FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2989358691> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2989358691 endingPage "145" @default.
• W2989358691 startingPage "142" @default.
• W2989358691 abstract "AbstraCT[Comparative Analysis of the Quality of Corn Charcoal Briquettes with Teak Leaves Charcoal] This study is a preliminary study that aims to determine the quality of briquettes from different biomass raw materials, namely corncobs and teak leaves. Utilization which is still not maximized from corncobs and teak leaves in the biomass energy field made the initial thought of the study. In addition, both of these raw materials have lignocellulosic contents which are likely to be used as biomass raw materials, especially briquettes. The research method used is an experiment with the research procedure is the manufacture of the two briquettes then the products are analyzed and compared. Both of these raw materials receive the same treatment in the manufacturing process. The composition of the adhesive used is 5% of the main ingredient. The adhesive used is starch. Both briquettes were tested for quality including water content, ash content, volatility, and heating value. The results of testing the water content, ash content, volatile content, the calorific value of corn cobs briquettes and teak leaves charcoal briquettes are, respectively, 3.62% and 5.39% water content; ash content of 4.84% and 3.14%; volatile content of 11.75% and 25.86%; The heating value is 5653.99 cal / g and 7222.95 cal / g. From the results of the analysis, teak leaf charcoal briquettes dominate better quality than corn cobs charcoal briquettes, the water content of teak leaf charcoal briquettes is still higher. When compared with the SNI set value, the two briquettes have met the briquette standards that are suitable to be used as substitutes for alternative fuels.Keywords: Briquette quality; Corn cobs; teak leaves. (Received August 14, 2019; Accepted October 5, 2019; Published October 22, 2019) AbstrakPenelitian ini merupakan penelitian pendahuluan yang bertujuan untuk mengetahui kualitas briket dari bahan baku biomassa yang berbeda yaitu bonggol jagung dan daun jati. Pemanfaatan yang masih belum maksimal dari bonggol jagung dan daun jati di bidang energi biomassa menjadikan pemikiran awal penelitian. Selain itu, kedua bahan baku ini mempunyai kandungan ligniselulosa yang berpeluang untuk dijadikan bahan baku biomassa khususnya briket. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah eksperimen dengan prosedur penelitiannya adalah pembuatan kedua briket kemudian produknya dianalisis dan dibandingkan. Kedua bahan baku ini mendapat perlakuan sama dalam proses pembuatannya. Komposisi perekat yang digunakan sebesar 5% dari bahan utama. Perekat yang digunakan adalah tepung kanji. Kedua briket diuji kualitasnya meliputi kadar air, kadar abu, volatile, dan nilai kalor. Adapun hasil pengujian kadar air, kadar abu, kandungan volatile, nilai kalor dari briket arang bonggol jagung dan briket arang daun jati berturut-turut yaitu, kadar air 3,62% dan 5,39%; kadar abu 4,84% dan 3,14%; kandungan volatile 11,75% dan 25,86%; Nilai kalor 5653,99 kal/g dan 7222,95 kal/g. Dari hasil analisis tersebut, briket arang daun jati mendominasi kualitas yang lebih bagus dibanding dengan briket arang bonggol jagung, kelemahannya kadar air briket arang daun jati masih lebih tinggi. Jika dibandingkan dengan nilai yang telah ditetapkan SNI, kedua briket tersebut telah memenuhi standar briket yang layak digunakan sebagai pengganti bahan bakar alternatif. Kata kunci: Kualitas briket; bonggol jagung; daun jati." @default.
• W2989358691 created "2019-11-22" @default.
• W2989358691 creator A5037785308 @default.
• W2989358691 creator A5043878727 @default.
• W2989358691 creator A5077509829 @default.
• W2989358691 date "2019-10-22" @default.
• W2989358691 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2989358691 title "Analisis Perbandingan Kualitas Briket Arang Bonggol Jagung dengan Arang Daun Jati" @default.
• W2989358691 doi "https://doi.org/10.33369/pendipa.3.3.142-145" @default.
• W2989358691 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2989358691 type Work @default.
• W2989358691 sameAs 2989358691 @default.
• W2989358691 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2989358691 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2989358691 hasAuthorship W2989358691A5037785308 @default.
• W2989358691 hasAuthorship W2989358691A5043878727 @default.
• W2989358691 hasAuthorship W2989358691A5077509829 @default.
• W2989358691 hasBestOaLocation W29893586911 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C105923489 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C115540264 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C116065953 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C156383657 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C178790620 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C187320778 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C191897082 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C206139338 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C24939127 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C2780589914 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C31903555 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C39432304 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C518851703 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C526406351 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C528095902 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C548081761 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C6557445 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C105923489 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C115540264 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C116065953 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C127413603 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C156383657 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C178790620 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C185592680 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C187320778 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C191897082 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C192562407 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C206139338 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C24939127 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C2780589914 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C31903555 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C39432304 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C518851703 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C526406351 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C528095902 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C548081761 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C6557445 @default.
• W2989358691 hasConceptScore W2989358691C86803240 @default.
• W2989358691 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2989358691 hasLocation W29893586911 @default.
• W2989358691 hasOpenAccess W2989358691 @default.
• W2989358691 hasPrimaryLocation W29893586911 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W2621557144 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W2963359787 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W2972930964 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W2989358691 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W3171859584 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W3206431870 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W3212160635 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W4220904422 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W4226264908 @default.
• W2989358691 hasRelatedWork W4312049487 @default.
• W2989358691 hasVolume "3" @default.
• W2989358691 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2989358691 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2989358691 magId "2989358691" @default.
• W2989358691 workType "article" @default.