2009
DOI: 10.3923/jas.2009.3098.3103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Two-Step Biodiesel Production from Waste Cooking Oil: Optimization of Pre-Treatment Step

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
22
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It indicates that 93.11% of the factors play a vital role in the response. The model is sufficient in explaining most of the variability in the experiment results because the R 2 value is greater than 0.75 [25,59]. The value of the predicted R 2 is in reasonable agreement with the value of the adjusted R 2 since the difference is around 0.15 [25,60].…”
Section: Results and Analysis For Plackett-burman Designmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…It indicates that 93.11% of the factors play a vital role in the response. The model is sufficient in explaining most of the variability in the experiment results because the R 2 value is greater than 0.75 [25,59]. The value of the predicted R 2 is in reasonable agreement with the value of the adjusted R 2 since the difference is around 0.15 [25,60].…”
Section: Results and Analysis For Plackett-burman Designmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…Hierarchical order was prioritized over P-Value in the RSM analysis to obtain a reliable final equation model (Gaitonde et al, 2017;Noordin et al, 2004;Tanaka et al, 2007). The hierarchical order prioritization in this analysis was supported by the high R-square at 87.22% compared to the advised R-square of >75% (Haaland, 1989;Omar et al, 2009). Besides, the confidence level was also already set at 95% for all intervals throughout the RSM analysis in the Analyze Response Surface Design interface in Minitab.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This value translated to 87.22% of the variability in data was accounted for in the model. It is adequate the meet the data variability which is advised at more than 75% (Haaland, 1989;Omar et al, 2009). Table 2 shows the details of the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for the RSM analysis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The determination of coefficient value (R 2 ) is 0.9374, indicating the acceptability of the model in estimating the predicted values from the experimental data. The model is adequate in explaining most of the variability in the trial results since the R 2 value is greater than 0.75 [ 42 ]. The Adjusted R 2 value (0.8643) validates the proposed model.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%