Taguchis Robust Design Approach

Developed by a Japanese engineer, Genichi Taguchi

Choosing the levels of controllable factors in a process
or a product to achieve two objectives:
1. Ensure mean of the output response is at a desired
level or target
2. Ensure variability around this target value is as
small as possible

Introduced in the United States in the 1980s

Widely used in many large corporations, particularly
in the automotive and electronic industries.

Taguchis Philosophy Involves Three Central Ideas:

1. Products and processes should be designed so

that they are robust to external sources of
variability.
2. Experimental design methods are an engineering
tool to help accomplish this objective.
3. Operation on-target is more important than
conformance to upper and lower specifications.

Taguchis Quadratic Quality Loss Function

Design Approach
Uses statistical designs in an inner- and outerarray composite design that includes both
controllable process factors and uncontrollable
process factors.
The goal of experiments is to discover controllable
factor levels that render key process properties
relatively unaffected by changes in the
uncontrollable factor levels.
Inner array is an orthogonal array chosen for the
control factors and an outer array is an
orthogonal array chosen for the environmental
factors.
The complete design layout is obtained by crossing
the inner and outer arrays.

Alternative Labels for Control and

Environmental Factors

Numbers of Factors for Selecting

Orthogonal-Array Designs

Selected Orthogonal Arrays

L4

Factor
Run

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

Selected Orthogonal Arrays (Contd)

L8

Factor
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

A
-1
-1
-1
-1
1
1
1
1

B
-1
-1
1
1
-1
-1
1
1

C
-1
-1
1
1
1
1
-1
-1

D
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1
-1
1

E
-1
1
-1
1
1
-1
1
-1

F
-1
1
1
-1
-1
1
1
-1

G
-1
1
1
-1
1
-1
-1
1

Selected Orthogonal Arrays (Contd)

L9

Factor
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

A
-1
-1
-1
0
0
0
1
1
1

B
-1
0
1
-1
0
1
-1
0
1

C
-1
0
1
0
1
-1
1
-1
0

D
-1
0
1
1
-1
0
0
1
-1

Selected Orthogonal Arrays (Contd)

L16

Factor

Run

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

10

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

11

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

12

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

13

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

14

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

15

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

16

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

Selected Orthogonal Arrays (Contd)

L18

Factor
Run

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

10

-1

-1

-1

11

-1

-1

-1

12

-1

-1

-1

13

-1

-1

14

-1

-1

15

-1

-1

16

-1

-1

17

-1

-1

18

-1

-1

L27

Steering Column Example

Taguchi L8 inner- and L4 outer-array design

for the steering column example

Torque Data for Steering Column Example

(Desired Target Torque = 30)

Signal-to-Noise (SN) Ratio

1. Nominal the best:

SN T = 10 log

2
y

s 2

2. Larger the better:

1 n 1

SN L = -10log
n i =1 y 2
i

Torque Data Summaries for

Steering Column Example

Two-Step Process for the Analysis of SN Ratios

1.
2.

Factors (and factor-level combinations) are identified

which maximize the appropriate version of SN.
Additional factors (not substantively influencing SN) are
identified that affect the average response. Factor level
combinations from among this second set of factors are
chosen to yield a response average that is close to the
target, T.

Comment: This is a pick the winner approach that

experimental conditions are identified among the suite of
experimental runs which do the best job of satisfying
large values of SN and small values of y - T

Main Effects Plots of Average and

SN Ratios for Torque

Conclusions for this example

Pocket Depth appears to be the only active
factor for both SN and the average response.
A factor does not exist that can be used to
adjust the location of the response
distribution but not change the SN ratio.
The average is near the desired target for
four of the inner array combinations the
four corresponding to a deep pocket depth.

Comments on Taguchi Method

Extensive analysis revealed that Taguchis technical
method was usually inefficient and, in many cases,
ineffective.
More information on the pitfalls and inefficiencies of
Taguchi method is in the supplemental text.
Employ Taguchis robust design concept with response
model provide a sounder and more efficient approach to
robust design and analysis.
More details on the combined array designs and the
response model approach can be seen on Section 12-4 of
the textbook.

An Example Showing that the Crossed Array Approach Can

Lead to a Very Large Experiment (72 Run for only 7 Factors)

Modified Crossed Array Design

(The Leaf Spring Experiment)

Half-Normal Plot of Effects

(Mean Free Height Response)

y i = 7.63 + 0.12 x1 - 0.081x 2 + 0.044 x 4

Half-Normal Plot of Effects

(ln(si2) response)

ln( si 2 ) = -3.74 - 1.09 x 2

Contour Plot of the Mean Response with D=0

Plot of the Variance of Free Height vs. Factor B

Target of Mean between 7.74 and 7.76

with minimum variability (D at high)

Disadvantage of the Mean and Variance

Modeling Approach
Does not take direct advantage of the
interactions between controllable variables
and noise variables.
Variance response is likely to have a
nonlinear relationship with the controllable
variables, this can complicate the modeling
process.
Combined array designs and the response
model approach overcomes above issues.

The Role of the Control Noise Interaction

in Robust Design

Combined Array Designs and the

Response Model Approach
Design containing both the controllable and noise factors.
Obtain first-order response model with interaction terms.
(see eq. 12-1 for model with two controllable factors and
one noise factor).
Derive the mean response model and variance model (see
eqs. 12-2 and 12-3).
Replace 2 in the variance model by the residual mean
square found when fitting the response model.
Able to set the controllable variables to achieve a target
value of the mean response and minimize the variability.
Optimize the mean and variance model using the standard
multiple response optimization method.

Reconsider Example 6-2 with Factor A assumed difficult

to control in the full-scale process (24 factorial design)

Contours of Mean Filtration Rate with Factor A=0

Contour Plot and Response Surface of POE (square

root of variance) with Factor A=0

Overlay Plot of Mean and POE with Factor A=0

(Run with Concentration High and Stirring Rate near Middle)

Combined Array Experiment with Two Controllable

Variables and Three Noise Variables, Example 12-2

Contour Plot of the Mean Model

(Second-order model equation on page 476)

Contour Plot of the Square Root of Variance

(Propagation of Error, POE)

Keep Mean Below 20 and

POE Less Than or Equal to 5