Experimental completely randomized

Background variables could also be introduced into the experiment by randomization, rather than by blocking techniques. Thus in the previous example, the four tires of each type could have been assigned to automobiles and wheel positions completely randomly, instead of treating automobiles and wheel positions as experimental blocks. This could have resulted in an assignment such as the following ... 

Soybean bloassays of root exudates. Four soybean seeds ( Bragg ) were planted In each of 100 12.5 cm plastic pots filled with an artificial soil mix consisting of perlite/coarse sand/coarse vermiculite 3/2/1 by volume. After one week the plants were thinned to two per pot and the treatments were begun. The experimental design was a completely randomized design with 10 replications (pots) per treatment. On the first day of each week each pot was watered with 300 ml effluent from the appropriate growth units. On the fifth day of each week all pots were watered with Peter s Hydro-sol solution with CaCNOj. At other times the pots were watered as needed with tap water. On the second and fifth day of each week the height of the soybeans (base to apical bud) was measured. 

Root elongation bloassay of root exudates. Five ml aliquots of the root exudates were pipetted onto three layers of Anchor1 germination paper In a 10 by 10 by 1.5 cm plastic petri dish. Twenty five radish or tomato seeds were placed in a 5x5 array in each petri dish. Radish seeds were incubated at 20C for 96 hours tomato seeds were incubated at 20C for 168 hours, before the root length was measured. Experimental design was a completely randomized design with three replications (dishes) per treatment per bioassay seed species. The bioassay was repeated each week for 23 weeks. 

Completely randomized experimental design for determining the effect of temperature on a wine-making system. 

In the completely randomized design, a different fruit was randomly assigned a temperature, either 23°C or 27°C. Let us consider now a different experimental design. We will still employ the same number of experiments (20), but we will use only half as many fruit types, assigning each fruit type to both temperatures. Thus, each fruit will be involved in a pair of experiments, one experiment at 23°C and the... 

In Sections 2.2 and 2.3 we considered the application of response surface methodology to the investigation of the robustness of a product or process to environmental variation. The response surface designs discussed in those sections are appropriate if all of the experimental runs can be conducted independently so that the experiment is completely randomized. This section will consider the application of an alternative class of experimental designs, called split-plot designs, to the study of robustness to environmental variation. A characteristic of these designs is that, unlike the response surface designs, there is restricted randomization of the experiment. 

Taguchi) with no replication would require not only 72 tablet batches, but also 72 operations of the chamber. It is clear, therefore that this experimental arrangement can be considerably easier to run than the completely randomized cross-product design. 

There are two possible directions for both the atoms in both the first and second atomic jumps. If the jumping direction is completely random and the two atoms have the same probability of performing a jump, then these atomic jumps are said to be uncorrelated. A correlation factor, /, has been introduced for the two atomic jumps, which is defined as the extra probability that the atom making the first jump will also make the second jump in the forward direction. The rest of the probability, (1 — /), is then shared equally for either of the two atoms jumping in either of the two directions. Two experimental displacement distributions measured at 299 K and 309 K fit best with a Monte Carlo simulation with / = 0.1 and /=0.36, respectively. The correlation factor increases with diffusion temperature as can be expected. It is interesting to note that when/= 1, only a and steps can occur. 

Fig. 22. Configurational entropy for adsorption of hydrogen on Ni catalyst 8505 (I) experimental data, (II) theoretical values for homogeneous surface with completely random adsorption.

Since the experimental results, by design of completely randomized blocks, are processed by analysis of variance, experimental results of randomized blocks will be presented as a two-way classification and notation, as introduced in Sect. 1.5. We only introduce the change that the measured values or response are marked by y and factors by X j. Design of completely randomized block structure is given in Table 2.44... 

It should be noted that the number of measurement replications in the matrix of design of completely randomized blocks is marked by K. A distinction should also be made between mean squares for measurement error + experimental error and measurement error. Often this sum of measurement and experimental errors is just called experimental error, and measurement error sampling error. To check significance of the factor effect, the mean square of joint error or experimental error MSCR is used. 

In an experiment designed as completely randomized blocks, the effect of Co% on steel tensile strength was researched. Three vessels for producing alloys were used in experimental procedure. Each measurement of tensile strength was repeated and outcomes are shown in thousands of PSI-a in Table 2.49. 

Although this direct method is more adequate for the given example, because the number of the values that are not available are smaller than the sum of rows and columns, the constant method has also been demonstrated for the case of comparison. It should be noted that both methods are generally used in two-way classification such as designs of completely randomized blocks, Latin squares, factorial experiments, etc. Once the values that are not available are estimated, the averages of individual blocks and factor levels are calculated and calculations by analysis of variance done. The degree of freedom is thereby counted only with respect to the number of experimental values. Results of analysis of variance for this example are... 

Based on previous testing of the research subject, the design of the full factorial experiment 23 with one replication to determine experimental error has been chosen. To eliminate the influence of systematic error in doing the experiment, the sequence of doing design point-trials, in accord with theory of design of experiments, has been completely random. The outcomes are given in Table 2.107. 

In applying this method one should also account for the effect of time, since between the first and series of trials a lot of time may pass. A suggestion in such situations is to systematically replicate trials in experimental center of the basic design of experiments as well as those when moving to optimum, but in a completely random sequence. This approach makes a check of hypothesis on existence of time effects possible. Situations given in Fig. 2.44 are possible when moving to optimum. 

If the experimental runs are completely randomized, then randomization theory (see Hinkelmann and Kempthorne, 1994) tells us that least squares gives us unbiased estimators of any pre-chosen set of n — 1 linearly independent contrasts among the n combinations of factor levels (treatments). In most factorial experiments the pre-chosen treatment contrasts would be main effects and, perhaps, interactions. However, in supersaturated designs there is no rational basis for choosing a set of n — 1 contrasts before the analysis. Any model selection method will lead to selection biases, perhaps large biases, in the estimators of effects. If a2 is assumed known, then we can test the null hypothesis that all n treatment populations have equal means. This would not be of great interest, because even if this null hypothesis were true it would not imply that all main effects are zero, only that a particular set of n - 1 linear combinations of treatment means are zero. Of course, in practice, a2 is not known. 

The order in which the data are listed is simply a convenient systematic one, not to be confused with the order in which experimental runs were actually made. The table order is far too regular for it to constitute a wise choice itself. For example, the fact that all x3 = 1.0 combinations precede the x3 = 2.5 ones might have the unfortunate effect of allowing the impact of unnoticed environmental changes over the study period to end up being confused with the impact of x3 changes. The order in which the 12 experimental runs were actually made was chosen in a completely randomized fashion. For a readable short discussion of the role of randomization in industrial experimentation, the reader is referred to Box.20... 

---