## 3 Results
### Results for Dimensions and Tensile Strength for the Lower Level of the Working Chamber
#### 3.2.1 Results for Tensile Strength in the Lower Level of the Working Chamber  
The model F-value of 1704.10 implies the model is significant. There is only a 0.01% chance that an F-value this large could occur due to noise. \(p\)-values less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case, A, B, AB, A\({}^{2}\), A\({}^{2}\)B, and A\({}^{3}\) are significant model terms. If there are many insignificant model terms (not counting those required to support hierarchy), model reduction must be carried out. The lack of fit F-value of 25.46 implies that the lack of fit is significant. There is only a 1.10% chance that a lack of fit F-value this large could occur due to noise. A significant lack of fit is not good because we want the model to fit.  
Figure 8: Dependence of hatch distance and orientation on the width in the upper part of the working chamber.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline  & **Width \(b\), mm** \\ \hline Standard deviation & 0.0214 \\ Mean & 9.99 \\ Coefficient of determination (\(R\)-squared (\(R^{2}\))) & 0.9572 \\ Adjusted \(R^{2}\) & 0.9144 \\ Predicted \(R^{2}\) & 0.1255 \\ Adeq Precision & 19.314 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 10: Fit statistics for the width of the upper level of the working chamber.  
According to the analysis (Tables 12 and 13), it can be concluded that the chosen model, regardless of the excellent \(R^{2}\) value of 0.9987 and many influencing factors, cannot be chosen to describe the tensile strength at the lower level of the chamber. Otherwise, exclusion of certain test conditions and exclusion of non-influential factors can lead to a reduction of the model error or to an increase of the model to the fifth, sixth, and higher levels; in this case, it did not help either, as it was the case for the tensile strength in the upper level of the chamber. For the tensile strength at the lower level of the chamber, it is necessary to carry out additional analyses or include additional processing parameters with orientation and hatch distance.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Run**} & **Factor A: Hatch** & **Factor B:** & **Tensile Strength** & **Length _I_**, mm** & **Thickness _h_**,** & **Width _b_**, mm** \\  & **Distance HD, mm** & **Orientation \(\mathbf{\alpha}_{r}\)\({}^{\circ}\)** & \(\mathbf{\sigma}_{\text{m}}\), MPa** & **Length _I_**, mm** & **mm** & **Width _b_**, mm** \\ \hline  
\hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 12: Analysis according to ANOVA for the tensile strength at the lower level of the working chamber.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Sum of** & **Degrees of** & **Mean** & **F Value** & **\(\mathbf{p}\)-Value (Risk of** \\  & **Squares** & **Freedom DF** & **Square** & **Rejection of H\({}_{0}\))** \\ \hline
**Model** & 2882.51 & 6 & 480.42 & 1704.10 & \textless{}0.0001 significant \\ A & 593.01 & 1 & 593.01 & 2103.48 & \textless{}0.0001 \\ B & 11.04 & 1 & 11.04 & 39.16 & \textless{}0.0001 \\ AB & 7.43 & 1 & 7.43 & 26.34 & 0.0002 \\ A\({}^{2}\) & 46.02 & 1 & 46.02 & 163.23 & \textless{}0.0001 \\ A\({}^{2}\)B & 5.69 & 1 & 5.69 & 20.19 & 0.0006 \\ A\({}^{3}\) & 52.77 & 1 & 52.77 & 187.20 & \textless{}0.0001 \\
**Residual** & 3.66 & 13 & 0.2819 & & \\ Lack of fit & 3.62 & 10 & 0.3622 & 25.46 & 0.0110 significant \\ Pure error & 0.0427 & 3 & 0.0142 & & \\
**Cor Total** & 2886.18 & 19 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 11: Results for the lower level of the working chamber.