Analysing the effects of variability measure selection on process and product optimisation

Since the integration of response surface methods into process robustness studies, many researchers have suggested numerous approaches to further enhance product development. Generally, these robust design methods seek the factor settings that minimise variability and the deviation of the mean from the desired target value. In the absence of a uniform approach to modelling process variability, researchers have typically chosen the standard deviation, variance, or logarithm of the standard deviation. Each measure, however, can produce a different set of optimal factor settings, thus complicating comparison studies. The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of variability measure selection on solutions and suggest a uniform approach.

[1]  Nian-Zhong Chen,et al.  A robust design procedure for improvement of quality of lower-limb prosthesis. , 2006, Bio-medical materials and engineering.

[2]  Daniele Romano,et al.  Robust design via simulation experiments: a modified dual response surface approach , 2008, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int..

[3]  Y.H. Hung,et al.  Thermal Design Optimization for Strip-Fin Heat Sinks with a Ducted Air Flow , 2006, Thermal and Thermomechanical Proceedings 10th Intersociety Conference on Phenomena in Electronics Systems, 2006. ITHERM 2006..

[4]  G. Box,et al.  On the Experimental Attainment of Optimum Conditions , 1951 .

[5]  Christine M. Anderson-Cook,et al.  A semi-parametric approach to robust parameter design , 2008 .

[6]  Wanzhu Tu,et al.  Dual response surface optimization , 1995 .

[7]  Kenneth Kelly,et al.  Robust Design Techniques for Evaluating Fuel Cell Thermal Performance , 2006 .

[8]  Jun Chen,et al.  Robust design of sheet metal forming process based on adaptive importance sampling , 2009 .

[9]  Makarand S. Kulkarni,et al.  Multiple response optimization for improved machined surface quality , 2003 .

[10]  Byung Rae Cho,et al.  Development of Priority-Based Robust Design , 2002 .

[11]  G. Derringer,et al.  Simultaneous Optimization of Several Response Variables , 1980 .

[12]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Design strategies for response surface models for the study of supersonic combustion , 2009, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int..

[13]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  A Nonlinear Programming Solution to the Dual Response Problem , 1993 .

[14]  Young Jin Kim,et al.  Desirability Function Modeling for Dual Response Surface Approach to Robust Design , 2008 .

[15]  Peter R. Nelson,et al.  Dual Response Optimization via Direct Function Minimization , 1996 .

[16]  Jiju Antony,et al.  Development of a variance prioritized multiresponse robust design framework for quality improvement , 2009 .

[17]  Mark J. Anderson,et al.  DOE Simplified: Practical Tools for Effective Experimentation , 2000 .

[18]  Loon Ching Tang,et al.  A unified approach for dual response surface optimization , 2002 .

[19]  G. Geoffrey Vining,et al.  Combining Taguchi and Response Surface Philosophies: A Dual Response Approach , 1990 .

[20]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Response Surface Designs within a Split-Plot Structure , 2005 .