Construction of Optimizing Standard for Robust Parameter Design in the Target Being Best

ZHANG Zhihong^{1, 2}  HE Zhen³  GUO Wei¹

(1. School of Mechanical Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072;
2. School of Accounting, Shandong Economic University, Jinan 250014;
3. School of Management, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072)

Abstract: Robust design is an effective cost methodology to improve product quality by reducing the variation effects of input variables. Mean square error (MSE) is usually regarded as the most appropriate standard for robust optimization design process in the target being best, but with MSE standard the process variation and product quality fluctuation resulted from the noise factors could not be analyzed. The rationality and deficiency of MSE standard and the important about process variance are analyzed. Confidence region of process variance is given by response model. Then an optimizing model of robust parameter design is constructed with MSE as target function and process variance and mean bias as constrictions. The simulation example successfully illustrates the developed model’s advantage. Not only can the process capability achieve six sigma level, but the value of process variance lies in the con-striction of minimization process variance. When minimizing MSE, the process capability is higher than the developed model, but the value of process variance is beyond the constriction. So the solution would can not be guaranteed the process robustness and un-expected variation behavior would occur in practice. The conflict between bias and variance in MSE standard is effectively solved with the restriction of process variance. A robust optimized strategy is set up.

Key words: Robust design  Mean square error  Six sigma  Confidence region of process variance

CLC No: F406.3 O212.6

国家自然科学基金(70572044)和新世纪优秀人才(NCET-04—0240)资助项目. Received 20070526, received in revised form 20071013

References

[1]  WU, HAMADA. Experiments: planning, analysis, and parameter design optimization[M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000.
[2]  GAURY E G A, KLEIJNEN J P C. Risk analysis of robust system design[C]//Proceedings of the 1998 Simulation Conference, Ohio: Dayton, 1998, 2(2): 1 533-1 540.
[3]  BOX G E P, DRAPER N R. A basis for the selection of a response surface design [J]. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1959, 54 (287): 622-654.
[4]  BOX G E P, DRAPER N R. The choice of a second order rotatable design[J]. Biometrika, 1963, 50 (3, 4): 335-352.
[5]  ANDREW K. Deterministic tolerance synthesis: a comparative study[J]. Computer-Aided Design, 1995, 27(10): 759-764.
[6]  KIM Kwang-jae, LIN Dennis K. Dual response surface optimization: a fuzzy modeling approach[J]. Journal of Quality Technology, 1998, 30 (1): 1-10.
[7]  MYERS Raymond H, MONTGOMERY Douglas C. Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments [M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1995.
[8]  KUHN Andrew M. Optimizing response surface experiments with noise factors using confidence regions[J]. Quality Engineering, 2003, 15 (3): 419-442.
[9]  KOTZ S, LOVELACE Cynthia R. Process capability endexes in theory and practice [M]. Great Britain: Arnold, Hodder Headline Group, 1998.
[10]  TAGUCHI G, WU Y. Introduction to quality engineering. asian productivity organization [M]. New York: UNIPUB, White Plains, 1986.
[11]  KUSIAK A. Concurrent engineering: automation, tools and techniques [M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1993.