In: Statistics and Probability
Use Minitab to do a complete analysis of the following problem. Heat treating is often used to carburize metal parts such as gears. The of the carburized layer is considered a crucial feature of the gear and contributes to the overall reliability of the part. Because of the critical nature of this feature, two different lab tests are performed on each furnace load. One test is run on a sample pin that accompanies each load. The other test is a destructive test that cross-sections an actual part. This test involves running a carbon analysis on the surface of both the gear pitch (top of the gear tooth) and the gear root (between the gear teeth). Data is in excel file HW 6-Q6 Heat Treating.xlsx, shows the results of the pitch carbon analysis test for 32 parts. The regressors are furnace temperature (TEMP), carbon concentration and duration of the carburizing cycle (SOAK-PCT, SOAKTIME), and carbon concentration and duration of the diffuse cycle (DIFFPCT, DIFFTIME)
Temp |
SoakTime |
SoakPct |
DiffTime |
DiffPct |
Pitch |
1650 |
0.58 |
1.1 |
0.25 |
0.9 |
0.013 |
1650 |
0.66 |
1.1 |
0.33 |
0.9 |
0.016 |
1650 |
0.66 |
1.1 |
0.33 |
0.9 |
0.015 |
1650 |
0.66 |
1.1 |
0.33 |
0.95 |
0.016 |
1600 |
0.66 |
1.15 |
0.33 |
1 |
0.015 |
1600 |
0.66 |
1.15 |
0.33 |
1 |
0.016 |
1650 |
1 |
1.1 |
0.5 |
0.8 |
0.014 |
1650 |
1.17 |
1.1 |
0.58 |
0.8 |
0.021 |
1650 |
1.17 |
1.1 |
0.58 |
0.8 |
0.018 |
1650 |
1.17 |
1.1 |
0.58 |
0.8 |
0.019 |
1650 |
1.17 |
1.1 |
0.58 |
0.9 |
0.021 |
1650 |
1.17 |
1.1 |
0.58 |
0.9 |
0.019 |
1650 |
1.17 |
1.15 |
0.58 |
0.9 |
0.021 |
1650 |
1.2 |
1.15 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
0.025 |
1650 |
2 |
1.15 |
1 |
0.8 |
0.025 |
1650 |
2 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
0.026 |
1650 |
2.2 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
0.024 |
1650 |
2.2 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
0.025 |
1650 |
2.2 |
1.5 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
0.024 |
1650 |
2.2 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
0.9 |
0.025 |
1650 |
2.2 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
0.9 |
0.027 |
1650 |
2.2 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
0.9 |
0.026 |
1650 |
3 |
1.15 |
1.5 |
0.8 |
0.029 |
1650 |
3 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
0.7 |
0.03 |
1650 |
3 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
0.75 |
0.028 |
1650 |
3 |
1.15 |
1.66 |
0.85 |
0.032 |
1650 |
3.33 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
0.8 |
0.033 |
1700 |
4 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
0.7 |
0.039 |
1650 |
4 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
0.7 |
0.04 |
1650 |
4 |
1.15 |
1.5 |
0.85 |
0.035 |
1700 |
12.5 |
1 |
1.5 |
0.7 |
0.056 |
1700 |
18.5 |
1 |
1.5 |
0.7 |
0.068 |
1.State the problem—what are you trying to find out?
2.Fit a regression model using all of the five regressors. Summarize this analysis by providing the equation, ??2, and list the standard errors. What do you notice about the p values for the regressors? What does the analysis of variance indicate?
3.Use the model to predict PITCH when TEMP=1650, SOAKTIME=1, SOAKPCT=1.1, DIFFTIME=1 and DIFFPCT=.8.
4.Do you have any problems with multicollinearity?
5.Construct a t-test on each regression coefficient. What can you conclude about the variables in this model? Use an alpha = 0.05.
6.Find a 95% confidence interval on each of the coefficients that were identified to be significant. Also construct a confidence interval and prediction interval on the future observation for the data given in Q3.
7.Prepare a normal probability plot of the residuals and check the adequacy of the model.
8.Utilize stepwise regression to identify a model. How does this model differ from the first one you created? Construct a normal probability plot on the residuals to check model adequacy. Write out the equation.
9.What are the possible benefits of using a model that has fewer regressors?
solution:
1.our problem is to test whether do these regresion varibles really affect the response pitch
2. Output through miinitab
Regression Equation
pitch = -0.0302 + 0.000029 temp + 0.002318 soaktime - 0.00303 soakpct + 0.00848 difftime - 0.00236 diffpct
Regression Analysis: pitch versus temp, soaktime, soakpct, difftime, diffpct
Analysis of Variance
Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | P-Value |
Regression | 5 | 0.004189 | 0.000838 | 158.92 | 0 |
temp | 1 | 0.000004 | 0.000004 | 0.69 | 0.414 |
soaktime | 1 | 0.000939 | 0.000939 | 178.17 | 0 |
soakpct | 1 | 0.000001 | 0.000001 | 0.27 | 0.609 |
difftime | 1 | 0.000256 | 0.000256 | 48.47 | 0 |
diffpct | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.09 | 0.772 |
Error | 26 | 0.000137 | 0.000005 | ||
Lack-of-Fit | 19 | 0.000127 | 0.000007 | 4.6 | 0.023 |
Pure Error | 7 | 0.00001 | 0.000001 | ||
Total | 31 | 0.004326 |
?conclusion: through ANOVA table we can observe that Pvlue for Soaktime and diff time is 0 ,ths implies that there is no contributio of these two variables in variablity of pitch
3) pitch=-0.0302+0.000029*1650+0.00231*1-0.00303*1.1+0.00848*1-0.00236*0.8
pitch=0.023219
4) we can observe for all variables is greater than 1 ,hence
multicollinearity is present
5) t-test on each regression coefficient
?# result of indidvidual t test
Term | Coef | SE Coef | T-Value | P-Value | VIF |
Constant | -0.0302 | 0.0618 | -0.49 | 0.629 | |
temp | 0.000029 | 0.000034 | 0.83 | 0.414 | 2.78 |
soaktime | 0.002318 | 0.000174 | 13.35 | 0 | 2.28 |
soakpct | -0.00303 | 0.00584 | -0.52 | 0.609 | 1.22 |
difftime | 0.00848 | 0.00122 | 6.96 | 0 | 2 |
diffpct | -0.00236 | 0.00808 | -0.29 | 0.772 | 2.71 |
??conclusion: we can observe that Pvlue for Soaktime and diff time is 0 ,ths implies that there is no contributio of these two variables in variablity of pitch
6) Confidence interval
regressor | lower limit | upper limit |
temp | 1.722E-05 | 4.07804E-05 |
soakpct | -0.00505346 | -0.001006543 |
diffpct | -0.00515958 | 0.000439577 |