## 3 Results and Discussion
### Elemental Analysis Values of Pellets  
Table 4 reports the ten elemental compositions of the pellets. According to Table 4, there was no significant difference in the K and Hg content between WPP samples and RDF samples. Meanwhile, the remaining elemental compositions varied greatly. For instance,  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Sample** \\ **Type** \\ **(Sawdust/RDF)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Proximate Analysis**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**HHV**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & **MC** & **VVM** & **AC** & **FC** & **(MJ/kg)** \\ \cline{2-9}  & **Mean (\%)** & **Mean (\%)** & **Mean (\%)** & **Mean (\%)** & **Mean \\ \hline
100/0 & 9.57 b  & \(\pm\)(0.26) & 72.11 d  & \(\pm\)(0.31) & 2.54 a  & \(\pm\)(0.09) & 15.78 b  & \(\pm\)(0.56) & 19.40 a  & \(\pm\)(0.07) \\
70/30 & 11.27 d  & \(\pm\)(0.31) & 65.87 b  & \(\pm\)(0.36) & 9.85 b  & \(\pm\)(0.11) & 13.01 a  & \(\pm\)(0.45) & 21.19 b  & \(\pm\)(0.09) \\
60/40 & 10.48 c  & \(\pm\)(0.06) & 65.17 a  & \(\pm\)(0.36) & 11.86 c  & \(\pm\)(0.15) & 12.48 a  & \(\pm\)(0.40) & 21.83 c  & \(\pm\)(0.14) \\
50/50 & 5.38 a  & \(\pm\)(0.35) & 68.17 c [FONOTE:c]Footnote c: footnotemark: [ENDFOOTNOTE] & \(\pm\)(0.49) & 13.86 d  & \(\pm\)(0.16) & 12.59 a  & \(\pm\)(0.55) & 22.09 d  & \(\pm\)(0.08) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Numbers in parentheses are standard deviation values. Mean values with the different letters are significantly different at \(p<0.05\).  
\end{table}
Table 2: Proximate analysis and higher heating values of samples.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sample** **Type** **(Sawdust/RDF)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Sample** **Type**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Utimate Analysis (\%)**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **C** & **H** & **N** & **S** \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **Mean** & & **Mean** & & **Mean** & **Mean** \\ \hline
100/0 & Control & 51.20 a  & \(\pm\)(7.24) & 8.01 a  & \(\pm\)(1.13) & 0.27 a  & \(\pm\)(0.03) & 0.60 a  & \(\pm\)(0.03) \\
70/30 & 70/30 & 47.46 a  & \(\pm\)(0.27) & 10.21 b  & \(\pm\)(1.10) & 0.47 b  & \(\pm\)(0.03) & 0.91 b  & \(\pm\)(0.02) \\
60/40 & 60/40 & 47.67 a  & \(\pm\)(0.34) & 11.45 b  & \(\pm\)(0.69) & 0.50 b  & \(\pm\)(0.13) & 1.38 c  & \(\pm\)(0.15) \\
50/50 & 50/50 & 49.87 a  & \(\pm\)(1.58) & 10.38 b  & \(\pm\)(1.00) & 0.69 c  & \(\pm\)(0.04) & 1.04 b  & \(\pm\)(0.08) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Ultimate analysis values of samples.  
RDF samples had significantly higher Na, Cl, Zn, Cu, Pb, Cd, Cr, and As content compared to that of WPP samples. Additionally, ANOVA testing showed a significant difference between groups and within groups of the sample type, as displayed in Table 5. Generally, pellets with the highest RDF ratio (50%) had the highest value of all elemental compositions. RDF is a fuel made from various wastes, including municipal solid waste (MSW) and industrial waste. MSW is primarily composed of various types of waste, such as plastics, textiles, rubber, and foam, which contain varying amounts of elemental components [35]. As a result, it is understandable that the RDF samples had more elemental components than the WPP samples.