Afable Gio Francis Ie405 Doe-Project Ie 2204-1

Republic of the Philippines
BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY

The National Engineering University
Alangilan Campus
Golden Country Homes, Alangilan, Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines 4200
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
E-mail Address: ceafa@g.batstate-u.edu.ph | Website Address: http://www.batstate-u.edu.ph
College of Engineering
Department of Industrial Engineering
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING
IE 405 PROJECT:
DESIGN OF EXPERIMENT
Course Code IE 405
Course Title STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR IE 2
Semester /AY Second Semester, AY 2021-2022
Section IE 2201
Date May 1, 2022
SR-Code 20-09955
Name of Student Gio Francis H. Afable
RUBRIC OF GRADING
1|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
I. OBJECTIVE
1. To demonstrate knowledge of the factorial experiments.
2. To design and conduct experiment using several factors and levels.
3. To analyze and interpret data gathered from experiment.
4. To derive conclusion and meaningful recommendations that can be
applied in real industry setup and life in general.
5. To determine which factors and combination of factors are significant in
achieving long flight time and safe flight of helicopters.
II. MATERIALS NEEDED

A. For the Helicopter Simulation
1. Coupon Bond (70GSM)
2. Paper Clips
3. Scissors/ Cutters
4. Ruler
5. Pen/Marking Pen
6. 2 phones (for video documentation and as stopwatch (nanotimer
application)
B. For Data Analysis

1. MS Excel Data Analysis Function(discuss)
Ms excel will not be used to solve the four factor analysis but will be beneficial in the
creation of tables for the plan of making the design as well as encoding of data gathered. These
data encoded in MS excel will be copy and pasted to the Minitab 19 Software.
2. Minitab Software (Discuss briefly the module to be used)

Minitab Software 19 will be the main statistical tool to be used in solving the analysis of
the 4 factors. A function the Minitab Design of Experiment (DOE) is used to create the Factorial
design and analyze the factorial. In which it will determine and roved if there is a significant
differences in each factors and interactions of the factors to each other. Also, the Minitab will also
be responsible for the creation of the graphs such as Paretto Diagram and the 4 in one graph such
as residual plots and histogram.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
III. DESIGN OF HELICOPTERS
The design for the helicopter simulation will have a total dimension of 20x5
measured in centimetre for each type of helicopter. I decided to have a dimension of
20x5 to easily determine the center to easy layout the measured cutting section. Only
a 1 type of paper will be used in this experiment because weight is not one the factors
for these designs. The researcher will used a coupon bond type paper which has a 70
GSM.
TABLE 1 PRESENTS THE HELICOPTER SIMULATION DESIGN.
TABLE #1
HELICOPTER SIMULATION DESIGN
Factors Levels Coding Dimension (cm)
SHORT a1 3.0
A. WING LENGTH MEDIUM a2 5.0
LONG a3 6.0
SHORT b1 3.5
B. TAIL LENGTH MEDIUM b2 5.0
LONG b3 6.0
WITHOUT FOLD c1
C. FOLD/CREASE
WITH FOLD c2
WITHOUT STABILIZER d1
D. STABILIZER
WITH STABILIZER d3

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
IV. PROCEDURE
FIGURE #1
PAPER HELICOPTERS DESIGN
FIGURE #2
SAMPLE PAPER HELICOPTER

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
FIGURE #3
ACTUAL HELICOPTER FLIGHT SIMULATION

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
TABLE #2 PRESENTS THE DETAILED HELICOPTER SIMULATION DESIGN WITH 3 REPLICATIONS
TABLE #2
DETAILED HELICOPTER SIMULATION DESIGN WITH 3 REPLICATIONS
STABILIZER (D)
WITHOUT WITH WITHOUT WITH WITHOUT WITH WITHOUT WITH WITHOUT WITH WITHOUT WITH
FLIGHT TIME STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER
(seconds) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2)
FOLD/CREASE (C)
WITHOUT FOLD (c1) WITH FOLD (c2) WITHOUT FOLD (c1) WITH FOLD (c2) WITHOUT FOLD (c1) WITH FOLD (c2)
TAIL LENGTH (B)

WING LENGTH
LONG (6.0) (b3)
(A) SHORT (3.5) (b1) MEDIUM (5.0) (b2)
a1b1c1d1 a1b1c1d2 a1b1c2d1 a1b1c2d2 a1b2c1d1 a1b2c1d2 a1b2c2d1 a1b2c2d2 a1b3c1d1 a1b3c1d2 a1b3c2d1 a1b3c2d2
SHORT (3.0) a1b1c1d1 a1b1c1d2 a1b1c2d1 a1b1c2d2 a1b2c1d1 a1b2c1d2 a1b2c2d1 a1b2c2d2 a1b3c1d1 a1b3c1d2 a1b3c2d1 a1b3c2d2
MEDIUM (5.0) a2b1c1d1 a2b1c1d2 a2b1c2d1 a2b1c2d2 a2b2c1d1 a2b2c1d2 a2b2c2d1 a2b2c2d2 a2b3c1d1 a2b3c1d2 a2b3c2d1 a2b3c2d2
LONG (6.0) a3b1c1d1 a3b1c1d2 a3b1c2d1 a3b1c2d2 a3b2c1d1 a3b2c1d2 a3b2c2d1 a3b2c2d2 a3b3c1d1 a3b3c1d2 a3b3c2d1 a3b3c2d2

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
V. PRESENTATION OF DATA
TABLE #3 PRESENTS THE FLIGHT TIME OF HELICOPTERS
TABLE #3
FLIGHT TIME OF HELICOPTERS (SECONDS)
STABILIZER (D)
FLIGHT TIME STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER
(seconds) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2)
FOLD/CREASE (C)
TAIL LENGTH (B)
LONG (6.0) (b3)

WING LENGTH (A) SHORT (3.5) (b1) MEDIUM (5.0) (b2)
2.48 1.69 2.70 1.73 2.53 2.56 2.27 1.29 2.66 1.49 2.72 1.40
SHORT (3.0)
3.09 1.52 2.99 1.68 2.48 1.66 3.25 1.27 2.32 1.46 3.32 1.39
2.66 1.93 3.20 1.68 2.31 1.55 3.28 1.29 2.70 1.62 2.28 1.89
2.70 1.95 2.67 1.53 2.72 1.62 3.26 1.24 2.13 1.56 2.63 2.12
MEDIUM (5.0)
2.89 1.80 3.30 1.61 2.41 1.40 2.19 1.44 2.56 1.41 2.35 1.97
2.65 1.71 2.58 1.93 2.00 1.71 2.34 1.43 3.31 1.60 2.43 1.77
3.15 2.10 2.69 1.85 2.86 1.83 3.26 2.02 2.75 1.66 2.88 1.34
LONG (6.0)
3.07 2.02 2.32 2.31 2.20 1.55 2.50 1.85 2.98 1.96 2.43 1.34
2.65 2.20 2.51 1.62 2.58 1.87 2.07 1.37 2.45 1.99 2.76 1.66

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
TABLE #4
QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF FLIGHT OF HELICOPTERS
TABLE #4
QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF FLIGHT OF HELICOPTERS
STABILIZER (D)
STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER STABILIZER
FLIGHT TIME
(d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2) (d1) (d2)
(seconds)
FOLD/CREASE (C)
TAIL LENGTH (B)

WING LENGTH LONG (6.0) (b3)
(A) SHORT (3.5) (b1) MEDIUM (5.0) (b2)
UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE SHAKY
SHORT (3.0)
UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE UNSAFE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE UNSAFE
UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE UNSAFE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE UNSAFE
SHAKY STABLE UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH UNSTABLE UNSTABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH
MEDIUM (5.0)
UNSTABLE SHAKY UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH UNSAFE SMOOTH UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH
UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH UNSAFE SMOOTH UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH
UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH UNSTABLE SMOOTH UNSTABLE SMOOTH UNSTABLE STABLE UNSTABLE SMOOTH
LONG (6.0)

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
VI. ANALYSIS OF DATA, DISCUSSION, AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
1. HYPOTHESES
TABLE 5.1 PRESENTS THE NULL HYPOTHESIS
NULL HYPOTHESIS
H0': There is no significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different wing
length are used.
H0'' :
There is no significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different tail
length are used.
H0 ''':
There is no significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different folds
are used.
H0 '''':
There is no significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different
stabilizers are used.
H0 ''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different wing length and tail length.
H0 '''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different wing length and type of fold.
H0 ''''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different wing length and type of
stabilizers.
H0 '''''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different tail length and type of fold.
H0 ''''''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different tail length and type of stabilizers.
H0 '''''''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different type of fold and type of
stabilizers.
H0 ''''''''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different types of wing length, tail length,
and fold.
H0 '''''''''''':
and stabilizers.
H0 ''''''''''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different types of wing length, fold, and
stabilizers.
H0 '''''''''''''':
There is no significant interaction between the different types of tail length, fold, and
stabilizers.
H0 ''''''''''''''':
fold, and stabilizers.
Table 5.1 shows the declaration of the 15 null hypothesis, 4 null hypothesis for the single
factor, 6 for two way interactions, 4 for three way interactions, and 1 for four way interactions.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
TABLE 5.2 PRESENTS THE ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS
H1 ': There is a significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different wing
length are used.
H1'' :
There is a significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different tail
length are used.
H1 ''':
There is a significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different folds are
used.
H1 '''':
There is a significant difference in the means of the coded yields when different
stabilizers are used.
H1 ''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different wing length and tail length.
H1 '''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different wing length and type of fold.
H1 ''''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different wing length and type of stabilizers.
H1 '''''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different tail length and type of fold.
H1 ''''''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different tail length and type of stabilizers.
H1 '''''''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different type of fold and type of stabilizers.
H1 ''''''''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different types of wing length, tail length,
and fold.
H1 '''''''''''':
and stabilizers.
H1 ''''''''''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different types of wing length, fold, and
stabilizers.
H1 '''''''''''''':
There is a significant interaction between the different types of tail length, fold, and
stabilizers.
H1 ''''''''''''''':
fold, and stabilizers.
Table 5.2 shows the declaration of the 15 alternative hypothesis, 4 alternative hypothesis for the
single factor, 6 for two way interactions, 4 for three way interactions, and 1 for four way
interactions.
10 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
2. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
TABLE 6: PRESENTS THE FACTOR INFORMATION
TABLE 7: PRESENTS THE COMPUTED ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
FIGURE 4: SHOWS THE PARETO CHART IN RESPONSE TO FLIGHT TIME
FIGURE 5: SHOWS THE 4 IN ONE GRAPH OF THE RESIDUAL PLOTS FOR

FLIGHT TIME

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
TABLE 8: SHOWS THE ANOVA DATA COMPARING TO THE ALPHA 0.05

Source P-Value DECISIONS α CONCLUSION
0.05
WING LENGTH (A) 0.6630 > 0.05 Not Statistically Significant
TAIL LENGTH (B) 0.0190 < 0.05 Statistically Significant
FOLD/CREASE (C) 0.6590 > 0.05 Not Statistically Significant
STABILIZER (D) 0.0000 < 0.05 Statistically Significant
2-Way Interactions 0.5700 > 0.05 Not Statistically Significant
WING LENGTH 0.1550 > 0.05 Not Statistically Significant
(A)*TAIL LENGTH
(B)
(A)*FOLD/CREASE
(C)
(A)*STABILIZER
(D)
TAIL LENGTH 0.8630 > 0.05 Not Statistically Significant
(B)*FOLD/CREASE
(C)
(B)*STABILIZER
(D)
FOLD/CREASE 0.1250 > 0.05 Not Statistically Significant
(C)*STABILIZER
(D)
(A)*TAIL LENGTH
(B)*FOLD/CREASE
(C)
(A)*TAIL LENGTH
(B)*STABILIZER
(D)
(A)*FOLD/CREASE
(C)*STABILIZER
(D)
(B)*FOLD/CREASE
(C)*STABILIZER
(D)
(A)*TAIL LENGTH
(B)*FOLD/CREASE
(C)*STABILIZER
(D)

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
3. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
The experiment conducted is a four factor analysis with a three numbers of replications.
Shown in Table 6 the factors for these experiments are; Wing Length (A), Tail Length (B),
Fold/Crease (C), and Stabilizer (D). These factors have different levels, the Wing Length has a 3
levels and replications wherein named and coded as Short (3.0 cm) (a1), Medium (5.0 cm) (a2),
Long (6.0 cm) (a3), the Tail Length has also a 3 levels and replications wherein named and coded
as Short (3.5 cm) (b1), Medium (5.0 cm) (b2), Long (6.0 cm) (b3), the fold has a two levels which
is classified and coded as without fold (c1) and with fold (c2), same with fold the stabilizers is
classified and coded in a two level which is without fold (d1) and with fold (d2). Having a 3 levels
for Wing and Tail and 2 levels for Fold and Stabilizers a total of 108 flight time is gathered.
Using the Minitab Software results shown for the Analysis of Variance shown in table n is
the results for the linear factors, 2 way interactions, 3 way interactions, and 4 way interactions.
First is the linear factors; Wing Length (A) and Tail Length (B) has a degrees of freedom
(DF) of 2 on the other hand Fold/Crease (C) and Stabilizer (D) has a degrees of freedom (DF) 1
which has a total of 6. The calculated P value for the four linear factors are; Wing Length (A) is
0.663, Tail Length (B) is 0.019, Fold/Crease (C) is 0.659 and for Stabilizer (D) is 0.
The 2-Way Interactions, The degrees of freedom for the two way interactions have a total
of 13; for AB = 4, AC = 2, AD = 2, BC = 2, BD = 2 and CD = 1 and the computed P value for two
factor interaction are; AB = 0.155, AC = 0.731, AD = 0.531, BC = 0.863, BD = 0.975, and CD =
0.125.
The 3-Way Interactions, The degrees of freedom for the three way interactions have a total
of 12; for ABC = 4, ABD = 4, ACD = 2, and BCD = 2 and the computed P value for three factor
interaction are; ABC = 0.78, ABD = 0.968, ACD = 0.676, and BCD = 0.154.
The 4-Way Interactions, The total degrees of freedom is 4 and the calculated P value for
ABCD is 0.702.
The total DF for the model is 35, 6 for linear, 13 for two way, 12 for three way, and 4 for
four way. The error is equal to 72 and adding it to 35 will be having a total of 107 for degrees of
freedom. The P value computed in each model will be crucial for determining the significance of
each factor and its interactions. It will be compared to the significance level or the alpha equals to
0.05.
Figure 4 shows the Pareto Chart of the standardized effects of the Flight time in an alpha
level 0.05. Shown in the chart the factor D which is the Stabilizer has the largest effects and next
to the factor B the Tail Length which has the second largest effects among all factors. These two
factors that crosses the line 1.99 is shows that it is significant and for the rest that did not cross the
line are not significant such as CD, BCD, AB, AD, C, A, ACD, ABCD, AC, ABC, BC ABD, and
BD.
Figure 5 shows the four in one graphs of the residual plot for the flight time, the Normal
Probability plot shows that the data are well distributed because it generally shows how the data
are well fit. The residual versus fits shows that the date are randomly distributed and have a
constant variance. The histogram shows a bell shaped figure in which it can conclude that the data
(Flight Time) is well distributed yet shows a small outlier. The residuals versus order, the pattern
shows that the data are correlated to each other.
Table 8 shows the decision in comparing the computed P-Value for each factors to the
significance level 0.05. Which also presents the decision and conclusion for each factors.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
4. INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
a. MAIN EFFECTS
TABLE 9.1
PRESENTS THE MAIN EFFECTS
P- Decisions Alpha
Linear Model
Value 0.05 Conclusion
Not Statistically
WING LENGTH (A) 0.6630
> 0.05
Significant
Statistically
TAIL LENGTH (B) 0.0190
< 0.05
Significant
Not Statistically
FOLD/CREASE (C) 0.6590
> 0.05
Significant
Statistically
STABILIZER (D) 0.0000
< 0.05
Significant
Table 9.1 shows the results for the main effects; Wing Length (A), Tail Length (B),
Fold/Crease (C), and Stabilizer (D).
The Wing Length (A) which has a P-value of 0.6630 is greater than the alpha level 0.05. It
concludes that it is not statistically significant and will accept the null hypothesis and will reject
the alternative hypothesis. Therefore, there is no significant difference in the means of the coded
yields when different wing lengths are used.
The Tail Length (B) which has a P-value of 0.0190 is less than the alpha level 0.05. It
concludes that it is statistically significant and will reject the null hypothesis and will accept the
alternative hypothesis. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the means of the coded yields
when different tail lengths are used.
The Fold/Crease (C) which has a P-value of 0.6590 is greater than the alpha level 0.05. It
concludes that it is not statistically significant and will accept the null hypothesis and will reject
the alternative hypothesis. Therefore, there is no significant difference in the means of the coded
yields when different folds are used.
The Stabilizer (D) which has a P-value of 0.000 is less than the alpha level 0.05. It concludes
that it is statistically significant and will reject the null hypothesis and will accept the alternative
hypothesis. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the means of the coded yields when
different stabilizers are used.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
b. TWO-FACTOR INTERACTION EFFECTS
TABLE 9.2
PRESENTS THE 2-WAY INTERACTIONS
Decisions Alpha
2-Way Interactions P-Value
0.05 Conclusion
WING LENGTH (A)*TAIL Not Statistically
LENGTH (B)
0.1550
0.05 > Significant
WING LENGTH Not Statistically
(A)*FOLD/CREASE (C)
0.7310
0.05 > Significant
WING LENGTH Not Statistically
(A)*STABILIZER (D)
0.5310
0.05 > Significant
TAIL LENGTH Not Statistically
(B)*FOLD/CREASE (C)
0.8630
0.05 > Significant
TAIL LENGTH Not Statistically
(B)*STABILIZER (D)
0.9750
0.05 > Significant
FOLD/CREASE Not Statistically
(C)*STABILIZER (D)
0.1250
0.05 > Significant
Table 9.2 shows the 2- way interactions: AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, and CD.
The interactions of Wing Length (A) and Tail Length (B) shows that the computed P-value
0.1550 is greater than the alpha level 0.05.It concludes that it is not statistically significant.
Therefore, we will accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternative hypothesis. There is no
significant interaction between the different wing length and tail length.
The interactions of Wing Length (A) and Fold/Crease (C) shows that the computed P-value
significant interaction between the different wing length and type of fold.
The interactions of Wing Length (A) and Stabilizer (D) shows that the computed P-value
significant interaction between the different wing length and type of stabilizers.
The interactions of Tail Length (B) and Fold/Crease (C) shows that the computed P-value
significant interaction between the different tail length and type of fold.
The interactions of Tail Length (B) and Stabilizer (D) shows that the computed P-value
significant interaction between the different tail length and type of stabilizers.
The interactions of Fold/Crease (C) and Stabilizer (D) shows that the computed P-value

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
significant interaction between the different type of fold and type of stabilizers.
c. THREE-FACTOR INTERACTION EFFECTS
TABLE 9.3
Decisions Alpha
3-Way Interactions P-Value
0.05 Conclusion
WING LENGTH (A)*TAIL LENGTH Not Statistically
(B)*FOLD/CREASE (C)
0.7800
0.05 > Significant
WING LENGTH (A)*TAIL LENGTH Not Statistically
0.9680
(B)*STABILIZER (D) > 0.05 Significant
WING LENGTH (A)*FOLD/CREASE Not Statistically
0.6760
(C)*STABILIZER (D) > 0.05 Significant
TAIL LENGTH (B)*FOLD/CREASE Not Statistically
0.1540
(C)*STABILIZER (D) > 0.05 Significant
The interactions of Wing Length (A), Tail Length (B), and Fold/Crease (C) shows that the
computed P-value 0.7800 is greater than the alpha level 0.05. It concludes that it is not statistically
significant. Therefore, we will accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternative hypothesis.
There is no significant interaction between the different types of wing length, tail length, and fold.
The interactions of Wing Length (A), Tail Length (B), and Stabilizer (D) shows that the
There is no significant interaction between the different types of wing length, tail length, and
stabilizers.
The interactions of Wing Length (A), Fold/Crease (C), and Stabilizer (D) shows that the
There is no significant interaction between the different types of wing length, fold, and stabilizers.
The interactions of Tail Length (B), Fold/Crease (C), and Stabilizer (D) shows that the
There is no significant interaction between the different types of tail length, fold, and stabilizers.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
d. FOUR- FACTOR INTERACTION EFFECTS
TABLE 9.4
P- Decisions Alpha
4-Way Interactions
Value 0.05 Conclusion
Not
WING LENGTH (A)*TAIL LENGTH
(B)*FOLD/CREASE (C)*STABILIZER (D)
0.7020
> 0.05
Statistically
Significant
Table 9.4 shows the 4-way interactions comparison of computed P-Value and significance
level. The interactions of Wing Length (A)*Tail Length (B)*Fold/Crease (C)*Stabilizer (D) shows
that the computed P-value 0.7020 is greater than the alpha level 0.05. It concludes that it is not
statistically significant. Therefore, we will accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternative
hypothesis. There is no significant interaction between the different types of wing length, tail
length, fold, and stabilizers.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, based from the findings in the conducted flight simulation using the factorial
analysis to determine the effects and interaction of the 4 main factors; Wing Length (A), Tail
Length (B), Fold/Crease (C), and Stabilizer (D) which has a 3 number of replication and a total
sample of 108 test flights. It is observed and analyze that the factor Stabilizer (D) is crucial for the
success of flight simulation. The paper clip which adds some weights at the bottom part (Tail) of
the paper helicopter, in observance reduce the tendency of the aircraft to be unstable upon
launching. Another observation is that the groups that has no stabilizers has the tendency to be
unstable or crash upon its release. I conclude that weight is crucial for reducing or rather
elimination of unstable and shaky flight. Based on the Table 4, the best combination for the success
of a flight simulation is from the group of a2b3c2d2, and a3b3c2d2. This has the combination of
Medium length of Wing (5.0cm), Tail length of 6.0 cm, with fold and stabilizer. Another
combination is Long Wing length (6.0 cm), Tail length of 6.0 cm, with fold and stabilizer. These
group has by far the best flight simulation. I also notice that in my conducted experiment in
gathering the data those flight time that has an average of 2 seconds or more are qualitatively
describe as unsafe and those flight time that has below 2 seconds are the aircraft that successfully
completed and perfectly land.
2. RECOMMENDATION
After executing the flight simulation I have already an idea for recommendations. First, is
the total dimension of the airplane should be 17x6 because at what I have observed it has a large
gap in the middle because of my measurements for wing and tail are too short. I therefore conclude
that because most of the paper airplanes failed or unstable during flight is that its body is not
perfectly shaped that is why a stabilizer is highly recommended. My next recommendation is the
type of paper since I used a type of paper that is very common and has 70 gsm its weight is very
light that makes the launching of these paper helicopters to be unstable. Final recommendation is
fold and stabilizer must always be present because it provides a smooth flight and landing.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
VIII. LEARNING POINT

(How can the learning be applied to real life; your realizations after making the project).
In these project the design of experiment using the multi factor analysis I have learned
a lot in these project and has develop new ideas and shortcuts in MS Excel as well as in the
Minitab. My learning points in this experiment is that in order to work faster I need to create
my own path or technique in which I will excel and master it in short amount of time. For
example is the creation of the paper helicopters, I picked a four factors in which I will have to
create a total of 108 different paper helicopters. At first I give doubt to myself that I will not
be able to make it but after all struggles I developed my own technique from cutting the coupon
bonds to cutting the designated length of each aircraft until the computation and analysis of
data. I also rely on the software like MS Excel and Minitab 19 in the preparation, gathering,
solving and analyzing of data. I realize that this project will benefit me a lot because of the
new learning at ideas specially in using Minitab as well as the analysis and interpretation of
data. On my journey to my higher years I will be able to prove statistically my null hypothesis
and compared and decide for the alternative hypothesis. Using the 4 factor analysis I can easily
decide in any decision considering the effects of various factor. These will be I think beneficial
when I will be conducting Feasibility Studies.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
IX. APPENDICES
1. PICTURES WHILE DOING THE HELICOPTERS.

Alangilan Campus
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 loc. ` / 2221
2. VIDEO LINK OF THE ACTUAL FLIGHT SIMULATION
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lIDmm3ncETkQys-rWz0jPsUqSeHlut1p/view
3. REFERENCES USED INMAKING THE PROJECT
 For Understanding the functions in Minitab as well as its interpretation.
https://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/18/help-and-how-to/modeling-
statistics/doe/how-to/factorial/analyze-factorial-design/interpret-the-results/all-statistics-
and-graphs/analysis-of-variance-table/
https://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/18/help-and-how-to/modeling-
statistics/regression/how-to/fit-regression-model/interpret-the-results/all-statistics-and-
graphs/residual-plots/
https://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/20/help-and-how-to/statistical-
modeling/regression/how-to/fit-regression-model/interpret-the-results/all-statistics-and-
graphs/pareto-
chart/#:~:text=The%20Pareto%20chart%20shows%20the,denoted%20by%20%CE%B1
%20or%20alpha
 For Learning how to use Minitab-DOE-Analyze Factorial Design

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxFZ8nM8Cww
https://youtu.be/fxFZ8nM8Cww

Afable Gio Francis Ie405 Doe-Project Ie 2204-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Afable Gio Francis Ie405 Doe-Project Ie 2204-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY

Department of Industrial Engineering

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING

Course Title STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR IE 2

Semester /AY Second Semester, AY 2021-2022

Date May 1, 2022

Name of Student Gio Francis H. Afable

1|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

II. MATERIALS NEEDED

B. For Data Analysis

2. Minitab Software (Discuss briefly the module to be used)

2|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

TABLE 1 PRESENTS THE HELICOPTER SIMULATION DESIGN.

3|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

4|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

5|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

DETAILED HELICOPTER SIMULATION DESIGN WITH 3 REPLICATIONS

TAIL LENGTH (B)

6|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

FLIGHT TIME OF HELICOPTERS (SECONDS)

TAIL LENGTH (B)

LONG (6.0) (b3)

7|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF FLIGHT OF HELICOPTERS

TAIL LENGTH (B)

8|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

9|Page Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

TABLE 5.2 PRESENTS THE ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS

10 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

TABLE 6: PRESENTS THE FACTOR INFORMATION

TABLE 7: PRESENTS THE COMPUTED ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

11 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

FIGURE 5: SHOWS THE 4 IN ONE GRAPH OF THE RESIDUAL PLOTS FOR

12 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

TABLE 8: SHOWS THE ANOVA DATA COMPARING TO THE ALPHA 0.05

13 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

14 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

15 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

16 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

c. THREE-FACTOR INTERACTION EFFECTS

17 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

d. FOUR- FACTOR INTERACTION EFFECTS

18 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

19 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

VIII. LEARNING POINT

20 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

1. PICTURES WHILE DOING THE HELICOPTERS.

21 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

3. REFERENCES USED INMAKING THE PROJECT

 For Understanding the functions in Minitab as well as its interpretation.

 For Learning how to use Minitab-DOE-Analyze Factorial Design

22 | P a g e Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives

You might also like