AbstractIn many experimental situations, practitioners are confronted with costly, time consuming, or hard‐to‐change (HTC) factors. These practical or economic restrictions on randomization can be accommodated with a split‐plot design structure that minimizes the manipulation of the HTC factors. Selecting a good design is a challenging task and requires knowledge of the opportunities and restrictions imposed by the experimental apparatus and an evaluation of statistical performance among competing designs. Building on the well‐established evaluation criteria for the completely randomized context, we emphasize the unique qualitative and quantitative evaluation criteria for split‐plot designs. An example from hypersonic propulsion research is used to demonstrate the consideration of multiple design evaluation criteria. Published in 2007 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.