Results and Discussions with Data Analysis

Table 1: Time of Operation (minute) of the Different Replications per Treatment

TREATMENT
(rpm)
A
B
C

R1
5:18
1:07
33sec

REPLICATION
R2
R3
6:23
6:52
1:14
1:20
36sec
46sec

AVERAGE
R4
6:11
1:11
35sec

6:11
1:13
37.5sec

Table 2: Sieving Capacity (kg/h) of Different Replications per Treatment

TREATMENT
(rpm)
A
B
C

R1
113.2
537.30
1090.9

REPLICATION
R2
R3
94
87.4
486.5
450
1000
782

AVERAGE
R4
97
467.5
1028.6

97.9
485.325
975.375

From Table 1, by calculating the data by statistical method (One-way ANOVA and FTest)
Table 1.1 Time of Operation (minute) of the Different Replications per Treatment in
Decimal Form
TREATMENT
(rpm)
A
B
C

R1
5.3
1.117
0.55

REPLICATION
R2
R3
6.383
6.867
1.233
1.333
0.6
0.767

AVERAGE
R4
6.183
1.183
0.583

6.183
1.217
0.625

H0: The time of operation of treatment C is not the lowest.

Ha: Treatment C has the lowest time of operation.
Grand Mean = Summation of Average/3 = (6.183 + 1.217 + 0.625)/3 = 2.675
SSy=
(Y- Grand Mean)2 = (5.3-2.675)2+(6.383-2.675)2+(6.867-2.675)2+(6.1832.675)2+(1.117-2.675)2+
(1.233-2.675) 2+(1.333-2.675)2+(1.183-2.675)2+(0.552.675)2+(0.6-2.675)2+
(0.767-2.675)2+(0.583-2.675)2

= 75.89

SSx=
2.675)2

n(average-grand mean)2 = 3(6.183-2.675)2 + 3(1.217-2.675)2 + 3(0.625= 74.55

SSerror=
(data-average) 2 = (5.3-6.183)2 + (6.383-6.183)2 + (6.687-6.183)2 +
(6.183-6.183)2 +
(1.117-1.217) 2 + (1.233-1.217)2 + (1.333-1.217)2 + (1.1831.217)2 +
(0.55-0.625)2 + (0.6-0.625)2 + (0.767-0.625)2 + (0.5830.625)2
= 1.34
To verify: SSy=SSx+SSerror
75.89=74.55+1.34
75.89=75.89, thus it is verified.

= SSx / SSy = 74.55 / 75.89

= 0.982
Interpretation of n2:
The strength of the effect of the Replication(X) to the time operation(Y) is
0.982. It indicates a 98.2% of variation in the time of operation(Y) is accounted for
by Replications.

F= [SSx/(c-1)]/[SSerr/(n-c)] ; where c=3 & n=12

= [74.55/(3-1)]/[1.34 /(12-3)
= 250.3545

Interpretation:

From the F-table, for 2 and 9 degrees of freedom, the value of is 4.26.Since
the calculated value of F is greater than the critical value, the null hypothesis is
rejected and the alternative hypothesis is considered. Thus, it is concluded that
treatment C has the lowest time duration for the harvest efficiency.

From Table 2, by calculating the data by statistical method (One-way ANOVA and FTest)
Table 2.1: Sieving Capacity (kg/h) of Different Replications per Treatment
TREATMENT
(rpm)
A
B
C

R1
113.2
537.3
1090.9

REPLICATION
R2
R3
94
87.4
486.5
450
1000
782

AVERAGE
R4
97
467.5
1028.6

97.9
485.325
975.375

H0: The Sieving Capacity (kg/h) of treatment C is not the highest.

Ha: Treatment C has the highest Sieving Capacity (kg/h).

Grand
Mean:
Summation
(97.9+485.325+975.375)/3=1558.6/3=519.5333

of

Average/3=

SSy= (Y-Grand Mean)2 = (-1219/3)2 + (-6383/15)2 + (-6482/15)2 + (-6338/15)2 +

(533/30)2 + (-991/30)2 +
(-1043/15)2 + (1561/30)2 + (17141/30)2 + (7207/15)2 +
(3937/15)2 + (1636/15)2
= 1605753.947

SSx = n(average-grand mean)2 = 3(97.9-519.5333)2 + 3(485.325-519.5333)2 +

3(975.375-519.5333)2
= 1546946.012

SSerror=(data-average)2 = (113.2-97.9)2 + (94-97.9)2 + (87.4-97.9)2 + (97-97.9)2 +

(537.30-485.325)2 +

(486.5-485.325)2 + (450-485.325)2 + (467.5-485.325)2 +

(1090.9-975.375) +
(1000-975.375)2 + (782-975.375)2 + (1028.6-975.375)2
= 58807.937

= SSx/SSy = 1546946.012 / 1605753.947

= 0.963
Interpretation of n2:
The strength of the effect of the Replication(X) to the sieving capacity(Y) is
0.963. It indicates a 96.3% of variation in the sieving capacity(Y) is accounted for by
Replications.

F= [SSx/(c-1)]/[SSerr/(n-c)] ; where c=3 & n=12

=[1546946.012/(3-1)]/[58807.935/(12-3)
=118.37

Interpretation:
From the F-table, for 2 and 9 degrees of freedom, the value of is 4.26.Since
the calculated value of F is greater than the critical value, the null hypothesis is
rejected and the alternative hypothesis is considered. Thus, it is concluded that
Treatment C has the highest Sieving Capacity (kg/h).

GENERALIZATION:
Based on the first table, after calculations, the data on each replication at
treatment C gives the smallest time which proves that it is more efficient compared
to the other two treatments. Furthermore, at table 2, after calculations, treatment C
provides the highest average in Sieving Capacity (kg/hr).
These data analyses prove that Treatment C minimizes the time duration of
the process and to maximize the harvest efficiency.