A second order model is generally used to approximate the response once it is realized that the experiment is close to the

optimum response region where a first order model is no longer adequate. The second order model is usually sufficient for the optimum region, as third order and higher effects are seldom important. The second order regression model takes the following form for factors:

(5) The model contains effects ( regression parameters that include coefficients for main ), coefficients for quadratic main effects ( ) and coefficients for

two factor interaction effects ( . ). A full factorial design with all factors at three levels would provide estimation of all the required regression parameters. However, full factorial three level designs are expensive to use as the number of runs increases rapidly with the number of factors. For example, a three factor full factorial design with each factor at three levels would require runs while a design with four factors would require runs. Additionally, these designs will estimate a number of higher order effects which are usually not of much importance to the experimenter. Therefore, for the purpose of analysis of response surfaces, special designs are used that help the experimenter fit the second order model to the response with the use of a minimum number of runs. Examples of these designs are the central composite and Box-Behnken designs.

Central Composite Designs
Central composite designs are two level full factorial (2 ) or fractional factorial (2 ) designs augmented by a number of center points and other chosen runs. These designs are such that they allow the estimation of all the regression parameters required to fit a second order model to a given response. The simplest of the central composite designs can be used to fit a second order model to a response with two factors. The design consists of a 2 full factorial design augmented by a few runs at the center point (such a design is shown in Figure 9.10 (a)). A central composite design is obtained when runs at four other points - ( ), ( ), ( ) and ( ) are added to this design. These points are referred to as axial points or star points and represent runs where all but one of the factors are set at their mid-levels. The number of axial points in a central composite designs having The distance of the axial points from the center point is denoted by factors is 2 .

and is always specified in terms , while for

of coded values. For example, the central composite design in Figure 9.10 (b) has the design of Figure 9.10 (c) levels ( , , , and . It can be noted that when ) instead of the three levels of , and

, each factor is run at five . The reason for running

central composite designs with

is to have a rotatable design, which is explained next.

Earlier, we described the response surface method (RSM) objective. Under some circumstances, a

. 2. Analysis of the results revealed no evidence of "pure quadratic" curvature in the response of interest (i. The design matrix originally used included the limits of the factor settings available to run the process.model involving only main effects and interactions may be appropriate to describe a response surface when 1.e. the response at the center approxima tely equals the average of the responses at the factorial runs)..

9 to 3. then finding an industrial process that requires a third-order model is highly unusual. for example).Equations for quadratic and cubic models In other circumstances. Therefore. we will only focus on designs that are useful for fitting quadratic models. with all possible terms.10 A Response Surface "Hillside" .9 A Response Surface "Peak" FIGURE 3. As we will see.12 identify the general quadratic surface types that an investigator might encounter General quadratic surface types FIGURE 3. rarely would all of the terms be needed in an application. a complete description of the process behavior might require a quadratic or cubic model: Quadratic Cubic These are the full models. Quadratic models almost always sufficient for industrial applications If the experimenter has defined factor limits appropriately and/or taken advantage of all the tools available in multiple regression analysis (transformations of responses and factors. Figures 3. these designs often provide lack of fit detection that will help determine when a higher-order model is needed.

Table 3. quadratic effects FIGURE 3.14.11 A Response Surface "Rising Ridge" FIGURE 3.FIGURE 3. in more complex cases such as illustrated in Figure 3. assume the value of the response increases from the bottom of the figure to the top and that the factor settings increase from left to right. TABLE 3.13. the design matrix to quantify that behavior need only contain factors with two levels -. but not fit. the design matrix must contain at least four levels of each factor to characterize the behavior of the response adequately. One might logically assume that adding center points to a two-level design would satisfy that requirement.15.13 through 3. Finally. FIGURE 3.low and high.15 Cubic Function If a response behaves as in Figure 3.14 would be to use a threelevel factorial design.21 Three-level Factorial Designs Three-level factorial design Four-level factorial design 3-level factorial . but the arrangement of the treatments in such a matrix confounds all quadratic effects with each other.15 illustrate possible behaviors of responses as functions of factor settings.21 explores that possibility. This model is a basic assumption of simple two-level factorial and fractional factorial designs.14 Quadratic Function FIGURE 3. In each case. While a two-level design with center points cannot estimate individual pure quadratic effects. the minimum number of levels required for a factor to quantify that behavior is three. it can detect them effectively.12 A Response Surface "Saddle" Factor Levels for Higher-Order Designs Possible behaviors of responses as functions of factor settings Figures 3. A solution to creating a design matrix that permits the estimation of simple curvature as shown in Figure 3. If a response behaves as in Figure 3.13 Linear Function A two-level experiment with center points can detect.

For example. Table 3. the absolute minimum number of runs required to estimate all the terms present in a four-factor quadratic model is 15: the intercept term. Figures 3.designs can fit quadratic models but they require many runs when there are more than 4 factors Number of Factors 2 3 4 5 6 Treatment Combinations 3k Factorial 9 27 81 243 729 Number of Coefficients Quadratic Empirical Model 6 10 15 21 28 Fractional factorial designs created to avoid such a large number of runs Two-level factorial designs quickly become too large for practical application as the number of factors investigated increases. 4 main effects. the experimental design matrix should not bias an investigation in any direction. In a rotatable design. the three-level factorial designs suffer a major flaw in their lack of `rotatability. and 4 quadratic terms. given the success of fractional designs when applied to two-level designs. 6 two-factor interactions. With only a modest number of factors. The corresponding 3k design for k = 4 requires 81 runs. Therefore. The last column in Table 3. the alias structure for the three-level fractional factorial designs is considerably more complex and harder to define than in the two-level case. This problem was the motivation for creating `fractional factorial' designs.' Rotatability of Designs "Rotatability" is a desirable property not present in 3level factorial designs In a rotatable design. the contours associated with the variance of the predicted values are concentric circles. the variance of the predicted values of y is a function of the distance of a point from the center of the design and is not a function of the direction the point lies from the center. Unfortunately. Additionally. the number of runs is very large.17 Contours of variance of .21 shows that the number of runs required for a 3k factorial becomes unacceptable even more quickly than for 2k designs.16 and 3. little or no knowledge may exist about the region that contains the optimum response. Number of runs large even for modest number of factors Complex alias structure and lack of rotatability for 3-level fractional factorial designs Considering a fractional factorial at three levels is a logical step. even an order of magnitude greater than the number of parameters to be estimated when k isn't small.21 shows the number of terms present in a quadratic model for each case. Before a study begins.

' page 485) illustrate a three-dimensional plot and contour plot. The information function is: Information function with V denoting the variance (of the predicted value ).predicted values are concentric circles (adapted from Box and Draper. Graphs of the information function for a rotatable quadratic design Figures 3.18 and 3.19 Contour Map of the Dimensional Illustration of Information Function for a the Information Function Rotatable Quadratic Design for for a Rotatable Quadratic Two Factors .16 ThreeFIGURE 3. FIGURE 3.18 ThreeFIGURE 3. Each figure clearly shows that the information content of the design is not only a function of the distance from the center of the design space. In each of these figures. the value of the information function depends only on the distance of a point from the center of the space. respectively. `Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces. but also a function of direction. of the `information function' associated with a 32 design.17 Dimensional Illustration for Contour Map of the Information the Information Function of Function for a 32Design a 32 Design FIGURE 3.19 are the corresponding graphs of the information function for a rotatable quadratic design.

catalyst concentration. a standard RSM design called CCD was applied to study the variables for preparing the activated carbon from rice husk (RHAC). linear regression is used. 2(n) axial runs . In statistics. Seth. the effect of three parameters. Bangwal. Dehradun. for building a second order (quadratic) model for the response variable without needing to use a complete three-level factorial experiment. Catalyst concentration was found to have a negative effect on biodiesel yield. In this study.Design for Two Factors Classical Quadratic Designs Central composite and Box-Behnken designs Introduced during the 1950's. After the designed experiment is performed.e. classical quadratic designs fall into two broad categories: Box-Wilson central composite designs and BoxBehnken designs. i.e. The reaction conditions were optimized for maximum response. In this work. Prateek CSIR-Indian Institute of Petroleum. and molar ratio of methanol to oil on biodiesel yield was studied. The next sections describe these design classes and their properties.. Optimization of Biodiesel Production by Response Surface Methodology and Genetic Algorithm Singhal. to obtain results. Kaul. The CCD consists of three kinds of runs which are the 2n factorial runs. i. reaction temperature. The program for the RSM model. was developed for predicting the optimized process parameters for maximum biodiesel yield to obtain a global optimal solution. Richa CSIR-Indian Institute of Petroleum. Savita CSIR-Indian Institute of Petroleum. useful in response surface methodology. biodiesel yield from RSM. accepted 18 April 2012) Abstract The biodiesel production from alkali-catalyzed transesterification of karanja oil was investigated. Dinesh CSIR-Indian Institute of Petroleum. Dehradun. Central composite design (CCD) along with response surface methodology (RSM) was used for designing experiments and estimating the quadratic response surface. Dehradun. a central composite design is an experimental design. coupled with genetic algorithm (GA). Coded variables are often used when constructing this design. whereas molar ratio showed positive effect. (Received 15 September 2011. The results were found to be similar from both of the methods. Dehradun. sometimes iteratively. Temperature and molar ratio showed significant interaction effect..

These three variables together with their respective ranges were chosen based on literature and prelimin .and six center runs. activation time (x2) and IR (x3) indicating that altogether 20 experiments for this procedure as calculated from (4): 2 2n n 2 2‫٭‬3 6 20 4 where N is the total number of experiments required. The preparation variables used were activation temperature (x1). where n is the number of variables.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful