Chapter 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter deals with the presentation of the project. This consists of the

project description, project specifications product development, block diagram,

resource management, design calculation, try-outs and revision and

presentation, analysis and interpretation data of the project.

Project Description

The Project Prototype ginger and turmeric extractor machine is a

specialized apparatus designed for the extraction of ginger and turmeric.

Engineered to optimize the extraction process, this machine utilizes a series of

advanced techniques to efficiently extract the valuable juice present in both

ginger and turmeric.

For the assembly of the machine, the frame of the prototype is made of

sheet stainless steel. The machine dimensions are 33 inches long, 19.5 inches

wide and 44 inches high. A high capacity feeding hopper is for a continuous

loading of raw materials with the length of 10 inches long, 8.8 inches wide. Pair

of roller press assembly has a diameter of 3.5 inches and length of 6.50 inches.

Each pair has a specific clearance to slightly crush the raw materials that can

ease the operation of extraction. Inclined perforated screen was used to transfer

raw materials. For the main component of machine, it is where the extraction

mainly happens, the screw conveyor. Screw conveyor has a dimension of 53 cm.

The screw conveyor is located at the lower part of the machine which is

horizontally extended from the main frame together with its juice outlet and exit

hopper of the crushed ginger and turmeric.

 The machine was operated by a 1 ½ HP motor with 220 volts, 7.8

amperes, 60 hertz and 1760 rpm. Speed reducer or gearbox was also used with

a speed ratio of 1:60 to reduce an electric motor's speed and increase the torque.

Physical Description

This segment involves the physical features and dimensions of the said

project prototype.

*insert model of prototype*

Project Specification

Table 6. Project Description

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION SPECIFICATIONS

Machine’s Color Stainless

Machine’s Length 33”

Machine’s Width 19.5”

Machine’s Height 44”

No. of Rollers 2 pairs

Screw Conveyor 53 cm

Electric Motor 1 ½ HP

Speed Reducer’s Ratio 1:60

The Table 6 shows the specification and physical characteristics of the

components needed in the process of the machine.

Project Development

Ginger root which is known for its powerful medicinal benefits while

turmeric, a yellow-colored root also from the ginger family is said can cure

several conditions such menstrual problems, toothaches, bruises, chest pain and

has anti-cancer properties, initiated the researches to conduct their study. In

Calauan, Laguna the researchers discovered a turmeric and ginger enterprise

producing items like juice, coffee, capsules, and sugar. This business, named

Dorenie’s Food and Beverages Trading, also assists a neighboring cooperative

called "Likha ni Inay." This inspired the researchers to develop a new way of

helping small businesses and local farmers of ginger and turmeric.

The researches had the opportunity to meet Dorie Angeles the owner of

Dorenie’s Food and Beverages Trading residing at Barangay Mabacan, Calauan

Laguna. During their meeting, the researchers inquired about some problems

they encountered in their business and one of these is extracting the turmeric

using a manual hydraulic operation. Mrs. Angeles mentioned that it is an issue

since man power is needed to extract the turmeric and it also takes time to

produce the juice they needed. Inspired by this encounter, the researchers

decided to conduct a study in developing an extractor machine as a solution.

For extracting ginger and turmeric, the researchers developed an extractor

machine using a pair of rollers and a screw conveyor operated by an electric

motor with 1 ½ HP. The dimensions of the machine were 33 inches long, 19.5

inches wide and 44 inches high. The researchers conducted the study in

Calauan, Laguna focusing on the production rate, percent juicing recovery and
the efficiency of the machine. The researchers designed the machine that would

automatically extract the juice of ginger and turmeric by continuously adding the

raw materials to the feeding hopper.

Block Diagram
Ginger and
Turmeric

Transporting
section

Shredding &
Extracting
section

Extracting &
Shredded Ginger and
Filtering
section Turmeric

Extracted juice

Figure 4. Block Diagram

Figure 4 shows the flow operation of the Ginger and Turmeric Extractor

Machine. Starting from the feeding the hopper with the raw materials, the first

pair of roller press assembly with a clearance of 7mm will transport the raw

materials to the next pair with a smaller clearance of 4mm that will shred and

slightly extract the ginger and turmeric. As the raw materials enter the screw

conveyor, the final extraction and filtration process happened. The extracted juice
is then directed to the juice outlet, while the shredded ginger and turmeric exit

through the conveyor and hopper.

Objective 1:

To determine the design requirements needed to construct the

“Ginger and Turmeric Extractor” that will satisfy the needs of Dorenie’s
food and beverages trading.

Design Calculations

The following were the calculations of the design that helped provide data
to the researchers to attain the desired output of the Ginger and Turmeric
Extractor Using Four-Way Roller Press Assembly. The data were thoroughly
calculated and computed in order to attain the right dimension and specifications
of the required materials. Machine Design and Machine Elements were used.

For the design, we have taken some assumptions based on the existing
machine and some other parameters. The following factors were considered:

1. The machine consists of four rollers.

2. Each roller has a diameter of 3.5 inches (88.9 mm) to ensure efficient
compression of turmeric and ginger.
3. The roller length is 6.50 inches (165.1 mm), based on the number of
turmeric it can handle simultaneously.

Design of roller

Determination of ginger and turmeric size

We have measured 3 different sizes of ginger and turmeric to obtain the

maximum and minimum size that can be crushed by the machine. From the
research and observation, we have made so far, by measuring 3 ginger and
turmeric we get the diameter. Measured values are listed in the table below:

Number Type Diameter (mm)

 1 Small 7
2 Medium 9
3 Large 10
So, the maximum size of the ginger and turmeric is 10 mm and the minimum size
is 7mm.

From the research and observation, we have made, the maximum

thickness is 10 mm and the minimum thickness is 7 mm.

Solving for the size of the roller to accommodate the varying sizes of
ginger and turmeric

The clearance that can accommodate the maximum and minimum size of
ginger and turmeric that can be fed into the extractor is determined using
equation 1

( )
1
R+
2 equation 1
x=2 −r
cos ∅

Where;

x=¿ ginger∧turmeric that can be fed into machine

r =radius of theroller , mm

c=clearance between the top∧feed roller ,mm

2 θ=nip angle

The nip angle is a function of the coefficient of friction, µ, between the

roller surface and the ginger and turmeric surface, and the relationship between
the nip angle and the coefficient of friction is such that;

−1
θ=tan μ

Where;
 μ=coefficient of friction between the roller surface ( engineering plastic )

¿ the ginger∧turmeric

μ=0.25

−1
θ=tan 0.25

θ=14.04 °

From equation 1 the formula of clearance is derived below:

Where;

c max =maximum gap between roller 1∧2

c min =minimum gap between roller 3∧4

Roller 1 c max Roller 2

Roller 3 Roller 4
c min

c max =2 ( 2x + R ) cosθ−2 R
c max =2 ( 112 +44.45) cos 14.04−2 ( 44.45)
c max =7.05 ≈ 7 mm

c min =2 ( 72 +44.45) cos 14.04−2 ( 44.45)

c min =4.14 ≈ 4 mm

Minimum gap between the two rollers which is 4mm and the maximum gap is 7
mm.
Solving for the shaft’s thickness

A cylindrical shaft is used to build the roller; this shaft’s thickness must be
calculated to check for its ability to withstand the compressive strength of the
ginger and turmeric by equation 2.

Pd
t= equation 2
2 σt

Where;

t=thickness of the roller

σ t=tensile strength of theroller ,34.5 MPa

P=roller pressure , 8.55 MPa

d=diameter of the roller

8.55 x 88.9
t=
2 x 34.5

t=11.01 ≈ 11mm

It is the minimum thickness of the roller to withstand the compression strength.

Weight of roller

The weight of the crushing roller is estimated from equation 3.

W =pvg equation 3

Where;

W =weight of crushing roller , N

kg
ρ=density of the crushing roller material , 2200 3
m

3
v=material volume of the roller ,m
 m
g=acceleration due ¿ gravity , 9.81 2
s

The volume of the roller is calculated using the following formula,

( ) ( )
2 2 2
π Do π d i π di
v= − l+2 t equation 4
4 4 4

Where;

DO =outer diameter of the roller , m

d i=inner diameter of the roller , m

l=length of the roller

'
t=shaf t s thickness

Substituting from Equation 3 and 4 we can determine the weight of the roller,

[( ) ( )]
2 2 2
π Do π d i π di
w=ρ − l+2 t g
4 4 4

w=2200 ¿

w=7.40 N

Crushing force of the roller

F c =Rf x F s

Where;

R f =Rapture force of turmeric ,116.68 N (Shelake , 2018)

R f =Rapture force of ginger , 20.12 N (Jayashree , 2011)

F s=Factor of safety ,2(Tadese ,2021)

F c =(116.68 N + 20.12 N ) x 2
 F c =273.6 N

Crushing torque of roller

T =F c x r

Where;

T =torque onthe shaft

F c =crushing force

r =radius of theroller , m

T =273.6 Nx 0.04445 m

T =12.16 Nm=107.55lb−¿

Rotating speed of the roller

Zeleke (2021) in his laboratory manual entitled, “Particle Technology”

indicated that the peripheral speeds vary about 1m/s for small rolls up to about
15m/s for largest rolls. Use 1m/s.

Solving for the speed of crushing roller

The speed of crushing roller formula was used below

Where;

N r =speed of roller

v=velocity of theroller

r =radius of theroller

60
Nr= v
2 πr

60
Nr= (1)
2 π ( 0.04445 )
 N r =215 rpm

Angular velocity

2 πN
ω=
60

2 π ( 215 )
ω=
60

rad
ω=23
s

Solving for the Motor Hp

TN
Motor Hp=
63000

( 107.55 lb−¿ )( 215 rpm )

Motor Hp=
63000

Motor Hp=0.367 Hp

Motor Hp=0.5 Hp

Solving for the diameters of pulley

Assume that the minimum diameter is 3 inches from table 17.1 by Faires.

D2=2 D1

Considering the maximum permissible ratio of diameter of shaft pulley to

that of electric motor is 2:1 based on a journal entitled “Development of Ginger
Juice Extractor”. (Dela Cruz, 2016)

Where;

D1=smaller diameter of pulley

D2=larger diameter of pulley

 D2=2 ( 3 inches )

D2=6 inches

Solving for the Speed of the line shaft

Considering a speed of 1740 rpm (Dela Cruz et.al, 2016) based on journal
entitled, “Development of Ginger Juice Extractor” to increase at 1760 rpm
because of the load.

N 2=N 1
( )
D1
D2
(V . M Faires)

Where;

N 2=speed of the line shaft

N 3=speed of the pulley connected ¿ thereducer

SR=speed reducer ratio ¿ pulleys

N 2=(1760 rpm)¿

N 2=880rpm

Solving for the Speed Reducer Ratio

Considering a speed of 540 rpmrequired ¿ extract the juce ( Salawudeen , 2022 )

N2
SR=
N3

880
SR= =1.6296
540

SR=2 :1

For Speed Ratio Adder

Considering a desired speed reducer ratio of 1:60 for driving heavy load (Abiad,
2021).

desired speed ratio

Additional Reduction= pulleys ¿
speed reducer ratio ¿

60
Addtional Reduction=
1.6296

Addtional Reduction=36.8189

Final Speed ratio=speed reducer ratio ¿ pulleys x additional reduction

Final Speed ratio=1.6296 x 36.8189

Final Speed ratio=60

Use a speed reducer ratio of 1:60

N2
N 3=
SR

880
N 3=
60

N 3=14.67 rpm

Design of Screw Press Type Conveyor

Considering the 70 mm as the diameter of screw used in juice extractor

based on a journal by (Eyeowa,2017), we will be using 65 mm in our design
since our raw material is not larger. Also, based on the diameter of screw, the
pitch will be half of it.

D
S=
2

65
S=
2

S=32.5 mm ≈1 inch
 Since, the ginger an turmeric is considered as average flow ability, the
minimum loading ratio is 0.25 and the maximum loading ratio is 0.30. The screw
is installed without inclination based on our design, the correction factor will be 1.

π 2
Q=60( )D SNαρC
4

Where;

kg
Q=screw capacity ∈
h

D=screw diameter ∈m

S=screw pitch∈m

N=screw speed

α =loading ratio

kg kg kg
ρ=material density ∈ 3
, ginger=471.49 3 ,turmeric=570.38 3
m m m

C=inclination factor For ginger

π 2 kg
Q=60( ) ( 0.065 ) (0.0325)(14.67 rpm)(0.30)(471.49 3 )(1)
4 m

Q=10 kg/hr

For turmeric

π 2 kg
Q=60( ) ( 0.065 ) (0.0325)(14.67 rpm)(0.30)(570.38 3 )(1)
4 m

Q=12 kg /hr

Solving for the length of Screw

L=S x number of worms

L=32.5 mm x 12
 L=390 mm

Solving for the helix angle

S
tan a=
2 πD

32.5 mm
tan a=
2 π ( 65 mm )

tan a=0.0796

−1
a=tan ( 0.0796 )

a=tan−1 ( 0.0796 )

a=4.55 °

Solving for the length of Screw Press Rod

According to Adesina et.al (2017), the length of stainless rod is 475 mm

and the length of screw is 335 mm, it shows that there is an additional length of
140 mm. Based on this journal, we will also add 140 mm.

Lr =L1+ L2

Where;

Lr =length of stainless rod

L1=length of screw

L2=additonal length ,140 mm

Lr =390 mm+140 mm

Lr =530 mm

Solving for the Diameter of Screw Shaft (Equation by Khurmi and Gupta)
 3 16
d s= ¿¿
π Ss

Where;

d s=diameter of the screw shaft

6 N
S S=maximum shear stress , 40 x 10 2
( ASME code for steel shafting )
m

K b =combined shock ∧fatigue factor for bending ,

1.5 ( Table 14.2 , Machine Design by Khurmi∧Gupta )

K t =combined shaft ∧fatigue factor for torsion ,

1.0 ( Table 14.2 , Machine Design by Khurmi∧Gupta )

M b=maximum bendingmoment , 21.10 Nm (Olaniyan, 2014)

M t =maximum twisting moment , 69.18 Nm(Olaniyan ,2014 )

3 16
d s= ¿¿
N 6
π ( 40 x 10 2 )
m

d s=0.02110660648 m=21.11mm

d s ≈ 25 mm

Solving for the total force exerted on the shaft

F t=F 1 + F2 + F 3

Where;

m
F 1=1 kg x 9.81 2
=9.81 N
s

m
F 2=3 kg x 9.81 2
=29.43 N
s
 m
F 3=5 kg x 9.81 2
=49.05 N
s

F t=9.81 N +29.43 N + 49.05 N

F t=88.29 N

According to (Shelake,2018), the rupture force of turmeric is 116.68 N in

his journal entitled, “Effect of Moisture Content on Physical and Mechanical
Properties”. The rupture force of ginger is 20.12 based on the journal entitled,
“Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Ginger” (Jayashree,2011)

Solving for the torque of the Screw Press

T =Fr (V . M Faires )

Where;

T =torque of the screw press

F=force required ¿ press

r =radius of the screw shaft

101.97 kg f 2.205 lb f
F=(0.08829 kN +0.11668 kN +0.02012 kN ) x x =50.61 lb f
1 kN 1 kg f

T =¿ ( 50.61 lb f ) ¿

T =¿ 49.60 lb−¿

Solving for the transmitted Hp in Screw Shaft

According to Salawudeen (2022), a shaft speed of 540 rpm is required to

extract juice in his study entitled “Design and Fabrication of Mango Juice
Extractor”.

TN
Motor Hp=
63000
 (49.60 lb−¿)(14.67 rpm)
Motor Hp=
63000

Motor Hp=0.0115 Hp

Motor Hp ≈ 0.5 Hp

Solving for the torque of the motor

63000 Hp
T=
N

63000 ( 0.5 )
T=
880

T =35.80 lb−¿

Solving for the motor Hp

TN
Motor Hp=
63000

(35.80 lb−¿)(1760)
Motor Hp=
63000

Motor Hp ≈ 1 Hp

In order to prevent the motor from overloading by the simultaneous

crushing and extracting operations of the machine, we will use a Motor Hp
= 1.5 Hp.

Design of flat belt

Solving for the belt width

V m =π D1 N 1

V m =π ( 123 )( 1760 rpm )

V m =1382.30 fpm
From table 17.1 (Machine Design by Faires),
13
Use Heavy , single ply with a thickness of inches
64

V m (fpm) Hp
¿
1200 2.5
1382.30 2.8646
1400 2.9
Based on ALBA

Hp
b=
Hp
( ¿ )C m C p C f

Where;

C m=correction factor for the type of drive ,

1.0 for electric motor (Table 17.2by Faires)

C p=correction factor for smaller pulley ,0.5 (Table 17.2 by Faires)

C f =correction factor for the environmental conditions ,

0.83 ¿)

1.5
b=
( 2.8646 ) ( 1.0 )( 0.5 )( 0.83 )

b ≈ 1.5 inches

Solving for the center distance

C=2 D2

C=2 ¿

C=12 inches

Solving for the belt length

 π
L= ( D1 + D 2 ) +2 C+ ¿¿
2

π
L= ¿
2

L=38∈¿

Solving for the maximum allowable stress

From table 9.1 (Machine Design 2: Flexible Power Transmitting Elements by

Engr. J. Francisco)

For rubber type belt

Su=4200 psi

N=12

From table 9.2 (Machine Design 2: Flexible Power Transmitting Elements by

Engr. J. Francisco)

For Joint Factor

Cemented by belt maker , JF=1.0

Su
st = JF
N

Where;

st =maximum allowable stress

Su=ultimate stress , psi

N=factor of safety

JF= joint factor

4200
st = (1.0 )
12
 st =350 psi

Solving for the net belt tension

F 1=s t ( bt )

Where;

F 1=tight side belt tension

F 2=slack side belt tension

b=belt width ,inches

t=belt thickness ,inch

F 1=( 350 psi ) ¿

F 1=106.64 lb

33000 Hp
( F 1−F 2) = Vm

33000(1.5 Hp)
( 106.64 lb−F 2 )= 1382.30 fpm

F 2=70.83 lb

Solving for the belt tension ratio

F 1 106.64 lb
=
F 2 70.83 lb

F1
=1.51
F2

Design of sprocket

For Driving Sprocket:

number of teeth=16
From Table 9.2 (Machine Design 2: Roller Chain Sizes by Engr. J. Francisco)

5
Use , chain ¿50∧ pitch=
8

For driven sprocket

T 2=T 1
( )
N1
N2

Where;

T 1=number of teeth of smaller sprocket

T 2=number of teeth of larger sprocket

T 2=16 ( 1760
880 )

T 2=32 teeth

T2
SR=
T1

32
SR=
16

SR=2 :1

Solving for the transmitted Hp through the roller chain

The required transmitted Hp was calculated using this equation below.

transmitted Hp=Hp(ns )

transmitted Hp=0.5(2)

transmitted Hp=1 Hp

Solving for the Design Hp of chain

From table 17.7 (Faires), N sf =1.4

Design Hp=N sf ( Nominal Hp )

design Hp=1.4 ( 1 )

design Hp=1.4 Hp

Solving for the Rated Hp of chain

The required rated Hp was calculated using this equation (Roller-Bushing

Impact) below.

( )
1.5
100 T 1 0.8
Rated Hp=K r P
n1

Where;

P=chain pitch ,inches

T 1=number of teeth of the smaller sprocket

n1=rpm of the smaller sprocket

K r =17 for chain 40 ¿240

nm
n1 =
SR

1760
n1 =
2

n1=880 rpm

( )()
1.5 0.8
100(16) 5
Rated Hp=17
880 8

Rated Hp=28.62 Hp

Considering a 1-strand chain since 1.4 Hp ¿28.62 Hp with a pitch of 0.625 inch
Solving for the sprocket pitch diameter

P
D 1=
sin
( )
180
T1

Where;

P= roller chain pitch, inch

T= number of teeth of sprocket

Assumptions: Chain number 50, P= 5/8 and T= 16 teeth

5/8
D 1=
sin ( )
180
16

D1 ≈ 4∈(101.6 mm)

P
D 2=
sin
( )
180
T2

5
8
D 2=
sin
180
32 ( )
D2 ≈ 6∈(152.4 mm)

Design of Chain

Solving for the center distance

Use a center distance of 30 in (General rule in Machine Design 30P≤ C≤50P)

30 ( 58 )≤ C ≤ 50( 58 )
18.75 ≤C ≤31.25
 30
C= =48 pitches
5/8

C=48 pitches

Solving for the length of chain

2
T 1+ T 2 ( T 2−T 1 )
L=2 C+ +
2 40 C

Where;

T 1=number of teeth for smaller sprocket

T 2=number of teeth for larger sprocket

C=center distance

L=length of chain , pitches

2
16+ 32 ( 32−16 )
L=2(48)+ +
2 40(40)

L=120.16 ≈ 120 pitches

Solving for the number of chains

L
Number of chains=
5 /8

120
Number of chains=
5/8

Number of chains=192

Objective 2: To determine the performance of the machine in terms of

production rate, machine efficiency, and percent juicing recovery

Try-outs and Revisions

 The try-out and revision phase of the project study involved making

changes to the prototype if any modifications could be made. The try-out and

revision are also used to gather data/information about the operation and

production of the machine and how to come up to the product in an efficient and

effective way.

Determining the production rate

For Ginger

Test 1: For 1 kg

Number of Trials Juice Extracted (ml) Juicing Time (min)

1 283 15
2 277 18
3 267 20
Average 276 18
Table. Test for Production Rate (1kg)

Table shows the results of a test for production rate. The table presents

data from three trials, each with different juicing times. In the first trial, it took 15

minutes to extract 283 ml of juice. In the second trial, 277 ml of juice was

extracted over 18 minutes. In the third trial, 267 ml of juice was extracted in 20

minutes. The average juice extracted was 276 ml with an average juicing time of

18 minutes.

Test 2: For 3 kg

Number of Trials Juice Extracted (ml) Juicing Time (min)

1 1403 33
2 1363 40
3 1302 43
 Average 1356 39
Table. Test for Production Rate (3kg)

Table illustrates the juice extraction process for 3 kilograms of ginger. In

trial 1,403 ml of juice were obtained in 33 minutes. In trial 1,363 ml in 40 minutes

and 1,302 ml in 43 minutes for trial 3. The average production rate for 3

kilograms is 1,356 ml of juice in 39 minutes.

Test 3: For 5 kg

Number of Trials Juice Extracted (ml) Juicing Time (min)

1 1871 49
2 1711 50
3 1667 55
Average 1750 51
Table. Test for Production Rate (5kg)

Table presents the data on the production rate of juicing 5 kilograms of

ginger. In the first trial, 1,871 ml of juice were extracted in 49 minutes. In second
trial, the amount of juice extracted decreased to 1,711 ml in 50 minutes. In third
trial, 1,667 ml of juice yielded in 55 minutes. The average juice extracted was
1,750 ml in 51 minutes.

For turmeric

Test 1: For 1 kg

Number of Trials Juice Extracted (ml) Juicing Time (min)

1 234 12
2 218 15
3 198 18
Average 217 15
Table. Test for Production Rate (1kg)
 Table shows the results of a test for production rate. The table presents

data from three trials, each with different juicing times. In the first trial, it took 12

minutes to extract 234 ml of juice. In the second trial, 218 ml of juice was

extracted over 15 minutes. In the third trial, 198 ml of juice was extracted in 18

minutes. The average juice extracted was 217 ml with an average juicing time of

15 minutes.

Test 2: For 3kg

Number of Trials Juice Extracted (ml) Juicing Time (min)

1 705 29
2 681 31
3 616 35
Average 667 32
Table. Test for Production Rate (3kg)

Table illustrates the juice extraction process for 3 kilograms of turmeric.

In trial 1, 705 ml of juice were obtained in 29 minutes. In trial 2, 681 ml in 31
minutes and 616 ml in 35 minutes for trial 3. The average production rate for 3
kilograms is 667 ml of juice in 32 minutes.

Test 3: For 5 kg

Number of Trials Juice Extracted (ml) Juicing Time (min)

1 1016 45
2 978 47
3 924 50
Average 973 47
Table. Test for Production Rate (5 kg)

Table presents the data on the production rate of juicing 5 kilograms of

turmeric. In the first trial, 1016 ml of juice were extracted in 45 minutes. In second
trial, the amount of juice extracted decreased to 978 ml in 47 minutes. In third
trial, 924 ml of juice yielded in 50 minutes. The average juice extracted was 973
ml in 47 minutes.

Determining the Percent Juicing Recovery

For ginger

Number of Weight of Juice extracted Percent Juicing

Trials Ginger (g) (ml) Recovery
1 1000 283 28.33%
2 1000 277 27.67%
3 1000 267 26.67%
Average 27.56%
Test 1: For 1 kg

Table. Test for Percent Juicing Recovery (1 kg)

Table presents findings from assessing the percent juicing recovery for
1 kilogram of ginger. In trial 1, the percent juicing percentage is 28.33%. In trial 2,
from the same initial weight of ginger, resulting in a juicing recovery of 27.67%. In
trial 3, the percentage is 26.67%. On average across these trials, a juicing
recovery percentage is 27.56% for 1 kilogram of t ginger.

Number of Weight of Juice extracted Percent Juicing

Trials Ginger (g) (ml) Recovery
1 3000 1403 46.78%
2 3000 1363 45.42%
3 3000 1302 43.39%
Average 45.19%
Table. Test for Percent Juicing Recovery (3kg)

Table summarizes the findings from juicing 3 kilograms of ginger. Trial

1, the percent juicing percentage is 46.78%. Trial 2, from the same initial weight
of turmeric, resulting in a juicing recovery of 45.42%. Trial 3, the percentage is
43.39%. On average across these trials, a juicing recovery percentage is 45.19%
for 3 kilograms of ginger.

Test 3: For 5 kg
 Number of Weight of Juice extracted Percent Juicing
Trials Ginger (g) (ml) Recovery
1 5000 1871 37.42%
2 5000 1711 34.22%
3 5000 1667 33.33%
Average 34.99%

Table. for Percent Juicing Recovery (5kg)

Table presents the findings from juicing 5 kilograms of ginger. In trial 1,

the juicing recovery is recorded as 37.42%. Trial 2 yields a juicing recovery of
34.22%. In trial 3, the percentage is 33.33%. On average across these trials, a
juicing recovery percentage is 34.99% for 5 kilograms of ginger.

For turmeric

Test 1: For 1 kg

Number of Weight of Juice extracted Percent Juicing

Trials Turmeric (g) (ml) Recovery
1 1000 234 23.35%
2 1000 218 21.80%
3 1000 198 19.80%
Average 217 21.65%
Table. Test for Percent Juicing Recovery (1 kg)

Table presents findings from assessing the percent juicing recovery for
1 kg of turmeric. In trial 1, the percent juicing percentage is 23.25%. In trial 2,
from the same initial weight of turmeric, resulting in a juicing recovery of 21.80%.
In trial 3, the percentage is 19.80%. On average across these trials, a juicing
recovery percentage is 21.65% for 1 kilogram of turmeric.

Test 2: For 3 kg

Number of Weight of Juice extracted Percent Juicing

Trials Turmeric (g) (ml) Recovery
1 3000 705 23.49%
2 3000 681 22.69%
3 3000 616 20.53%
 Average 667 22.23%
Table. Test for Percent Juicing Recovery (3kg)

Table summarizes the findings from juicing 3 kilograms of turmeric. Trial

1, the percent juicing percentage is 23.49%. Trial 2, from the same initial weight
of turmeric, resulting in a juicing recovery of 22.69%. Trial 3, the percentage is
20.53%. On average across these trials, a juicing recovery percentage is 22.23%
for 3 kilograms of turmeric.

Test 3: For 5kg

Number of Weight of Juice extracted Percent Juicing

Trials Turmeric (g) (ml) Recovery
1 5000 1016 20.32%
2 5000 978 19.56%
3 5000 924 18.48%
Average 19.45%
Table. for Percent Juicing Recovery (5kg)

Table presents the findings from juicing 5 kilograms of turmeric. In trial

1, the juicing recovery is recorded as 20.32%. Trial 2 yields a juicing recovery of
19.56%. In trial 3, the percentage is 18.48%. On average across these trials, a
juicing recovery percentage is 19.45% for 5 kilograms of turmeric.

Determining the Machine Efficiency

For ginger

Number of Interruption Actual Theoretical Machine

Trials (min) Capacity Capacity Efficiency
1 2 58.82352941 66.66666667 88.24%
2 2 50 55.55555556 90.00%
3 2 45.45454545 50 90.91%
Average 89.71%
Test 1: For 1 kg

Table. Test for Machine Efficiency (1 kg)

Table shows the machine efficiency for 1 kilogram of ginger. In trial 1,

with a 2-minute interruption such as nut adjustment that led to turning off the
machine has a percentage of 88.24%. In trial 2 with a similar time of interruption,
the machine achieved with an efficiency of 90.00%. In trial 3, the machine has an
efficiency of 90.91% with same time duration. Overall, the machine operated at
an efficiency of 89.71%.

Number of Interruption Theoretical Machine

Trials (min) Actual Capacity Capacity Efficiency
1 5 78.94736842 90.90909091 86.84%
2 5 66.66666667 75 88.89%
3 5 62.5 69.76744186 89.58%
Average 88.44%
Test 2: For 3 kg

Table. Test for Machine Efficiency (3kg)

Table presents the machine efficiency in processing 3 kilograms of

ginger. In trial 1, an interruption of 5 minutes resulted in an efficiency of 86.84%.
In trial 2, with a similar interruption duration achieved an efficiency of 88.89%. In
trial 3, the machine operated at 89.58% efficiency with the same interruption
time. On average, the machine efficiency is 88.44%.

Number of Interruption Actual Theoretical Machine

Trials (min) Capacity Capacity Efficiency
1 10 84.74576271 102.0408163 83.05%
2 10 83.33333333 100 83.33%
3 10 76.92307692 90.90909091 84.62%
Average 83.67%
Test 3: For 5 kg

Table. Test for Machine Efficiency (5kg)

Table shows the efficiency of the machine when processing 5 kilograms

of ginger. In trial 1, a 10-minute interruption led to an efficiency of 83.05%. Trial
2, with same time achieved an efficiency of 83.33%. In trial 3, the machine
operated at an efficiency of 84.62%. On average, the machine’s efficiency is
83.67%.

For turmeric
Test 1: For 1 kg

Number Interruption Actual Theoretical Machine

of Trials (min) Capacity Capacity Efficiency
1 2 71.42857143 83.33333333 85.71%
2 2 58.82352941 66.66666667 88.24%
3 2 50 55.55555556 90.00%
Average 87.98%
Table. Test for Machine Efficiency (1 kg)

Table shows the machine efficiency for 1 kilogram of turmeric. In trial 1,

with a 2-minute interruption such as nut adjustment that led to turning off the
machine has a percentage of 85.71%. In trial 2 with a similar time of interruption,
the machine achieved with an efficiency of 88.24%. In trial 3, the machine has an
efficiency of 90% with same time duration. Overall, the machine operated at an
efficiency of 87.98%.

Test 2: For 3 kg

Number Interruption Actual Theoretical Machine

of Trials (min) Capacity Capacity Efficiency
1 5 88.23529412 103.4482759 85.29%
2 5 83.33333333 96.77419355 86.11%
3 5 75 85.71428571 87.50%
Average 86.30%
Table. Test for Machine Efficiency (3kg)

Table presents the machine efficiency in processing 3 kilograms of

turmeric. In trial 1, an interruption of 5 minutes resulted in an efficiency of
85.29%. In trial 2, with a similar interruption duration achieved an efficiency of
86.11%. In trial 3, the machine operated at 87.50% efficiency with the same
interruption time. On average, the machine efficiency is 86.30%.

Number Interruption Actual Theoretical Machine

of Trials (min) Capacity Capacity Efficiency
1 10 90.90909091 111.1111111 81.82%
2 10 87.71929825 106.3829787 82.46%
3 10 83.33333333 100 83.33%
Average 82.54%
Test 3: For 5 kg
 Table. Test for Machine Efficiency (5kg)

Table shows the efficiency of the machine when processing 5 kilograms

of turmeric. In trial 1, a 10-minute interruption led to an efficiency of 81.82%. Trial
2, with same time achieved an efficiency of 82.46%. In trial 3, the machine
operated at an efficiency of 83.33%. On average, the machine’s efficiency is
82.54%.

Objective 3: To evaluate the machine by the end user in terms of its ease of
operation, safety of operation, and acceptability of extracted juice from
clientele’s perspective.

Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data

In this section, the researchers provide an analysis of the data obtained

from a questionnaire completed by a group of 5 respondents. The respondents

selected for this study were specifically chosen from a pool of individuals in Brgy.

Mabacan Calauan, Laguna. This group included the workers of Dorenie’s Food

and Beverages Trading, the ones that are doing manual extraction of ginger and

turmeric.

Table. Summary of Performance of the Ginger and Turmeric Extractor

Machine in terms of its Ease of Use

Criteria Mean SD Mean Rating Verbal Interpretation

1.The machine is
simple and easy to Strongly
understand 4.80 0.40 Agree Highly Acceptable
2. The machine is Strongly
properly labeled. 4.60 0.49 Agree Highly Acceptable
 3. The machine
provides a stable
method of Extracting Strongly
Ginger and Turmeric 4.80 0.40 Agree Highly Acceptable
Strongly
Weighted Mean 4.73 Agree Highly Acceptable

The table shows the summary on the performance of the prototype of the

machine from the clientele’s perspective. In terms of usability, three criteria were

assessed. Criteria 1 achieved a mean score of 4.80, with a standard deviation of

0.40. The mean rating for this criterion was "Strongly Agree," indicating that the

clientele generally found the machine to be satisfactory. The verbal interpretation

assigned to this criterion was "Highly Acceptable." Criteria 2 obtained a mean

score of 4.60, with a standard deviation of 0.49. The mean rating remained

"Strongly Agree," indicating a generally positive perception of the machine's

usability. The verbal interpretation for this criterion was also "Highly Acceptable."

Moving on to Criteria 3, it achieved a mean score of 4.80, with a standard

deviation of 0.40 indicating a stronger level of agreement among the clientele.

The mean rating for this criterion was "Strongly Agree," suggesting that the

machine was highly acceptable in terms of usability. For the ease of operation of

the machine, an average mean score of 4.73. The remark assigned to this score

was "Strongly Agree," indicating that the clientele found the machine relatively

easy to operate.

Table. Summary of Performance of the Ginger and Turmeric Extractor

Machine in terms of Safety of Operation

 Summary Mean SD Mean Rating Verbal Interpretation
1. The wirings of the
machine are properly
installed 4.20 0.40 Agree Acceptable
2. The machine
provides sufficient
insulation to
guarantee that the
surface of the
machine is not hot. 4.20 0.40 Agree Acceptable
3. The machine
provides safety
warnings 4.00 0.63 Agree Acceptable
Weighted Mean 4.00 Agree Acceptable

The table shows the summary and interpretation of data gathered based

on the performance of the machine prototype based on the clientele’s

perspective. A set of criteria was utilized in order to assess the Safety of

Operation, Criteria 1 has obtained a mean of 4.20, standard deviation of 0.40 and

Mean rating of “Agree” and a Verbal Interpretation of “Acceptable”. For criteria 2,

the mean obtained was 4.20, standard deviation of 0.40 and Mean rating of

“Agree” and a Verbal Interpretation of “Acceptable”. The criteria 3 obtained a

mean of 4.00, standard deviation of 0.63 and Mean rating of “Agree” and a

Verbal Interpretation of “Acceptable”. Criteria for the Safety of operation obtained

an average mean of 4.00 Mean rating of “Agree” and a Verbal Interpretation of

“Acceptable”.

Table. Summary of Performance of the Ginger and Turmeric Extractor

Machine in terms of Acceptability of Extracted Juice from Clientele’s

Perspective
 Summary Mean SD Mean Rating Verbal Interpretation
1. The juice extracted
has no pulp remains. 4.20 0.40 Agree Acceptable
2. The amount of
juice extracted per Strongly
kilo exceeds 0.60 ml. 5.00 0.00 Agree Highly Acceptable
3. The juice extracted
has a steady
consistency in
appearance. 4.20 0.40 Agree Acceptable
Weighted Mean 4.20 Agree Acceptable

The table shows the summary on the performance of the prototype of the

machine from the clientele’s perspective. In terms of usability, three criteria were

assessed. Criteria 1 achieved a mean score of 4.20, with a standard deviation of

0.40. The mean rating for this criterion was “Agree," indicating that the clientele

generally found the machine to be satisfactory. The verbal interpretation

assigned to this criterion was "Acceptable." Criteria 2 obtained a mean score of

5.00, with a standard deviation of 0. The mean rating remained "Strongly Agree,"

indicating a generally positive perception of the machine's usability. The verbal

interpretation for this criterion was also "Highly Acceptable." Moving on to Criteria

3, it achieved a mean score of 4.20, with a standard deviation of 0.40 indicating a

stronger level of agreement among the clientele. The mean rating for this

criterion was "Agree," suggesting that the machine was acceptable in terms of

usability. For the ease of operation of the machine, an average mean score of

4.20. The remark assigned to this score was "Agree," and a Verbal Interpretation

of “Acceptable”.
Objective 4: To determine the cost and return analysis of the machine

Cost and Return Analysis

Machine cost. The total cost of material used in fabricating the ginger and
turmeric extractor machine was Php 34,320. With the labor cost of 25% of
material cost amounted to Php 42,900. With 75% mark up, the selling price
would be Php 75,075.

Cost of operation. The annual operating costs is the total amount of fixed costs
and variable costs as shown in Table. At daily production of box per day and
assumed 188 working days per year, the annual production per liter per year
would be Php 3,760. Hence the cost per liter would be Php 241.71 which would
be sold at 60% mark up. It is assumed that the production is continuous and the
ginger and turmeric juice is highly in-demand with these operating assumptions,
the payback period would This means that the operating expenses would be
recovered in only 1.67 year.

Table. Annual Operating Cost of Ginger and Turmeric Extractor

ITEM PRICE (Php)

Fixed Cost 14,157

Depreciation 3,861

Interest on Ave. Investment 5,898

R&M Cost 3,432

TSI Cost 965.25

Variable Cost 875,881.57

Labor Cost 122,200

Ginger Cost 451,200

Turmeric Cost 300,800

Power Consumption 1,681.57

Plastic Bottle Cost 18,800
Annual Cost 908,838.57

Annual Production (liter – yr −1) 3,760

Cost per liter of ginger and 241.71

turmeric (Php – liter−1)
Computed of all the total expenses,

Table. Cost and Return Analysis of Operation of the Ginger and Turmeric
Extractor
PARTICULARS PRICE (Php)

Annual Production (liter – yr −1) 3,760

Cost per liter of ginger and turmeric 241.71

(Php – liter−1)
Variable Cost 237.95

Annual Cost 908,838.57

Gross Income 1,454,124.4

Net Income 545,303.83

BEP (Ginger and Turmeric) 95.15

Payback Period 1.67

Rate of Return 60.00

Selling Price 386.74

This analysis does not include facilities, miscellaneous equipment, electric and
water bills, transportation expenses, etc.
Wage rate is Php350/day

The assumptions to be used are the following:

Machine cost = cost of fabrication

Salvage value = 10 % of the machine

Machine life = 10 years

Interest rate = 25% of machine cost

Repair and maintenance cost (R&M) = 8% of machine cost

Tax, shelter and insurance cost (TSI) 2.25% of machine cost

Number of days of operation= 188

Number of hours of operation per day = 8

Number of Operator = 2

Wage rate = Php 350 per day per person (operator) Php 300 per day pe r person
(helper) Cost of ginger = Php 120 per kilogram

Cost of turmeric = Php 80 per kilogram

Cost of ginger= Php 120 per kilogram

Mark up (machine) = 60%

Mark up (selling price per liter) =75%

𝑆𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 = 𝑚𝑎𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑥 10%

𝑆𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 = 42,900 𝑥 10%

𝑆𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 = 4,290

machine cost−Salvage value

Depreciation=
machine life

42,900−4,290
Depreciation=
10 years

Depreciation=3,861

machine cost +Salvage value

Interest cost= x interest rate
2
 42,900+4,290
Interest cost= x 25 %
2

Interest cost=5,898.75

R∧M Cost =machine cost x 8 %

R∧M Cost =42,900 x 8 %

R∧M Cost =3,432

TSI =machine cost x 2.25 %

TSI =42,900 x 2.25 %

TSI =965.25

¿ Cost =Depreciation+ Interest + R∧M +TSI

¿ Cost =3,861+5,898.75+3,432+965.25

¿ Cost =14,157

number of days
Labor cost=labor cost x
year

188
Labor cost=( 350+300 ) x 1 x
year

Labor cost=122,200

ph kg of ginger
Ginger Cost = x
kg year

120 3,760 kg
Ginger Cost = x
kg year

Ginger Cost =451,200

 php kg of turmeric
Turmeric Cost = x
kg year

80 3,760 kg
Turmeric Cost = x
kg year

Turmeric Cost =300,800

kw . h number of days php

Power Consumed Cost = x x
day year kW . h

0.746 188 11.99

Power Consumed Cost = x x
day year kW . h

Power Consumed Cost =1,681.57

Php pcs plastic bottle use

Plastic bottle cost per year= x
pcs year

5 3,760 bottle use

Plastic bottle cost per year= x
pcs year

Plastic bottle cost per year=18,800

Variable cost=labor cost + ginger cost+turmeric cost + power consumed cost + plastic bottle use

Variable cost=122,200+ 451,200+300,800+1,681.57+18,800

Variable cost=894,681 .57

𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 = 𝐹𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 + 𝑉𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡

𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 = 14,157+ 894 , 681.57

Annual cost=908,838.57

L annual production number of days

Annual production L per year = x
day year
 20 L 188
Annual production L per year = x
day year

Annual production L per year =3,760 L per year

annual cost
cost per liter=
annual production

908,838.57
cost per liter=
3,760

cost per liter=241.71

variable cost
Variable cost per liter=
annual production

894,681.57
Variable cost per lit er =
3,760

Variable cost per liter=237.95

Gross income=selling price x annual production

Gross income=386.74 x 3 , 76 0

Gross income=1, 454 , 142.4

Net income=Grossincome− Annual cost

Net income=1,454,142.4−908,838.57

Net income=545 , 303.83

¿ Cost
Break Even Period=
selling price , L−variable cost , L

14,157
Break Even Period=
386.74−237.95

Break Even Period=95.15

 cost of operation
Payback Period=
net income

908,838.57
Payback Period=
545,303.83

Payback Period=1. 67

net income
Rate of Return= x 100
annual cost

545,303.83
Rate of Return= x 100
908,838.57

Rate of Return=60.00