POSSIBLE QUESTIONS Flashcards
memorize and familiarize (26 cards)
Statement of the Problem: “This study aims to assess whether it is feasible to create hollow blocks, specifically sand or gravel, from fruit waste by-products.”
The feasibility of creating hollow blocks from fruit waste by-products was evaluated based on the compressive strength and water absorption of the resulting blocks. Our results indicate that while hollow blocks can be produced using fruit waste, the feasibility for structural applications is affected by the reduction in compressive strength as the percentage of fruit waste increases.
What are the physical and mechanical properties of hollow blocks made from fruit waste in terms of: 1.1. compressive strength; and 1.2. water absorption?
The compressive strength of the hollow blocks varied depending on the percentage of fruit waste additive. The control group had the highest compressive strength (172.32 PSI), while the samples with fruit waste showed a decrease in strength as the percentage of fruit waste increased (15% waste = 171.77 PSI, 20% waste = 162.18 PSI, and 25% waste = 148.33 PSI);
Water absorption also varied. The control group had the lowest water absorption (1.923%), and absorption increased with higher percentages of fruit waste (15% waste = 1.926%, 20% waste = 2.084%, and 25% waste = 2.230%).
How can fruit waste byproducts percentage affect: 2.1. compressive strength; and 2.2. water absorption?
The percentage of fruit waste by-products negatively affected the compressive strength of the hollow blocks. As the percentage of fruit waste increased from 0% to 25%, the compressive strength decreased;
Conversely, the percentage of fruit waste by-products positively affected the water absorption of the hollow blocks. As the percentage of fruit waste increased, the water absorption also increased.
What are the statistical tests used?
We used the post hoc Tukey test to analyze significant differences in compressive strength across the different percentages of fruit waste additives. This test allowed us to determine which specific groups differed significantly from each other. For water absorption, we used the Mann-Whitney U test. This test was used to compare the differences in water absorption between the groups and identify where significant variations occurred.
The Tukey HSD test was used because it’s a post-hoc test suitable for comparing means of multiple groups after an ANOVA, which is appropriate for our compressive strength data. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for water absorption because it’s a non-parametric test that can compare two independent groups.
Can you elaborate on the criteria used to define “feasibility” in this context?
It assesses feasibility based on the physical and mechanical properties of hollow blocks made from fruit waste, specifically compressive strength and water absorption. The comparison of these properties between fruit waste-based hollow blocks and conventional ones is also used to determine feasibility.
What’s the purpose of your study?
The purpose of this study is to assess the potential of utilizing fruit waste by-products as sustainable alternatives in construction materials. The research aims to explore the physical properties and overall effectiveness of these materials in comparison to conventional construction options, specifically within concrete materials. Ultimately, it seeks to address the issue of fruit waste while promoting innovative solutions in the construction sector.
Why did you conduct this study?
The study is motivated by the need to address the pressing issue of fruit waste and promote innovative solutions within the construction sector. We aim to assess the potential of utilizing fruit waste byproducts as sustainable alternatives in construction materials, contributing to environmental sustainability and economic growth.
What is the problem with your study?
The study focuses on the feasibility of using fruit waste by-products to create hollow blocks. It also seeks to determine the physical and mechanical properties of these hollow blocks, specifically compressive strength and water absorption. Additionally, it investigates how the percentage of fruit waste by-products affects these properties and whether there is a significant difference between fruit waste-based hollow blocks and conventional hollow blocks.
What is the felt need of your study?
The study addresses the global issue of food waste, particularly fruit byproducts, and the need for sustainable alternatives to traditional construction materials. It aims to find ways to repurpose fruit waste into a valuable resource, specifically as an additive to hollow blocks, to reduce environmental impact and promote sustainability in the construction industry.
The research is limited to certain types of fruit waste (banana peel, orange peel, and pineapple husk). What is the justification for selecting these specific fruit wastes, and what other fruit wastes could potentially be explored?
We selected banana peel, orange peel, and pineapple husk primarily due to their local availability in the market. This accessibility ensured a consistent supply for our research. Additionally, these fruit wastes have been cited in previous research for their potential as additives in construction materials. While other fruit wastes may also be viable, our focus was on these three to maintain a manageable scope for this study.
The study includes a comparison between fruit waste-based hollow blocks and conventional hollow blocks. What specific standards or benchmarks are used to evaluate the “significance of the difference” in physical and mechanical properties?
The study evaluates the “significance of the difference” in physical and mechanical properties by conducting tests such as the Compressive Strength Test and the Water Absorption Test. Statistical tests, including the post hoc Tukey test and the Mann-Whitney U test, are used to analyze the data and determine significant differences between groups.
What is your hypothesis about?
The study’s null hypothesis (Ho1) proposes that the percentage of fruit waste by-products does not significantly affect the compressive strength and water absorption of hollow blocks. Essentially, it assumes no relationship between the amount of fruit waste used and these key properties, an assumption the research aims to test.
Does changing the percentage of fruit waste by-products in hollow blocks alter their compressive strength?
The study includes a “Compressive Strength Test.” This test involves applying a load to the hollow block samples until they fail. We prepare hollow block samples with varying percentages of fruit waste by-products. By comparing the compressive strength values of these different samples, we analyze if and how the fruit waste percentage influences the block’s ability to withstand loads.
How does varying the percentage of fruit waste by-products in hollow blocks affect their water absorption?
The study includes a “Water Absorption Test.” This test measures the amount of water absorbed by the hollow block samples. Similar to the compressive strength test, samples with different percentages of fruit waste are tested. By comparing the water absorption rates, we determine if there is a relationship between the fruit waste content and the block’s tendency to absorb water.
You’ve limited your fruit waste to banana peel, orange peel, and pineapple husk. Why did you choose these specific types of fruit waste, and are there other fruit wastes that could also be viable?
We selected banana peel, orange peel, and pineapple husk primarily due to their local availability in the local market. This accessibility ensured a consistent supply for our research. Additionally, these fruit wastes have been cited in previous research for their potential as additives in construction materials. While other fruit wastes may also be viable, our focus was on these three to maintain a manageable scope for this study.
Your study focuses on the physical and mechanical properties of hollow blocks. Why did you limit yourselves to these properties, and are there other important characteristics you did not consider?
We concentrated on physical and mechanical properties, specifically compressive strength and water absorption, as these are fundamental indicators of the structural integrity and durability of hollow blocks. Compressive strength is critical for load-bearing capacity, and water absorption is important for the block’s resistance to environmental factors. While other characteristics like thermal conductivity and sound insulation are also relevant, we narrowed our focus to these two to provide a clear and feasible scope for our experimental investigation.
The theoretical framework discusses the use of hybrid waste materials. How does this study incorporate or differ from the concept of combining various waste types to enhance concrete properties?
The theoretical framework mentions that the use of hybrid waste materials focuses on combining various waste types to improve concrete’s mechanical properties. While the study utilizes a combination of fruit waste by-products, it does not explicitly discuss combining fruit waste with other waste types like glass or polypropylene fibers, as mentioned in the hybrid waste theory.
The methodology mentions drying and grinding fruit waste. Can you provide more detail on the drying conditions (temperature, duration) and the particle size achieved after grinding?
The fruit waste was dried using an oven set to 60 degrees Celsius until it no longer absorbed moisture, and then ground into a fine powder using a grinding machine. The document does not specify the duration of drying or the particle size achieved after grinding.
Could you elaborate on the specific procedures used for compressive strength and water absorption testing?
For the Compressive Strength Test, standard-sized concrete samples were loaded using a compression testing machine until failure, and the maximum load was recorded to calculate compressive strength. For the Water Absorption Test, material samples were weighed before and after being submerged in water for 24 hours, and the difference in weight was calculated to determine the percentage of water absorbed.
The study used the Tukey HSD and Mann-Whitney U tests. Why were these specific statistical tests chosen?
The post hoc Tukey test was applied to assess significant differences in compressive strength across different percentages of fruit waste additives. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for water absorption analysis to compare differences between groups and identify significant variations.
The study reports statistical significance between certain groups. Explain the practical significance of these statistical differences in the context of construction applications.
The study reports statistical significance between certain groups, with the control group having significantly higher strength than the 20% and 25% groups, and significantly lower water absorption compared to other groups. The practical significance in construction applications is that higher percentages of fruit waste may compromise the structural integrity and durability of hollow blocks, especially in wet conditions.
The conclusion states that higher percentages of fruit waste reduce durability, limiting the feasibility of fruit waste-based blocks for structural applications. Does this mean the research concludes that using fruit waste by-products as an additive is not feasible? If so, what are the conditions in which it would be feasible?
The study concludes that higher percentages of fruit waste weaken the structural integrity of the hollow blocks. It suggests that while small amounts of fruit waste may not drastically impact strength, higher concentrations lead to a notable reduction in compressive strength, potentially affecting the blocks’ durability. The document does not provide conditions in which using fruit waste by-products as an additive would be feasible.
Your results showed a decrease in compressive strength with increased fruit waste. Is there a specific chemical component in the fruit waste that might be responsible for this?
Yes, our results indicated a trend of decreasing compressive strength as the percentage of fruit waste increased. While our study did not analyze the specific chemical composition of the fruit waste, it’s possible that the organic matter present in the peels introduced more porosity into the concrete matrix, which could compromise its strength. This idea is supported by Ganiron et al. (2017), which noted that higher percentages of fruit waste can impact mix consistency, potentially leading to such porosity. It’s also possible that certain compounds in the fruit waste interfered with the hydration process of the cement. Further research could investigate the chemical interactions between fruit waste components and cement to pinpoint the exact causes of strength reduction.
The increase in water absorption is a concern. Could you suggest any ways to mitigate this issue in future applications of your hollow blocks?
Yes, we observed an increase in water absorption with higher percentages of fruit waste, which could affect the durability of the blocks. One approach could be to incorporate waterproofing admixtures into the concrete mix to reduce its permeability. Another strategy might involve applying a sealant or coating to the surface of the hollow blocks to prevent water ingress. Additionally, De Carvalho Terra (2023) found that the incorporation of coconut fibers increased porosity and water absorption in concrete blocks, which aligns with our findings and further supports the need for mitigation strategies. Therefore, exploring different curing methods or longer curing times might also improve the density and reduce water absorption. It may also be beneficial to investigate the use of pozzolanic materials, like fly ash or silica fume, which have been shown to improve concrete’s durability by reducing permeability, as discussed in Charitha (2021). Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of these mitigation strategies and optimize the mix design for improved water resistance.
