## 3 Results and Discussion
### Multiple Factors' Interaction in EFLP Suspension
#### 3.3.1 Multiple Factors' Interaction in EFLP Suspension at 3-h Reaction
The signs of all the parameters in Equation (2) were positive, showing that they all contributed to \(\eta\); in particular, their related values were 23.60, 18.64 and 17.12, indicating that particle size was the most important, followed by hydrochemical component and its concentration, which agreed with the results obtained by the single-factor test described above (Figures 2 and 3). The \(\eta\) values were different for different hydrochemicals (Figure 5I-a,I-A). In one condition, the \(\eta\) value was the greatest for Cu(NO\({}_{3}\))\({}_{2}\), followed by NaNO\({}_{3}\), and the smallest for NaF, which supports the results from Figure 3 above. No matter the hydrochemical component, the \(\eta\) value increased with increasing concentration. These results agreed with those obtained in the single-factor tests described above (Figures 2 and 3) and reported by [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2020) [50] and [PERSON] et al. (2023) [46]. The contour line for the interaction of BC (Figure 5I-b,I-B) was elliptical, indicating that the interaction was significant [39]. The straight lines of the hydrochemical components and concentrations were approximately parallel to the short and long axes of the ellipse, showing that the effects of hydrochemical composition were more significant than those of hydrochemical concentration on particles AS and existence in the studied systems with a 3-h reaction. No matter the hydrochemical component, the \(\eta\) value increased as the particle size increased (Figure 5I-c,I-C). This result agreed with those obtained in the single-factor tests described above (Figure 2). The contour line for the interaction of BA was also elliptical, and the straight lines for hydrochemical component and particle size were almost parallel to the short and long axes of the ellipse, showing that the effect of hydrochemical component was more significant than that of particle size in a 3-h reaction. Figure 4: Normal distribution plot of residuals at 3-h reaction. The \(\eta\) value increased as either the hydrochemical concentration or particle size increased (Figure 5I-c,I-C), similar to the results described above (Figures 2 and 3). The contour line for their interaction was also elliptical, and the straight lines for particle size and hydrochemical component were approximately parallel to the short and long axes, showing that the effects of particle size were more significant than those of hydrochemical concentration in the studied systems. Figure 5: Three-dimensional surface plots and contour maps for the interaction of hydrochemical component and concentration (**I-a,I-A**), hydrochemical component and particle size (**I-b,I-B**), and hydrochemical concentration and particle size (**I-c,I-C**) on the AS and suspension of 1.1 \(\mu\)m EFLs with a 3-h reaction, respectively. In conclusion, there was a clear interaction between the studied factors, and their significance was ranked in the order of hydrochemical component, diameter size and component concentration, showing that these interactions had a certain dependence on the hydrochemical components in a 3-h reaction.