DoE: Box-Benhken or Face Centered Central Composite design ?Hey JMP users,
Here we want to compare the use of Box-Behnken or Face Centered Central Composite design (both with 3 levels for each factor).
- For 3 factors, the Box-Behnken design (BBD) offers the advantage in requiring a fewer number of runs. For 4 or more factors, this advantage disappears.
- the BBD contains regions of poor prediction quality. Its "missing corners" may be useful when the experimenter should avoid combined factor extremes. This property prevents a potential loss of data in those cases.
- The Face Centered Central Composite Design give poor precision for estimating pure quadratic coefficients. Does that mean that BBD gives better pure quadratic coefficients ?
Any other consideration ?
Many thanks,
I
DOERe: DoE: Box-Benhken or Face Centered Central Composite design ?Consider an I-optimal custom design.
Re: DoE: Box-Benhken or Face Centered Central Composite design ?I agree with Mark. There are limitations with both B-B and face-centered CCD. Those limitations do typically disappear with an I-optimal Custom Design.
Re: DoE: Box-Benhken or Face Centered Central Composite design ?I'm confused? Do you want alternatives or do you want to understand the pros and cons of the two mentioned designs?
Re: DoE: Box-Benhken or Face Centered Central Composite design ?-The pros and cons of each
