Você está na página 1de 43

Design of Experiment Spring 2014

Project

[1]

Submitted By
Harshavardhan D. Gorakh

[2]

Table 1

Level

Factor
1
Apatit
e (a)

Factors
Factor Factor
2
3
pH (b)

abc

60 (+)

7 (+)

ab

60 (+)

7 (+)

ac

60 (+)

4 (-)

60 (+)

4 (-)

bc

30 (-)

7 (+)

30 (-)

7 (+)

30 (-)

4 (-)

(1)

30 (-)

4 (-)

Pb (c)
2.41
(+)
0.483
(-)
2.41
(+)
0.483
(-)
2.41
(+)
0.483
(-)
2.41
(+)
0.483
(-)

Table 2

FishBone
Pb milli Mole
Replica Replicat
te I
e II
1.82
1.81
0.01
0
1.11
1.04
0
0.01
2.11
2.18
0.03
0.05
1.7
1.69
0.05
0.05

FishBone
pH
Replica Replicat
te I
e II
5.22
5.12
6.84
6.61
3.35
3.34
5.77
6.25
5.29
5.06
5.93
6.02
3.39
3.34
4.5
4.74

Hydroxyapatite
Pb milli Mole
Replica Replicat
te I
e II
0.11
0.12
0
0
0.8
0.76
0.03
0.05
1.03
1.05
0
0
1.34
1.26
0.06
0.07

Hydroxyapatite
pH
Replica Replicat
te I
e II
3.49
3.46
5.84
5.9
2.7
2.74
3.36
3.24
3.22
3.22
5.53
5.43
2.82
2.79
3.28
3.28

FISHBONE Pb
General Linear Model: Fishbone Pb mM versus Apetite, pH, Pb
Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Analysis of Variance for Fishbone Pb mM, using Adjusted SS for Tests


Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*pH
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Apetite*pH*Pb
Error
Total
S = 0.0257391

DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
15

Seq SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.0225
0.1892
0.3600
0.0196
0.0053
12.1992

Adj SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.0225
0.1892
0.3600
0.0196
0.0053

R-Sq = 99.96%

Adj MS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.0225
0.1892
0.3600
0.0196
0.0007

F
400.34
525.43
16587.51
33.96
285.62
543.40
29.58

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001

R-Sq(adj) = 99.92%

General Linear Model: Fishbone Pb mM versus Apetite, pH, Pb


Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Analysis of Variance for Fishbone Pb mM, using Adjusted SS for Tests


Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*pH
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Error
Total

DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
15

S = 0.0525991

Seq SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.0225
0.1892
0.3600
0.0249
12.1992

Adj SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.0225
0.1892
0.3600
0.0249

R-Sq = 99.80%

Adj MS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.0225
0.1892
0.3600
0.0028

F
95.86
125.82
3972.01
8.13
68.39
130.12

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.019
0.000
0.000

R-Sq(adj) = 99.66%

General Linear Model: Fishbone Pb mM versus Apetite, pH, Pb


Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Analysis of Variance for Fishbone Pb mM, using Adjusted SS for Tests


Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Error
Total

DF
1
1
1
1
1
10
15

Seq SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.1892
0.3600
0.0474
12.1992

Adj SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.1892
0.3600
0.0474

Adj MS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.1892
0.3600
0.0047

F
55.95
73.44
2318.40
39.92
75.95

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000

S = 0.0688477

R-Sq = 99.61%

R-Sq(adj) = 99.42%

Versus Fits with all 7 interaction


(response is Fishbone Pb mM)

-1

-2
0.0

0.5

1.0
Fitted Value

1.5

2.0

Figure 1

Probability Plot of SRES1 all 7 interaction


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90
80

Percent

Standardized Residual

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES1

Figure 2

6.485762E-15
1.033
16
0.865
0.020

Versus Fits after excluding a* b* c interaction


(response is Fishbone Pb mM)

Standardized Residual

1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
-2.0
0.0

0.5

1.0
1.5
Fitted Value

2.0

2.5

Figure 3

Probability Plot of SRES2 excluding interaction a* b* c


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES2

Figure 4

3.622103E-15
1.033
16
0.856
0.021

General Linear Model: Fishbone Pb mM versus Apetite, pH, Pb


Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Final ANOVA table


Analysis of Variance for Fishbone Pb mM, using Adjusted SS for Tests
Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Error
Total

DF
1
1
1
1
1
10
15

S = 0.0688477

Seq SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.1892
0.3600
0.0474
12.1992

Adj SS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.1892
0.3600
0.0474

R-Sq = 99.61%

Adj MS
0.2652
0.3481
10.9892
0.1892
0.3600
0.0047

F
55.95
73.44
2318.40
39.92
75.95

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000

R-Sq(adj) = 99.42%

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Apetite
-1
1

N
8
8

Mean
1.0
0.7

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Lower
-0.3342

Center
-0.2575

Upper
-0.1808

---+---------+---------+---------+--(------*-------)
---+---------+---------+---------+---0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.00

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
-0.2575

Apetite
1

SE of
Difference
0.03442

T-Value
-7.480

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
1
-1

N
8
8

Mean
1.0
0.7

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Lower
0.2183

Center
0.2950

Upper
0.3717

------+---------+---------+---------+
(--------------*--------------)

------+---------+---------+---------+
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
Tukey Simultaneous Tests
Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Difference
of Means
0.2950

SE of
Difference
0.03442

T-Value
8.570

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Pb
1
-1

N
8
8

Mean
1.7
0.0

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Pb
1

Lower
1.581

Center
1.658

Upper
1.734

----+---------+---------+---------+-(---------------*--------------)
----+---------+---------+---------+-1.600
1.650
1.700
1.750

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Pb
1

Difference
of Means
1.658

SE of
Difference
0.03442

T-Value
48.15

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Apetite
-1
1
-1
1

Pb
1
1
-1
-1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
1.9
1.4
0.0
0.0

Grouping
A
B
C
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*Pb
Apetite = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

Lower
1.7259
-0.1891
1.2509

Center
1.87500
-0.04000
1.40000

Upper
2.0241
0.1091
1.5491

-------+---------+---------+--------(-*)
(-*)
(-*)
-------+---------+---------+---------1.2
0.0
1.2

Apetite = -1
Pb = 1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1
1

Pb
-1
1

Lower
-2.064
-0.624

Center
-1.915
-0.475

Upper
-1.766
-0.326

-------+---------+---------+--------(*)
(*)
-------+---------+---------+---------1.2
0.0
1.2

Apetite = 1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Pb
1

Lower
1.291

Center
1.440

Upper
1.589

-------+---------+---------+--------(*)
-------+---------+---------+---------1.2
0.0
1.2

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*Pb
Apetite = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

Difference
of Means
1.87500
-0.04000
1.40000

Pb
1
-1
1

SE of
Difference
0.04868
0.04868
0.04868

T-Value
38.5148
-0.8216
28.7577

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.8430
0.0000

T-Value
-39.34
-9.76

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0000

T-Value
29.58

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Apetite = -1
Pb = 1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1
1

Difference
of Means
-1.915
-0.475

Pb
-1
1

SE of
Difference
0.04868
0.04868

Apetite = 1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Difference
of Means
1.440

Pb
1

SE of
Difference
0.04868

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
1
-1
-1
1

Pb
1
1
-1
-1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
2.0
1.4
0.0
0.0

Grouping
A
B
C
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

Lower
1.2084
-0.1541
1.8034

Center
1.35750
-0.00500
1.95250

Upper
1.5066
0.1441
2.1016

-----+---------+---------+---------+(-*)
(-*)
(-*)

-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH
1

Pb
1

subtracted from:
Lower
-1.512
0.446

Center
-1.363
0.595

Upper
-1.213
0.744

-----+---------+---------+---------+(*-)
(-*)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0

subtracted from:
Lower
1.808

Center
1.958

Upper
2.107

-----+---------+---------+---------+(-*)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH
1

Pb
1

Difference
of Means
1.35750
-0.00500
1.95250

SE of
Difference
0.04868
0.04868
0.04868

T-Value
27.8847
-0.1027
40.1067

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.9996
0.0000

T-Value
-27.99
12.22

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0000

T-Value
40.21

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
-1.363
0.595

SE of
Difference
0.04868
0.04868

subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
1.958

SE of
Difference
0.04868

Final Versus Fits after excluding a* b and a* b* c


(response is Fishbone Pb mM)
1.5

Standardized Residual

1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
-2.0
0.0

0.5

1.0
1.5
Fitted Value

2.0

2.5

Figure 5

Final Probability Plot of SRES3 Excluding a* b and a* b* c


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES3

Figure 6

2.080801E-15
1.033
16
0.699
0.055

Final Fishbone Pb interaction


-1

Apetite
-1
1

A petite

pH

pH
-1
1

Pb
-1
1

Pb

0
-1

-1

Figure 7

FISHBONE pH
General Linear Model: Fishbone pH versus Apetite, pH, Pb
Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Analysis of Variance for Fishbone pH, using Adjusted SS for Tests


Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*pH
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Apetite*pH*Pb
Error
Total

DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
15

Seq SS
1.1183
8.1368
9.8439
0.0977
1.1718
0.6123
0.1073
0.2073
21.2952

S = 0.160954

R-Sq = 99.03%

Adj SS
1.1183
8.1368
9.8439
0.0977
1.1718
0.6123
0.1073
0.2073

Adj MS
1.1183
8.1368
9.8439
0.0977
1.1718
0.6123
0.1073
0.0259

F
43.17
314.08
379.98
3.77
45.23
23.64
4.14

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.088
0.000
0.001
0.076

R-Sq(adj) = 98.18%

Versus Fits
(response is Fishbone pH)

Standardized Residual

-1

-2
3

5
Fitted Value
Figure 8

Probability Plot of SRES5 for all interaction


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES5

Figure 9

General Linear Model: Fishbone pH versus Apetite, pH, Pb


Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Final ANOVA table


Analysis of Variance for Fishbone pH, using Adjusted SS for Tests
Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Error
Total
S = 0.203018

DF
1
1
1
1
1
10
15

Seq SS
1.1183
8.1368
9.8439
1.1718
0.6123
0.4122
21.2952

Adj SS
1.1183
8.1368
9.8439
1.1718
0.6123
0.4122

R-Sq = 98.06%

Adj MS
1.1183
8.1368
9.8439
1.1718
0.6123
0.0412

F
27.13
197.42
238.84
28.43
14.86

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.003

R-Sq(adj) = 97.10%

Unusual Observations for Fishbone pH


Obs
8

Fishbone pH
6.25000

Fit
5.85000

SE Fit
0.12432

Residual
0.40000

St Resid
2.49 R

R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual.


Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence
Apetite
1
-1

N
8
8

Mean
5.3
4.8

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.

4.718448E-16
1.033
16
0.196
0.868

Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals


Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Lower
0.3026

Center
0.5287

Upper
0.7549

+---------+---------+---------+-----(--------------*--------------)
+---------+---------+---------+-----0.30
0.45
0.60
0.75

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
0.5287

Apetite
1

SE of
Difference
0.1015

T-Value
5.209

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0004

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
1
-1

N
8
8

Mean
5.8
4.3

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Lower
1.200

Center
1.426

Upper
1.652

+---------+---------+---------+-----(--------------*--------------)
+---------+---------+---------+-----1.20
1.35
1.50
1.65

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Difference
of Means
1.426

SE of
Difference
0.1015

T-Value
14.05

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Pb
-1
1

N
8
8

Mean
5.8
4.3

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Pb
1

Lower
-1.795

Center
-1.569

Upper
-1.343

------+---------+---------+---------+
(----*---)
------+---------+---------+---------+

-1.50

-1.00

-0.50

0.00

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Pb
1

Difference
of Means
-1.569

SE of
Difference
0.1015

T-Value
-15.45

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Apetite
1
-1
-1
1

Pb
-1
-1
1
1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
6.4
5.3
4.3
4.3

Grouping
A
B
C
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*Pb
Apetite = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

Lower
-1.467
0.630
-1.480

Center
-1.028
1.070
-1.040

Upper
-0.5880
1.5095
-0.6005

-------+---------+---------+--------(--*--)
(--*--)
(--*--)
-------+---------+---------+---------1.5
0.0
1.5

Apetite = -1
Pb = 1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1
1

Pb
-1
1

Lower
1.6580
-0.4520

Center
2.09750
-0.01250

Upper
2.5370
0.4270

-------+---------+---------+--------(--*--)
(--*--)
-------+---------+---------+---------1.5
0.0
1.5

Apetite = 1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Pb
1

Lower
-2.550

Center
-2.110

Upper
-1.670

-------+---------+---------+--------(--*--)
-------+---------+---------+---------1.5
0.0
1.5

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*Pb
Apetite = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

Difference
of Means
-1.028
1.070
-1.040

SE of
Difference
0.1436
0.1436
0.1436

T-Value
-7.158
7.454
-7.245

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0002
0.0001
0.0001

Apetite = -1
Pb = 1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1
1

Difference
of Means
2.09750
-0.01250

Pb
-1
1

SE of
Difference
0.1436
0.1436

T-Value
14.6111
-0.0871

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.9997

T-Value
-14.70

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Apetite = 1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Difference
of Means
-2.110

Pb
1

SE of
Difference
0.1436

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
1
-1
1
-1

Pb
-1
-1
1
1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
6.3
5.3
5.2
3.4

Grouping
A
B
B
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH
1

Pb
1

Lower
-2.400
0.595
-0.582

Center
-1.960
1.035
-0.143

Upper
-1.520
1.475
0.297

-----+---------+---------+---------+(--*-)
(-*--)
(--*--)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.6
0.0
1.6
3.2

subtracted from:
Lower
2.555
1.378

Center
2.995
1.817

Upper
3.435
2.257

-----+---------+---------+---------+(--*-)
(-*--)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.6
0.0
1.6
3.2

subtracted from:
Lower
-1.617

Center
-1.178

Upper
-0.7380

-----+---------+---------+---------+(--*-)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.6
0.0
1.6
3.2

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Fishbone pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH
-1

Pb
1

Difference
of Means
-1.960

SE of
Difference
0.1436

T-Value
-13.65

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

-1
1

pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH
1

Pb
1

1.035
-0.143

0.1436
0.1436

7.21
-0.99

0.0001
0.7569

T-Value
20.86
12.66

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0000

T-Value
-8.202

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0001

subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
2.995
1.817

SE of
Difference
0.1436
0.1436

subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
-1.178

SE of
Difference
0.1436

Versus Fits after eliminating a* b and a* b* c


(response is Fishbone pH)
3

Standardized Residual

1
1

-1

-2
3

5
Fitted Value

Figure 10

Probability Plot of SRES6 after eliminating a* b and a* b* c


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

3.382711E-16
1.033
16
0.449
0.241

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES6

Figure 11

Fishbone pH interaction excluding a* b and a* b* c


-1

Apetite
-1
1

6
5

A petite

6
5

pH

pH
-1
1

Pb
-1
1

6
5

Pb

-1

-1

Figure 12

Hydroxyapatite Pb
General Linear Model: Hydroxyapatite Pb mM versus Apetite, pH, Pb
Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Analysis of Variance for Hydroxyapatite Pb mM, using Adjusted SS for Tests


Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*pH
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Apetite*pH*Pb
Error
Total
S = 0.0237171

DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
15

Seq SS
0.54023
0.26523
2.44923
0.03610
0.50410
0.16810
0.04623
0.00450
4.01370

Adj SS
0.54022
0.26522
2.44923
0.03610
0.50410
0.16810
0.04623
0.00450

R-Sq = 99.89%

Adj MS
0.54022
0.26522
2.44923
0.03610
0.50410
0.16810
0.04623
0.00056

F
960.40
471.51
4354.18
64.18
896.18
298.84
82.18

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000

R-Sq(adj) = 99.79%

Probability Plot of SRES7 (all interactions)


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES7

Figure 13

7.542578E-15
1.033
16
0.534
0.145

Versus Fits all interaction


(response is Hydroxyapatite Pb mM)
3

Standardized Residual

2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6
0.8
Fitted Value

1.0

1.2

Figure 14

General Linear Model: Hydroxyapatite Pb mM versus Apetite, pH, Pb


Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Final ANOVA table


Analysis of Variance for Hydroxyapatite Pb mM, using Adjusted SS for Tests
Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Error
Total

DF
1
1
1
1
1
10
15

S = 0.0931799

Seq SS
0.54023
0.26523
2.44923
0.50410
0.16810
0.08683
4.01370

Adj SS
0.54022
0.26522
2.44923
0.50410
0.16810
0.08683

R-Sq = 97.84%

Adj MS
0.54022
0.26522
2.44923
0.50410
0.16810
0.00868

F
62.22
30.55
282.09
58.06
19.36

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001

R-Sq(adj) = 96.76%

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Apetite
-1
1

N
8
8

Mean
0.6
0.2

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Lower
-0.4713

Center
-0.3675

Upper
-0.2637

-+---------+---------+---------+----(------*-----)
-+---------+---------+---------+-----

1.4

-0.45

-0.30

-0.15

0.00

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
-0.3675

Apetite
1

SE of
Difference
0.04659

T-Value
-7.888

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
-1
1

N
8
8

Mean
0.5
0.3

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Lower
-0.3613

Center
-0.2575

Upper
-0.1537

------+---------+---------+---------+
(---------*----------)
------+---------+---------+---------+
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.00

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Difference
of Means
-0.2575

SE of
Difference
0.04659

T-Value
-5.527

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0003

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Pb
1
-1

N
8
8

Mean
0.8
0.0

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Pb
1

Lower
0.6787

Center
0.7825

Upper
0.8863

-------+---------+---------+--------(----------------*-----------------)
-------+---------+---------+--------0.720
0.780
0.840

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:

Pb
1

Difference
of Means
0.7825

SE of
Difference
0.04659

T-Value
16.80

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Apetite
-1
1
-1
1

Pb
1
1
-1
-1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.0

Grouping
A
B
C
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*Pb
Apetite = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

Lower
0.9358
-0.2142
0.2133

Center
1.13750
-0.01250
0.41500

Upper
1.3392
0.1892
0.6167

-------+---------+---------+--------(-*--)
(--*-)
(-*--)
-------+---------+---------+---------0.80
0.00
0.80

Apetite = -1
Pb = 1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1
1

Pb
-1
1

Lower
-1.352
-0.924

Center
-1.150
-0.723

Upper
-0.9483
-0.5208

-------+---------+---------+--------(--*-)
(--*-)
-------+---------+---------+---------0.80
0.00
0.80

Apetite = 1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Pb
1

Lower
0.2258

Center
0.4275

Upper
0.6292

-------+---------+---------+--------(-*--)
-------+---------+---------+---------0.80
0.00
0.80

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*Pb
Apetite = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

Difference
of Means
1.13750
-0.01250
0.41500

SE of
Difference
0.06589
0.06589
0.06589

T-Value
17.2641
-0.1897
6.2986

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.9974
0.0004

T-Value
-17.45
-10.97

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0000

Apetite = -1
Pb = 1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1
1

Pb
-1
1

Difference
of Means
-1.150
-0.723

SE of
Difference
0.06589
0.06589

Apetite = 1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Difference
of Means
0.4275

Pb
1

SE of
Difference
0.06589

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0003

T-Value
6.488

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
-1
1
-1
1

Pb
1
1
-1
-1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
1.0
0.6
0.1
-0.0

Grouping
A
B
C
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH
1

Pb
1

Lower
0.7858
-0.2542
0.3233

Center
0.98750
-0.05250
0.52500

Upper
1.1892
0.1492
0.7267

--------+---------+---------+-------(--*--)
(--*--)
(--*-)
--------+---------+---------+--------0.70
0.00
0.70

subtracted from:
Lower
-1.242
-0.664

Center
-1.040
-0.463

Upper
-0.8383
-0.2608

--------+---------+---------+-------(--*--)
(-*--)
--------+---------+---------+--------0.70
0.00
0.70

subtracted from:
Lower
0.3758

Center
0.5775

Upper
0.7792

--------+---------+---------+-------(--*--)
--------+---------+---------+--------0.70
0.00
0.70

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite Pb mM
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH Pb
-1
1
1 -1
1
1
pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH

Pb

Difference
of Means
0.98750
-0.05250
0.52500

SE of
Difference
0.06589
0.06589
0.06589

T-Value
14.9875
-0.7968
7.9680

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.8544
0.0001

subtracted from:
Difference
SE of
of Means Difference
-1.040
0.06589
-0.463
0.06589

T-Value
-15.78
-7.02

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0002

T-Value

Adjusted
P-Value

subtracted from:
Difference
of Means

SE of
Difference

0.5775

0.06589

8.765

0.0000

Probability Plot of SRES12 excluding a* b and a* b* c


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

1.837072E-15
1.033
16
0.507
0.171

80

Percent

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES12

Figure 15

Hydroxyapatite Pb interaction
-1

Apetite
-1
1

1.0

A petite

0.5

0.0
1.0

pH

pH
-1
1

0.5

0.0

Pb
-1
1

1.0

Pb

0.5

0.0
-1

-1

Figure 16

Hydroxyapatite pH
General Linear Model: Hydroxyapatite pH versus Apatite, pH, Pb
Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Analysis of Variance for Hydroxyapatite pH, using Adjusted SS for Tests


Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*pH
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Apetite*pH*Pb
Error
Total
S = 0.0443001

DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
15

Seq SS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
0.0144
3.2400
0.0002
0.0157
20.4524

Adj SS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
0.0144
3.2400
0.0002
0.0157

R-Sq = 99.92%

Adj MS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
0.0144
3.2400
0.0002
0.0020

F
42.85
4494.73
4153.39
64.22
7.34
1650.96
0.11

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.027
0.000
0.744

R-Sq(adj) = 99.86%

Versus Fits all interactions


(response is Hydroxyapatite pH)

Standardized Residual

-1

-2
3.0

3.5

4.0
4.5
Fitted Value

Figure 17

5.0

5.5

6.0

Probability Plot of SRES13 all interaction


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES13

Figure 18

General Linear Model: Hydroxyapatite pH versus Apetite, pH, Pb


Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Analysis of Variance for Hydroxyapatite pH, using Adjusted SS for Tests


Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*pH
Apetite*Pb
pH*Pb
Error
Total

DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
15

S = 0.0420648

Seq SS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
0.0144
3.2400
0.0159
20.4524

Adj SS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
0.0144
3.2400
0.0159

R-Sq = 99.92%

Adj MS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
0.0144
3.2400
0.0018

F
47.53
4985.12
4606.54
71.22
8.14
1831.08

R-Sq(adj) = 99.87%

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.019
0.000

-7.10656E-15
1.033
16
0.215
0.815

Versus Fits eliminating a* b* c


(response is Hydroxyapatite pH)

Standardized Residual

-1

-2
3.0

3.5

4.0
4.5
Fitted Value

5.0

5.5

6.0

Figure 19

Probability Plot of SRES14 excluding a* b* c


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES14

Figure 20

-7.05165E-15
1.033
16
0.287
0.575

General Linear Model: Hydroxyapatite pH versus Apetite, pH, Pb


Factor
Apetite
pH
Pb

Type
fixed
fixed
fixed

Levels
2
2
2

Values
-1, 1
-1, 1
-1, 1

Final ANOVA table


Analysis of Variance for Hydroxyapatite pH, using Adjusted SS for Tests
Source
Apetite
pH
Pb
Apetite*pH
pH*Pb
Error
Total

DF
1
1
1
1
1
10
15

Seq SS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
3.2400
0.0303
20.4524

S = 0.0550681

Adj SS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
3.2400
0.0303

R-Sq = 99.85%

Adj MS
0.0841
8.8209
8.1510
0.1260
3.2400
0.0030

F
27.73
2908.79
2687.89
41.56
1068.43

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000

R-Sq(adj) = 99.78%

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Apetite
1
-1

N
8
8

Mean
3.841
3.696

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Lower
0.08365

Center
0.1450

Upper
0.2063

------+---------+---------+---------+
(----------------*-----------------)
------+---------+---------+---------+
0.105
0.140
0.175
0.210

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite
Apetite = -1 subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
0.1450

Apetite
1

SE of
Difference
0.02753

T-Value
5.266

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0004

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
1
-1

N
8
8

Mean
4.511
3.026

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Lower
1.424

Center
1.485

Upper
1.546

---+---------+---------+---------+--(----------------*-----------------)

---+---------+---------+---------+--1.435
1.470
1.505
1.540
Tukey Simultaneous Tests
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH
pH = -1 subtracted from:
pH
1

Difference
of Means
1.485

SE of
Difference
0.02753

T-Value
53.93

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Pb
-1
1

N
8
8

Mean
4.483
3.055

Grouping
A
B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Pb
1

Lower
-1.489

Center
-1.428

Upper
-1.366

+---------+---------+---------+-----(*-)
+---------+---------+---------+------1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Pb
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
Pb
1

Difference
of Means
-1.428

SE of
Difference
0.02753

T-Value
-51.84

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


Apetite
1
-1
-1
1

pH
1
1
-1
-1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
4.673
4.350
3.043
3.010

Grouping
A
B
C
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*pH
Apetite = -1
pH = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

pH
1
-1
1

Apetite = -1

Lower
1.1883
-0.1517
1.5108

Center
1.30750
-0.03250
1.63000

Upper
1.42672
0.08672
1.74922

-----+---------+---------+---------+(*)
(-*)
(*)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0

pH =

subtracted from:

Apetite
1
1

pH
-1
1

Lower
-1.459
0.203

Center
-1.340
0.323

Upper
-1.221
0.442

-----+---------+---------+---------+(-*)
(*)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0

Apetite = 1
pH = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

pH
1

Lower
1.543

Center
1.662

Upper
1.782

-----+---------+---------+---------+(-*)
-----+---------+---------+---------+-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of Apetite*pH
Apetite = -1
pH = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
-1
1
1

Difference
of Means
1.30750
-0.03250
1.63000

pH
1
-1
1

SE of
Difference
0.03894
0.03894
0.03894

T-Value
33.5781
-0.8346
41.8603

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.8370
0.0000

T-Value
-34.41
8.28

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0001

T-Value
42.69

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

Apetite = -1
pH = 1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1
1

Difference
of Means
-1.340
0.323

pH
-1
1

SE of
Difference
0.03894
0.03894

Apetite = 1
pH = -1 subtracted from:
Apetite
1

Difference
of Means
1.662

pH
1

SE of
Difference
0.03894

Grouping Information Using Tukey Method and 95.0% Confidence


pH
1
1
-1
-1

Pb
-1
1
-1
1

N
4
4
4
4

Mean
5.675
3.348
3.290
2.763

Grouping
A
B
B
C

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.


Tukey 95.0% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH
-1
1
1

Pb
1
-1
1

Lower
-0.6467
2.2658
-0.0617

Center
-0.5275
2.3850
0.0575

Upper
-0.4083
2.5042
0.1767

------+---------+---------+---------+
*)
(*)
*)
------+---------+---------+---------+

-1.5
pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH
1

Pb
1

0.0

Pb
1
-1
1

pH = -1
Pb = 1
pH
1
1

Pb
-1
1

pH = 1
Pb = -1
pH
1

Pb
1

3.0

subtracted from:
Lower
2.7933
0.4658

Center
2.9125
0.5850

Upper
3.0317
0.7042

------+---------+---------+---------+
*)
(*)
------+---------+---------+---------+
-1.5
0.0
1.5
3.0

subtracted from:
Lower
-2.447

Center
-2.328

Upper
-2.208

------+---------+---------+---------+
*)
------+---------+---------+---------+
-1.5
0.0
1.5
3.0

Tukey Simultaneous Tests


Response Variable Hydroxyapatite pH
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of pH*Pb
pH = -1
Pb = -1 subtracted from:
pH
-1
1
1

1.5

Difference
of Means
-0.5275
2.3850
0.0575

SE of
Difference
0.03894
0.03894
0.03894

T-Value
-13.55
61.25
1.48

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0000
0.4849

T-Value
74.80
15.02

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000
0.0000

T-Value
-59.77

Adjusted
P-Value
0.0000

subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
2.9125
0.5850

SE of
Difference
0.03894
0.03894

subtracted from:
Difference
of Means
-2.328

SE of
Difference
0.03894

Versus Fits excluding a* b* c and then a* c


(response is Hydroxyapatite pH)

Standardized Residual

-1

-2
3.0

3.5

4.0
4.5
Fitted Value

5.0

5.5

6.0

Figure 21

Hydroxyapatite pH after excluding a* b* c and then a* c


Normal
99

Mean
StDev
N
AD
P-Value

95
90

Percent

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5

-3

-2

-1

0
SRES4

Figure 22

-7.68829E-15
1.033
16
0.139
0.966

Hydroxyapatite excluding a* b* c and then a* c


-1

Apetite
-1
1

5
A petite

4
3

5
pH

pH
-1
1

4
3

Pb
-1
1

5
Pb

4
3
-1

-1

Figure 23

Test for equal variance


For Fishbone Pb concentration mM P value 0.309 implies rejecting alternative hypothesis in favor
of null hypothesis
Test for Equal Variances for Fishbone Pb mM
Apetite

pH

Pb

-1

-1

-1

Bartlett's Test
Test Statistic
P-Value

1
1

7.13
0.309

-1
1

-1

-1
1

-1
1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs

Figure 24

Test for equal variance for Fishbone pH P- value 0.324 implies rejecting alternative hypothesis in
favor of null hypothesis
Test for Equal Variances for Fishbone pH
Apetite

pH

Pb

-1

-1

-1

Bartlett's Test
Test Statistic
P-Value

1
1

-1
1

-1

-1
1

-1
1
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs

Figure 25

8.10
0.324

Test for equal variance for hydroxyapatite Pb mM concentration. P-value 0.452 implies rejecting
alternative hypothesis in favor of null hypothesis

Test for Equal Variances for Hydroxyapatite Pb mM


Apetite

pH

Pb

-1

-1

-1

Bartlett's Test
Test Statistic
P-Value

1
1

4.71
0.452

-1
1

-1

-1
1

-1
1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs

Figure 26

Test for equal variance for hydroxyapatite Pb mM concentration. P-value 0.782 implies rejecting
alternative hypothesis in favor of null hypothesis.

Test for Equal Variances for Hydroxyapatite pH


Apetite

pH

Pb

-1

-1

-1

Bartlett's Test
Test Statistic
P-Value

1
1

-1
1

-1

-1
1

-1
1
0
2
4
6
8
10 12 14 16
18
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs

Figure 27

2.46
0.782

Conclusion
a) For the lead response of the Fishbone apatite concentration of Pb and apatite amount is
important factor. F-value for Pb concentration is highest. Factor effects were calculated
using formula given in the book (example 6.1) The following table constructed
Fishbone
Pb
abc
ab
ac
A
bc
B
C
(1)
Factor
effects
A
B
C

Fishbone
Replicate
Pb
1
1.82
0.01
1.11
0
2.11
0.03
1.7
0.05

Replicat
e2
1.81
0
1.04
0.01
2.18
0.05
1.69
0.05

Total
3.63
0.01
2.15
0.01
4.29
0.08
3.39
0.1
b) The standard residuals are generated after
eliminating interaction with very small F-value
compare to F-value of other factors and interactions.
These standard residuals are then tested for normal
distribution hypothesis. As seen from Figure 6 pvalue generated is 0.055 which is greater than 0.05
(assumed). Figure 24 for equal variance check shows
that data is adequate with P-value 0.309. Hence the
model is adequate

-0.2575 Lowest
0.295
1.6575 Highest
Eliminate
AB
0.075 d
AC
-0.2175
BC
0.3
ABC
0.07
Eliminate
Replicat Replicat
Fishbone pH e 1
ed 2
Total
c) For pH response of the Fishbone apatite,
abc
5.22
5.12
10.34
concentration of Pb and pH are more important than others. Factor effects are calculated
abas shown 6.84
6.61 table.13.45
in the following
ac
3.35
3.34
6.69
Fihbone
a
5.77
6.25
12.02
pH
bc
5.29
5.06
10.35
b
5.93
6.02
11.95
c
3.39
3.34
6.73
(1)
4.5
4.74
9.24
Factor
effects
0.5287
A
5
1.4262
B
5 Highest
1.5687
C
5 Lowest
0.1562 Eliminat
AB
5 ed
AC
0.5412

BC
ABC

5
0.3912
5
0.1637 Eliminat
5 ed

d) After eliminating non influencing factors and generating standard residuals and testing
them for normality assumption, P-values obtained is 0.245 which is greater than 0.05.
Therefore the data is normal and model is adequate, Shown in Figure 11. Also Figure 25
shows that model has equal variance implies adequate model with P-value of 0.324.

e) For the lead response of the Hydroxyapatite apatite, concentration of Pb and amount of
apatite were important factor. Factor effects also suggest the same conclusion as shown in
table below.
Hydroxyap
Replicat
Hydroxyapat atite
e Pb
ite Pb
1
abc
0.11
ab
0
ac
0.8
a
0.03
bc
1.03
b
0
c
1.34
(1)
0.06
Factor
effects
A
-0.3675
B
-0.2575
C
0.7825
AB
-0.095
AC
-0.355
BC
-0.205
ABC
-0.1075

Replica
te 2
0.12
0
0.76
0.05
1.05
0
1.26
0.07

Total
0.23
0
1.56
0.08
2.08
0
2.6
0.13

Lowest
Highest
Eliminated

Eliminated

f) After eliminating interactions with very small F-value as compare to others the standard
residuals are tested for normality. P-value of 0.171 in Figure 15 suggests that model is
adequate. Also test for equal variance as shown in Figure 26 also suggests that model is
adequate with P-value of 0.452.
g) For the pH response of the Hydroxyapatite apatite, pH factor is most important among all
factor. Factor effects are shown in below mentioned table.
Hydroxyapat Hydroxyap
Replicat
atite
ite pH
e 1Pb
abc
3.49
ab
5.84
ac
2.7
a
3.36
bc
3.22
b
5.53
c
2.82
(1)
3.28
Factor
effects
A
0.145
B
1.485
C
-1.4275
AB
0.1775
AC

-0.06

Replica
te 2
3.46
5.9
2.74
3.24
3.22
5.43
2.79
3.28

Total
6.95
11.74
5.44
6.6
6.44
10.96
5.61
6.56

Highest
Lowest
Eliminate
d

BC

-0.9

ABC

-0.0075

Eliminate
d

h) After eliminating interactions with very small F-value as compare to others the standard
residuals are tested for normality. P-value of 0.966 shown in Figure 22 suggests that model
is adequate. Also test for equal variance as shown in Figure 27 suggests that model is
adequate with P-value of 0.782.
i) From above 23 designs it is observed that for given amount of apatite the fishbone and
hydroxyapatite has similar response. Also the pattern of effects of Factor in case of
fishbone and hydroxyapatite are similar. I second the authors conclusion that fishbone
apatite can replace the hydroxyapatite apatite because it is cheaper and has almost
similar effects as that of hydroxyapatite.

References:
[1 W. B. Brentlinger, W. B. Leonard and M. Lee, Artists, New Lamar Universtiy Logo 2013. [Art].
] Lamar University, 1982.
[2 D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, Arizona: John Wiley & Sons, INC,
] 2013.

Você também pode gostar