1

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

Globally, pollution is a major problem that the people are facing. There are

different types of pollution such as land, air, water and sound. This pollution creates

different problem that affects the economy, nature and such.

According to Livescience.com (2015), pollution is the process of making land,

water, air or other parts of the environment dirty and unsafe or unsuitable to use. This

can be done by of a contaminant into a natural environment, but the contaminant

doesn't need to be tangible. Things as simple as light, sound and temperature can be

considered pollutants when introduced artificially into an environment.

In the Philippines pollution is a problem, since citizens in the Philippines are

not used to dispose garbage’s properly. This leads to sanitary problems that later on

spread diseases and affect the health condition of the people living in the area.

Locally in Zamboanga City, pollution can be observed anywhere. One of its

pollutants are the waste materials produced by machines and factories. Some of

these waste materials are harmful and some can still be recycled. Luffa and Water

Hyacinth is one type of waste that can still be recycled and can be transformed into

another useful material. And as a response to the said problems the researchers

envisions to develop a useful product which is the cement tile out of Luffa and Water

Hyacinth.
 2

B. Statement of the Problem

This research study aimed to determine if Waste Agar Powder is a good

component in making cement tiles.

Specifically it sought to answer the following questions:

1.) Which Treatments [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of waste agar

powder and cement and the cement tiles (control) component with a

treatment of [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of sand and cement cured for 4

and 7 days is a good component in making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

 3

2. Is there any significant difference among the treatments [A(3:15),

B(4:15), C(5:15)] of waste agar powdered tiles and the cement tiles

(control) component with a treatment of [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of

sand and cement cured for 4 and 7 days is a good component in making

cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

C. Hypothesis

1. There is no significant difference on the Treatments [ A(3:15),

B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of waste agar powder and cement cured for 4 and 7

days is a good component in making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

2. There is no significant difference treatments [ A(3:15), B(4:15),

C(5:15) ] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth and cement cured for 4 and 7 days

to the control set ups with a treatment of [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of

sand and cement which cured for 4 days and 7 days is a good component

in making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

 4

D. Significance of the Study

This research study would help every individual in practicing other

ways in making cement tiles.

For business purposes this study helps in developing new ways

in producing tiles. Tiles are one of important materials needed in building

establishments and infrastructure especially in flooring.

For the consumers, this study helps save more money and

spend less if this waste agar powder cement tiles is effective.

For the environment, this study helps lessen pollution by recycling

the used of waste agar powder as an additive component in making

cement tiles.

As for the community, this study provide the community to be

known for developing a new material from waste agar powder as an

additive component in making cement tiles and can augment the financial

economic needs of the family. And also this study could enhance the

knowledge of people in community about the different ways of recycling

the waste materials.

 5

E. Scope and Limitation of the Study

The research study limits on the use of waste agar powder as a

component in making cement tiles. Luffa and Water Hyacinth was

collected from the Polygums Corp. Maasin, Zamboanga City.

This study limits on conducting the two tests;Mortar Test and Water

Absorbency Test. These only limits to 3 treatments with 3 replicates

namely; A(3:15), B(4:15) and C(5:15) of waste agar powder and cement

and there were a total of 36 Waste Agar Powder Tiles were made.

Moreover, it limits on using eighteen (18) waste agar powdered tiles

cured for 4 days and conducted the mortar test and water absorbency

test. And also limits on using eighteen (18) waste agar powdered tiles

cured for 7 days and conducted the mortar test and water absorbency

test.
 6

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This section contains the literature and related studies that supports the

research study.

Agar

Fit Day (2000-2013) agar-agar, often just abbreviated to agar, derived

substance from red algae or seaweed. An edible substance that isstaple in many

regions of the world and for vegetarians and vegans. Additionally, you will see

agar listed as a thickening agent on some candies. Calcium, iodine, phosphorous

and ironare some of the health benefits from agar. There is no calories, sugars,

fats or carbohydrates and it composed of 80% fiber. Agar may prevent the body

from storing unnecessary fats and sugars and absorbs glucose and is quickly

digested. In addition to absorbing glucose,it has also shown to absorb bile, which

may help lower the amount of cholesterol absorbed by the body. As a slight

laxative which agar acts, which may help certain digestive disorders, specifically

liver sluggishness, constipation, and slow motility.

According to Dr. Porto (2003) in the natural state, agar exists in the form

of calcium salt or a mixture of calcium and magnesium saltsand occurs as

structural carbohydrate in the cell walls of agarophytes algae. Composing a

complex mixture of polysaccharides of two major fractions - agarose, a neutral

polymer, and agaropectin, a charged, sulfated polymer.Agarose, the gelling

 7

fraction, is a neutral linear molecule essentially free of sulfates, composing of

agarose and varying percentages of ester sulfate, D-glucuronic acid, and small

amounts of pyruvic acid and consisting of chains of repeating alternate units of β-

1,3-linked- D-galactose and α-1,4-linked 3,6-anhydro-L-galactose. A sulfated

polysaccharide (3% to 10% sulfate)non gelling fraction which is called

Agaropectin.According to the species of seaweed,the proportion of these two

polymers varies. At least two-thirds of the natural agar-agar, which is Agarose

were normally represents.

PRODUCTION PROCESS

Powdered, flakes, bars and threads are the several forms that agar agar

comes in.A product mostly used for industrial applications is called powdered

agar-agar. Mostly, flakes, bars and threads are used in cooking. Through two

methods: Gel Press or Precipitation in solvents the manufacture of powdered and

flake-like agar-agar may be accomplished. Due to its high cost and low efficiency

the latter is not much used now a days.Through a more traditional manufacturing

system agar-agar in bar and thread forms is produced.

PROPERTIES

The solubility of gar-agar is insoluble in cold water, but it swells

considerably, absorbing as much as twenty times its own weight of water. It

dissolves readily in boiling water and as low as 0.50% it sets to a firm gel at

concentrations. Solvents at temperatures between 95º and 100º C the powdered

 8

dry agar-agar is soluble in water and other. Moistened agar flocculated by

ethanol, 2-propanol or acetone, or salted out by high concentrations of

electrolytes, is soluble in a variety of solvents at room temperature.

The gelling portion of agar-agar composed of a double helical structure.

The double helices aggregate to form a three-dimensional structure framework

which holds the water molecules within the interstices of the framework. Thus,

the formation of thermo-reversible gels; due to the three equatorial hydrogen

atoms on the 3,6-anhydro-L-galactose residues the gelling property of agar-agar

is produced, which constrain the molecule to form a helix. The interaction of the

helixes is produced. Agar-agar is outstanding among other hydrocolloids as

regards to gelling power. In very dilute solutions, containing a fraction of 0.5% to

1.0% of agar-agar gels can be formed. These gels are rigid, brittle, have well

defined shapes, as well as sharp melting and gelling points.

Moreover, the interesting phenomenon of syneresis (spontaneous

extrusion of water through the surface of the gel), and hysteresis (temperature

interval between melting and gelling temperatures) which they clearly

demonstrate.At temperatures far below the gel melting temperature, the gelling

occurs. Agar-agar forms a gel on a 1.5% solution, on cooling to about 32º to 45º

C that does not melt below 85º C. This hysteresis interval is a novel property of

agar-agar that finds many uses in food applications. The gel strength of the agar-

agar is influenced by concentration, time, pH, and sugar content. The pH

 9

noticeably affects the strength of the agar gel; as the pH decreases, the gel

strength weakens. Sugar content has also a considerable effect over agar gel.

Increasing levels of sugar make gels with harder but less cohesive texture.

3. VISCOSITY

The viscosity of agar solutions varies widely and is markedly dependent

upon the raw material source. The viscosity of an agar solution at temperatures

above its gelling point is relatively constant at pHs 4.5 to 9.0, and is not greatly

affected by age or ionic strength within the pH range 6.0 to 8.0. However, once

gelling starts viscosity at constant temperature increases with time.

4. STABILITY

An agar-agar solution is slightly negatively charged. Its stability depends

upon two factors: hydration and the electric charge. The removal of both factors

result in flocculation of the agar-agar. Prolonged exposure to high temperatures

can degrade solutions of agar-agar, resulting in a lower gel strength after

temperature decrease and gel formation. The effect is accelerated by decreasing

pH . Therefore, it should be avoided to expose agar-agar solutions to high

temperatures and to pHs lower than 6.0 for prolonged periods of time. Agar-agar

in the dry state is not subject to contamination by microorganisms. However,

agar-agar solutions and gels are fertile media for bacteria and/or molds and

appropriate precautions should be taken to avoid the growth of microorganisms.

 10

Science Buddy (2002-2013) with its distinctive smell, one can easily

distinguish agar from the other materials commonly found in a laboratory.

Chemically, agar is a polymer made up of subunits of the sugar galactose, and is

a component of the cell walls of several species of red algae that are usually

harvested in eastern Asia and California. Dissolved in boiling water and cooled,

laboratory agar looks gelatinous. Although agar's chief use is as a culture

medium for various microorganisms, particularly for bacteria, its other less well-

known uses include serving as a thickening for soups and sauces, in jellies and

ice cream, in cosmetics, for clarifying beverages, and for sizing fabrics.(1)

One might ask why agar, as opposed to regular gelatin (like that found in

Jello), is used for culturing bacteria. The answer is agar, unlike gelatin, won't be

degraded (eaten) by bacteria. Also, agar is firmer and stronger than gelatin. It's

still possible, however, to use gelatin as a culture medium for bacteria if agar is

unavailable.(2)

The Difco& BBL Manual gives more details about agar and its usage:(3)

Agar is a phycocolloid extracted from a group of red-purple marine algae

(Class Rhodophyceae) including Gelidium, Pterocladia and Gracilaria. Gelidium

is the preferred source for agars. Impurities, debris, minerals and pigment are

reduced to specified levels during manufacture.

Agar is a gel at room temperature, remaining firm at temperature as high

as 65°C. Agar melts at approximately 85°C, a different temperature from that at

 11

which it solidifies, 32-40°C. This property is known as hysteresis. Agar is

generally resistant to shear forces; however, different agars may have different

gel strengths or degrees of stiffness.

Agar is typically used in a final concentration of 1-2% for solidifying culture

media. Smaller quantities (0.05-0.5%) are used in media for motility studies

(0.5% w/v) and for growth of anaerobes (0.1%) and microaerophiles.

Specifications for bacteriological grade agar include good clarity,

controlled gelation temperature, controlled melting temperature, good diffusion

characteristics, absence of toxic bacterial inhibitors and relative absence of

metabolically useful minerals and compounds.

Notenoughcinnamon (2012-2014) Agar (or Agar Agar), sometimes

referred to as kanten, is a gelling agent coming from a South East Asian

seaweed. It is used for scientific purposes (in biology for instance), as a filler in

paper sizing fabric and as a clarifying agent in brewing. Agar can also be used as

a laxative (it’s 80-percent fiber) and as an appetite suppressant.

And it’s of course an amazing culinary ingredient. It’s a vegetarian gelatin

substitute, a thickener for soups, in fruits preserves, ice cream and others

desserts.
 12

Where can you find agar?

Agar is available in health food stores, in supermarket that carry health

food lines, in Asian grocery stores and online.

Health Benefits

Agar has no calories, no carbs, no sugar, not fat and is loaded with fiber.

It’s free from starch, soy, corn, gluten, yeast, wheat, milk, egg and preservatives.

It absorbs glucose in the stomach, passes through digestive system

quickly and inhibits the body from retaining and storing excess fat. Its water

absorbing properties also aids in waste elimination. Agar absorbs bile, and by

doing so, causes the body to dissolve more cholesterol.

Hawwa (2015) Agar is a polymer used to grow bacteria. Agar is first

supplied as a powder and, when dissolved in boiling water and cooled, solidifies

to a firm surface for bacterial growth. There are many different types of agar that

can be used to grow your bacteria of interest, depending on the species and your

research needs. Nutrient agar is popular because it can grow a variety of types of

bacteria and fungi, and contains many nutrients needed for robust bacterial

growth.
 13

Components of Nutrient Agar

Nutrient agar contains 0.5 percent peptone, which is an enzymatic digest

of animal protein. Peptone is the principal source of organic nitrogen for the

growing bacteria. Nutrient agar also contains 0.3 percent beef extract, which

contains water-soluble substances which aid in bacterial growth, such as

vitamins, carbohydrates, organic nitrogen compounds and salts. The last

component of nutrient agar is 1.5 percent agar, which is the solidifying agent.

Cement and its History

WHD Microanalysis Consultants Ltd (2005-2015) Throughout history,

cementing materials have played a vital role and were used widely in the ancient

world. The Egyptians used calcined gypsum as a cement and the Greeks and

Romans used lime made by heating limestone and added sand to make mortar,

with coarser stones for concrete.

The Romans found that a cement could be made which set under water

and this was used for the construction of harbours. This cement was made by

adding crushed volcanic ash to lime and was later called a "pozzolanic" cement,

named after the village of Pozzuoli near Vesuvius.

In places where volcanic ash was scarce, such as Britain, crushed brick or

tile was used instead. The Romans were therefore probably the first to
 14

manipulate systematically the properties of cementitious materials for specific

applications and situations.

Roman contribution to cement technology

Marcus Vitruvius Pollio, a Roman architect and engineer in the 1st century

BCE wrote his "Ten books of Architecture" - a revealing historical insight into

ancient technology. Writing about concrete floors, for example:

"First I shall begin with the concrete flooring, which is the most important

of the polished finishings, observing that great pains and the utmost precaution

must be taken to ensure its durability".

"On this, lay the nucleus, consisting of pounded tile mixed with lime in the

proportions of three parts to one, and forming a layer not less than six digits

thick."

And on pozzolana:

"There is also a kind of powder from which natural causes produces astonishing

results. This substance, when mixed with lime and rubble, not only lends strength

to buildings of other kinds, but even when piers are constructed of it in the sea,

they set hard under water."

(Vitruvius, "The Ten Books of Architecture," Dover Publications, 1960.)

His "Ten books of Architecture" are a real historical gem bringing together

history and technology. Anyone wishing to follow his instructions might first need

to find a thousand or so slaves to dig, saw, pound and polish...

 15

After the Romans, there was a general loss in building skills in Europe,

particularly with regard to cement. Mortars hardened mainly by carbonation of

lime, a slow process. The use of pozzolana was rediscovered in the late Middle

Ages.The great mediaeval cathedrals, such as Durham, Lincoln and Rochester in

England and Chartres and Rheims in France, were clearly built by highly skilled

masons. Despite this, it would probably be fair to say they did not have the

technology to manipulate the properties of cementitious materials in the way the

Romans had done a thousand years earlier.

Cement history and the Industrial Revolution

The Renaissance and Age of Enlightenment brought new ways of thinking

which led to the industrial revolution. In eighteenth century Britain, the interests of

industry and empire coincided, with the need to build lighthouses on exposed

rocks to prevent shipping losses. The constant loss of merchant ships and

warships drove cement technology forwards.

Smeaton, building the third Eddystone lighthouse (1759) off the coast of

Cornwall in Southwestern England, found that a mix of lime, clay and crushed

slag from iron-making produced a mortar which hardened under water. Joseph

Aspdin took out a patent in 1824 for "Portland Cement," a material he produced

by firing finely-ground clay and limestone until the limestone was calcined. He

called it Portland Cement because the concrete made from it looked like Portland

stone, a widely-used building stone in England.While history usually regards

Aspdin as the inventor of Portland cement, Aspdin's cement was not produced at
 16

a high-enough temperature to be the real forerunner of modern Portland cement.

Nevertheless, his was a major innovation and subsequent progress could be

viewed as mere development. A ship carrying barrels of Aspdin's cement sank off

the Isle of Sheppey in Kent, England, and the barrels of set cement, minus the

wooden staves, were later incorporated into a pub in Sheerness and are still

there now. Those who wish can sup a pint and contemplate cement history!

A few years later, in 1845, Isaac Johnson made the first modern Portland

Cement by firing a mixture of chalk and clay at much higher temperatures, similar

to those used today. At these temperatures (1400C-1500C), clinkering occurs

and minerals form which are very reactive and more strongly cementitious.

While Johnson used the same materials to make Portland cement as we

use now, three important developments in the manufacturing process lead to

modern Portland cement:

Development of rotary kilns

Addition of gypsum to control setting

Use of ball mills to grind clinker and raw materials

From the turn of the 20th century, rotary cement kilns gradually replaced

the original vertical shaft kilns, used originally for making lime. Rotary kilns heat

the clinker mainly by radiative heat transfer and this is more efficient at higher

temperatures, enabling higher burning temperatures to be achieved. Also,

 17

because the clinker is constantly moving within the kiln, a fairly uniform clinkering

temperature is achieved in the hottest part of the kiln, the burning zone.

The two other principal technical developments, gypsum addition to

control setting and the use of ball mills to grind the clinker, were also introduced

at around the start of the 20th century.An entire website could easily be devoted

to the history of cement, but this brief introduction may suffice to place cement in

a historical context.

A Better Understanding of Cement

The "Understanding Cement" book contains even more information.

Compared with this web site, the book has, for example, about two-and-a-

half times as much on ASR, one-and-a-half times as much on sulfate attack and

nearly three times as much on carbonation. It has sections on alkali-carbonate

reaction, frost (freeze-thaw) damage, steel corrosion, leaching and efflorescence

on masonry. It also has about four-and-a-half times as much on cement

hydration (comparisons based on word count).

Mason (2015) cement-making process [Credit: Encyclopædia Britannica,

Inc.]in general, adhesive substances of all kinds, but, in a narrower sense, the

binding materials used in building and civil engineering construction. Cements of

this kind are finely ground powders that, when mixed with water, set to a hard

mass. Setting and hardening result from hydration, which is a chemical

 18

combination of the cement compounds with water that yields submicroscopic

crystals or a gel-like material with a high surface area. Because of their hydrating

properties, constructional cements, which will even set and harden under water,

are often called hydraulic cements. The most important of these is portland

cement.

Applications of cement

Cements may be used alone (i.e., “neat,” as grouting materials), but the

normal use is in mortar and concrete in which the cement is mixed with inert

material known as aggregate. Mortar is cement mixed with sand or crushed

stone that must be less than approximately 5 mm (3/16 inch) in size. Concrete is

a mixture of cement, sand or other fine aggregate, and a coarse aggregate that

for most purposes is up to 19 to 25 mm (3/4 to 1 inch) in size, but the coarse

aggregate may also be as large as 150 mm (6 inches) when concrete is placed in

large masses such as dams. Mortars are used for binding bricks, blocks, and

stone in walls or as surface renderings. Concrete is used for a large variety of

constructional purposes. Mixtures of soil and portland cement are used as a base

for roads. Portland cement also is used in the manufacture of bricks, tiles,

shingles, pipes, beams, railroad ties, and various extruded products. The

products are prefabricated in factories and supplied ready for installation.

Because concrete is the most widely used of all construction materials in

the world today, the manufacture of cement is widespread. Each year almost one

ton of concrete is poured per capita in the developed countries.

 19

Portland Cement Association (2015)In its simplest form, concrete is a

mixture of paste and aggregates. The paste, composed of portland cement and

water, coats the surface of the fine and coarse aggregates. Through a chemical

reaction called hydration, the paste hardens and gains strength to form the rock-

like mass known as concrete. Within this process lies the key to a remarkable

trait of concrete: it's plastic and malleable when newly mixed, strong and durable

when hardened. Concrete’s durability, strength and relatively low cost make it the

backbone of buildings and infrastructure worldwide—houses, schools and

hospitals as well as airports, bridges, highways and rail systems. The most-

produced material on Earth will only be more in demand as, for example,

developing nations become increasingly urban, extreme weather events

necessitate more durable building materials and the price of other infrastructure

materials continues to rise.

Even construction professionals sometimes incorrectly use the terms

cement and concrete interchangeably. Cement is actually an ingredient of

concrete. It is the fine powder that, when mixed with water, sand, and gravel or

crushed stone (fine and coarse aggregate), forms the rock-like mass known as

concrete.

Tiles

Flooring About.com (2015) Ceramic tile is one of the most durable,

versatile, and popular flooring materials available. Hard enough to handle even
 20

the highest traffic locations ceramic tiles are resistant to scratching, chipping, and

cracking; and if they do break individual tiles can be replaced with relative ease.

At the same time glazed ceramics have a colorful glass surface coating which

also makes these materials impervious to water penetration and staining. In

addition to its functional characteristics ceramic tile also provides you with a

wealth of design options. It can be manufactured and printed to replicate

numerous styles from solid colors, to complex patterns. It can evenly credibly

reproduce the look of natural stone and some hardwood materials.

Basic Ceramic Flooring Information

Ceramics are manufactured materials which are made mostly from clay

and other natural substances. They are durable, resilient, and able to withstand

the challenges posed by a variety of environments. At the same time they can

also be cold, hard, and uncomfortable to stand on for long periods of time. By

understanding all of the characteristics of ceramics you will be able to make an

informed decision about their use.

The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed. (2015) Tile one of the ceramic

products used in building, to which group brick and terra-cotta also belong. The

term designates the finished baked clay—the material of a wide variety of units

used in architecture and engineering, such as wall slabs or blocks, floor pavings,

coverings for roofs, and drainage pipes. In these products the distinction between

terra-cotta and tile is often vague, and any small flat slab of ceramic material

used for veneering is also called a tile.

 21

The Ancient World

Tile-making evolved from primitive pottery manufacture, and the earliest

architectural sites give evidence of the use of tiles. As soon as the art of glazing

was discovered, it became possible to use the thin slabs of hard-burned clay,

decorated in colors, as a decorative adjunct to architecture. This aesthetic use of

tiles as a facing for walls distinguishes them from other ceramic products, such

as brick, terra-cotta, and roofing units, which are essentially structural. Colored

glazed tiles dated from 4700 BC have been found in Egypt.

Ancient ceramics were perfected in Mesopotamia. Large wall surfaces

were faced with bas-relief decorations executed in enameled tiles resembling

modern bricks in shape, most notably at the palace at Khorsabad (722–705 BC)

in Assyria, near ancient Nineveh, and the Ishtar Gate (c.7th cent. BC) in Babylon.

From these regions ancient Persia acquired ceramic techniques for the fine bas-

reliefs of animals and archers in the palaces of Susa and Persepolis (5th cent.

BC). The earliest tile sewer pipes are those excavated at Crete (c.1800 BC). The

Greeks also employed tile drains and conduits as well as tiles for roofing. Their

architectural ceramics were mostly confined to cornices and cornice adornments

and are customarily classed as terra-cotta. The Romans made wide use of floor

tiles of various shapes and of floor mosaics, as well as a variety of wall tiles,

including a type similar to modern hollow tiles, which were used in bathing
 22

establishments for the passage of warm air and smoke and as insulation. Roman

tiles received no colored or glazed decoration.

The Islamic World

The Muslim peoples brought tile to its greatest splendor as a decorative

medium. In the countries that came under their influence the tradition of a brilliant

ceramic art is still active. Muslim architecture is distinguished by the lavish tile

incrustations upon the exterior surfaces of walls, domes, and minarets, as well as

in rooms, mosques, and patios. The Persians remained masters of tile

decoration. Unsurpassed masterpieces of tile design were produced in Persia

from the 12th to the 16th cent. Examples are the 15th-century Blue Mosque at

Tabriz and numerous structures at Esfahan and Shiraz.

Europe and the Americas

Firmly established by the 11th cent., ceramics became an integral element

of architectural decoration in Spain, chiefly for floors and wainscots, their

richness exemplified in the Alhambra at Granada. From Spain the art was

transmitted not only to Italy and Holland and from there to England, but also into

Mexico by the Spanish conquerors. The Spaniards in Mexico developed a

distinctive style from the 16th to 18th cent., especially applied in the external

decoration of domes.At Delft, Holland, tile manufacturing began early in the 16th
 23

cent., and by 1670 numbers of factories were making the celebrated blue-and-

white Delft tiles, which enjoyed great popularity in N Europe and were exported

to the American colonies for fireplace facings. In Holland tiles were used to cover

large wall spaces in rooms, often being arranged to form complete pictorial

murals. In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland tiles were used to cover heating

stoves as early as the Gothic period and into the 19th cent., and numbers of

these, decorated and beautifully executed, still remain. In modern times the

vastly increased use for tiles, as in bathrooms, kitchens, and swimming pools

and in industrial buildings, has created an extensive tile industry.

 24

METHODOLOGY

A. Research Design

This research study employs an experimental research design which is

the Complete Randomized Design (CRD) to test the effectiveness of Luffa and

Water Hyacinth as component in making cement tiles.

It composes of 3 experimental treatments [T1 (10:5:15), T2 (5:5:15), T3

(5:10:15)] of waste agar powder is to cement and the 3 control treatments [T4

(3:15), T5 (4:15), T6 (5:15)] of sand is to cement which was cured for 4 and 7

days. Each of the treatments consists of 3 replicates.

B.Research Locale

The research experimentation was conducted at the Department of Public

Works and Highways (DPWH) District Office,Divisoria, ZamboangaCity. The

mortar test was also conducted at DPWH Regional Office, Tumaga,

ZamboangaCity and the water absorbency test was conducted at Zamboanga

National HighSchool West Science Laboratory.

 25

A. General Procedure

Data Gathering Process

Collection of Materials

Preparation of Molders/ Frame

Preparation of Different Treatments of Luffa and

Water Hyacinth Tiles

Preparation of Different Treatments of Cement

Tiles (Control – Set up)

Curing of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Tiles and

Cement Tiles (Control – Set up)

Mortar
[Type a quote from the document or the Test
summary of an interesting point. You
can position the text box anywhere in the document. Use the Text Box Tools
tab to change the formatting of the pull quote text box.]

Water Absorbency Test

Statistical Tool

Figure 1.Schematic diagram of the procedure.

 26

1. Collection of Materials

The Luffa will be bought at the Zamboanga City Public Market and the

Water Hyacinth will be gathered at Upper Calarian, Zamboanga City. The cement

will be bought at the Pulmano Hardware, Sta. Catalina, Zamboanga City which is

the Type 1 cement. The wood, plywood and nails were also prepared for

molders/framemaking. The researchers also borrowed the standard molder from

the DPWH District Office, Divisoria, Zamboanga City.

2. Preparation of Molders/Frame

There were a total of 72 molders. The size of the frame/molder has the

measurement of 6x4x2 inches.There are three treatments [T1 (10:5:15), T2 (5:5:15),

T3 (5:10:15)] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth is to cement for experimental set ups that

was cured for 4 and 7 days and there were three treatments[T4 (3:15), T5 (4:15), T6

(5:15)] of sand is to cement for the control set ups that was cured for 4 and 7 days.

There are 3 replicates in each treatment and the standard molders were borrowed

from DPWH District Office, Divisoria, Zamboanga City.

3. Preparation of Different Treatments

a. Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement Board

There were (3) three treatments [T1 (10:5:15), T2 (5:5:15), T3

(5:10:15)] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber is to cement for the mortar test

and water absorbency test. In treatment 1, there were 45 grams of Luffa , 90

 27

grams of Water Hyacinth and 150 grams of cement; treatment 2, there were

90 grams of Luffa and 90 grams of Water Hyacinth and 150 grams of cement;

and treatment , and in treatment 3 there were 90 grams of Luffa and 45

grams of Water Hyacinth and 150 grams of cement. Each treatment was

mixed homogeneously. There were a total of 36 Luffa and Water Hyacinth

Fiber Cement Board made; 18 for the mortar test and 18 for the water

absorbency test which was cured for 4 and 7 days and in each treatment

there were 3 replicates.

b. Cement Tiles (Control set – up)

There were (3) three treatments of sand is to cement [T4 (3:15), T5 (4:15), T6

(5:15)] as the control set-ups; used for the mortar test and the water

absorbency test. In treatment 1, there were grams of sand and 150 grams of

cement; treatment 2, there were 40 grams of sand and 150 grams of cement;

and treatment 3, there were 50 grams of sand and 150 grams of cement. In

each treatment there were 3 replicates. The total numbers of control cement

tiles were 36; 18 for the mortar test and 18 for the water absorbency test

which cured for 4 and 7 days.

4. Curing of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Board (control – set up)

After making the (36) thirty six Luffa and Water Hyacinth of different

treatments [T1 (10:5:15), T2 (5:5:15), T3 (5:10:15)] of Luffa fiber is to Water

Hyacinth fiber (36) thirty six cement tiles (control set-ups) of different treatments
 28

[T4 (3:15), T5 (4:15), T6 (5:15)] of sand is to cement. These were cured for 4 and

7 days. There were 18 Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber and 18 cement tiles that

underwent the mortar test and the water absorbency test respectively.

B. Mortar Test ( Compressive Test)

The compressive strength of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement

Board and the Cement Board (control set-up) was determined and tested using

the compressive strength test machine at Department of Public Works and

Highways (DPWH).

There were a total of 9 Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement Board and

9 Fiber Cement Board (control set-up) undergone the mortar testing that was

cured for 4 days.

And another mortar test conducted; 9 waste and Water Hyacinth Fiber

Cement Board and 9 Cement Board (control set-up) that were cured for 7 days.
 29

C. Water Absorbency Test

Water absorbency test was conducted at Zamboanga National High

School West Science Laboratory.

The 9 Luffa and Water Hyacinthed cement tiles and 9 cement tiles (control

set – up) were pre weighed separately by different treatments and with 3

replicates.

After pre weighing the 9 waste agar powdered cement tiles and labeled

with different treatments [T1 (5:10:15), T2 (5:5:15), T3 (10:5:15)] of Luffa and

Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement Board and the 9 Cement Board(control – set up)

and labeled with different treatments [T4 (3:15), T5 (4:15), T6 (5:15)] of sand is

to cement, the tiles were soaked in a container with water separately for one

hour.

The 9 Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement Board and 9 Cement Board

(control – set up) were post weighed separately to determine the amount of water

absorbed. The water absorbed were determined by taking the difference of the

mass before and after soaking in water the Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber and

Cement board(control set – up). The difference is the amount of water absorbed

by the Cement board.

 30

D. Statistical Tool

Average mean was used to determine the compressive strength and water

absorbed Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement Board and Cement Board

which was cured for 4 and 7 days.

One Way Analysis of Variance was used to determine the significant

difference among the different treatments [T1 (5:10:15), T2 (5:5:15), T3

(10:5:15)] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement Board and Cement Board;

T4, T5 and T6 (control set-up) which was cured for 4 and 7 days in terms of its

compressive strength and water absorbency.

T Test Independent was used to test the significant difference of the

highest mean compressive strength (psi) and with the less water absorbed by

Luffa and Water Hyacinth Fiber Cement Board compared with the control

Cement board(control set – up) that was cured for 4 days and 7 days.
 31

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This section presents the data gathered during the experimentation period. In this, the

effectiveness of the product was measured where the data are presented in tables.

Table 1. Mean Compressive Strength of Waste Agar Powdered Tiles

And Cement Tiles (control set-up) cured for 4 days

Treatments Replicate 1 (Psi) Replicate 2 (Psi) Replicate 3 (Psi) Average Mean

Psi

T1 (3:15) of Luffa
and Water
1058.5 1251.35 1059.95 1123.27
Hyacinth is to
cement

T2 (4:15) of Luffa
and Water
1177.5 1319.5 1015 1170.7
Hyacinth is to
cement

T3 (5:15) of Luffa
and Water
1174.5 1102.00 1058.5 1111.7
Hyacinth is to
cement

T4 (3:15) of sand
1058.5 1087.5 1174.5 1106.83
is to cement

T5 (4:15) of sand
1073 1044.00 1116.5 1077.83
is to cement

T6 (5:15) of sand
1044.00 1160.00 1102.00 1102.00
is to cement
 32

Based on the mean results of compressive strength test of Waste Agar

Powdered Tiles which was cured for 4 days, T2 (4:15) has the highest mean PSI

(Pounds per Square Inch) of 1170.7, followed by T1 (3:15); 1123.27 and T3 (5:15) with

average mean of 1111.7.

For cement tiles (control set-up) tiles; T4 (3:15) has the highest mean Psi

(Pounds per Square Inch) of 1106.83, followed by T6 (5:15) = 1102 and the T5 (4:15) =

1077.83. T2 (4:15) of Luffa and Water Hyacinthed Tiles and the T4 (3:14) of Cement

tiles cured for 4 days has the highest Psi (Pounds per Square Inch) mean value.

Table 2. One Way Analysis of Variance on the significant difference among the

Treatments (T1, T2 and T3) of Luffa and Water Hyacinthed Tiles in terms of its

Compressive strength which was cured for 4 days

Source of Sum of Degree of Mean of F Test F Crit. Decision

Variation Squares Freedom Square

Between 5873.11 2 2936.553 0.226 5.14

Within 77694.51 6 12994.086 Accept Ho

5%
Total 83837.62 8

The result of One-Way Analysis of variance on the compressive strength of

theWaste Agar Powdered Tiles shows F-test is 0.226 at 5% level of significance or

0.5 ∝. The F-test result 0.226<5.14 F crit:so, the decision is to accept the null

hypothesis means that there is no significant difference among the different treatments
 33

of Waste Agar powdered tiles that was cured for 4 days. The result implied that different

treatments (T1, T2, T3) cured for 4 days does not differ on its compressive strength.

Table 3. T test independent On the significant difference of effective Waste Agar Powdered
CementTiles and Cement Tiles (control set-ups) that cured for 4 days in terms of compressive
strength.

No. x test y test x-x y-y (x-x)2 (y-y)2

1 1177.5 1058.5 6.83 -48.33 46.69 2336.11

2 1319.5 1087.5 148.83 -19.83 22151.36 373.8
3 1015 1174.5 -155.67 67.67 4578.78 4578.78
Total 3512 46430.17 7288.67

Mean 1170.67
Computed Value: Critical Value: Accept Ho
0.67 2.776

This table shows that the most effective treatment of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles which is the T2 (4:15) and the most effective treatment of Cement Tiles

(control set-ups) which is the T4 (3:15). Since the computed value is 0.67> 2.776 of the

critical value, which implies to accept Ho and there is no significant difference between

the most effective treatment cement tiles and the most effective treatment of cement tiles

(control set -ups).

 34

Table 4. Mean Compressive Strength of Waste Agar Powdered

Tiles and the Cement Tiles (control set-up) which cured for 7 days

Treatments Average Psi

Replicate 1 (Psi) Replicate 2 (Psi) Replicate 3 (Psi)

T1 (3:15) of Luffa
and Water
1087.5 1261.5 1062.85 1137.28
Hyacinth is to
cement

T2 (4:15) of Luffa
and Water 1131.00
1203.5 1335.45 1223.32
Hyacinth is to
cement

T3 (5:15) of Luffa
and Water
1189 1113.6 1074.45 1125.68
Hyacinth is to
cement

T4 (3:15) of sand
1067.2 1103.45 1193.35 1121.33
is to cement

T5 (4:15) of sand
1088.95 1059.95 1131 1093.3
is to cement

T6 (5:15) of sand
1058.5 1177.4 1110.7 1115.53
is to cement

`Based on the results of compressive strength test of Waste Agar Powdered

Tiles which was cured for 7 days, T2 (4:15) has the highest Psi (Pounds per Square

Inch) mean with the 1223.32, followed by T1 (3:15) = 1137.28 and T3 (5:15)= 1125.68.

For cement tiles T4 (3:15) has the highest Psi (Pounds per Square Inch) mean =

1121.33, followed by T6 (5:15) = 1115.53 and the T5 (4:15)= 1093.3. T2 (4:15) of Luffa
 35

and Water Hyacinth is to cementand T4 (3:15) of cement (control set – up) tiles which

was cured for 7 days has the highest Psi (Pounds per Square Inch) mean value.

Table 5. One Way Analysis of Variance on the significant difference among the

Treatments (T1, T2 and T3) of Luffa and Water Hyacinthed Tiles in terms of its

Compressive strength which was cured for 7 days

Source of Sum of Degree of Mean of F Test F Crit. Decision

Variation Squares Freedom Square

Between 32617.25 2 16308.625 2.075 5.14

Within 36168.61 6 6028.101 5% Accept Ho

Total 68785.86 8

The result of One-Way Analysis of variance on the compressive strength of

theWaste Agar Powdered Tiles shows F-test is 2.075 at 5% level of significance or

0.5 ∝. The F-test result 2.075<5.14 F-critso, the decision is to accept the null hypothesis

means that there is no significant difference among the different treatments of Waste

Agar powdered tiles that was cured for 7 days. The result implied that different

treatments (T1, T2, T3) cured for 7 days does not differ on its compressive strength.
 36

Table 6 . T test independent of the the effective Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and Cement
tiles (control set-ups) that cured for 7 days in terms of compressive strength

No. x test y test x-x y-y (x-x)2 (y-y)2

1 1203.5 1067.2 -19.82 -54.13 392.7 2930.42

2 1335.45 1103.45 112.13 -17.88 12573.88 319.81
3 1131 1193.45 -92.62 72.02 8522.37 5186.4
Total 3669.95 21,488.595 8436.63

Mean 1223.32
Computed Value: Critical Value: Conclusion:
1.44 2.776 Accept Ho

This table shows that the most effective treatment of Luffa and Water Hyacinth

which is the T2 (4:15) and the most effective treatment of commercialized tiles which is

the T4 (3:15) Since the computed value is 1.44> 2.776 of the critical value, which implies

to accept ho and there is no significant difference between the most effective treatment

cement tiles and the most effective treatment of cement tiles (control set -ups).
 37

Table 7. Mean Results of Water Absorbency of the different Treatments of Waste Agar Powder
Cement Tiles and Cement Tiles (control set-ups) which cured for 4 days

Treatments Replicate 1 (g) Replicate 2 (g) Replicate 3 (g) Average Water

Absorbed

T1 (3:15) of Luffa 9 13 7 9.67

and Water
Hyacinth is to
cement

T2 (4:15) of Luffa 11 6 10 9
and Water
Hyacinth is to
cement

T3 (5:15) of Luffa 12 6 10 9.34

and Water
Hyacinth is to
cement

T4 (3:15) of sand 9 11 8 9.34

is to cement

T5 (4:15) of sand 5 12 8 8.33

is to cement

T6 (5:15) of sand 8 7 11 8.67

is to cement

Based on the mean results of water absorbency test of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles which cured for 4 days, T2 (4:15) got the lowest average water absorbed

of 9, followed by T3 (5:15) with the average water absorbed of 9.34 and followed by the

T1 (3:15) with the average water absorbed of 9.67. In cement tiles (control set-ups) ,

T5(4:15) got the lowest average water absorbed of 8.33, followed by T6(5:15) with the
 38

average water absorbed of 8.67 and the T4(3:15)the average water absorbed of 9.34.

The results implies that T2(4:15) of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and the T5 (4:15)

of cement tiles (control set-ups) which cured for 4days got the lowest the lowest average

water absorbed.

Table 8. One Way Analysis of Variance on the significant difference among the treatments
of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles in terms of its water absorption test which cured for 4 days

Source of Sum of Degree of Mean of F Test F Crit. Decision

Variation Squares Freedom Square

Between 44.22 2 22.111 0.353 5.14

Within 375.33 6 62.556 5% Accept Ho

Total 419.56 8

The result of One-Way Analysis of variance on the water absorption test that was

cured for 4 days of theLuffa and Water Hyacinth Tilesshows that the F-test is 0.353 at

5% level or 0.5 ∝ of significance. The F-test result 0.353>5.14 so, the decision is to

accept the null hypothesis that implies that there is no significant difference on the

different treatments of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles. The result implies thatdifferent

treatments of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles has the same water absorbency

capability.
 39

Table 9. T test independent of the effective Waste Agar Powder CementTiles and Cement Tiles
that cured for 4 days in terms of water absorbency test

No. x test y test x-x y-y (x-x)2 (y-y)2

1 167 163 11.33 2.67 128.44 7.11

2 149 157 -6.67 -3.33 44.44 11.11
3 151 161 -4.67 0.67 21.78 0.44
Total 467 194.67 18.67
481
Mean 155.67 160.33
Computed Value: Critical Value: Conclusion:
0.78 2.776 Accept Ho

This table shows that the most effective treatment of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles which is the T2 (4:15) and the most effective treatment of Cement Tiles

(control set-ups) which is the T5 (4:15) Since the computed value is 0.78> 2.776 of the

critical value, which implies to accept ho and there is no significant difference between

the most effective treatment cement tiles and the most effective treatment of cement tiles

(control set -ups).

 40

Table 10.Mean Results of Water Absorbency of the different treatments of Waste Agar Powder
Cement Tiles and Cement Tiles (control set-ups) which cured for 7 days

Treatments Replicate 1 (g) Replicate 2 (g) Replicate 3 (g) Average Water

Absorbed

T1 (3:15) of Luffa
and Water
7 7 6 6.67
Hyacinth is to
cement

T2 (4:15) of Luffa
and Water
9 6 7 7.33
Hyacinth is to
cement

T3 (5:15) of Luffa
and Water
10 8 9 9
Hyacinth is to
cement

T4 (3:15) of sand
8 9 7 8
is to cement

T5 (4:15) of sand
6 5 10 8.67
is to cement

T6 (5:15) of sand
10 8 11 9.67
is to cement

Based on the mean results of water absorbency test of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles which cured for 7 days, T1 (3:15) got the lowest average water absorbed

of 6.67, followed by T2 (4:15) with the average water absorbed of 7.33 and followed by
 41

the T3 (5:15) with the average water absorbed of 9 In cement tiles (control set-ups),

T4(5:15) got the lowest average water absorbed of 8, followed by T5(4:15) with the

average water absorbed of 8.67 and the T6(5:15)the average water absorbed of 9.67.

The results implies that T1(3:15) of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and the T4 (3:15)

of Commercialized Tiles which cured for 7 days got the lowest average water absorbed.

Table 11. One Way Analysis of Variance on the significant difference among the treatments of
Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles in terms of its water absorption test which cured for 7 days

Source of Sum of Degree of Mean of F Test F Crit. Decision

Variation Squares Freedom Square

Between 70.22 2 35.111 0.600 5.14

Within 351.33 6 58.556 5% Accept Ho

Total 421.56 8

The result of One-Way Analysis of variance on the water absorption test that was

cured for 7 days of theLuffa and Water Hyacinth Tilesshows that the F-test is 0.600 at

5% level or 0.5 ∝ of significance. The F-test result 0.600>5.14 so, the decision is to

accept the null hypothesis that implies that there is no significant difference on the

different treatments of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles. The result implies that the

different treatments of Luffa and Water Hyacinth tiles has the same water absorbency

capability.
 42

Table 12. T test independent of the the effective Waste Agar Powder CementTiles
and Cement Tiles (control set-ups) that cured for 7 days in terms of water absorbency test

No. x test y test x-x y-y (x-x)2 (y-y)2

1 170 168 12.0 3.33 144.0 11.11

2 148 160 -10.0 -4.67 110.0 21.78
3 156 166 -2.0 1.33 4.0 1.78
Total 470 248.0 34.67
494
Mean 158.0 164.7

Computed Value: Critical Value: Conclusion:

0.97 2.776 Accept Ho

This table shows that the most effective treatment of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles which is the T1 (3:15) and the most effective treatment of Cement Tiles

(control set-ups) which is the T4 (3:15) Since the computed value is 0.97> 2.776 of the

critical value, which implies to accept ho and there is no significant difference between

the most effective treatment cement tiles and the most effective treatment of cement tiles

(control set -ups).

 43

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data obtained from the test conducted for the Waste Agar Powder Cement

Tiles and Cement Tiles (control set-ups), the following conclusions were drawn:

Mortar Test (Compressive Strength)

Based on the Average mean Results of Compressive Strength of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles which cured for 4 days, T2 (4:15) has the highest PSI (Pounds per Square Inch)

average mean with the value of 1170.7 and for 7 days, T2 (4:15) has the highest PSI (Pounds

per Square Inch) average mean with the value of 1223.32 . for Cement Tiles (control set-ups)

that cured for 4 days, T4 (3:15) has the highest PSI (Pounds per Square Inch) average mean

with the value of 1106.83 and for 7 days, T4 (3:15) has the highest PSI (Pounds per Square

Inch) average mean with the value of 1121.33.

Based on the result of One-Way Analysis of variance on the compressive strength of the

Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles that was cured for 4 and 7 days, the decision is reject the null

hypothesis; for the 4 days of curing period, the F-test result was 0.226<5.14 so, the decision is

to accept the null hypothesis that implies that there is no significant difference among the

different treatments of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and for 7 days of curing period, the F-
 44

test is 0.600 at 5% level or 0.5 ∝ of significance. The F-test result 0.600>5.14 so, the decision is

to accept the null hypothesis that implies that there is no significant difference on the different

treatments of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles.

Based on the t test independent, on the 4days of curing period, the most

effective treatment of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles which is the T2 (4:15) and the

most effective treatment of Cement Tiles (control set-ups) which is the T4 (3:15). Since

the computed value is 1.03 > 2.776 of the critical value, which implies to accept Ho and

there is no significant difference between the most effective treatment cement tiles and

the most effective treatment of cement tiles (control set -ups).

On the 7 days of curing period, the most effective treatment of Luffa and Water

Hyacinth which is the T2 (4:15) and the most effective treatment of commercialized tiles

which is the T4 (3:15) Since the computed value is 1.44> 2.776 of the critical value,

which implies to accept ho and there is no significant difference between the most

effective treatment cement tiles and the most effective treatment of cement tiles (control

set -ups).

Water Absorbency Test

Based on the Mean Results of Water Absorbency Test that was cured for 4 days,

Treatment 1 (3:15) got the lowest mean of water absorption of 155.67 and for curing period of 7

days, Treatment 1 (3:15) got the lowest mean of water absorption of 158. For cement tiles

(control set-up) that cured for 4 days, T5 (4:15) got the lowest mean water absorption of

158.67 and for 7 days, T5 (4:15) got the lowest mean water absorption of 164.67
 45

The result of One-Way Analysis of variance on the water absorption test Waste Agar

Powder Cement Tiles that cured for 4 days, shows that the F-test is 0.600 at 5% level or 0.5 ∝

of significance. The F-test result 0.600>5.14 so, the decision is to accept the null hypothesis

that implies that there is no significant difference on the different treatments of Waste Agar

Powder Cement Tiles. The result implies that different treatments of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles has the same water absorbency capability and for curing period of 7 days, shows

that the F-test is 0.600 at 5% level or 0.5 ∝ of significance. The F-test result 0.600>5.14 so, the

decision is to accept the null hypothesis that implies that there is no significant difference on the

different treatments of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles. The result implies that different

treatments of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles has the same water absorbency capability.

Based on the t test independent, for the curing for 4 days,shows the most

effective treatment of Luffa and Water Hyacinth which is the T2 (4:15) and the most

effective treatment of commercialized tiles which is the T4 (3:15) Since the computed

value is 1.44> 2.776 of the critical value, which implies to accept ho and there is no

significant difference between the most effective treatment cement tiles and the most

effective treatment of cement tiles (control set -ups).

For the curing of 7 days, the most effective treatment of Waste Agar Powder

Cement Tiles which is the T1 (3:15) and the most effective treatment of Cement Tiles

(control set-ups) which is the T4 (3:15) Since the computed value is 0.97> 2.776 of the

critical value, which implies to accept ho and there is no significant difference between

the most effective treatment cement tiles and the most effective treatment of cement tiles

(control set -ups).

 46

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Use other kind of cement such as the dark cement instead of white cement.

2. Use safety equipment or apparatuses.

3. Make use of other proportions of waste photocopier powdered ink and cement.

4. Use additional number of days in curing the Luffa and Water Hyacinth in Tiles.
 47

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Schematic Process

Data Gathering Process

Collection of Materials

Preparation of Molders/ Frame

Preparation of Different Treatments of Luffa and

Water Hyacinth Cement Tiles

Preparation of Different Treatments of Cement

Tiles (Control – Set up)

Curing of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Cement Tiles

and Cement Tiles (Control – Set up)

Mortar
[Type a quote from the document or the Test
summary of an interesting point. You
can position the text box anywhere in the document. Use the Text Box Tools
tab to change the formatting of the pull quote text box.]

Water Absorbency Test

 48

Statistical Tool

APPENDIX B: Documentation and Pictorials

COLLECTION OF MATERIALS PREPARATION OF MOLDERS

PREPARATION OF DIFFERENT TREATMENT OF LUFFA AND WATER HYACINTH AND THE CONTROL
SET UPS
 49

Appendix C: Computation
ANOVA

Results of Compressive Strength of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Tiles which cured for 4
days

77,907.39
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
6
∑(∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐 (∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐
𝑆𝑆𝒃 = − 𝑴𝒔𝒘 = 𝟏𝟐, 𝟗𝟖𝟒. 𝟓𝟔𝟔
𝑛𝑗 𝑁
𝑀𝑠𝑏
(10,261.80)2 𝐹=
𝑆𝑆𝑏 = 𝑀𝑠𝑤
9
2,931.160
𝑺𝑺𝒃 = 𝟓, 𝟖𝟔𝟐. 𝟑𝟐 𝐹=
12,984.566
(∑ 𝑥𝑗)2
2
𝑆𝑆𝑤 = ∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗 − ∑
𝑛𝑗
𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟐𝟐𝟔
𝑆𝑆𝑤 = 11,681,881.08
𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 𝑘 − 1
𝑺𝑺𝒘 = 𝟕𝟕, 𝟗𝟎𝟕. 𝟑𝟗
𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 3 − 1
𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 𝑆𝑆𝑏 + 𝑆𝑆𝑤
𝒅𝒇𝒃 = 𝟐
𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 5,862.32 + 77,907.39
𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁 − 𝐾
𝑺𝑺𝒕 = 𝟖𝟑, 𝟕𝟔𝟗. 𝟕𝟐
𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 9 − 3
𝑆𝑆𝑏
𝑀𝑠𝑏 =
𝑑𝑓𝑏 𝒅𝒇𝒘 = 𝟔

5,862.32 𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 𝑁 − 1
𝑀𝑠𝑏 =
2
𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 9 − 1
𝑴𝒔𝒃 = 𝟐𝟗𝟑𝟏. 𝟏𝟔𝟎
𝒅𝒇𝒕 = 𝟖
𝑆𝑆𝑤
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
𝑑𝑓𝑤
 50

Results of Compressive Strength of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Tiles which cured for 7
days

𝑴𝒔𝒘 = 𝟖, 𝟔𝟐𝟕. 𝟑𝟗𝟑

𝑀𝑠𝑏
𝐹=
𝑀𝑠𝑤
∑(∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐 (∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐
𝑆𝑆𝒃 = − 8, 541.160
𝑛𝑗 𝑁 𝐹=
8, 627.393
(10,458.55)2
𝑆𝑆𝑏 =
9

𝑺𝑺𝒃 = 𝟏𝟕, 𝟎𝟖𝟐. 𝟑𝟐

2
2
(∑ 𝑥𝑗)
𝑆𝑆𝑤 = ∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗 − ∑
𝑛𝑗

𝑆𝑆𝑤 = 12, 222, 320.91 𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟗𝟗𝟎

𝑺𝑺𝒘 = 𝟓𝟏, 𝟕𝟔𝟒. 𝟑𝟔 𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 𝑘 − 1
𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 𝑆𝑆𝑏 + 𝑆𝑆𝑤 𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 3 − 1

𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 17,082.32 + 51, 764.36 𝒅𝒇𝒃 = 𝟐

𝑺𝑺𝒕 = 𝟔𝟒, 𝟖𝟒𝟔. 𝟔𝟖 𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁 − 𝐾
𝑆𝑆𝑏 𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 9 − 3
𝑀𝑠𝑏 =
𝑑𝑓𝑏
𝒅𝒇𝒘 = 𝟔
17, 082.32
𝑀𝑠𝑏 =
2 𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 𝑁 − 1

𝑴𝒔𝒃 = 𝟖, 𝟓𝟒𝟏. 𝟏𝟔𝟎 𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 9 − 1

𝑆𝑆𝑤 𝒅𝒇𝒕 = 𝟖
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
𝑑𝑓𝑤

51, 764.36
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
6
 51

Results of Average Mean of Water Absorption of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Tiles that
cured for 4 days

∑(∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐 (∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐 𝑴𝒔𝒘 = 𝟔𝟐. 𝟓𝟏

𝑆𝑆𝒃 = −
𝑛𝑗 𝑁 𝑀𝑠𝑏
𝐹=
(1,429)2 𝑀𝑠𝑤
𝑆𝑆𝑏 = 226,937.67 −
9 22.111
𝐹=
𝑺𝑺𝒃 = 𝟒𝟒. 𝟐𝟐 62.556

(∑ 𝑥𝑗)2
2
𝑆𝑆𝑤 = ∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗 − ∑
𝑛𝑗

𝑆𝑆𝑤 = 227,313.00 − 226, 937.67 𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟓𝟑

𝑺𝑺𝒘 = 𝟑𝟕𝟓. 𝟑𝟑 𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 𝑘 − 1

𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 𝑆𝑆𝑏 + 𝑆𝑆𝑤 𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 3 − 1

𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 44.22 + 375.33 𝒅𝒇𝒃 = 𝟐

𝑺𝑺𝒕 = 𝟒𝟏𝟗. 𝟓𝟔 𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁 − 𝐾

𝑆𝑆𝑏 𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 9 − 3
𝑀𝑠𝑏 =
𝑑𝑓𝑏
𝒅𝒇𝒘 = 𝟔
44.22
𝑀𝑠𝑏 = 𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 𝑁 − 1
2

𝑴𝒔𝒃 = 𝟐𝟐. 𝟏𝟏𝟏 𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 9 − 1

𝑆𝑆𝑤 𝒅𝒇𝒕 = 𝟖
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
𝑑𝑓𝑤

375.33
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
6
 52

Results of Average Mean of Water Absorption of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Tiles that
cured for 4 days

𝑴𝒔𝒘 = 𝟓𝟖. 𝟓𝟓𝟔

∑(∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐 (∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗)𝟐 𝑀𝑠𝑏

𝑆𝑆𝒃 = − 𝐹=
𝑛𝑗 𝑁 𝑀𝑠𝑤

(1,456)2 35.111
𝑆𝑆𝑏 = 235, 618.67 − 𝐹=
9 58.556

𝑺𝑺𝒃 = 𝟕𝟎. 𝟐𝟐
2
(∑ 𝑥𝑗)
2
𝑆𝑆𝑤 = ∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑗 − ∑
𝑛𝑗

𝑆𝑆𝑤 = 235, 970.00 − 235, 618.67

𝑺𝑺𝒘 = 𝟑𝟓𝟏. 𝟑𝟑 𝑭 = 𝟎. 𝟔𝟎𝟎

𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 𝑆𝑆𝑏 + 𝑆𝑆𝑤 𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 𝑘 − 1

𝑆𝑆𝑡 = 70.22 + 351.33 𝑑𝑓𝑏 = 3 − 1

𝑺𝑺𝒕 = 𝟒𝟐𝟏. 𝟓𝟔 𝒅𝒇𝒃 = 𝟐

𝑆𝑆𝑏 𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁 − 𝐾
𝑀𝑠𝑏 =
𝑑𝑓𝑏
𝑑𝑓𝑤 = 9 − 3
70.22
𝑀𝑠𝑏 = 𝒅𝒇𝒘 = 𝟔
2

𝑴𝒔𝒃 = 𝟑𝟓. 𝟏𝟏𝟏 𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 𝑁 − 1

𝑆𝑆𝑤 𝑑𝑓𝑡 = 9 − 1
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
𝑑𝑓𝑤
𝒅𝒇𝒕 = 𝟖
351.33
𝑀𝑠𝑤 =
6
53
 54

Appendix D: Tables
Table 1. Average Mean of water absorption of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and the Cement
Tiles (control set-ups) which cured for 7 days

Treatments Replicate 1 (g) Replicate 2 (g) Replicate 3 (g) Average Mean

of Absorption
(g)

T1 (3:15) of Weight before 163 141 150 151.33

Luffa and soaking
Water
Hyacinth is to Weight after 170 148 156 158
cement soaking

T2 (4:15) of Weight before 149 156 161 155.33

Luffa and soaking
Water
Hyacinth is to Weight after 158 162 168 162.67
cement soaking

T3 (5:15) of Weight before 159 151 157 155.67

Luffa and soaking
Water
Hyacinth is to
cement Weight after 169 159 166 164.67
soaking

T4 (3:15) of Weight before 167 148 158 157.67

sand is to soaking
cement

Weight after 175 159 165 166.33

soaking

T5 (4:15) of Weight before 162 148 158 156

sand is to soaking
cement

Weight after 168 160 166 164.67

soaking

T6 (5:15) of Weight before 158 164 159 160.33

sand is to soaking
cement

Weight after 168 172 170 170

 55

soaking
Based on the results of water absorbency test of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles which cured

for 7 days, Treatment 1 (3:15) got the lowest mean of water absorption of 158 , followed by T2

(4:15) with the mean of water absorption of162.67 and followed by the T3 (5:15) with the mean

of water absorption of 164.67. In cement tiles (control set-ups) , T5(4:15) got the lowest mean

water absorption of 164.67, followed by T4(3:15) with the mean of water absorption of 166.33

and the T6(5:15) with the the mean of water absorption of 170. The results implies that T1(3:15)

of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and the T5 (4:15) of Cement Tiles (control set-ups) which

cured for 7 days got the lowest mean of water absorption.

Table 1. Average Mean of water absorption of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and the Cement
Tiles (control set-ups) which cured for 7 days

Treatments Replicate 1 (g) Replicate 2 (g) Replicate 3 (g) Average Mean

of Absorption
(g)

T1 (3:15) of Weight before 158 136 144 146

Luffa and soaking
Water
Hyacinth is to Weight after 167 149 151 155.67
cement soaking

T2 (4:15) of Weight before 145 150 158 151

Luffa and soaking
Water
Hyacinth is to Weight after 156 156 168 160
cement soaking

T3 (5:15) of Weight before 155 148 151 151.33

Luffa and soaking
Water
Hyacinth is to
cement Weight after 167 154 161 160.67
soaking

T4 (3:15) of Weight before 163 144 153 153.33

sand is to soaking
 56

cement

Weight after 172 155 161 162.67

soaking

T5 (4:15) of Weight before 158 145 153 152

sand is to soaking
cement

Weight after 163 157 161 158.67

soaking

T6 (5:15) of Weight before 153 161 155 156.33

sand is to soaking
cement

Weight after 161 168 166 165

soaking

Based on the results of water absorbency test of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles

which cured for 4 days, Treatment 1 (3:15) got the lowest mean of water absorption of 155.67 ,

followed by T2 (4:15) with the mean of water absorption of160 and followed by the T3 (5:15)

with the mean of water absorption of 160.67. In cement tiles (control set-ups), T5(4:15) got the

lowest mean water absorption of 158.67, followed by T4(3:15) with the mean of water

absorption of 162.67 and the T6(5:15) with the mean of water absorption of 165. The results

implies that T1(3:15) of Waste Agar Powder Cement Tiles and the T5 (4:15) of Cement Tiles

(control set-ups) which cured for 4days got the lowest mean of water absorption.
 57

Research Plan
A. Questions or Problems being addressed

1.) Which Treatments [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of waste agar

powder and cement cured for 4 and 7 days is a good component in

making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

2. Is there a significant difference among the treatments [ A(3:15),

B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth and cement cured for 4 and

7 days is a good component in making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

3. Which among the treatments [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of

waste agar powder and cement cured for 4 and 7 days is comparable

tothe control set ups which is the commercialized component with a

treatment of [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of sand and cement which cured

for 4 days and 7 days is a good component in making cement tiles in

terms of:
 58

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

4. Is there a significant difference among the treatments [ A(3:15),

B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth and cement cured for 4 and

7 days to the control set ups with a treatment of [ A(3:15), B(4:15),

C(5:15) ] of sand and cement which cured for 4 days and 7 days is a good

component in making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

B . Hypothesis or Engineering Goals

1. There is no significant difference on the Treatments [ A(3:15),

B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of waste agar powder and cement cured for 4 and 7

days is a good component in making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

 59

2. There is no significant difference treatments [ A(3:15), B(4:15),

C(5:15) ] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth and cement cured for 4 and 7 days

to the control set ups with a treatment of [ A(3:15), B(4:15), C(5:15) ] of

sand and cement which cured for 4 days and 7 days is a good component

in making cement tiles in terms of:

a. Mortar Test (Compressive Test)

b. Water Absorbency Test

 60

C. Description or in Detail of Method or Procedures

Data Gathering Process

Collection of Materials

Preparation of Molders/ Frame

Preparation of Different Treatments of Luffa and

Water Hyacinth Tiles

Preparation of Different Treatments of Cement

Tiles (Control – Set up)

Curing of Luffa and Water Hyacinth Tiles and

Cement Tiles (Control – Set up)

Mortar
[Type a quote from the document or the Test
summary of an interesting point. You
can position the text box anywhere in the document. Use the Text Box Tools
tab to change the formatting of the pull quote text box.]

Water Absorbency Test

Statistical Tool
 61

Figure 1.Schematic diagram of the procedure.

5. Collection of Materials

The Waste Agar Powder was collected at Polygums Corporation at San

Jose Gusu, Zamboanga City. The cement was bought at the Pulmano Hardware,

Sta. Catalina, Zamboanga City which is the Type 1 cement. The wood, plywood

and nails were also prepared for molders/framemaking. The researchers also

borrowed the standard molder from the DPWH District Office, Divisoria,

Zamboanga City.

6. Preparation of Molders/Frame

There were a total of 72 molders. The size of the frame/molder has the

measurement of 2”x2”x2”. There are three treatments [T1 (3:15), T2 (4:15), T3

(5:15)] of Luffa and Water Hyacinth is to cement for the experimental set ups that

was cured for 4 and 7 days and there were three treatments[T4 (3:15), T5 (4:15), T6

(5:15)] of sand is to cement for the control set ups that was cured for 4 and 7 days.

There are 3 replicates in each treatment and the standard molders were borrowed

from DPWH District Office, Divisoria, Zamboanga City.

7. Preparation of Different Treatments

c. Luffa and Water Hyacinth Tiles

 62

There were (3) three treatments [T1 (3:15), T2 (4:15), T3 (5:15)] of

waste agar powder is to cement for the mortar test and water absorbency

test. In treatment 1, there were 30 grams of Luffa and Water Hyacinth and

150 grams of cement; treatment 2, there were 40 grams of Luffa and Water

Hyacinth and 150 grams of cement; and treatment 3, there were 50 grams of

Luffa and Water Hyacinth and 150 grams of cement. Each treatment was

mixed homogeneously. There were a total of 36 Waste Agar Powder Cement

Tiles made; 18 for the mortar test and 18 for the water absorbency test which

was cured for 4 and 7 days and in each treatment there were 3 replicates.

d. Cement Tiles (Control set – up)

There were (3) three treatments [T4 (3:15), T5 (4:15), T6 (5:15)] of sand is to

cement as the control set-ups; used for the mortar test and the water

absorbency test. In treatment 1, there were 30 grams of sand and 150 grams

of cement; treatment 2, there were 40 grams of sand and 150 grams of

cement; and treatment 3, there were 50 grams of sand and 150 grams of

cement. In each treatment there were 3 replicates. The total numbers of

control cement tiles were 36; 18 for the mortar test and 18 for the water

absorbency test which cured for 4 and 7 days.

8. Curing of Waste Agar Powdered Tiles and Cement Tiles (control – set up)

After making the (36) thirty six waste agar powdered tiles of different

treatments [T1 (3:15), T2 (4:15), T3 (5:15)] of waste agar powder is to cement

 63

and (36) thirty six cement tiles (control set-ups) of different treatments [T4 (3:15),

T5 (4:15), T6 (5:15)] of sand is to cement. These were cured for 4 and 7 days.

There were 18 waste agar powder tiles and 18 cement tiles that underwent the

mortar test and the water absorbency test respectively.

E. Mortar Test ( Compressive Test)

The compressive strength of waste agar powdered cement tiles and the

cement tiles (control set-up) was determined and tested using the compressive

strength test machine at Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

There were a total of 9 waste agar powdered cement tiles and 9 cement

tiles (control set-up) undergone the mortar testing that was cured for 4 days.

And another mortar test conducted; 9 waste agar powdered cement tiles

and 9 cement tiles (control set-up) that were cured for 7 days.

F. Water Absorbency Test

Water absorbency test was conducted at Zamboanga National High

School West Science Laboratory.

 64

The 9 Luffa and Water Hyacinth cement tiles and 9 cement tiles (control

set – up) were pre weighed separately by different treatments and with 3

replicates.

After pre weighing the 9 waste agar powdered cement tiles and labeled

with different treatments [T1 (3:15), T2 (4:15), T3 (5:15)] of Luffa and Water

Hyacinth is to cement and the 9 cement tiles (control – set up) and labeled with

different treatments [T4 (3:15), T5 (4:15), T6 (5:15)] of sand is to cement, the tiles

were soaked in a container with water separately for one hour.

The 9 waste agar powdered cement tiles and 9 cement tiles (control – set

up) were post weighed separately to determine the amount of water absorbed.

The water absorbed were determined by taking the difference of the mass before

and after soaking in water the waste agar powdered cement tiles and cement

tiles (control set – up). The difference is the amount of water absorbed by the

tiles.

G. Statistical Tool

Average mean was used to determine the compressive strength and water

absorbed by waste agar powder tiles and control cement tiles which was cured

for 4 and 7 days.

 65

One Way Analysis of Variance was used to determine the significant

difference among the different treatments [T1 (3:15), T2 (4:15), T3 (5:15)] of

waste agar powdered tiles is to cement tiles and cement tiles; T4, T5 and T6

(control set-up) which was cured for 4 and 7 days in terms of its compressive

strength and water absorbency.

T Test Independent was used to test the significant difference of the

highest mean compressive strength (psi) and with the less water absorbed by

waste agar powdered cement tiles compared with the cement tiles (control set –

up) that was cured for 4 days and 7 days.

66