Hi Kimberly,
I'm not sure about the last comment/question :
@K_JMP wrote:
Remaining question/concern:
When performing the 2nd augmentation step (so adding the Scheffé cubic points), I definitely see an increase in the number of prediction variances (to 0.57) and also an increase in Fraction of design Space plot (as you can see below). It makes sense that this increases, however I am just not really certain if this is the smartest move to do for my purpose?

You should use the platform Compare Designs to make sure the Prediction Variance Profile and Fraction of Design Space Plot are calculated on the same assumed model. If you compare these information on each "Evaluate Designs" designs' script, the comparison is not the same, as the original and replicated designs have the same assumed model, but not the augmented one, since Scheffe cubic terms were added.
When using the Compare Designs platform with the 3 designs, the comparison of the designs is done on the same assumed model, and the comparative results are completely logical:

You can clearly see a big decrease of prediction variance from the original I-Optimal design to the Replicated Design, and another decrease from the Replicated design to the Augmented design, which make totally sense : big decrease first thanks to replication, then thanks to adding points to better support the first initial model and validate it.
Hope this answer will help you,
Victor GUILLER
"It is not unusual for a well-designed experiment to analyze itself" (Box, Hunter and Hunter)