Solutions from Montgomery, D. C.

(2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Chapter 7
Blocking and Confounding in the 2k Factorial Design
Solutions

7.1 Consider the experiment described in Problem 6.1. Analyze this experiment assuming that each
replicate represents a block of a single production shift.

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F0
Cutting Speed (A) 0.67 1 0.67 <1
Tool Geometry (B) 770.67 1 770.67 22.38*
Cutting Angle (C) 280.17 1 280.17 8.14*
AB 16.67 1 16.67 <1
AC 468.17 1 468.17 13.60*
BC 48.17 1 48.17 1.40
ABC 28.17 1 28.17 <1
Blocks 0.58 2 0.29
Error 482.08 14 34.43
Total 2095.33 23

Design Expert Output

Response: Life in hours
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 0.58 2 0.29
Model 1519.67 4 379.92 11.23 0.0001 significant
A 0.67 1 0.67 0.020 0.8900
B 770.67 1 770.67 22.78 0.0002
C 280.17 1 280.17 8.28 0.0104
AC 468.17 1 468.17 13.84 0.0017
Residual 575.08 17 33.83
Cor Total 2095.33 23

The Model F-value of 11.23 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case B, C, AC are significant model terms.

These results agree with the results from Problem 6.1. Tool geometry, cutting angle and the interaction
between cutting speed and cutting angle are significant at the 5% level. The Design Expert program also
includes factor A, cutting speed, in the model to preserve hierarchy.

7-1
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

7.2. Consider the experiment described in Problem 6.5. Analyze this experiment assuming that each one
of the four replicates represents a block.

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F0
Bit Size (A) 1107.23 1 1107.23 364.22*
Cutting Speed (B) 227.26 1 227.26 74.76*
AB 303.63 1 303.63 99.88*
Blocks 44.36 3 14.79
Error 27.36 9 3.04
Total 1709.83 15

These results agree with those from Problem 6.5. Bit size, cutting speed and their interaction are
significant at the 1% level.
Design Expert Output
Response: Vibration
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 44.36 3 14.79
Model 1638.11 3 546.04 179.61 < 0.0001 significant
A 1107.23 1 1107.23 364.21 < 0.0001
B 227.26 1 227.26 74.75 < 0.0001
AB 303.63 1 303.63 99.88 < 0.0001
Residual 27.36 9 3.04
Cor Total 1709.83 15

The Model F-value of 179.61 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, AB are significant model terms.

7.3. Consider the alloy cracking experiment described in Problem 6.15. Suppose that only 16 runs could
be made on a single day, so each replicate was treated as a block. Analyze the experiment and draw
conclusions.

The analysis of variance for the full model is as follows:

Design Expert Output

Response: Crack Lengthin mm x 10^-2
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 0.016 1 0.016
Model 570.95 15 38.06 445.11 < 0.0001 significant
A 72.91 1 72.91 852.59 < 0.0001
B 126.46 1 126.46 1478.83 < 0.0001
C 103.46 1 103.46 1209.91 < 0.0001
D 30.66 1 30.66 358.56 < 0.0001
AB 29.93 1 29.93 349.96 < 0.0001
AC 128.50 1 128.50 1502.63 < 0.0001
AD 0.047 1 0.047 0.55 0.4708
BC 0.074 1 0.074 0.86 0.3678
BD 0.018 1 0.018 0.21 0.6542
CD 0.047 1 0.047 0.55 0.4686
ABC 78.75 1 78.75 920.92 < 0.0001

7-2
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

ABD 0.077 1 0.077 0.90 0.3582

ACD 2.926E-003 1 2.926E-003 0.034 0.8557
BCD 0.010 1 0.010 0.12 0.7352
ABCD 1.596E-003 1 1.596E-003 0.019 0.8931
Residual 1.28 15 0.086
Cor Total 572.25 31

The Model F-value of 445.11 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C, D, AB, AC, ABC are significant model terms.

The analysis of variance for the reduced model based on the significant factors is shown below. The BC
interaction was included to preserve hierarchy.

Design Expert Output

Response: Crack Lengthin mm x 10^-2
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 0.016 1 0.016
Model 570.74 8 71.34 1056.10 < 0.0001 significant
A 72.91 1 72.91 1079.28 < 0.0001
B 126.46 1 126.46 1872.01 < 0.0001
C 103.46 1 103.46 1531.59 < 0.0001
D 30.66 1 30.66 453.90 < 0.0001
AB 29.93 1 29.93 443.01 < 0.0001
AC 128.50 1 128.50 1902.15 < 0.0001
BC 0.074 1 0.074 1.09 0.3075
ABC 78.75 1 78.75 1165.76 < 0.0001
Residual 1.49 22 0.068
Cor Total 572.25 31

The Model F-value of 1056.10 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C, D, AB, AC, ABC are significant model terms.

Blocking does not change the results of Problem 6-15.

7.4. Consider the data from the first replicate of Problem 6.1. Suppose that these observations could not
all be run using the same bar stock. Set up a design to run these observations in two blocks of four
observations each with ABC confounded. Analyze the data.

Block 1 Block 2
(1) a
ab b
ac c
bc abc

From the normal probability plot of effects, B, C, and the AC interaction are significant. Factor A was
included in the analysis of variance to preserve hierarchy.

7-3
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
Life
N o rm a l p lo t
A: Cutting Speed 99
B: Tool Geometry

N o r m a l % p r o b a b i l i ty
C: Cutting Angle
95
90 B
80
70 C

50

30
20
10
AC
5

-1 3 .7 5 -7 .1 3 -0 .5 0 6 .1 3 1 2 .7 5

E ffe c t

Design Expert Output

Response: Life in hours
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 91.13 1 91.13
Model 896.50 4 224.13 7.32 0.1238 not significant
A 3.13 1 3.13 0.10 0.7797
B 325.12 1 325.12 10.62 0.0827
C 190.12 1 190.12 6.21 0.1303
AC 378.13 1 378.13 12.35 0.0723
Residual 61.25 2 30.62
Cor Total 1048.88 7

The "Model F-value" of 7.32 implies the model is not significant relative to the noise. There is a
12.38 % chance that a "Model F-value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case there are no significant model terms.

This design identifies the same significant factors as Problem 6.1.

7.5. Consider the data from the first replicate of Problem 6.7. Construct a design with two blocks of
eight observations each with ABCD confounded. Analyze the data.

Block 1 Block 2
(1) a
ab b
ac c
bc d
ad abc
bd abd
cd acd
abcd bcd

7-4
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

The significant effects are identified in the normal probability plot of effects below:

DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
yield
N o rm a l p lo t
A: A
B: B 99

N o r m a l % p r o b a b i l i ty
C: C
D: D D
95
90
AB D
80 AB
70

50

30
20
AD
10 AB C
5
A
1

-1 0 .0 0 -6 .2 5 -2 .5 0 1 .2 5 5 .0 0

E ffe c t

AC, BC, and BD were included in the model to preserve hierarchy.

Design Expert Output

Response: yield
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 42.25 1 42.25
Model 892.25 11 81.11 9.64 0.0438 significant
A 400.00 1 400.00 47.52 0.0063
B 2.25 1 2.25 0.27 0.6408
C 2.25 1 2.25 0.27 0.6408
D 100.00 1 100.00 11.88 0.0410
AB 81.00 1 81.00 9.62 0.0532
AC 1.00 1 1.00 0.12 0.7531
AD 56.25 1 56.25 6.68 0.0814
BC 6.25 1 6.25 0.74 0.4522
BD 9.00 1 9.00 1.07 0.3772
ABC 144.00 1 144.00 17.11 0.0256
ABD 90.25 1 90.25 10.72 0.0466
Residual 25.25 3 8.42
Cor Total 959.75 15

The Model F-value of 9.64 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 4.38% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, D, ABC, ABD are significant model terms.

7.6. Repeat Problem 7.5 assuming that four blocks are required. Confound ABD and ABC (and
consequently CD) with blocks.

The block assignments are shown in the table below. The normal probability plot of effects identifies
factors A and D, and the interactions AB, AD, and the ABCD as strong candidates for the model. For
hierarchal purposes, factor B was included in the model; however, hierarchy is not preserved for the ABCD
interaction allowing an estimate for error.

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

7-5
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

(1) ac c a
ab bc abc b
acd d ad cd
bcd abd bd abcd

DESIGN-EXPERT Plot No r m a l p lo t
y ield

A: A
B: B 99
C: C
D: D
95 D
90
AB

Normal % probability
80
ABC D
70

50
B
30

20

10 AD
5
A

- 1 0 .0 0 - 6 .2 5 - 2 .5 0 1 .2 5 5 .0 0

E ffec t

Design Expert Output

Response: yield
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 243.25 3 81.08
Model 681.75 6 113.63 19.62 0.0011 significant
A 400.00 1 400.00 69.06 0.0002
B 2.25 1 2.25 0.39 0.5560
D 100.00 1 100.00 17.27 0.0060
AB 81.00 1 81.00 13.99 0.0096
AD 56.25 1 56.25 9.71 0.0207
ABCD 42.25 1 42.25 7.29 0.0355
Residual 34.75 6 5.79
Cor Total 959.75 15

The Model F-value of 19.62 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.11% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, D, AB, AD, ABCD are significant model terms.

7-6
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

7.7. Using the data from the 25 design in Problem 6.26, construct and analyze a design in two blocks with
ABCDE confounded with blocks.

Block 1 Block 1 Block 2 Block 2

(1) ae a e
ab be b abe
ac ce c ace
bc abce abc bce
ad de d ade
bd abde abd bde
cd acde acd cde
abcd bcde bcd abcde

The normal probability plot of effects identifies factors A, B, C, and the AB interaction as being significant.
This is confirmed with the analysis of variance.

DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
Yield
N o rm a l p lo t
A: Aperture
B: Exposure Time 99
N o r m a l % p r o b a b i l i ty

C: Develop Time
B
D: Mask Dimension
E: Etch Time 95 A
90 C
AB
80
70

50

30
20
10
5

-1 .1 9 7 .5 9 1 6 .3 8 2 5 .1 6 3 3 .9 4

E ffe c t

Design Expert Output

Response: Yield
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 0.28 1 0.28
Model 11585.13 4 2896.28 958.51 < 0.0001 significant
A 1116.28 1 1116.28 369.43 < 0.0001
B 9214.03 1 9214.03 3049.35 < 0.0001
C 750.78 1 750.78 248.47 < 0.0001
AB 504.03 1 504.03 166.81 < 0.0001
Residual 78.56 26 3.02
Cor Total 11663.97 31

The Model F-value of 958.51 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C, AB are significant model terms.

7-7
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

7.8. Repeat Problem 7.7 assuming that four blocks are necessary. Suggest a reasonable confounding
scheme.

Use ABC and CDE, and consequently ABDE. The four blocks follow.

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

(1) a ac c
ab b bc abc
acd cd d ad
bcd abcd abd bd
ace ce e ae
bce abce abe be
de ade acde cde
abde bde bcde abcde

The normal probability plot of effects identifies the same significant effects as in Problem 7.7.

DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
Yield
N o rm a l p lo t
A: Aperture
B: Exposure Time 99
N o r m a l % p r o b a b i l i ty

C: Develop Time
B
D: Mask Dimension
E: Etch Time 95
A
90 C
AB
80
70

50

30
20
10
5

-1 .1 9 7 .5 9 1 6 .3 8 2 5 .1 6 3 3 .9 4

E ffe c t

Design Expert Output

Response: Yield
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 13.84 3 4.61
Model 11585.13 4 2896.28 1069.40 < 0.0001 significant
A 1116.28 1 1116.28 412.17 < 0.0001
B 9214.03 1 9214.03 3402.10 < 0.0001
C 750.78 1 750.78 277.21 < 0.0001
AB 504.03 1 504.03 186.10 < 0.0001
Residual 65.00 24 2.71
Cor Total 11663.97 31

The Model F-value of 1069.40 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C, AB are significant model terms.

7-8
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

7.9. Consider the data from the 25 design in Problem 6.26. Suppose that it was necessary to run this
design in four blocks with ACDE and BCD (and consequently ABE) confounded. Analyze the data from
this design.

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

(1) a b c
ae e abe ace
cd acd bcd d
abc bc ac ab
acde cde abcde ade
bce abce ce be
abd bd ad abcd
bde abde de bcde

Even with four blocks, the same effects are identified as significant per the normal probability plot and
analysis of variance below:

DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
Yield
N o rm a l p lo t
A: Aperture
B: Exposure Time 99
N o r m a l % p r o b a b i l i ty

C: Develop Time
B
D: Mask Dimension
E: Etch Time 95
A
90 C
AB
80
70

50

30
20
10
5

-1 .1 9 7 .5 9 1 6 .3 7 2 5 .1 6 3 3 .9 4

E ffe c t

Design Expert Output

Response: Yield
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 2.59 3 0.86
Model 11585.13 4 2896.28 911.62 < 0.0001 significant
A 1116.28 1 1116.28 351.35 < 0.0001
B 9214.03 1 9214.03 2900.15 < 0.0001
C 750.78 1 750.78 236.31 < 0.0001
AB 504.03 1 504.03 158.65 < 0.0001
Residual 76.25 24 3.18
Cor Total 11663.97 31

7-9
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

The Model F-value of 911.62 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C, AB are significant model terms.

7.10. Consider the fill height deviation experiment in Problem 6.20. Suppose that each replicate was run
on a separate day. Analyze the data assuming that the days are blocks.

Design Expert Output

Response: Fill Deviation
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 1.00 1 1.00
Model 70.75 4 17.69 28.30 < 0.0001 significant
A 36.00 1 36.00 57.60 < 0.0001
B 20.25 1 20.25 32.40 0.0002
C 12.25 1 12.25 19.60 0.0013
AB 2.25 1 2.25 3.60 0.0870
Residual 6.25 10 0.62
Cor Total 78.00 15

The Model F-value of 28.30 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C are significant model terms.

The analysis is very similar to the original analysis in chapter 6. The same effects are significant.

7.11. Consider the fill height deviation experiment in Problem 6.20. Suppose that only four runs could be
made on each shift. Set up a design with ABC confounded in replicate 1 and AC confounded in replicate 2.
Analyze the data and comment on your findings.

Design Expert Output

Response: Fill Deviation
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 1.50 3 0.50
Model 70.75 4 17.69 24.61 0.0001 significant
A 36.00 1 36.00 50.09 0.0001
B 20.25 1 20.25 28.17 0.0007
C 12.25 1 12.25 17.04 0.0033
AB 2.25 1 2.25 3.13 0.1148
Residual 5.75 8 0.72
Cor Total 78.00 15

The Model F-value of 24.61 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C are significant model terms.

The analysis is very similar to the original analysis of Problem 6.20 and that of problem 7.10. The AB
interaction is less significant in this scenario.

7-10
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

7.12. Consider the putting experiment in Problem 6.21. Analyze the data considering each replicate as a
block.

The analysis is similar to that of Problem 6.21. Blocking has not changed the significant factors, however,
the residual plots show that the normality assumption has been violated. The transformed data also has
similar analysis to the transformed data of Problem 6.21. The ANOVA shown is for the transformed data.

Design Expert Output

Response: Distance from cupTransform:Square root Constant: 0
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 13.50 6 2.25
Model 37.26 2 18.63 7.83 0.0007 significant
A 21.61 1 21.61 9.08 0.0033
B 15.64 1 15.64 6.57 0.0118
Residual 245.13 103 2.38
Cor Total 295.89 111

The Model F-value of 7.83 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.07% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B are significant model terms.

7.13. Using the data from the 24 design in Problem 6.22, construct and analyze a design in two blocks with
ABCD confounded with blocks.

Design Expert Output

Response: UEC
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 2.500E-005 1 2.500E-005
Model 0.24 4 0.059 32.33 < 0.0001 significant
A 0.10 1 0.10 56.26 < 0.0001
C 0.070 1 0.070 38.59 < 0.0001
D 0.051 1 0.051 27.82 0.0004
AC 0.012 1 0.012 6.65 0.0275
Residual 0.018 10 1.820E-003
Cor Total 0.25 15

The Model F-value of 32.33 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, C, D, AC are significant model terms.

The analysis is similar to that of Problem 6.22. The significant effects are A, C, D and AC.

7.14. Consider the direct mail experiment in Problem 6.24. Suppose that each group of customers is in
different parts of the country. Support an appropriate analysis for the experiment.

Set up each Group (replicate) as a geographic region. The analysis is similar to that of Problem 6.24.
Factors A and B are included to achieve a hierarchical model.

7-11
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Design Expert Output

Response: Yield
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 0.25 1 0.25
Model 241.75 6 40.29 11.62 0.0014 significant
A 12.25 1 12.25 3.53 0.0970
B 2.25 1 2.25 0.65 0.4439
C 36.00 1 36.00 10.38 0.0122
AB 42.25 1 42.25 12.18 0.0082
AC 100.00 1 100.00 28.83 0.0007
BC 49.00 1 49.00 14.13 0.0056
Residual 27.75 8 3.47
Cor Total 269.75 15

The Model F-value of 11.62 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.14% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case C, AB, AC, BC are significant model terms.

7.15. Consider the isatin yield experiment in Problem 6.38. Set up the 24 experiment in this problem in
two blocks with ABCD confounded. Analyze the data from this design. Is the block effect large?

The block effect is very small.

Design Expert Output

Response 1 Yield
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 1.406E-003 1 1.406E-003
Model 0.55 3 0.18 4.15 0.0340 significant
B-Reaction time 1.806E-003 1 1.806E-003 0.041 0.8440
D-Reaction temperature 0.30 1 0.30 6.74 0.0249
BD 0.25 1 0.25 5.68 0.0363
Residual 0.49 11 0.044
Cor Total 1.04 15

The Model F-value of 4.15 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 3.40% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case D, BD are significant model terms.

7.16. The experiment in Problem 6.39 is a 25 factorial. Suppose that this design had been run in four
blocks of eight runs each.

(a) Recommend a blocking scheme and set up the design.

Interactions ABC and BDE are confounded with the blocks such that:

Block ABC BDE

1 - +
2 + -
3 - -

7-12
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

4 + +

Note, the ACDE interaction is also confounded with the blocks. The experimental runs with the
blocks are shown below.

Block A B C D E y
Block 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 8.11
Block 2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 5.56
Block 4 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 5.77
Block 3 1 1 -1 -1 -1 5.82
Block 2 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 9.17
Block 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 7.8
Block 3 -1 1 1 -1 -1 3.23
Block 4 1 1 1 -1 -1 5.69
Block 3 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 8.82
Block 4 1 -1 -1 1 -1 14.23
Block 2 -1 1 -1 1 -1 9.2
Block 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 8.94
Block 4 -1 -1 1 1 -1 8.68
Block 3 1 -1 1 1 -1 11.49
Block 1 -1 1 1 1 -1 6.25
Block 2 1 1 1 1 -1 9.12
Block 3 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 7.93
Block 4 1 -1 -1 -1 1 5
Block 2 -1 1 -1 -1 1 7.47
Block 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 12
Block 4 -1 -1 1 -1 1 9.86
Block 3 1 -1 1 -1 1 3.65
Block 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 6.4
Block 2 1 1 1 -1 1 11.61
Block 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 12.43
Block 2 1 -1 -1 1 1 17.55
Block 4 -1 1 -1 1 1 8.87
Block 3 1 1 -1 1 1 25.38
Block 2 -1 -1 1 1 1 13.06
Block 1 1 -1 1 1 1 18.85
Block 3 -1 1 1 1 1 11.78
Block 4 1 1 1 1 1 26.05

(b) Analyze the data from this blocked design. Is blocking important?

Blocking does not appear to be important; however, if the ADE or ABE interaction had been
chosen to define the blocks, then blocking would have appeared as important. The ADE and ABE
are significant effects in the analysis below.

7-13
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Ha
lf-No
rma
lPlo
t

99

D
Half-Normal % Probability
95
E
90 AD
A
80
DE
BE
AB
70 ABE
AE
ADE
50

30
20
10
0

0.00 1.00 1.99 2.99 3.98 4.98 5.98

|Sta
ndard
ize
dEffe
ct|

Design Expert Output

Response 1 y
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 2.58 3 0.86
Model 879.62 11 79.97 45.38 < 0.0001 significant
A-A 83.56 1 83.56 47.41 < 0.0001
B-B 0.060 1 0.060 0.034 0.8553
D-D 285.78 1 285.78 162.16 < 0.0001
E-E 153.17 1 153.17 86.91 < 0.0001
AB 48.93 1 48.93 27.76 < 0.0001
AD 88.88 1 88.88 50.43 < 0.0001
AE 33.76 1 33.76 19.16 0.0004
BE 52.71 1 52.71 29.91 < 0.0001
DE 61.80 1 61.80 35.07 < 0.0001
ABE 44.96 1 44.96 25.51 < 0.0001
ADE 26.01 1 26.01 14.76 0.0013
Residual 29.96 17 1.76
Cor Total 912.16 31

The Model F-value of 45.38 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, D, E, AB, AD, AE, BE, DE, ABE, ADE are significant model terms.

7.17. Repeat Problem 7.16 using a design in two blocks.

(a) Recommend a blocking scheme and set up the design.

Interaction ABCDE is confounded with the blocks. The design is shown below.

Block A B C D E y
Block 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 8.11
Block 2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 5.56
Block 2 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 5.77

7-14
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Block 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 5.82
Block 2 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 9.17
Block 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 7.8
Block 1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 3.23
Block 2 1 1 1 -1 -1 5.69
Block 2 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 8.82
Block 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 14.23
Block 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 9.2
Block 2 1 1 -1 1 -1 8.94
Block 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 8.68
Block 2 1 -1 1 1 -1 11.49
Block 2 -1 1 1 1 -1 6.25
Block 1 1 1 1 1 -1 9.12
Block 2 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 7.93
Block 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 5
Block 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 7.47
Block 2 1 1 -1 -1 1 12
Block 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 9.86
Block 2 1 -1 1 -1 1 3.65
Block 2 -1 1 1 -1 1 6.4
Block 1 1 1 1 -1 1 11.61
Block 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 12.43
Block 2 1 -1 -1 1 1 17.55
Block 2 -1 1 -1 1 1 8.87
Block 1 1 1 -1 1 1 25.38
Block 2 -1 -1 1 1 1 13.06
Block 1 1 -1 1 1 1 18.85
Block 1 -1 1 1 1 1 11.78
Block 2 1 1 1 1 1 26.05

(b) Analyze the data from this blocked design. Is blocking important?

The analysis below shows that the blocking does not appear to be very important.

7-15
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Ha
lf-No
rma
lPlo
t

99

D
Half-Normal % Probability
95
E
90 AD
A
DE
80 BE
AB
ABE
70
ADA
EE

50

30
20
10
0

0.00 1.00 1.99 2.99 3.98 4.98 5.98

|Sta
ndard
ize
dEffe
ct|

Design Expert Output

Response 1 y
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 4.04 1 4.04
Model 879.62 11 79.97 53.31 < 0.0001 significant
A-A 83.56 1 83.56 55.71 < 0.0001
B-B 0.060 1 0.060 0.040 0.8431
D-D 285.78 1 285.78 190.54 < 0.0001
E-E 153.17 1 153.17 102.12 < 0.0001
AB 48.93 1 48.93 32.62 < 0.0001
AD 88.88 1 88.88 59.26 < 0.0001
AE 33.76 1 33.76 22.51 0.0001
BE 52.71 1 52.71 35.14 < 0.0001
DE 61.80 1 61.80 41.20 < 0.0001
ABE 44.96 1 44.96 29.98 < 0.0001
ADE 26.01 1 26.01 17.34 0.0005
Residual 28.50 19 1.50
Cor Total 912.16 31

The Model F-value of 53.31 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, D, E, AB, AD, AE, BE, DE, ABE, ADE are significant model terms.

7.18. The design in Problem 6.40 is a 24 factorial. Set up this experiment in two blocks with ABCD
confounded. Analyze the data from this design. Is the block effect large?

The runs for the experiment are shown below with the corresponding blocks.

Glucose NH 4 NO 3 FeSO 4 MnSO 4 y

Run Block (g dm-3) (g dm-3) (g dm-3 x 10-4) (g dm-3 x 10-2) (CMC)-1
1 Block 2 20.00 2.00 6.00 4.00 23
2 Block 1 60.00 2.00 6.00 4.00 15
3 Block 1 20.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 16
4 Block 2 60.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 18

7-16
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

5 Block 1 20.00 2.00 30.00 4.00 25

6 Block 2 60.00 2.00 30.00 4.00 16
7 Block 2 20.00 6.00 30.00 4.00 17
8 Block 1 60.00 6.00 30.00 4.00 26
9 Block 1 20.00 2.00 6.00 20.00 28
10 Block 2 60.00 2.00 6.00 20.00 16
11 Block 2 20.00 6.00 6.00 20.00 18
12 Block 1 60.00 6.00 6.00 20.00 21
13 Block 2 20.00 2.00 30.00 20.00 36
14 Block 1 60.00 2.00 30.00 20.00 24
15 Block 1 20.00 6.00 30.00 20.00 33
16 Block 2 60.00 6.00 30.00 20.00 34

The analysis of the experiment shown below identifies the contribution of the blocks. By reducing the SS E
and MS E , the AD and CD interactions now appear to be significant.

Ha
lf-No
rma
lPlo
t

99
Half-Normal % Probability

AB
95

90
C
80 D
70
CD
A
BC
50 AD
30
20
10
0

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

|Sta
ndard
ize
dEffe
ct|

Design Expert Output

Response 1 y
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 6.25 1 6.25
Model 713.00 8 89.13 50.93 < 0.0001 significant
A-Glucose 42.25 1 42.25 24.14 0.0027
B-NH4NO3 0.000 1 0.000 0.000 1.0000
C-FeSO4 196.00 1 196.00 112.00 < 0.0001
D-MnSO4 182.25 1 182.25 104.14 < 0.0001
AB 196.00 1 196.00 112.00 < 0.0001
AD 12.25 1 12.25 7.00 0.0382
BC 20.25 1 20.25 11.57 0.0145
CD 64.00 1 64.00 36.57 0.0009
Residual 10.50 6 1.75
Cor Total 729.75 15

The Model F-value of 50.93 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, C, D, AB, AD, BC, CD are significant model terms.

7-17
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

7.19. The design in Problem 6.42 is a 23 factorial replicated twice. Suppose that each replicate was a
block. Analyze all of the responses from this blocked design. Are the results comparable to those from
Problem 6.42? Is the block effect large?

The block effect is not large and does not appear to be important for the analysis on any of the four the
responses as shown below. The results are comparable to those from Problem 6.42.

Design Expert Output

Response 1 Fishbone Pb
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 0.000 1 0.000
Model 12.19 7 1.74 2300.73 < 0.0001 significant
A-Apatite 10.99 1 10.99 14514.07 < 0.0001
B-pH 0.35 1 0.35 459.75 < 0.0001
C-Pb 0.27 1 0.27 350.30 < 0.0001
AB 0.36 1 0.36 475.47 < 0.0001
AC 0.19 1 0.19 249.92 < 0.0001
BC 0.022 1 0.022 29.72 0.0010
ABC 0.020 1 0.020 25.89 0.0014
Residual 5.300E-003 7 7.571E-004
Cor Total 12.20 15

Coefficient Standard 95% CI 95% CI

Factor Estimate df Error Low High VIF
Intercept 0.85 1 6.879E-003 0.84 0.87
Block 1 0.000 1
Block 2 0.000
A-Apatite -0.83 1 6.879E-003 -0.85 -0.81 1.00
B-pH -0.15 1 6.879E-003 -0.16 -0.13 1.00
C-Pb 0.13 1 6.879E-003 0.11 0.15 1.00
AB 0.15 1 6.879E-003 0.13 0.17 1.00
AC -0.11 1 6.879E-003 -0.13 -0.092 1.00
BC 0.037 1 6.879E-003 0.021 0.054 1.00
ABC -0.035 1 6.879E-003 -0.051 -0.019 1.00

Design Expert Output

Response 1 Fishbone pH
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 2.256E-003 1 2.256E-003
Model 21.09 7 3.01 102.87 < 0.0001 significant
A-Apatite 9.84 1 9.84 336.14 < 0.0001
B-pH 8.14 1 8.14 277.85 < 0.0001
C-Pb 1.12 1 1.12 38.19 0.0005
AB 0.61 1 0.61 20.91 0.0026
AC 1.17 1 1.17 40.01 0.0004
BC 0.098 1 0.098 3.33 0.1106
ABC 0.11 1 0.11 3.66 0.0972
Residual 0.20 7 0.029
Cor Total 21.30 15

The Model F-value of 102.87 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C, AB, AC are significant model terms.

7-18
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Coefficient Standard 95% CI 95% CI

Factor Estimate df Error Low High VIF
Intercept 5.05 1 0.043 4.95 5.15
Block 1 -0.012 1
Block 2 0.012
A-Apatite 0.78 1 0.043 0.68 0.89 1.00
B-pH -0.71 1 0.043 -0.81 -0.61 1.00
C-Pb -0.26 1 0.043 -0.37 -0.16 1.00
AB 0.20 1 0.043 0.094 0.30 1.00
AC -0.27 1 0.043 -0.37 -0.17 1.00
BC -0.078 1 0.043 -0.18 0.023 1.00
ABC -0.082 1 0.043 -0.18 0.019 1.00

Design Expert Output

Response 1 Hydroxyapatite Pb
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 2.250E-004 1 2.250E-004
Model 4.01 7 0.57 937.82 < 0.0001 significant
A-Apatite 2.45 1 2.45 4010.43 < 0.0001
B-pH 0.27 1 0.27 434.29 < 0.0001
C-Pb 0.54 1 0.54 884.58 < 0.0001
AB 0.17 1 0.17 275.25 < 0.0001
AC 0.50 1 0.50 825.43 < 0.0001
BC 0.036 1 0.036 59.11 0.0001
ABC 0.046 1 0.046 75.69 < 0.0001
Residual 4.275E-003 7 6.107E-004
Cor Total 4.01 15

The Model F-value of 937.82 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, B, C, AB, AC, BC, ABC are significant model terms.

Coefficient Standard 95% CI 95% CI

Factor Estimate df Error Low High VIF
Intercept 0.42 1 6.178E-003 0.40 0.43
Block 1 3.750E-003 1
Block 2 -3.750E-003
A-Apatite -0.39 1 6.178E-003 -0.41 -0.38 1.00
B-pH 0.13 1 6.178E-003 0.11 0.14 1.00
C-Pb 0.18 1 6.178E-003 0.17 0.20 1.00
AB -0.10 1 6.178E-003 -0.12 -0.088 1.00
AC -0.18 1 6.178E-003 -0.19 -0.16 1.00
BC -0.048 1 6.178E-003 -0.062 -0.033 1.00
ABC 0.054 1 6.178E-003 0.039 0.068 1.00

Design Expert Output

Response 1 Hydroxyapatite pH
ANOVA for selected factorial model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III]
Sum of Mean F p-value
Source Squares df Square Value Prob > F
Block 2.025E-003 1 2.025E-003
Model 20.44 7 2.92 1494.46 < 0.0001 significant
A-Apatite 8.15 1 8.15 4172.37 < 0.0001
B-pH 8.82 1 8.82 4515.27 < 0.0001
C-Pb 0.084 1 0.084 43.05 0.0003
AB 3.24 1 3.24 1658.50 < 0.0001
AC 0.014 1 0.014 7.37 0.0300

7-19
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

BC 0.13 1 0.13 64.51 < 0.0001

ABC 2.250E-004 1 2.250E-004 0.12 0.7443
Residual 0.014 7 1.954E-003
Cor Total 20.45 15

Coefficient Standard 95% CI 95% CI

Factor Estimate df Error Low High VIF
Intercept 3.77 1 0.011 3.74 3.79
Block 1 0.011 1
Block 2 -0.011
A-Apatite 0.71 1 0.011 0.69 0.74 1.00
B-pH -0.74 1 0.011 -0.77 -0.72 1.00
C-Pb -0.073 1 0.011 -0.099 -0.046 1.00
AB -0.45 1 0.011 -0.48 -0.42 1.00
AC -0.030 1 0.011 -0.056 -3.871E-003 1.00
BC 0.089 1 0.011 0.063 0.11 1.00
ABC 3.750E-003 1 0.011 -0.022 0.030 1.00

7.20. Design an experiment for confounding a 26 factorial in four blocks. Suggest an appropriate
confounding scheme, different from the one shown in Table 7.8.

We choose ABCE and ABDF, which also confounds CDEF.

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

a c ac (1)
b abc bc ab
cd ad d acd
abcd bd abd bcd
ace e ae ce
bce abe be abce
de acde cde ade
abde bcde abcde bde
cf af f acf
abcf bf abf bcf
adf cdf acdf df
bdf abcdf bcdf abdf
ef acef cef aef
abef bcef abcef bef
acdef def adef cdef
bcdef abdef bdef abcdef

7.21. Consider the 26 design in eight blocks of eight runs each with ABCD, ACE, and ABEF as the
independent effects chosen to be confounded with blocks. Generate the design. Find the other effects
confound with blocks.

7-20
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4 Block 5 Block 6 Block 7 Block 8

b abc a c ac (1) bc ab
acd d bcd abd bd abcd ad cd
ce ae abce be abe bce e ace
abde bcde de acde cde ade abcde bde
abcf bf cf af f acf abf bcf
df acdf abdf bcdf abcdf bdf cdf adf
aef cef bef abcef bcef abef acef ef
bcdef abdef acdef def adef cdef bdef abcdef

The factors that are confounded with blocks are ABCD, ABEF, ACE, BDE, CDEF, BCF, and ADF.

7.22. Consider the 22 design in two blocks with AB confounded. Prove algebraically that SS AB = SS Blocks .

If AB is confounded, the two blocks are:

Block 1 Block 2
(1) a
ab b
(1) + ab a+b

(1) + ab  + [a + b ] (1) + ab + a + b 
2 2 2

SS Blocks = −
2 4
(1) + (ab ) + 2 (1)ab + a 2 + b 2 + 2ab
2 2

SS Blocks =
2
(1) + (ab ) + a + b 2 + 2 (1)ab + 2 (1)a + 2 (1)b + 2a (ab ) + 2b (ab ) + 2ab
2 2 2

−
4
(1) + (ab ) + a + b + 2 (1)ab + 2ab − 2 (1)a − 2 (1)b − 2a (ab ) − 2b (ab )
2 2 2 2

SS Blocks =
4
1
(1) + ab − a − b  = SS AB
2
SS Blocks =
4

7.23. Consider the data in Example 7.2. Suppose that all the observations in block 2 are increased by 20.
Analyze the data that would result. Estimate the block effect. Can you explain its magnitude? Do blocks
now appear to be an important factor? Are any other effect estimates impacted by the change you made in
the data?

406 715 −309

Block Effect = yBlock1 − yBlock 2 = − = = −38.625
8 8 8

This is the block effect estimated in Example 7.2 plus the additional 20 units that were added to each
observation in block 2. All other effects are the same.

7-21
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F0
A 1870.56 1 1870.56 89.93
C 390.06 1 390.06 18.75
D 855.56 1 855.56 41.13
AC 1314.06 1 1314.06 63.18
AD 1105.56 1 1105.56 53.15
Blocks 5967.56 1 5967.56
Error 187.56 9 20.8
Total 11690.93 15

Design Expert Output

Response: Filtration in gal/hr
ANOVA for Selected Factorial Model
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Block 5967.56 1 5967.56
Model 5535.81 5 1107.16 53.13 < 0.0001 significant
A 1870.56 1 1870.56 89.76 < 0.0001
C 390.06 1 390.06 18.72 0.0019
D 855.56 1 855.56 41.05 0.0001
AC 1314.06 1 1314.06 63.05 < 0.0001
AD 1105.56 1 1105.56 53.05 < 0.0001
Residual 187.56 9 20.84
Cor Total 11690.94 15

The Model F-value of 53.13 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise.

Values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant.
In this case A, C, D, AC, AD are significant model terms.

7.24. Suppose that the data in Problem 6.1 we had confounded ABC in replicate I, AB in replicate II, and
BC in replicate III. Construct the analysis of variance table.

Replicate I Replicate II Replicate III

(ABC Confounded) (AB Confounded) (BC Confounded)
Block-> 1 2 1 2 1 2
(1) a (1) a (1) b
ab b ab b bc c
ac c abc ac abc ab
bc abc c bc a ac

7-22
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F0
A 0.67 1 0.67 <1
B 770.67 1 770.67 20.77
C 280.17 1 280.17 7.55
AB (reps 1 and III) 25.00 1 25.00 <1
AC 468.17 1 468.17 12.62
BC (reps I and II) 22.56 1 22.56 <1
ABC (reps II and III) 0.06 1 0.06 <1
Blocks within replicates 119.25 3 39.75
Replicates 0.58 2
Error 408.21 11 37.11
Total 2095.33 23

7.25. Repeat the analysis of Problem 6.1 assuming that ABC was confounded with blocks in each
replicate.

Replicate I, II, and III

(ABC Confounded)
Block-> 1 2
(1) a
ab b
ac c
bc abc

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F0
A 0.67 1 0.67 <1
B 770.67 1 770.67 22.38
C 280.17 1 280.17 8.14
AB 16.67 1 16.67 <1
AC 468.17 1 468.17 13.59
BC 48.17 1 48.17 1.40
Blocks (or ABC) 28.17 1 28.17
Replicates/Lack of Fit 0.58 2
Error 482.09 14 34.44
Total 2095.33 23

7-23
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

7.26. Suppose that in Problem 6.7 ABCD was confounded in replicate I and ABC was confounded in
replicate II. Perform the statistical analysis of variance.

Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean

Variation Squares Freedom Square F0
A 657.03 1 657.03 84.89
B 13.78 1 13.78 1.78
C 57.78 1 57.78 7.46
D 124.03 1 124.03 16.02
AB 132.03 1 132.03 17.06
AC 3.78 1 3.78 <1
AD 38.28 1 38.28 4.95
BC 2.53 1 2.53 <1
BD 0.28 1 0.28 <1
CD 22.78 1 22.78 2.94
ABC 144.00 1 144.00 18.64
ABD 175.78 1 175.78 22.71
ACD 7.03 1 7.03 <1
BCD 7.03 1 7.03 <1
ABCD 10.56 1 10.56 1.36
Replicates 11.28 1 11.28
Blocks 118.81 2 59.41
Error 100.65 13 7.74
Total 1627.47 31

7.27. Construct a 23 design with ABC confounded in the first two replicates and BC confounded in the
third. Outline the analysis of variance and comment on the information obtained.

Replicate I Replicate II Replicate III

(ABC Confounded) (ABC Confounded) (BC Confounded)
Block-> 1 2 1 2 1 2
(1) a (1) a (1) b
ab b ab b bc c
ac c ac c abc ab
bc abc bc abc a ac

7-24
 Solutions from Montgomery, D. C. (2012) Design and Analysis of Experiments, Wiley, NY

Source of Degrees of
Variation Freedom
A 1
B 1
C 1
AB 1
AC 1
BC 1
ABC 1
Replicates 2
Blocks 3
Error 11
Total 23

This design provides “two-thirds” information on BC and “one-third” information on ABC.

7-25