Hexafluoroethane Rate |
Observations |
|||||
(SCCM) |
||||||
125 |
2.7 |
4.6 |
2.6 |
3 |
3.2 |
3.8 |
160 |
4.9 |
4.6 |
5 |
4.2 |
3.6 |
4.2 |
200 |
4.6 |
3.4 |
2.9 |
3.5 |
4.1 |
5.1 |
Result:
Write down the Null and Alternative hypotheses to test if at least one flowrate causes a different uniformity than the other uniformities. Define all the terms used.
The three groups ( group 1 , group 2 and group 3) are flow rates with 125, 160 and 200.
µis the population mean.
Ho: µ1= µ2= µ3
H1: At least one of the mean is different from the others
What is the calculated Ftest statistic? What are the critical F value and the rejection region of H0 at α=5% ?
calculated Ftest statistic = 3.5856
critical F value = 3.68
Reject Ho if calculated F value > 3.68
c. Test the hypotheses using the test statistic / critical value method (use your answers to (b), and (c)). Clearly interpret the test result in the context of the problem.
calculated Ftest statistic 3.5856 < critical F value 3.68, Fail to reject Ho.
There is not sufficient evidence to conclude that at least one flowrate causes a different uniformity than the other uniformities.
d. What is the P value for the test? Test the hypotheses using the P value. Do you get the same answer as (d)? If your answer is different, clearly interpret it.
P value =0.0534 which is > 0.05 level of significance. Ho is not rejected. We get the same answer as above.
Excel calculations:
ANOVA: Single Factor |
||||||
SUMMARY |
||||||
Groups |
Count |
Sum |
Average |
Variance |
||
Rate125 |
6 |
19.9 |
3.316666667 |
0.5777 |
||
Rate160 |
6 |
26.5 |
4.416666667 |
0.2737 |
||
Rate200 |
6 |
23.6 |
3.933333333 |
0.6747 |
||
ANOVA |
||||||
Source of Variation |
SS |
df |
MS |
F |
P-value |
F crit |
Between Groups |
3.6478 |
2 |
1.8239 |
3.5856 |
0.0534 |
3.6823 |
Within Groups |
7.6300 |
15 |
0.5087 |
|||
Total |
11.2778 |
17 |
||||
Level of significance |
0.05 |
In Orthogonal Design for Process Optimization and Its Applications in Plasma Etching, G.Z. Yin and D.W....
An article in Materials Research Bulletin investigated four different methods of preparing the superconducting compound PbMo6S8. The authors contend that the presence of Oxygen during the preparation process affects the material’s superconducting transition temperature. Preparation methods 01 and 03 use techniques that are designed to eliminate the presence of Oxygen, and methods 03 and 04 allow Oxygen to be present. Five observations on Transition Temperature were made for each method, and the results are given in the table: Preparation Method...