Investigation of compressed earth brick containing ceramic waste
This study presented experimental results on the use of ceramic waste as substitutes in the composition of laterite soil compressed bricks, better known as compressed earth brick (CEB). The use of ceramic waste was chosen because in recent years it can be seen landfills can no longer accommodate the...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN)
2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/8556/ |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This study presented experimental results on the use of ceramic waste as substitutes in the composition of laterite
soil compressed bricks, better known as compressed earth brick (CEB). The use of ceramic waste was chosen because in
recent years it can be seen landfills can no longer accommodate the growing of solid waste. Some examples of solid waste
are glass, cans, plastic, paper and ceramic waste. Ceramics used in this study are ceramic rest that has been broken taken
from the landfill and then crushed before mixing with the mixture of CEB. The main objective of this study was to
investigate the physical and mechanical properties of compressed earth bricks containing waste ceramics and to determine
the optimum percentage of waste ceramic in any mix of revenue compressed earth bricks. A total of 72 units of bricks were
produced and used to test the density, water absorption, compressive strength and the initial rate absorption. The sample
size utilize prototypes size of 100 mm x 50 mm x 40 mm. Laboratory tests conducted in accordance with the test
procedures that were performed on brick CEB as specified in BS 3921: 1985 and MS 76: 1972. The experimental results
shows that the ratio of ceramic waste 75% was the optimum value because it recorded the highest compressive strength
with 33.6 N/mm2 and the test of water absorption and initial rate absorption test were 17.2% and 1,634 kg / min / m2
respectively. |
|---|