

    0
    #239608

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Watch, listen, and ask open ended questions are always a first place to start while at the process. This may sound “trite” but often forgotten.

    2
    #239559

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @tammyz06 nice book

    0
    #239150

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    The customers (even internal) ought to have an idea of service levels required.

    thanks.

    0
    #238797

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Consider your OTD vs family type, facility, state, etc. Things may begin to show up but I hope you have a good problem statement, team, and project champion.

    0
    #238635

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    You can set a maximum or minimum for control limits within the Minitab generated SPC charts.

    Please consider SPC is not always the best tool for all situations.

    0
    #238634

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell has tons of contacts in the RSA. He’s done a better job of keeping in touch than I have accomplished.

    0
    #238608

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I recognize some of those snippets from @mike-carnell :)

    1
    #238541

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Great posting @mike-carnell

    Yea, I didn’t give my treatise on DOE design. :)

    0
    #238525

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    This random question needs some randomization in its answer.

    Selection of levels, factors, and don’t use your whole resources in one experiment are things to consider.

    0
    #238501

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Use past history and process capability studies for the frequencies.

    1
    #238491

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Process scope?
    Your project scope should be defined by the project business statement, business metrics, and with the agreement/support of your project champion.

    1
    #238462

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @magicmaria I’d advise against control charts for process output off a line. As the surgeon once said, not everything can be fixed by duct tape. Paretos and other tools work better for this problem–my two cents.

    Just an amusing note to ya :)

    0
    #238205

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I would advise a run chart–you’ll probably get “out of control” indications most of the time. There are other things to track also besides output per hour but I’m sure you’re aware of this point.

    1
    #238104

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I don’t think it’s the color of the belt that matters. As a wise “old” person once said and I never forget….”I’d rather have one GB that knew how to work with people and manage a project than ten BB’s that knew how to do the tools” because it’s easier to assist a GB in times of need for tool than those who don’t know how to work well with folks and projects that need more intervention.

    food for thought

    2
    #238103

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    A more statistical approach would be to look at safety stock levels based on a % confidence in usage in days or hours or …. That safety stock plus your turns you typically have in inventory will give you a better idea of reorder points.

    1
    #238057

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    You’ll first need to identify good opportunities with some of the leadership and then worry about what tools, etc.

    0
    #238025

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Look for waste ( http://leanmanufacturingtools.org/7-wastes/ ) and this will help you but don’t overanalyze too much–cut the waste and see what happens and see how the process improves.

    1
    #238024

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Whiteboards, excel can work to track activities identified to improve the process.

    0
    #237761

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell I actually ran into one organization who told me they don’t track financial benefits for any of their projects.

    I didn’t get understand how they prioritized projects but thought it would give you “a bone to chew on” in the forum.

    0
    #237451

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    You might confirm with an example what you are attempting to accomplish. I suspect I understand but you never know.

    0
    #237450

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I’d definitely separate soft benefits but get finance involved on approaches to quantify them.

    0
    #237294

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I’d begin to get a high level process map started with a team and begin to gather data on time stamps (or date) to get data to begin confirmation of “impressions” people will have.

    At the same time, be sure to confirm quickly validity of the data for preciseness AND see if the past impression of lateness can be confirmed for time. This will be good for understanding at least one primary metric of cycle time.

    1
    #237280

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @rbutler , the first paragraph was perfect.

    0
    #237255

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Have you read AIAG manuals on the topic for guidance?

    1
    #237251

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @rbutler homework maybe? :)

    0
    #237214

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @jennatlas might have some more info

    0
    #237213

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Check out in Minitab, Stat>capability analysis>non-normal and if you have a distribution you’re comfortable with, they do a great job of predicting ppm defective based on the distribution chosen.

    0
    #237212

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell has been involved with hospitals.

    0
    #237174

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    How many batches do you produce annually? I wasn’t say you must have 30 batches but data from 6 batches would seem too few.

    Biggest question you should consider with your customer–are the batches fairly uniform (after completion)? I’d be just as interested in knowing my process capability with the many sources of variation so more batches than 6 would seem appropriate UNLESS you have so few but as @rbutler and I have indicated–30 samplees for 6 batches seems like oversampling if you want to understand your variation within the batches with not much data about your variation between batches.

    Doing an x-bar chart on 6 means would seem to be silly unless required by your customer as a minimum but would encourage more. Be sure they aren’t asking for 6 samples amopngst 30 batches would make more sense. I’m NOT advocating needing 30 batches but am trying to reconcile your statements about the customer needs. Heck, even 20 batches would give you a good picture of variability between batches if it’s practical.

    Please consider that running X-bar R charts isn’t a capability analysis but running a capability analysis on the individual readings from x samples/batch is more of one. If you are unclear about variability within a batch, then do your 30 samples on one batch and see what you see before even doing the other 5 batches.

    Basically, we’re saying be clear what your customer wants and also we’re clarifying X-bar R charts and process capability give you differing snapshots for your process. Have you confirmed you have a good gage? This would all be a waste of time if you haven’t confirmed precision and accuracy.

    0
    #237144

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I find the SIPOC is a useful discussion to understand project scope with the team and the project sponsor. It helps define the end point(s).

    0
    #237143

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @katiebarry , send me a ping to my private email address please.

    0
    #237142

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    This makes SOME sense if the batches aren’t homogeneous OR if the batches are changing over time after completion of a step or after final approval.

    Six batches only would make me ask why but you must satisfy the customer of course.

    However, i don’t understand 30 samples from each batch and making a control chart of X-bar for 6 means. I hope the samples are cheap to sample and test but I would think you’d find more interest in 6 samples for 30 batches or even fewer samples.

    Be aware that process capability using SPC isn’t as good as doing your Cp/Ppk/etc. analysis of the individual readings–capability analysis on means is the wrong approach.

    0
    #237094

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I’d ask you to consider why you’re looking to use SPC.

    0
    #237093

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    OEE is a good concept and I’d not mess it up by trying to convert to some sigma level number.

    0
    #236362

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    try just using time scale and get rid of that 11 and see if you begin to like it….

    0
    #236130

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Cp is meant to tell you the ABILITY to produce good product so it’s just a ratio of 99.7% of the “normal” distribution relative to the specs.

    Cpk is meant to give you an idea of how well your process is ACTUALLY doing relative to the closest spec to the mean–which is the highest portion of your defectives.

    There isn’t a ratio of 2.0 between Cpk and Cp because they are comparing different things in the numerator. Good question. Last point…it’s always important to graphically look at how your process is doing relative to the specs.

    1
    #236115

    Chris Seider
    Participant
    #236102

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Those dashboards are great tools for managing/controlling a process.

    1
    #236101

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I’m sure you didn’t mean to create a theoretical discussion but think of this. Statistics are used to make conclusions about populations based on sampling. If you have a sample of one, how do you propose understanding if the variation or central tendency is what you’d expect?

    A homogeneous powder? I’d be skeptical with that assumption with my experience. Especially if you imply the homogeneity wouldn’t impact the measurement but I’d assume you have particle size variation at a MINIMUM but of course as my good friend @mike-carnell would state–get a sampling plan to confirm your business understanding.

    Yes, I read how the testing is expensive but SOMEONE must have done sample random sampling in the bulk of powder to conclude homogeneity and that must have been justified?

    Just a few thoughts.

    0
    #236073

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    show your data visually?

    0
    #236072

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Have you considered your gage’s ability to measure yet?

    Anyways, assuming you have more than one operator or one machine, I’d randomly capture parts across some of the factors, record the factors along with your measurements, and then do process capability and see if you find greatness or opportunities to improve.

    0
    #236071

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    welcome to a neat site!

    0
    #235787

    Chris Seider
    Participant
    #235770

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Why combine? just track ppm separately for the two products you buy.

    0
    #235662

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    suggestion: If possible, change the measurement system to keep the vanadium measurements and not the good/bad attribute measurements in your database.

    You’ll learn lots in the future if you can.

    0
    #235656

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Have you done a capability analysis with the present measurement system? You should try to sample across your known sources of variation to help get a more process representative sample to do a gage R&R.

    @mike-carnell is spot on as usual. If your samples for the gage R&R don’t represent your process well, you’ll get confusing results.

    If you haven’t gathered samples with representative values across your typical process spectrum of results, you run the risk of not knowing how the gage performs. It’s possible it can’t read well “high” or “low” readings and you wouldn’t find the deficiency if you sample across a small part of your capability.

    0
    #235507

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    See link. @jennatlas could help more.

    However, one RARELY truly knows the population standard deviation so it’s more conservative to just do the 2 sample t test–my two cents.

    https://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/18/macro-library/macro-files/general-statistics-macros/two-sample-z-test/

    1
    #235468

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    If output B is dependent on output A and output A is dependent on inputs 1, 2, and 3…wouldn’t output B just be dependent on inputs 1, 2, and 3 also?

    1
    #235322

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    Don’t interpret my comment that you have to do a factorial design but checking for linearity is powerful depending on the needs.

    0
    #235321

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    @mike-carnell gave you good advice.

    0
    #211425

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I have two instincts. Depending on the scope of help you asked, if the sponsor says there would be no resources given–it would be an omen of future aid.

    Second instinct–you are maybe looking too low of a level for metric. How about output per hour rather than looking at time studies for the steps? Of course, it would seem the goal should be breakthrough for you to see a change in output while running.

    1
    #211375

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    By definition it’s not a factorial design that you’ve described. IF the 2nd of 3 levels for the 2nd factor is the “middle” setting of a machine or something, AND YOU INSIST ON LOOKING AT ALL 3, consider using the centerpoint approach for both factors. Highly depends on difficulty and expense to get the experimental runs.

    0
Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 1,980 total)