Pampanga State Agricultural University

Office of the Library Services and Museum

Waste Chicken Feather as a Reinforcement for Concrete Pave-Bricks [manuscript] / Elyssa Saldi Lagman.

By: Contributor(s): Material type: TextTextPublication details: Magalang, Pampanga : Pampanga State Agricultural University, June 2020.Description: xiv, 57 leaves ; 28 cm. + 1 computer disc (4 3/4 in.)
Contents:
This study investigated the use of Waste Chicken Feather (WCF) as a reinforcement for concrete pave-bricks consisting of various proportions of a waste chicken feather, cement, and sand were prepared in terms of weight. Analysis of Variance was the statistical mcthod to analyze the data. Based on the compressive strength, block with 10% of WCF at 28 days of curing was the strongest among treatments with WCF. It gained a mean compressive strength of 6.68 MPa. On the other hand, test results revealed that the ordinary blocks (without WCF) gained the highest mean compressive strength of 13.743 MPa. Revealed by the results of the flexural strength of the three ratios of a waste chicken feather, it was found out that on 7, 14 and 28 days of curing, block with 10% of WCF was the strongest as compared to blocks with 15% of WCF and 20% of WCF. It gained a mean flexural strength of 2.64 MPa at 7 days of curing, 2.633 MPa at 14 days of curing, and 3.067 MPa at 28 days of curing. Comparatively, the ordinary blocks (without WCF) had the highest mean flexural strength of 4.533 MPa. Based on the water absorption test, most of the block with waste chicken feather absorbs more water than the control. The cost comparison between blocks with waste chicken feather and commercial paving block revealed that the blocks with WCF are more economical having the cost of Php 4.76 for a block with 10% of WCF, Php 4.53 for a block with 15% of WCF, and Php 4.32 for a block with 20% of WCF. When it comes to commercialization paving blocks with 20% of WCF is highly recommended because compare to the paving blocks with 10% aud 15% of WCF, paving blocks with 20% of WCF can produce more blocks.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Barcode
Theses PSAU OLM Dissertation, Theses BSAg Eng'g UT L17 2020 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Not for loan UT12603

This study investigated the use of Waste Chicken Feather (WCF) as a reinforcement for concrete pave-bricks consisting of various proportions of a waste chicken feather, cement, and sand were prepared in terms of weight. Analysis of Variance was the statistical mcthod to analyze the data. Based on the compressive strength, block with 10% of WCF at 28 days of curing was the strongest among treatments with WCF. It gained a mean compressive strength of 6.68 MPa. On the other hand, test results revealed that the ordinary blocks (without WCF) gained the highest mean compressive strength of 13.743 MPa. Revealed by the results of the flexural strength of the three ratios of a waste chicken feather, it was found out that on 7, 14 and 28 days of curing, block with 10% of WCF was the strongest as compared to blocks with 15% of WCF and 20% of WCF. It gained a mean flexural strength of 2.64 MPa at 7 days of curing, 2.633 MPa at 14 days of curing, and 3.067 MPa at 28 days of curing. Comparatively, the ordinary blocks (without WCF) had the highest mean flexural strength of 4.533 MPa. Based on the water absorption test, most of the block with waste chicken feather absorbs more water than the control. The cost comparison between blocks with waste chicken feather and commercial paving block revealed that the blocks with WCF are more economical having the cost of Php 4.76 for a block with 10% of WCF, Php 4.53 for a block with 15% of WCF, and Php 4.32 for a block with 20% of WCF. When it comes to commercialization paving blocks with 20% of WCF is highly recommended because compare to the paving blocks with 10% aud 15% of WCF, paving blocks with 20% of WCF can produce more blocks.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.