6 views

Uploaded by Sam H. Saleh

question statistic

- SEMUA MATERI
- Case Analysis
- 2016
- Tugas Labcom Fix
- Output
- Basic Stat in SAS
- Seismic Fragility - Perotti
- pH
- Advanced Material Characterisation of Australian Mixes for Pavement Design
- 2009_3_ANOVA mat
- Stat
- SPSS 1 Okt '18
- Tugas 011018.docx
- Output
- Ginger Candy
- Whey Protein Nitrogen Index a21a
- Data Handling, Statistic and Errors
- Kinetic Modeling of the Photocatalytic Reaction Network The Parallel-Series Approximation.pdf
- A Colorimetric Study of Genic Effect on Guinea-pig Coat Color
- Cochran 1947 Some Consequences When the Assumptions for the Analysis of Variance Are Not Satisfied

You are on page 1of 13

1.

Batch 2: 17, 18, 14, 20

Batch 3: 13, 10, 16, 11, 9

a.) Construct a box plot of the data, and state you observations of the plot.

Calculate Quartiles

Batch 1

Batch 2

Batch 3

Min

15

14

1st Quartile

2nd Quartile

(Mean)

19.5

16.25

10

22

17.5

11

3rd Quartile

25.25

18.5

13

Max

28

20

16

b.) Compute the mean and standard deviation of each batch sample.

Mean

Batch 1

Batch 2

Batch 3

22

17.25

11.8

Standard

Deviation

4.733

2.5

2.775

State Hypothesis

Determine Critical Value

H 0 : 12 = 22 Assume =0.05

Ha: 12 22 F /2,v1,v2 = F 0.025,5,3 = 14.88 (using the F table)

Calculate t Statistic

L arg e S 2

F=

Small S 2

22.4

= 3.58

6.25

Since 3.58 < 14.88 then, we do not reject H 0 . Therefore at 95% Confidence (5%

significance) we find the sample variances are not significantly different.

F=

Determine if Variances Are Equal

State Hypothesis

H 0 : 12 = 32

Assume =0.05

Ha: 12 32

0.6

0.5

Density

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

0.025

0

9.364

Calculate t Statistic

L arg e S 2

F=

Small S 2

22.4

= 2.91

7.7

Since 3.54 < 9.364 then, we do not reject H 0 . Therefore at 95%

Confidence (5% significance) we find the sample variances are not

significantly different so we can pool the Variances for the t test

F=

Pooled variance t Test (Small sample size n<30, and we dont know s

but assume they are equal)

one Tail Test (Since we are looking for a Specific difference)

State Hypothesis

H 0 : 1 3 0

Assume =0.05

Ha: 1 3 > 0

12 = 32 , so df=n 1 +n 2 -2

t /2,n1+n2-2 = t 0.05,6+5-2 =1.83 (using the t table)

0.4

Density

0.3

0.2

0.1

13>0

0.05

0.0

1.833

Calculate t Statistic

2

p

(

n1 1)S12 + (n2 1)S 22

=

t=

( x1 x2 ) ( 1 2 )

1

1

S p2 +

5 22.4 + 4 7.7

n1 n2

S p2 =

6+52

22 11.8

t=

= 4.23

2

S p = 15.87

1 1

15.87 +

6 5

Since 4.23>1.83 then, Reject H 0 therefore at 95% Confidence (5%

significance) we find batch 3 disintegration time is significantly shorter

than batch 1.

n1 + n2 2

Calculator Data

Batch 1

Batch 2

Batch 3 Total

Mean

22

17.25

11.8

--Std dev

4.733

2.5

2.775

--132

69

59

260

x

3016

1209

727

4952

15

( x )

SST = x

N

T 2 T 2 T 2 ( x )

SSA = 1 + 2 + 3

n1 n 2 n3

N

SST = 4952

SSA =

(260)2

132 2 69 2 59 260 2

+

+

6

4

5

15

SSA = 283.783

15

SST = 445.333

SSE = SST SSA

SSE = 161.55

Anova Table

2.

Source of

Variation

Treatment

(Between)

Sum of

Squares

283.783

Degrees of

Freedom

k-1=3-1

k-1=2

Error

Within

161.55

N-k=15-3

N-k=12

Total

445.333

N-1=15-1

N-1=14

Mean

Squares

283.783

2

MSA = 141.89

161.55

MSE =

12

MSE = 13.46

MSA =

F Test

141.89

F=

13.46

F = 10.54

F Critical

3.88

(From F

Table)

binders. Batch 1 was prepared using a 10% starch paste, while batch 2 was

prepared with a 5% polyvinylpyrrolidone solution. Disintegration times in minutes,

were recorded for samples of each batch as follows

Batch B: 15.6 14.2 15.0 13.5 14.7 12.5

a.) If rapid disintegration is desired, would starch paste be a better choice than PVP?

Determine if Variances Are Equal

State Hypothesis

H 0 : 12 = 22

Ha: 12 22

Assume =0.05

F /2,v1,v2 = F 0.025,5,5 = 7.146 (using the F table)

0.6

0.5

Density

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

0.025

0

7.146

Calculate t Statistic

L arg e S 2

F=

Small S 2

1.854

= 1.49

1.243

Since 1.49 < 7.146 then, we do not reject H 0 . Therefore at 95%

Confidence (5% significance) we find the sample variances are not

significantly different so we can pool the Variances for the t test

F=

Pooled variance t Test (Small sample size n<30, and we dont know s

but assume they are equal)

One Tail Test (Since we are looking for a Specific difference)

State Hypothesis

H 0 : 1 2 0

Ha: 1 2 < 0

Assume =0.05

12 = 22 , so df=n 1 +n 2 -2

t /2,n1+n2-2 = t 0.05,6+6-2 =1.812 (using the t table)

0.4

Density

0.3

0.2

0.1

12<0

0.05

0.0

-1.812

t=

Calculate t Statistic

S p2 =

( x1 x2 ) ( 1 2 )

1

1

S p2 +

5 1.854 + 5 1.243

n1 n2

S p2 =

6+62

12.52 14.25

t=

= 2.41274

2

S p = 1.548

1 1

1.548 +

6 6

Since -2.41274<1.812 then, Reject H 0 therefore at 95% Confidence (5%

significance) we find starch as a better choice for shorter disintegration

time.

n1 + n2 2

b.) Suppose a third batch is prepared with 10% pregelatinized starch binder, with the

following disintegration times.

17.6 17.0 16.9 18.6 20.5 19.4

Does the type of binder used have a significant impact on disintegration times for

these three batches of tablets?

Calculator Data

Paste

PVP

Pre Gel Total

Mean

12.52

14.25

18.33

--Std dev

1.36

1.11

1.43

--75.1

85.5

110

270.6

x

949.27

1224.59

2026.94

4200.8

18

Total Sum of Squares

( x )

SST = x

N

(270.6)2

SST = 4200.8

18

SST = 132.78

T12 T22 T32 ( x )

SSA =

+

+

n1 n 2

n3

N

+

+

6

6

6

18

SSA = 107.02

SSA =

SSE = SST SSA

SSE = 25.76

Anova Table

Source of

Variation

Sum of

Squares

Degrees

of

Freedom

k-1=3-1

k-1=2

Treatment

(Between)

107.02

Error

Within

25.76

N-k=18-3

N-k=15

Total

132.78

N-1=18-1

N-1=17

Mean

Squares

107.02

2

MSA = 53.51

25.76

MSE =

15

MSE = 1.72

MSA =

F Test

F Critical

53.51

1.72

F = 31.1

3.68

(From F

Table)

F=

3. Tablet disintegration is under investigation. To find out if the tablet formulation has

an effect on the disintegration of 250mg Chlorpromazide tablets. An Analyst records

the disintegration times (in minutes) of tablets with each of four different tablet

formulations

A

16.8

20.8

13.8

B

17.1

15.3

17.7

C

12.8

8.3

13.7

D

21.3

21.3

24.8

Does the type of disintegrant in the formulation have an effect on the disintegration of

the tablets?

Calculator Data

A

Mean

Std dev

x

D

Total

22.47

--2.02

--67.4

203.7

17.1

3.51

51.4

16.7

1.25

50.1

11.6

2.89

34.8

905.32

839.79

420.42

1522.42

3687.95

12

Total Sum of Squares

SST = x 2

( x )

N

(203.7)2

SST = 3687.95

12

SST = 230.14

SSE = 230.14 177.45

SSE = 52.69

SSA =

+

+

+

n1 n2 n3 n4

N

+

+

+

3

3

3

3

12

SSA = 177.45

SSA =

Anova Table

Source of

Variation

Treatment

(Between)

Sum of

Squares

177.45

Degrees of

Freedom

k-1=4-1

k-1=3

Error

Within

52.69

N-k=12-4

N-k=8

Total

230.14

N-1=12-1

N-1=11

Mean

Squares

177.45

MSA =

3

MSA = 59.15

52.69

MSE =

8

MSE = 6.59

F Test

59.15

F=

6.59

F = 8.98

F Critical

4.07

(From F

Table)

4. A Batch of tablets was tested for dissolution in five different labs with the results as

follows

Lab

A

B

C

D

E

55, 62, 67, 60, 67, 73

78, 63, 78, 65, 70, 74

75, 60, 66, 69, 58, 64, 71, 71, 65, 77, 60, 63

65, 60, 66, 75, 75, 70

Calculator Data

A

B

Mean

65.83

Std dev

7.63

395

x

64

6.32

384

C

71.3

6.44

428

D

66.6

6.08

799

E

68.5

5.96

411

Total

----2417

26295

24776

30738

53607

28331

163747

12 6

Total Sum of Squares

SST = x 2

( x )

N

(2417)2

SST = 163747

36

SST = 1472.30

SSE = 1492.30 189.7

SSE = 1282.58

36

SSA =

+

+

+

+

n1 n2 n3 n4 n5

N

+

+

+

+

6

6

6

12

6

36

SSA = 189.72

SSA =

Anova Table

Source of

Variation

Treatment

(Between)

Sum of

Squares

189.72

Degrees of Mean

Freedom

Squares

k-1=5-1

189.72

MSA

=

k-1=4

4

MSA = 47.43

Error

Within

1282.58

N-k=36-5

N-k=31

Total

1472.3

N-1=36-1

N-1=35

1282.58

31

MSE = 41.37

MSE =

F Test

47.43

F=

41.43

F = 1.14

F Critical

2.68

(From

FINV

Excel)

5. A company is concerned about the impurity levels in its product. One possible source

is one of the raw materials used to make the product. To test this, six batches were

prepared (using six different raw materials), and then three samples were randomly

selected form each batch and assayed for level of impurity. The results are as

follows:

Batch

1

2

3

4

5

6

Impurity, ppm

15 20 17

12 16 15

20 18 14

9 10 13

12 14 8

21 16 19

Does the raw material have a significant effect on the level of impurity?

Calculator Data

Batch

1

2

3

4

5

6

Total

Mean

17.3

14.3

17.33

10.67

11.3 18.7

--Std dev

2.52

2.08

3.06

2.08

3.06 2.52

--52

43

52

32

34

56

269

x

914

625

920

350

404

1058

4271

16

Total Sum of Squares

SST = x 2

( x )

N

2

(

269 )

SST = 4271

18

SST = 250.94

SSE = 250.94 170.94

SSE = 80

T 2 T 2 T 2 T 2 T 2 ( x )

SSA = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5

n1 n2 n3 n4 n5

N

52 2 43 2 52 2 32 2 34 2 56 2 269 2

SSA =

+

+

+

+

+

3

3

3

3

3

3

18

SSA = 170.94

Anova Table

Source of

Variation

Treatment

(Between)

Sum of

Squares

170.94

Degrees of

Freedom

k-1=6-1

k-1=5

Error

Within

80

N-k=18-6

N-k=12

Total

250.94

N-1=18-1

N-1=17

Mean

Squares

170.94

MSA =

5

MSA = 34.19

80

MSE =

12

MSE = 6.67

F Test

34.19

F=

6.67

F = 5.13

F Critical

3.10

(From F Table)

- SEMUA MATERIUploaded bySinthiaTaalunganSepang
- Case AnalysisUploaded byMaryam Aleni BV
- 2016Uploaded bymartunis
- Tugas Labcom FixUploaded byMuhamad Al Hafiz
- OutputUploaded byGladys Hartono
- Basic Stat in SASUploaded byMae Sy
- Seismic Fragility - PerottiUploaded byhendra
- pHUploaded byEka Wahyuni
- Advanced Material Characterisation of Australian Mixes for Pavement DesignUploaded bybkollarou9632
- 2009_3_ANOVA matUploaded bydebashisdas
- StatUploaded byRezwanul Mumtahin Husain
- SPSS 1 Okt '18Uploaded byAmaliYah ILm
- Tugas 011018.docxUploaded byAmaliYah ILm
- OutputUploaded byYuni Setiyawati
- Ginger CandyUploaded byRizka Arifani Kromodimedjo
- Whey Protein Nitrogen Index a21aUploaded byDinesh Kumar Bansal
- Data Handling, Statistic and ErrorsUploaded byWanIntanNadiah
- Kinetic Modeling of the Photocatalytic Reaction Network The Parallel-Series Approximation.pdfUploaded byYESIKBMARTIN
- A Colorimetric Study of Genic Effect on Guinea-pig Coat ColorUploaded byDiana Lackey Haskins
- Cochran 1947 Some Consequences When the Assumptions for the Analysis of Variance Are Not SatisfiedUploaded bylhjkp
- Output Yulianto 25 Maret 2019Uploaded byIhda EL-Mahfuzah
- JMET Vol 7 No 2 Paper 1Uploaded byDustin White
- ANOVAUploaded byAditya
- EEP Demand EstimationUploaded byJai Shankar
- hammi2015Uploaded byVictor JG
- L8 TransformationUploaded byTeflon Slim
- objtest3Uploaded byStephanie Juanico Relatado
- Chapter 5 Estimation.pdfUploaded byElson Lee
- Estimating IndustryUploaded bycrazyitalian1988
- A Nova GuideUploaded byNolaine Nunez

- Ch18Acid Base(a) (1)Uploaded bySam H. Saleh
- Chapter 12 Powerpoint lUploaded bySam H. Saleh
- Chapter 19 Powerpoint l (1)Uploaded bySam H. Saleh
- 18abequilUploaded bySam H. Saleh
- Practice Unit Test Answers Grade 9 ElectricityUploaded bySam H. Saleh
- Grade11 Physics NotesUploaded byZobia Qureshi
- Acid Et BaseUploaded bySam H. Saleh
- EI and CI gc msUploaded bySam H. Saleh
- 2012 Sc Labour Market IndicatorsUploaded bySam H. Saleh
- Complexes MasterUploaded byAbderrahman Kalout
- Handout Chapter 17Uploaded bySam H. Saleh
- Intro Chimie OrganiqueUploaded bySam H. Saleh
- Diversity of Living ThingsUploaded bySam H. Saleh

- Phobias: a Reasearch by Hamza Moatsim BillahUploaded bySwiftPublishedDocs
- PCPD Grant Giving ManualUploaded byPhilippine Center for Population and Development
- StatisticsUploaded byazizi5701
- assignment sheet - analytical reportUploaded byapi-206154145
- Dissertation ProposalUploaded byPeter Jette
- Unit10 Maket ResearchUploaded byHong Van Pham
- Fairness Cream Chap 3Uploaded bySuhail Farid
- 2D AND 3D NUMERICAL MODELING OF THE HAJJAR MAGNETIC CENTRAL OREBODY.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- 3. Boolean AlgebraUploaded byUmair Zafar
- Art 2Uploaded bydanum
- A critical review of rock slope failure mechanisms The importance.pdfUploaded byAlonso Valeriano
- AP Statistics Final ProjectUploaded bySarahBukhsh
- Reaching Fence Sitters.pdfUploaded byAnonymous FmE6xY
- A Study of Indian OnlineUploaded byHarriesh Gomahan
- Evaluations of friends-with-benefits relationship scenarios: is there evidence of a sexual double standard?Uploaded bybashfulrevenue30
- BioStatisticsUploaded byBani Abdulla
- Assignment 1 Case Study Analysis OSM752 Sept 2015Uploaded byamal
- Module 3Uploaded byapi-3803750
- StatsUploaded byChristina Hill
- Design of Box CulvertUploaded byMichele Simmons
- Mca4020 Winter 2016 solved assignmentUploaded byaapki education
- New ProdUploaded byVineet Goyal
- Title PagesUploaded byMegan Joy Zaratan
- ADA954930 METALLURGYCAL EXAMINATION OF BRITISH ARMOURUploaded byhartmann100
- Economic Impact of EntrepreneurshipUploaded bysammysid
- Environmental ForecastingUploaded bySindhu Manja
- Market Research Services Firm Decipher Develops New Pricing Model for Mobile SurveysUploaded byAlexandra Hart
- Annotated SPSS Output.docUploaded byPinal Shah
- Chapter 16Uploaded bySenthil R
- tensor calculusUploaded byPrasad Ravichandran