J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(4)54-63, 2016 2016, TextRoad Publication ISSN 2090-4304 Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research www.textroad.com Decision Support System of Community Service Program Proposal Rank Setting Using the Simple Additive Weighting Method in the Institute for Research and Community Service in Musamus University of Merauke - Indonesia Gerzon Jokomen Maulany Information System, Engineering Faculty, Musamus University of Merauke-INDONESIA ABSTRACT Received: November 22, 2015 Accepted: February 29, 2016 This research had the purpose to make software that capable in determining the rank-setting of the winner of community service program proposal. The research was implemented in the Musamus University in Merauke- Indonesia by taking data sample in the Institute for Research and Community Service of the Musamus University of Merauke Indonesia. The research was conducted by using the structured approach technique for analysis process and information system designing and the waterfall method. The algorithm used to make the ranking was the Simple Additive Weighting-SAW Algorithm. The result of the research was that the Decision Support System DSS to determine the rank-setting of Community Service Program proposal winner in the Institute for Research and Community Service of the Musamus University of Merauke Indonesia, had the success level reached 61.76% if compared to the result of its size winner setting in Musamus University and it was better than used the direct weighing method to determine the winner rank-setting. Conclusions of the research were that (1). The Decision Support System-DSS determines the rank-setting of community service program proposal winner using the Simple Additive Weighting SAW method, has been developed successfully and can be used as one of software to support the decision taking in its field. (2). System functionality has been tested and may be used in the different locations with the different criteria parameter as well. The alternative used can be increased and the system will automatically adjust the result of preference rank-setting over the alternatives assesed KEYWORDS: Decision Support System, SAW, black box INTRODUCTION Community Service Program performed by the lecturers is an important part as one of implementations of the Three Duties of College (education/teaching, research and community service). A lecturer will not to be complete on acknowledge as a lecturer if the three elements of the Three Duties of College he or she doesn t performs. Musamus University as one of new State Universities, quite realize of this matter so that it prepare budget/funds to finance research and community service that implemented internally, it is aimed to spur the spirits of the lecturers in the Musamus University setting in order that they will to be involved and sharpen their knowledge abilities and applying those in application that can directly used in vast community particularly in South Papua region. The assessment mechanism done by determining criteria that should be meet by the proposer lecturer and made the rank setting based on the assessment results conducted by the assessor/reviewer. The obstacle faced was by the limitation of the available assessor thus it needed the adequate aid tools so that facilitate the assessor in provide assessment and process of the selection result of winner determination of the community service program proposal per budgetary fiscal year in the Musamus University setting. In this research shall be implemented a software that has capability to provide criteria weight and make assessment from the criteria value existing in every existing alternatives. The method will be used was the Simple Additive Weighting SAW so that it will seen the rank-setting of alternatives in the form of the Community Service Program Proposals existed on per value of their criteria. [1][2]. MATERIALS AND METHODS Decision Taking Process Decision taking involve several stages and by means of several process to Lucas, (1992) [3]. According to Simon (1960) [3], decision taking includes 4 (four) stage processes that interrelated and sequenced [4][5]. The four processes are as follow: *Corresponding Author: Gerzon Jokomen Maulany, Information System, Engineering Faculty, University of Musamus, Indonesia. Email: gerzonm@yahoo.com 54
Maulany, 2016 (1) Intelligence This stage is the investigation and detecting process of problem scope and the problem introduction process. Input data gained, processed, and tested in order to identify problems. (2) Design This stage is the finding and developing alternative process. This stage includes the process to understand problem, giving solution and testing solution feasibility. (3) Choice In this stage conducted selection process among various alternatives of actions that possible to carry out. This stage include searching, evaluation, and recommendation of solution that appropriate with model has been made. Solution of model is the specific value for variable on the alternative selected. (4) Implementation Implementation stage is the implementation stage of the decision has been taken. In this stage need to compose a range of planned actions, so the result of the decision can be monitored and adjusted to if it needed revision. In this case, the model according to Simon (1995) [6], also depicts the contribution of Management Information System and Management Science / Operation Research on the decision-taking process, as seen in figure, Figure 1 presents Decision-taking stage. SIM / PDE MANAGEMENT SCIENCE / OPERATIONS RESEARCH Figure 1 Decision taking stage Decision Support System DSS Decision Support System - DSS is an application system of flexible, interactive and adaptive natures built special for supporting the decision-taking process on management problem that not structured. The role of Decision Support System DSS is expected can improve the quality of decision-taking process. Decision Support System DSS uses data from the existing systems and using various certain analysis approach method built via the interactive process with the system users. [7] The main purpose of Decision Support System DSS supply the computer based support for the decisiontaking process which is complex and not routinely occurred compared to the Management Information System- MIS that supply report for taking the repeatedly decision. Decision Support System DSS can be implemented in various kinds from make calculation by spread sheet to the complex forms and the graphical features that make interactions with users easier to do. [1][2][8]. Following figure is Figure 2 presents Decision Support System Architecture. external & internal data Another computer based system Internet, Intranet, Extranet Mgn data Mgn model Mgn external Subsystem based knowledge User interface Knowledge based Org. Manager (User) Figure 2 Architecture Decision Support System 55
J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(4)54-63, 2016 Simple Additive Weighting - SAW Method Simple Additive Weighting - SAW method also often known with the weighted addition method term, and is one of methods characterized in the Fuzzy Multi Decision Making FMADM problem solving in which to achieve goal this method uses the optimal alternative from a numbers alternatives with certain criteria. Work method of Simple Additive Weighting Method SAW is by seeking the weighted addition from the performance rating on every alternative in all attributes, this method also needs the decision matrix (X) normalization process to a scale that can be compared to all existing alternative ratings. Normalization process obtained for each of criteria columns by divide it with the highest criteria column criteria in the matrix column. [7][8]. The Simple Additive Weighting SAW, is With r ij is the normalized performance rating of A i alternative on attribute C j; i =1,2,,m and j=1,2,,n. Preference value for each alternative ( Vi) is given as: V i r ij = = n j= 1 W j r X ij ij Max i x Min X X i ij ij ij If j is profit attribute If j is cost attribute In which V i value is the larger to indicate that rather alternative A i selected. Business Process of the Decision Support System of Community Service Program Proposal Rank-Setting The emphasize on system superficial developed is on the software ability to produce the alternative proposal rank analysis of Community Service Program based on the criteria values determined by user. Data, for determining the importance level of every criterion is determined by the experts that can be changed appropriate with the newest conclusion data consideration. User shall fill in the criteria weight valuation for each of alternatives, furthermore, system will processes the data by using Simple Additive Weighting SAW method and displays the vectors resultant data with the resultant vector ranking from the highest to the lowest, [7][9][10]. In making the decision support system, criteria applied as indicators will be rated in the feasibility determination of business open are (a). Program Feasibility of the aspect of how important and urgent the program proposed for the community problem solving, (b).program Feasibility of the aspect of Program benefit for community, likely the program implementation viewed from the aspects of human resources, tool, material, fund, time, role and community support, (c). The feasibility of target achievement by considering is the feasibility of proposer team, time, fund and the involvement of community partner in the proposed program, (d). Qualification of proposer team is determined based on track record and experience of the leader and/or team members in the research and service activities relevant with the proposed topic, (e). Program output should have real impact in solve the social, economic, and environment problems in community, (f). Activity sustainability may be seen from how large the involvement of community/work partner in this program, (g). Related to the subject matters supported by the leader or members of proposer team, (h). The presence of students involvement; program is the part of Student s Last Assignment or Working Practice, (i). Related to the research road map or knowledge development in Expertise Competence, (j) Program involves the community as work partner in program activity, (k). Program gets two counterpart fund or contribution from the partner side, (l). Program gets assistance in the form of facility from the partner side, (m). Business process of the developed system is seen as follow. Activity steps may be showed as presented on Figure 3. Flow Diagram of Business Process Data, mentioned above. System Entity Relationship Design After analysis process particularly business process done to the running system currently then further step is make design on system will be designed and/or developed. It is preceded by designing step of the correlation among the existing entities in the system, that is, the main entities of Researcher and Title and the assessor/reviewer that related to development weight; this system will be developed to determine the sequencing on the titles of Customer Service Program proposals for lecturers and be valid internally within the Musamus University UNMUS campus setting. The results of the decision support system will be compared to the proposals have been assessed by the reviewer by weighting value addition method and criteria weight value and to determine how large the similarity between the common calculation/selection results and the selection using Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method so that it can be concluded the success level using SAW method in determining the winner selection of Community Service Program proposals for lecturers in the Musamus University. [11][12][13][14]. Because of this system will be developed into an information system integrated to 56
Maulany, 2016 the decision support system then it obtained the design of Entity Relationship Diagram (ERD), as seen on Figure 4. Entity Relationship Diagram System as follow: Figure 3 Flow Diagram of Business Process Data Figure 4 Entity Relationship Diagram System Figure 5 Application Business Process Function is describe the Business Process Function of the application system will be developed that is by determining the business process function of the needs determination of Community Service Program proposal, the criteria determination business process function, the business process function for alternative selection of CSP proposal that comply with criteria obtained from the relationship of decision support system business process function to determine the CSP proposal ranking and will support the determination of business process function of the determination of Community Service Program proposal winner alternative simultaneously together with the criteria determination business process and the decision support system of Community Service Program proposal rank-setting to form the integrated decision support system business process. Actors are all entities out of system and interact with system by means of providing input, receiving output. Figure 6 System Package Layer Dependence, describe the dependence of system package will be developed, it is important for the developer to map the existence of system and influence of another systems out of the system developed. Also by this figure it is can be prioritized which system package that will be developed first so that ultimately system may run completely and support each other among one system and another systems integrated properly. [15][16][17]. 57
J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(4)54-63, 2016 Figure 5 Application Business Process Function Figure 6. System Package Layer Dependence RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1. System Implementation Figure 7 Criteria Weight Determination Form The implementation of the decision support system of community service program proposal winner ranksetting is by implementing the designs have been made before namely input design, business process design, data business design, and output design. To run this system then input design implementation need to make is the weight value setting on the existing criteria, in this case there are 12 (twelve) criteria to et if a proposal feasible to assess as the winner of community service program, this criteria weighting included to determine the importance degree on the existing criteria whether each another by entering in the reason of weight providing on 58
Maulany, 2016 the each criteria. The result of criteria weighting input design implementation seen on Figure 7. Criteria Weight Setting Form as follow. Figure 8 Researcher Data Form Every lecturer who proposes the Community Service Program proposal should be recorded within the system so that if it will be used in submitting proposal, data of the lecturer can already be used. The lecturer main data should be available are the researcher code, researcher name, academic functional position and scientific field to be the interest. This case has been illustrated on Figure 8. Researcher Data Form. Thereby, the result of location reviewer will be identified from sub-district up to regency levels. Every lecturer has right to propose one title of Community Service Program to the Institute for Research and Community Service of Musamus University and will be done assessment. One proposal of Community Service Program may has one team consisted of a leader and minimal 1 (one) member or maximal 2 (two) members adjusted in one budgetary fiscal year. Title data processing may be seen as on Figure 9Community Service Program Proposal Title Form following. Figure 9 Community Service Program Proposal Title Form Assessment Process of criteria on the existing weight conducted one by one on each of proposals of the Community Service Program to be alternative, the assessment result is the result of criteria weight multiplied with a value given on each alternative assessed, then the twelve values added up so that become a criteria weight value given to the alternative assessed. In this assessment, one proposal title assessed by more than one assessor/reviewer so that the sum of values given by the both reviewers added up and made average into the weight value given on the criteria weight given, this case seen on Figure 10 Weight Assessment Form of every proposal on the available criteria as follow: 59
J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(4)54-63, 2016 Figure 10 Weight Assessment Form of every proposal on the available criteria The results of recapitulation of the criteria weight assessment on the value given on every alternative of Community Service Program proposal entered in and evaluated by the Institute for Research and Community Service of UNMUS are seen on Figure 11. Directly criteria weight assessment on alternatives, as follow. RECAPITULATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM PROPOSAL ASSESSMENT RESULTS 2012/2014 Budgetary Fiscal Year 2013 NO. TITLE # TITLE RANKING WEIGHT 1 J33 ELECTRICAL MOTOR REPARATION TRAINING AS SERVICE BUSINESS 495.00 PIONEERING FOR MARIND YOUNG MEN Researcher Leader: Drs. JAYADI, M.T. 2 J03 APPLICATION OF EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY IN UTILIZATION OF 460.00 AGRICULTURAL WASTE AS ALTERNATIVE FUEL IN SIRAPU VILLAGE Researcher Leader: YOSEPINA MANGERA, S.Si., M.Si. 3 J07 BANANA JAM FOR WOMEN EMPOWERMENT IN SIRAPU VILLAGE 460.00 Researcher Leader: NI LUH SURYANINGSIH, SP., M.Sc. 4 J04 TORAJA GABUS FISH SAUCE 455.00 Researcher Leader: IRIANIS LUCKY LATUPERISSA, S.Pi., M.Si. 5 J05 FOOD DIVERSIFICATION OF SWEET POTATOES 445.00 Researcher Leader: NITA NASUTION, SP., M.Sc 6 J06 TRAINING OF PURE COCONUT OIL PREPARATION OR VIRGIN 437.00 COCONUT OIL (VCO) BY USING AGITATING METHOD Researcher Leader: UNTARI, M.Si. 7 J08 TRAINING OF EGG ABON 435.00 Researcher Leader: YENNY PINTAULI, ST., M.Si 8 J09 TRAINING OF SHREDDED EGG PREPARATION Researcher Leader: YENNY PINTAULI PASARIBU, ST., M.Si. 427.50 Figure 11 Direct criteria weight assessment on alternatives To view the application of the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method then data have been gained these weight value on criteria were conducted normalization process (weight improvement process) so that gained a matrix had been normalized namely a matrix in which every existing value previously divided by the highest value available on the column of each criteria so that obtained a result that enabling the opportunity equivalence to get the same value among the existing alternatives as seen on Figure 12. Display of criteria Weight Value Result normalized. 60
Maulany, 2016 No TITLE TITLE 1 st Weight 2 nd Weight 3 rd Weight 4 th Weight 5 th Weight 6 th Weight 7 th Weight 8 th Weight 9 th Weight 10 th Weight 11 th Weight 12 th Weight J01 TRAINING OF SEARCH 1.0000 0.9091 0.9091 0.6667 0.7273 0.8000 0.6364 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.4000 0.6000 ENGINE USE FOR ENRICHMENT J02 SAFETY OF ANIMAL 1.0000 0.7273 0.7273 0.8333 0.5455 0.8000 0.6364 0.8000 1.0000 0.8000 1.0000 0.8000 PRODUCT FOOD FROM WILD ANIMAL FOR NUTRIENT COVERAGE IN FAMILY J03 EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY 1.0000 0.9091 0.9091 0.9167 0.9091 1.0000 0.9091 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.5000 0.5000 APPLICATION IN WASTE UTILIZATION J04 TORAJA GABUS FISH SAUCE 1.0000 0.9091 1.0000 0.6667 0.9091 0.8000 1.0000 0.4000 1.0000 1.0000 0.4000 0.7000 J05 FOOD DIVERSIFICATION 1.0000 0.9091 0.9091 0.9167 0.7273 0.8000 0.7273 0.8000 0.8000 1.0000 0.5000 0.5000 FROM SWEET POTATOES J06 TRAINING OF PURE 1.0000 0.9091 0.7273 0.9167 0.7273 0.8000 0.9091 0.8000 0.8000 1.0000 0.4000 0.5000 COCONUT OIL PREPARATION OR VIRGIN COCONUT OIL (VCO) BY USING AGITATING METHOD J07 BANANA JAM FOR WOMEN 1.0000 1.0000 0.9091 0.6667 0.9091 0.8000 0.9091 0.8000 1.0000 1.0000 0.4000 0.6000 EMPOWERMENT IN SIRAPU VILLAGE J08 TRAINING OF SHREDDED 0.8000 0.9091 0.9091 0.7500 0.7273 1.0000 0.9091 1.0000 0.6000 1.0000 0.4000 0.8000 EGG PREPARATION J09 TRAINING OF CHICKEN 0.8000 0.9091 0.9091 0.9167 0.7273 0.6000 0.9091 1.0000 1.0000 0.8000 0.4000 0.5000 NUGGET PREPARATION J10 TRAINING OF ORGANIC 1.0000 0.9091 0.5455 0.9167 0.7273 0.8000 0.6364 0.8000 1.0000 1.0000 0.4000 0.5000 FERTILIZER PREPARATION FOR FARMERS GROUP IN URUMB VILLAGE Figure 12.Display of normalized criteria Weight Value Result Matrix. Furthermore, the matrix has been normalized in each of its columns multiplied with criteria weight of each column representing each criteria in the existing Community Service Program proposal, it done addition for each criteria existing in each Community Service Program Proposal (alternative) so that resulting in the final V value will be ranked thus the largest value is having the highest preference value to be accepted as the winner with the highest order. This case illustrated on Figure 13. Preference value Rank-Setting for each alternative of the Community Service Program Proposal of the lecturers of Musamus University. TITLE # TITLE YEAR RESULTANT VECTOR ELECTRICAL MOTOR REPARATION TRAINING AS SERVICE 2013/2014 0.93136500 BUSINESS PIONEERING FOR MARIND YOUNG MEN BANANA JAM FOR WOMEN EMPOWERMENT IN SIRAPU VILLAGE 2013/2014 0.86940000 APPLICATION OF EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY IN UTILIZATION OF 2013/2014 0.86531000 AGRICULTURAL WASTE AS ALTERNATIVE FUEL IN SIRAPU VILLAGE TORAJA GABUS FISH SAUCE 2013/2014 0.85894500 FOOD DIVERSIFICATION FROM SWEET POTATOES 2013/2014 0.83895000 TRAINING OF PURE COCONUT OIL PREPARATION OR VIRGIN 2013/2014 0.82486000 COCONUT OIL (VCO) BY USING AGITATING METHOD TRAINING OF SHREDDED EGG PREPARATION 2013/2014 0.82137000 BUILDING AND GUIDANCE OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 2013/2014 0.80531000 TRAINING OF ORGANIC FERTILIZER PREPARATION FOR FARMERS 2013/2014 0.80304500 GROUP IN URUMB VILLAGE TRAINING OF CHICKEN NUGGET PREPARATION 2013/2014 0.80304000 SOCIALIZATION OF THE ELIMINATION CONVENTION OF 2013/2014 0.79743000 DISCRIMINATION ON WOMEN IN PERSPECTIVE OF Figure 13. Preference value Rank-Setting for each alternative of the Community Service Program Proposal of the lecturers of Musamus University In the Figure 13.Preference value Rank-Setting for each alternative of the Community Service Program Proposal of the lecturers of Musamus University is reflected values V 1 until V 34representing the 34 Community Service Program Proposals have been processed using Simple Additive Weighting - SAW method with each of 61
J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(4)54-63, 2016 Vector V values represents the selection preference value to be the winner V 1 is 0.9313 with proposal title Electrical motor reparation training as service business pioneering for MARIND young men, while value V 2 representing title Banana jam for women empowerment in SIRAPU village is 0.8694, value V 3 representing Proposal with title Application of efficient technology in utilization of agricultural waste as alternative fuel in SIRAPU village is 0.8653, value V 4 representing title alternative Toraja Gabus fish Sauce is 0.8589, value V 5 representing title alternative Food diversification from sweet potatoes is 0.8369, value V 6representing title alternative Training of pure coconut oil preparation or virgin coconut oil (VCO) by using agitating method is 0.8248, value V 7 representing title alternative Training of shredded egg preparation is 0.8213, value V 8 representing title alternative Building and guidance of marketing management is 0.8053, value V 9 representing title alternative Training of organic fertilizer preparation for farmers group in URUMB village is 0.803045, value V 10 representing title alternative Training of chicken nugget preparation is 0.80304, are the 10 orders of the highest proposals of Community Service Program proposal rank-setting conducted by SAW method of 34 existing Proposals made comparison on the rank-setting conducted by the Institute for Research and Community Service of Musamus University side as direct weighting and calculation using SAW method, there is success or compatibility between the weighting done by the Institute for Research and Community Service and one done by SAW method as large as 61.76%. This research focused on how to prepare software which capable to determine the rank-setting of criteria alternative that certainly weighted by applying Simple Additive Weighting Method, thus values for weighting and criteria and assessor on criteria can be set itself by a given method and will be processed by this application become information needed for decision taking. The results of rank-setting can be seen in the two dimensions graphics shape by more informative as on Figure 14. Interactive Graphics of Preference values rank-setting for each of Community Service Program Proposals. Figure 14.Interactive Graphics of Preference values rank-setting for each of Community Service Program Proposals. System Testing System testing is very important to know if the system has been made has run properly and reliable so that it can be used appropriate with its allocation. The main purpose of system development is to meet the expectation of its users, thus if the system developed does not agree with the user expectation then the system may be said as does not successful to develop. On the process of Decision Support System of Superior Commodity Priority Setting was used the Black Box method, that is, to test whether the system has meet the functionality needs of the software set, Software Requirement Specification - SRS before the system developed. And to test the performance increase before and after system developed, it was used the users acceptance test. [18][19][20]. Testing was done by running every module/part of system so that known that functionality level might be tested. From these testing results can be seen that the process have been set as functionality should be owned by the system have been available and successfully developed on system thus have met the expectation of users. [21]. CONCLUSION Conclusion of the research results are as follow: a. Decision Support System determines the rank-setting of Community Service Program proposal winner using the Simple Additive Weighting - SAW method has succeed to develop and can be used as one of software to support the decision taking in its field. b. System functionality has been tested and can be used at the location differ to the different criteria parameter value as well. Alternative used can be added and system will adjusts automatically the result of preference rank-setting over the alternatives assessed. 62
Maulany, 2016 SUGGESTION Suggestions of the research results are as follow: a. In order to be tested of level success the Simple Additive Weighting should be done on several Proposals, the more the better, with different characteristics, with criteria parameter for each of the different alternatives as well so that it can be calculate the success level of this method with the result in field. b. This system is expected capable to help the decision taker in the winner setting of Community Service Program proposal. REFERENCES 1. Atkins., Marcia; Kramek, Andy, and Schummer. Rick 2002. MegaFox: 1002 things You Wanted to Know About Extending Visual Foxpro.Hentzenwerke Publishing, Whitefish bay. USA. 2. Atkins., Marcia; Kramek, Andy, and Schummer. 2000. 1001 things You Wanted to Know About Visual Foxpro.Hentzenwerke Publishing, Whitefish bay. USA. 3. Harjo S. 2008. Kajian sifat fisik mekanik dan superplastisitas komposit A1 6061 = Abu batubara. LPPKM UNTAG Surabaya Laporan Penelitian Hibah Bersaing. 4. Jogiyanto, HM, 2000. Analisis dan Disain Sistem Informasi : Pendekataan Terstruktur teori dan praktek aplikasi bisnis. Edisi ke 3, Andi Offset.Yogyakarta 5. Urwiler, Chuck; DeWitt, Gary; Levy, Mike and Leslie Koorhan, 2000. Client/Server Applications with Visual FoxPro and SQL Server. Hentzenwerke Publishing, Whitefish bay. USA. 6. Kezner, Harold R, PhD. 2013. Project Management A System Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling. Eleventh Edition. John Wiley and Sons. Inc. Hoboken. New Jersey. 7 Kusumadewi, Sri. 2006. Fuzzy Multi Attribute Decision Making (Fuzzy MADM). Graha Ilmu. Yogyakarta 8. Efraim Turban and Jay E. Aronson, 2001, Decision Support Systems and Intelligent Systems, 6th edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle 9. Paten nomor US 6863763 B2. 2005. Material propeller menggunakan bahan dari kevlar reiforcement plastic (Lee et al, 2005) 10. Patent nomor US 4,810,167 1989. material propeller blade used of composite resin bonded plastic (Spoltman et al, 1989) 11. Patent nomor 20080267782. 2008 material propeller of urethane plastic (Published Marshall Duffield. 12. Patent nomor US 4944655. 1990 material propeller used material of fiber reinforcement plastic (Herbert M) 13. Patent nomor US 5928042A 1990 material propeller used material of fiber reinforcement plastic and aluminium, Quiggins. 14. Kainer, Karl U., (2006). Basic of Metal Matrix Composites. Metal Matrix Composite Costome-mate Material for Automotive and Aerospace Engineering. Wiley-VCH Verlag Gmbh & Co. KgaA.pp 5. 15. Lee et al. 2005. Hybrid Propeller Made of Metal and Composite. United States Patent No US 6,863,763 B2. Date patent Mar.8,2005 16. Spoltman et al. 1989. Composite Aircraft propeller Blade. United States Patent No 4,810,167. Date of Patent March.7.1989 17. Marshall Duffield. 1990. Fluid reaction surfaces (i.e., impellers) specific blade structure (e.g., shape, material, etc.) 18. Herbert M. 1990. Propeller blade of a fiber-reinforced plastic material. Patent 4944655. Publication date July 31, 1990 19. Varun Sethi.2007. Effect of Aging on Abrasive Wear Resistance of Silicon Carbide, Particulate Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composite. A thesis submitted to the of Graduate Studies and Research of the University of Cincinnati Division 20. Khumar, G.B Veeresh et.al (2010). Studies on Al6061-SiC and Al7075-Al2O3 Metal, Matrix Composite, Journal of Minerals and Materials Characterization And Engineering, Vol.9 No.1, pp 43-55 21. Park, B.G et.al (2001). Material Characterization and Mechanical Properties of Al 2 O 3-Al Metal Matrix Composites, Journal of Material Science 36, p.2417-2436 63