Brief Overview of the Article
The article under analysis called Compaction Characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste is written by Hanson et al. (2). The paper investigates the compaction characteristics of solid waste located in Michigan landfill received from laboratory data. In general, the article has great significance for environmental and economic studies because it contributes to solving the problem of increased amount of waste in landfills.
We will write a custom Critical Writing on Compaction Characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Methodology and Findings
The researchers have defined moisture content, season effects, and compactive efforts as the main traits of municipal solid waste (MSW) and have supported the results with measured parameters from the laboratory. Field tests have also been conducted, but have been marked by higher efforts due to higher water content as compared to laboratory tests (2).
Moisture level is increased due to seasonal effects, but it has contributed to higher workability, increased number of incoming wasters, and compaction time reduction. The combined outcomes have introduced new information to managing landfill operations more effectively.
Relevance of Introducing Other Researches
The related researches considered in the article highlight the relevance and importance of the chosen method. In the article, the scholars have introduced a number of scientific works investigating standard effort tests analyzing the compaction index characteristics of dry unit weight with regard to moisture content. The studies also reveal tests indicating the moisture index of incoming wastes combined with adding water to the compaction process (2).
Hence, the researchers refer to those methods because the obtained results fit the hypothesis and objectives of the paper. The characteristics of waste can be congruent with other reliable studies supported by Zekkos et al. (4).
In particular, the researchers provide information about the main component of different types of solid wastes and these characteristics justify the research made in the presented study. More importantly, Zekkos et al. (4) prove the relevancy of equipment used in the experiments because their research is focused on discussing solid waste evaluation for geotechnical purposes.
Aside from the analysis of the related works introduced in the article, it will be purposeful to introduce studies on the use of different compaction techniques with regard to other materials, such as soil.
Hanson et al. (2) explain the choice of soil compaction technologies, but fail to introduce similar researchers related to the chosen method. In order to draw the parallels with the article, the table below provides a curve defining water content volume as per suction, as presented in the research by Miller et al (3).
Judging from the results, the level of compacted water soils was identical in the field and in the laboratory. Regarding the research under consideration, the results obtained from the laboratory and field tests have provided bell shaped curves; however, the results slightly differ. Miller et al. (3) also present field and laboratory tests to identify the influence of compaction conditions on the characteristics of soil water to highlight the fact of discrepancies between the application of laboratory tests and those carried under natural conditions.
Appropriateness of Methodologies
Relevancy of methodologies can also be justified because the researchers have managed to introduce a two-dimensional approach to data description. Specifically, the compaction process has been carried out under laboratory and natural conditions to outline possible errors and deviations and provide accurate results.
In this respect, the laboratory test consists in measuring the compaction index of three different types of solid waste unite, including dry unit weight (weight of solids deprived of natural moistures), operation unit weight (incoming solid wastes), and total unit weight (incoming wastes with water addition) (2).
These tree types of solids have uncovered logical and naturally determined results of how the compaction process will be influenced if moisture density varies. Field tests have also contributed to analyzing the numerical characteristics of compaction parameters.
Consequently, the introduction of the two tests was necessary to measure the influence of climatic conditions and seasonal effects. In addition, similar assumptions have been presented by Miller et al (3) where about six different types of soil water have been identified to outline common results. In order to enhance the validity and reliability of the results, the same approaches have been introduced by Babu, Reddy, and Chouksey (1) who have outlined three models of compressing municipal solid waste.
The model performance assessment has been indispensible to deducing accurate outcomes and developing the effective computer program calculating landfill settlements. The given researches are of high relevance to the article under analysis because both studies have similar implications and purposes.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
The methodologies have been effective in terms of identifying the influence of seasonal effects on the results of compaction. The researchers have paid significant attention to influence of temperature fluctuation on the presence of natural moisture, which influences significantly the results presented with the help of laboratory tests (2).
Analogous data is also considered in studies by Miller et al. (3), which proves the importance of investigating laboratory and natural conditions for highlighting the final results. Importantly, both studies have greatly contributed to the solving numerous geo-environmental and economical problems through the evaluation of various compaction methods with regard different materials (soil and solid waste).
Methodological relevance is largely identified by the extent to which geo-technical evaluation is integrated into geo-environmental and economical curriculum. Judging from the research conducted by Hanson et al. (2), the scope of study has been strictly attached to geo-environmental and ecological sciences which identify greater validity of the studies in general.
Nonetheless, insufficient connection has been revealed in the methodology level providing shallow comprehension of how the paper can be integrated into the disciplinary studies. In contrast to the given research, Babu et al. (1) have managed to effectively combine scientific studies and statistics with other related disciplines.
Analysis of Findings and Conclusions
The findings presented in the study correspond to the established purposes and implications of the research. The analysis of related researchers proves that the structure of the research provided by Hanson et al. (2) is more consistent in terms of strict coincidence between the established methods and findings.
Specifically, it is much easier to follow the logical flow of ideas and define how each method has contributed to the evaluation of the paper purpose. Most importantly, the difficulty of the presented terms and formulas does not prevent the article from comprehension. In contrast to the above-presented evaluation, Zekkos et al. (4) have not accurately juxtaposed the theoretical materials and methods to the outcomes of the study and practical implications that has led to misconceptions.
While evaluating the results of the study, specific emphasis should be placed on the value of the presented studies with regard to other social sciences. The researchers have managed to explain the importance of the experiments for enhancing economical and environmental implications. They have also provided new perspectives for decision-making and problem-solving methods (2).
Apparently, the success of the study is predetermined by the universality of methods applied in the research, as well as numerous models involved into measurement of the numerical data. In this respect, the given research clearly illustrates the functions and methods applicable in the practical sphere. Similar approaches have also been introduced by Babu et al. (1) who have sufficiently described the relation of the soil water studies to geo-environmental problems.
Evaluating the Structure of the Paper
The article at issue is logically structured because the initial arguments of the paper clearly correspond to the findings and test results. Specifically, laboratory test on exploring the compaction indices closely correlates with actual implication of the paper (2). The authors have managed to define how water addition can positively affect the compaction method to reduce the landfill areas and provide more efficient ways of managing solid wastes.
Despite the transparency and accuracy of the structure, some terms have not been adequately explained, which can create a number of confusions. This is of particular concern to such indices as moisture content (w) and specific gravity (Gs) (2). The latter term plays a crucial role in outlining the main numerical data as far as the field testing is concerned. Similar structure is attuned to researches by Millers et al. (3) and Babu et al. (1) who have succeeded in presenting consistent analysis revealing the actual significance of the study.
The overall structure logically and gradually exposes the pertinent information. It also follows the quantitative study schemes revealing the basic outline of the research, literature review, methodology, discussion, and findings (2)
Though the definitions of the previously mentioned terms are ambiguous, general presentation and organization is logically and grounded. In addition, the integration of charts, tables, and diagrams enhances the content and provides corresponding illustration of the tests. Pictures also contribute to the overall idea of the research.
Additionally, it should be stressed that the researchers have managed to draw a logical parallel between scientific information and environmental and economical studies. In order to justify the reliability of the structure, it is possible to review those presented in the studies by Babu et al. (1), Zekkos et al. (4), and Miller et al. (3). All the scientific works disclose a clear organization and consistency of each section with the topic.
While evaluating the overall value of the article under analysis, much attention should be paid to the integration of the given studies to the assessment of methodology appropriateness, discussion of findings, and organization and structure of the paper. All these sections underscore the validity and reliability of the research, as well as its practical value and implications.
Most importantly, a comparative analysis of the scientific work with other researches proves its prevalent importance in terms of its practical applicability and relevance of the chosen methodologies. Hence, consideration of other studies reveals that the introduction of both laboratory and field-testing is indispensible to obtaining transparent and accurate results.
Other researches have also introduced multi-dimensional approaches to investigating the compression methods and compaction techniques with regard to solid wastes and soil. Additionally, the evaluation has found certain shortcomings connected with the presentation of term definitions that makes the content difficult to read. Nevertheless, the identified lapses do not diminish the scientific importance of the article.
- Babu GLS, Reddy KR, Chouksey SK. Constitutive model for municipal solid waste incorporating mechanical creep and biodegradation-induced compression. Waste Management. 2010;30(1):11-22.
- Hanson JL, Yesiller N, Von Stockhausen SA, Wong WW. Compaction characteristics of municipal solid waste. Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2010;136(8):1095-1102.
- Miller CJ, Yesiller N, Yaldo K, Merayyan S. Impact of soil type and compaction conditions on soil water characteristics. Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2002;128(9):733.
- Zekkos D, Kavazanjian J, Bray JD, Matasovic N, Riemer MF. Physical characterization of municipal solid waste for geotechnical purposes. Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2010;136(9):1231-1241.