Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 9;31(9):1157–1167. doi: 10.1007/s10068-022-01111-1

Table 3.

Polynomial mathematical models with interaction terms obtained in terms of coded factors for different responses

Response Equation
Consistency coefficient 1.08 + 0.11 * A + 0.29 * B + 0.12 * AB − 0.38 * A2 − 0.20 * B2
Flow behaviour index 0.51 − 0.01 * A − 0.06 * B − 0.02 * AB + 0.08 * A2 + 0.04 * B2
Yield stress 8.900 e-007 − 1.997 e-008 * A + 5.043 e-008 * B − 8.498 e-009 * AB − 3.387 e-007 * A2 − 3.708 e-007 * B2
Foaming capacity 68.33 + 1.17 * A + 2.15 * B + 1.88 * AB + 3.93 * A2 + 4.04 * B2
Foaming stability 46.02 − 0.64 * A − 9.66 * B
Emulsion capacity 5.00 + 0.06 * A − 0.08 * B − 0.13 * AB + 0.30 * A2 − 0.03 * B2
Emulsion stability 4.33 + 0.17* A − 0.05 * B − 0.22 * AB + 0.49 * A2 + 0.07 * B2
Crystallinity 1048/1022 6.902 − 0.07 * A + 0.10 * B − 0.07 * AB + 0.50 * A2 + 0.35 * B2
Particle size 139.00 − 8.76 * A − 16.33 * B − 69.25 * AB + 20.38 * A2 + 18.63 * B2
Lightness (L*) 33.38 − 2.35 * A − 7.00 * B + 2.00 * AB − 1.190 * A2 + 4.09 * B2

A  pressure leve, B pressurization time