21.01.2015 Views

Compound Noise - MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering

Compound Noise - MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering

Compound Noise - MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

392 J. SINGH ET AL.<br />

System<br />

Table II. Results from resolution III control and noise factor array<br />

Hierarchy<br />

Measure<br />

<strong>of</strong> sparsity<br />

<strong>of</strong> effects<br />

Number <strong>of</strong><br />

replications<br />

Matching <strong>of</strong><br />

all control<br />

factors with<br />

their robust<br />

setting<br />

(%)<br />

Matching <strong>of</strong><br />

control factors<br />

with their<br />

robust setting<br />

(%)<br />

Improvement<br />

ratio<br />

(%)<br />

Op Amp Strong 0.105 100 98 99.6 99.91<br />

CSTR Weak 0.647 100 None 76.5 96.5<br />

Temperature Weak 0.725 100 28 55 87<br />

control circuit<br />

Slider crank Weak 0.119 100 91 95.5 97.6<br />

System<br />

Table III. Results from resolution III control factor array and two-level compound noise<br />

Hierarchy<br />

Measure <strong>of</strong><br />

sparsity <strong>of</strong><br />

effects<br />

Number <strong>of</strong><br />

replications<br />

Matching <strong>of</strong><br />

all control<br />

factors with<br />

their robust<br />

setting<br />

(%)<br />

Matching <strong>of</strong><br />

control factors<br />

with their<br />

robust setting<br />

(%)<br />

Improvement<br />

ratio<br />

(%)<br />

Improvement<br />

ratio (from<br />

resolution III<br />

noise array)<br />

(%)<br />

Op Amp Strong 0.105 100 86 97.2 99.37 99.91<br />

CSTR Weak 0.647 100 None 41.17 39.8 96.5<br />

Temperature Weak 0.725 100 None 43.5 25.2 87<br />

control circuit<br />

Slider crank Weak 0.119 100 89 94 96.5 97.6<br />

System<br />

Table IV. Average results from full factorial control factor array and two-level random compound noise<br />

Hierarchy<br />

Measure <strong>of</strong><br />

sparsity <strong>of</strong><br />

effects<br />

Number <strong>of</strong><br />

replications<br />

Matching <strong>of</strong><br />

all control<br />

factors with<br />

their robust<br />

setting<br />

(%)<br />

Matching <strong>of</strong><br />

control factors<br />

with their<br />

robust setting<br />

(%)<br />

Improvement<br />

ratio<br />

(%)<br />

Improvement<br />

ratio (from<br />

Taguchi’s<br />

compound<br />

noise)<br />

(%)<br />

Op Amp Strong 0.105 1000 30.8 73 80.2 99.2<br />

PNM Strong 0.132 2 4 = 16 50 68.75 79.9 99.5<br />

Journal bearing Strong 0.28 2 3 = 8 100 100 100 98.84<br />

CSTR Weak 0.647 2 6 = 64 54.69 70.3 67.6 58.4<br />

Temperature Weak 0.725 2 5 = 32 68.75 76.56 74.75 30.65<br />

control circuit<br />

Slider crank Weak 0.119 2 5 = 32 50 70 55.2 98.5<br />

The compound noise strategy also does not perform well with a resolution III control factor array for the<br />

temperature control circuit. The improvement ratio drops from 87% for a resolution III noise array to 25%<br />

for two-level compound noise.<br />

In the formulation <strong>of</strong> compound noise as suggested by Taguchi 1 and Phadke 3 , we need to know the<br />

directionality <strong>of</strong> noise factors on the system’s response. We need to run some fractional factorial experiments<br />

on the system to gather information about the directionality <strong>of</strong> noise factors. We tried a different formulation<br />

Copyright c○ 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Qual. Reliab. Engng. Int. 2007; 23:387–398<br />

DOI: 10.1002/qre

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!