Beltz Mong 24 Data Analysis and Interpretation In this experiment the data was collected by adding a water-vinegar solution

n to a plate of soil and measuring the change in pH of the water beneath the soil. The purpose was to determine what combination of soil composition, grass amount and rate of pour had the lowest change in pH. To collect viable data, repetition was needed. There were five 3-factor DOEs where the three factors were soil composition, grass amount, and rate at which the solution was poured. There were five DOEs performed to ensure that the data was accurate. Based on the Law of Large Numbers, more data means less variation in the results. Another element that was important to the accuracy of data was randomization. Randomization helped to reduce the bias. With randomization the data would be more reliable and contain less variability. In this experiment, the Ti-nSpire random integer function was used to randomize each trial. However, the standards were performed at the beginning, middle and end of each DOE. A control was also implemented into the experiment to account for lurking variables. The controls, which were the standards, were performed at the beginning, middle and end of each DOE. They helped show whether the pH would change when the soil composition, grass amount, and rate at which the solution was poured were kept at a standard value. The standards help show that the changes caused by the variables were caused purely by the variables, not by outside factors, because outside factors affected all groups equally.

Beltz Mong 25 In this experiment a 3-factor Design of Experiments (DOE) was performed to test how three independent variables affected a dependent variable. The DOE was performed to test how the soil composition, grass amount, and rate at which the solution was poured affected the pH of the water. There were five different DOEs performed, with three standards per DOE. This amount of repetition helped to, as said earlier, reduce the variation in the results. Table 9 15 Standards
1.58 1.48 1.56 1.49 1.53 Standards 1.51 1.53 1.55 1.56 1.54 1.52 1.51 1.52 1.52 1.57

Standards
1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Change in pH

Standard Number Figure 6. Fifteen Standards Table 9 shows the fifteen standards performed in this experiment. These standards measured the change in pH of the water at standard soil composition, standard grass amount and standard pour rate. As shown in figure 6, the data seems to be consistent. This shows that the tests were performed correctly with good results because of the little

Beltz Mong 26 variability in the results. All standards fall within the range of 1.48 and 1.58. This range of 0.1 is very miniscule, therefore the trials were performed correctly and consistently.

Factor: Soil Composition Effect of Soil Composition Table 10 Effect of Soil Composition Soil Composition (-) (+) 2.016 1.418 1.718 0.402 1.986 0.680 1.668 0.918 Avg = 1.847 Avg = 0.855
Change in pH 1.847 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -1 Soil Composition 1 0.855

Figure 7. Effect of Soil Composition The effect of soil composition is -0.992 from 1.847 (Low) to 0.855 (High). On average as soil composition increases, change in pH decreases by 0.992. Figure 7 shows the graph of soil composition on change in pH. As seen the change in pH decreases as the soil composition increases. Table 10 shows the eight averages of soil composition during the trials.

Beltz Mong 27 Factor: Grass Amount Effect of Grass Amount Table 11 Effect of Grass Amount Grass Amount (-) 2.016 1.418 1.986 0.680 Avg = 1.525 (+) 1.718 0.402 1.668 0.918 Avg = 1.177
Change in pH 2 1.525 1.5 1 0.5 0 -1 Grass Amount 1 1.177

Figure 8. Effect of Grass Amount The effect of grass amount is -0.348 from 1.525 (Low) to 1.177 (High). On average as grass amount increases, change in pH decreases by 0.348. Figure 8 shows the graph of grass amount on change in pH. As seen the change in pH decreases as the grass amount increases. Table 11 shows the eight averages of grass amount during the trials. Factor: Rate of Pour Table 12 Effect of Rate of Pour Rate of Pour (-) 2.016 1.418 1.718 0.918 Avg = 1.518 (+) 1.986 0.402 1.668 0.680 Avg = 1.184
Change in pH

Effect of Rate of Pour

2 1.518 1.5 1 0.5 0 -1 Rate of Pour 1 1.184

Figure 9. Effect of Rate of Pour The effect of rate of pour is -0.334 from 1.518(Low) to 1.184 (High). On average as rate of pour increases, change in pH decreases by 0.334. Figure 9 shows the graph of rate of pour on change in pH. As seen the change in pH decreases as the rate of pour increases. Table 12 shows the eight averages of rate of pour during the trials.

Beltz Mong 28 Three Factor Interactions: Soil Composition and Grass Amount Table 13 Soil Composition vs. Grass Amount Grass Amount
Change in pH

Interaction of Soil Comp. and Grass Amount

2.5 2.001 2 1.5 1.049 1 0.5 0 0.66 1.693

Soil Comp.

Solid Line

1.049

0.660

Dotted Line

2.001

1.693

-1 Grass Amount

Figure 10. Effect of Soil Comp. & Grass Amt. As seen on figure 10, there seems to be no interaction between the two factors, soil composition and grass amount. The slope of the high soil composition (Solid Line) minus the slope of the low soil composition (Dotted Line) can be calculated to be 0.041. This is derived from 0.195 (Solid Line) 0.154 (Dotted Line) = 0.041. Since the lines are not parallel (difference of slopes does not equal 0), it can be concluded that there may be an interaction between the soil composition and the grass amount. As grass amount went from low to high the soil composition had a positive effect on the change in pH.

Beltz Mong 29 Three Factor Interactions: Soil Composition and Rate of Pour Table 14 Soil Composition vs. Rate of Pour Rate of Pour + Interaction of Soil Comp. and Rate of Pour
2.5 Change in pH 1.867 1.168 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -1 Rate of Pour 1 0.541 1.827

Soil Comp.

Solid Line

1.168

0.541

Dotted Line

1.867

1.827

Figure 11. Effect of Soil Comp. & Rate As seen on figure 11, there seems to be an interaction between the two factors, soil composition and rate of pour. The slope of the high soil composition (Solid Line) minus the slope of the low soil composition (Dotted Line) can be calculated to be 0.294. This is derived from 0.314 (Solid Line) 0.02 (Dotted Line) = 0.294. Since the lines are not parallel (difference of slopes does not equal 0), it can be concluded that there may be an interaction between the soil composition and the rate of pour. As rate of pour went from low to high the soil composition had a positive effect on the change in pH.

Beltz Mong 30 Three Factor Interactions: Grass Amount and Rate of Pour Table 15 Grass Amount vs. Rate of Pour Rate of Pour + Interaction of Grass Amount and Rate of Pour
2.5 Change in pH 2 1.717 1.318 1 0.5 0 -1 Rate of Pour 1 1.5 1.333 1.035

Grass Amount

Solid Line

1.318

1.035

Dotted Line

1.717

1.333

Figure 12. Effect of Grass & Rate As seen on figure 12, there seems to be no interaction between the two factors, grass amount and rate of pour. The slope of the high grass amount (Solid Line) minus the slope of the low grass amount (Dotted Line) can be calculated to be -0.05. This is derived from 0.142 (Solid Line) 0.192 (Dotted Line) = -0.05. Since the lines are not parallel (difference of slopes does not equal 0), it can be concluded that there may be an interaction between the grass amount and the rate of pour. As rate of pour went from low to high the grass amount had a negative effect on the change in pH.

Beltz Mong 31 Grand Average: 1.4 Overall Effects of Single Factors: Effect of Soil Composition: -0.992 Effect of Grass Amount: -0.348 Effect of Rate of Pour: -0.334 Interactions between Factors: Soil Composition and Grass Amount: 0.041 Soil Composition and Rate of Pour: 0.294 Grass Amount and Rate of Pour: -0.05

Figure 13. Prediction Equation Figure 13 above shows the prediction equation. This equation is used to predict the change in pH at any given factor. For example: the soil composition is low, the grass amount is high and the rate of pour is high. Plug in -1 for the soil composition S, plug in 1 for the grass amount G and plug in 1 for the rate of pour R. From this example the equation would get 1.363 for the change in pH for a low soil composition, a high grass amount and a high rate of pour. The equation represents the grand average added to the individual effects and the interaction effect, each divided by two. The equation will never be able to give a perfect estimate because of the noise. The noise is any other outside factors that may affect the equation; therefore the estimation will never be perfectly precise.

Beltz Mong 32 Dot Plot of Effects:

Dot Plot of Effects

-0.992 -1 -0.8 -0.6

-0.348 -0.4

-0.334 -0.2

-0.05 0.041 0 0.2

0.294 0.4

Figure 14. Dot Plot of Effects Figure 14 above shows the dot plot of the effects. Soil composition had the greatest effect on the experiment with -0.992, then grass amount is second with -0.348 and the interaction between soil composition and grass amount had the smallest with 0.041. The factors may not seem to be significant; however the small range of standards makes them significant. Test of Significance: An effect is deemed significant if the quotient of the effects absolute value divided by the range of the standards is greater than or equal to two. The range of standards is this experiment is 0.1, found earlier. Effect of Soil Composition: Effect of Rate of Pour:

Effect of Grass Amount:

Effect of Soil Comp. vs. Grass Amount:

Beltz Mong 33 Effect of Soil Comp. vs. Rate of Pour: Effect of Grass Amount vs. Rate of Pour:

From this test, it can be concluded that all of the effects are significant except for the effect of soil composition vs. grass amount and the effect of grass amount vs. rate of pour. All of the effects will be included in the Parsimonious equation except these two.

Figure 15. Parsimonious Equation Figure 15 above shows the Parsimonious equation. The effect of soil composition vs. grass amount and the effect of grass amount vs. rate of pour are not included in the equation because they we deemed insignificant. Using the same scenario used in the prediction equation: low soil composition, high grass amount and high rate of pour. The Parsimonious equation would get 1.408. Since there is also noise in this equation, the prediction will never be exactly precise. After analyzing the data, it is clear that several of the factors do significantly affect the change in pH of the water. All of the individual factors tested (soil type, grass amount, and rate of pour) were deemed significant after a thorough analysis. Of the interaction effects, only soil rate and rate of pour significantly affected the change in pH of the water.