ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Feasibility Study to Produce Sound Barrier Brick Using Crumb Rubber

Siti Noreha Bt Che Bahrun1, Kalaikumar Vallyutham2, Mohamad Mubarak Abdul

Wahab2
1
Structural Engineer, Technip
2
Lecturer, Civil Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar,
31750 Tronoh, Perak; Kalaikumar@petronas.com.my

ABSTRACT: The production of automobiles is increasing yearly which produces

tremendous number of used tires. The used tires are piling up as the dumping areas are
limited. The disposed tires become the mosquitoes’ breeding spot which leads to
numerous cases of dengue in Malaysia. The tires cannot be disposed by burning as it
could cause environmental issues. Such materials can be recycled and used for other
purposes. A feasibility study was conducted to investigate the potential of using crumb
rubber to produce sound barrier wall. The literature review has revealed that
rubberized-brick has high porosity, which makes it suitable as a good sound insulator.
An experimental work was conducted by producing brick with 40% replacement of
sand with crumb rubber of two sizes namely 3.35 mm and 0.6 mm. A prototype sound
barrier wall of 1 m width x 1 m height was constructed using the bricks. Traffic noise
level was generated using a single source and the noise reduction was recorded by
determining the difference in noise level at the front and behind the wall at varied
location. It was found that, the noise reduction of the crumb rubber added brick wall is
encouraging and better than conventional sound barrier wall. In addition to that, the
crumb rubber added brick was not only lighter but also has compressive strength of
5.36 MPa which satisfies the minimum requirements. The study has proven the
redundant tires could be reused for a new product-based application namely sound
barrier wall. It not only posses’ capability to replace conventional sound barrier wall
but could also resolve two environmental problems: redundant waste tires and traffic
noise.

INTRODUCTION

Million tons of waste tires were produced in 2003; 87 % of them were generally
reused as rubber pavement material, railway track pads, material for creating parks
and recreation areas [1]. Rubbers cannot be dumped or burned; they are abandon
waste product that need to be controlled before it causes problems in the future. In
order to overcome such problem, the tires must be consumed in various sectors. One
 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

of the potential applications of recycling rubber is in highway noise abatement. The

properties of rubber itself enhance the noise reduction. Currently the major
consumption of used tires is the asphalt pavement industry [2]. The used tires are
being processed to become crumb rubber and being used in various rubber material
applications. Crumb rubber is a made of grinding used rubber-products such as scrap
tires to be free from fiber and metal [2]. The fine rubber particle is ranged in size from
0.075 to 4.75 mm.
Noise barrier is defined as solid obstructions built between highway and residential
area [2]. A noise barrier can reduces 5dB noise level when its height exceeded the line
of sight of the receiver. As it exceeded the line, the reduction of noise is about 1.5dB
for each meter barrier weight as shown in Figure 1. It cannot block all the noise;
however reduces the noise level by 5 to 10 decibels (dB). It can be effective depending
on the material used. There are many types of barrier such as concrete barrier, wood
barrier, timber barrier, earth berm barrier, and others. The common type is concrete
barrier as it satisfied the noise reduction parameter. Mainly in Malaysia, concrete or
brick barrier wall are being used.

Figure 1: Concept of noise barrier [2]

LITERATURE REVIEW

Crumb rubber has a special thermo-mechanical and chemical-physical properties

according to Zhu and Douglas [3]. It is light in weight, durable and can withstand
environmental changes. Furthermore, it is a non-toxic and inert material. In their
research on manufacturing method of crumb rubber panel, they have specified that the
rubber panel has high air porosity compared to concrete panel [3]. Eventually, it leads
to high sound absorption that is significant for effective noise barrier. Acoustical
Absorption Coefficient (AAC) is the concerned parameter in measuring the capability
of a material to absorb noise in terms of sound energy. Value of AAC=1 indicate that
all the sound energy is absorbed by a material. Their research has proven that crumb
rubber based product has greater absorption compared to other materials [3].
Meanwhile, Sukontasukkul has conducted study on thermal and sound properties of
crumb rubber concrete panel. He has used scrap tires produced locally in Thailand [4].
The samples were replaced with crumb rubber for fine aggregates at ratios of 10 to 30
% for respective sample. Crumb rubber is not suitable for structural application as it
has poor strength; however it performed well as insulator [4]. The mix proportion for
 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

the concrete samples is 1.00:1.64:1.55 and the water ratio of 0.47 is kept constant.
While the crumb rubber passing ASTM sieve No. 6 and passing ASTM sieve No. 26
are varied in the mixture. In determining the sound absorption coefficients, the sample
were tested using two different frequencies: low-mid-frequency (125, 250, 500 Hz)
and high-frequency (1000, 2000, 4000 Hz) [4]. From the result, it has been obtained
that, crumb rubber concrete is better sound absorber compare to plain concrete. In
average, crumb rubber concrete is 36% better than plain concrete.
Turgut and Yesilata (2008) have investigated physio-mechanical and thermal
performance of bricks with crumb rubber added. The size of crumb rubber used is in
range of 0.075 to 4.75 mm while the sand is taken from Goksu River, Turkey [5].
Eight different mixtures with varied percentage of crumb rubber from 10 to 70% were
considered and made accordance to BS 6073. It is a volumetric replacement. For each
mixture, slump test were conducted and found that mixture of 40% replacement
resulted highest slump value of 65mm. they also found that the higher percentage of
crumb rubber the better the brick’s appearance [5]. They have stipulated that, the new
brick can be used low cost building eventhough the replacement of crumb rubber in
the mix proportion reduces about 29% unit weight of the brick [5].

METHODOLOGY

Based on the research done by Sukontasukkul, it was revealed that combination of

two sizes of crumb rubber namely 3.35mm and 0.6mm resulting highest noise
reduction [4]. Furthermore, to ensure the mixture has workability, 40% replacement of
sand was adopted from Turgut and Yesilata [5]. The experimental works are divided
into two stages. First stage comprises of manufacturing brick and the second stage is
constructing a prototype sound barrier wall.

1) Brick Manufacturing
Prior to fabricate the bricks, the materials were prepared. The sand were sieved to
ensure it meet the fine aggregates requirement using several sizes of sieves; 1.18 mm,
600 µmm, 425 µmm, 300 µmm and 150 µmm. The sieve analysis result is provided in
Figure 2.

Figure 2. Sieve analysis of sand

 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Whilst, the crumb rubber was also seized in order to obtain the required sizes which
are 3.35 mm and 0.6 mm as shown in Figure 3. The mix design for the brick is shown
in Table 1, which was adopted from Turgut and Yesilata [5]. Ordinary Portland
cement was used for the mixes.

(a) 0.6 mm (b) 3.35mm

Figure 3. Crumb rubber

Table 1. Mix design

Cement Water Sand Crumb Total

(g) (g) (g) rubber (g)
(g)
952 554 1572 403 3481

Plywood mould was used to fabricate the 105 x 75 x 225 mm bricks. In addition to
that, steel moulds with dimension of 100 x 100 x 100 mm were use to produce cubes
for compression test. A total number of 94 bricks were required to construct the
prototype wall. Thus several mixes were made to fabricate the bricks due to limitation
of mould and mixer. Slump for each mixes were recorded and tabulated in Table 2.
The recorded average slump is 71 mm. After 24 upon casting, the bricks were
dismantled and cured for 28 days in the curing tank. Finally the bricks were oven dried
for 48 hours in a ventilated oven at 65o temperature as illustrated in Figure 3.
Meanwhile the cubes were tested for compressive test after 28 days and the result as
shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Slump value

Mix No. Slump

(cm)
1 6.8
2 7.2
3 7.4
4 8.2
5 6.5
6 6.9
7 7.0
8 6.6
 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Average 7.1

Figure 3. Oven-dried process

Table 3: Compressive strength for cubes tested

Unit 28-day
Cube Pace
Weight strength
No. Rate
(g/cm3) (MPa)
10-2 1.68 3.0 -
22-2 1.75 3.0 5.42
21-2 1.68 3.0 5.12
26-2 1.76 3.0 5.62
5-3 1.77 3.0 5.23
9-3 1.73 3.0 5.41
Average 1.73 5.36

2) Prototype Sound Barrier Wall Construction

The finished bricks were used to construct 1 m width x 1 m height prototype sound
barrier wall. Two barrier wall setups were considered in this study; a) without wing
wall b) with wing wall. This is to avoid the sound from diverging/seep through
sideway of the wall and to check the difference. Initially, field study was conducted at
Jalan Sultan Shah and Ipoh-Utara Highway to measure the actual traffic noise. The
measurements were taken at the front of existing sound barrier wall and behind it. The
readings are shown in Table 4 and the average traffic noise for both locations between
86 to 81 dB.
Thus, similar noise level was used for this study. Using a single noise source, the
noise was generated behind the wall; meanwhile the sound meter (receiver) was
placed at the front. The sources of noise and the receiver were placed at the same level
at both sides.
 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Table 3. Compressive strength for cubes tested

Location
Jln
Duration Ipoh-
Sultan
(minute) Utara
Azlan
Higway
Shah
Noise Level (dB)
1 75.1 84.5
2 86.5 89.3
3 89.7 85.1
4 89.1 82.7
5 75.8 86.4
6 78.7 87.3
7 83.6 86.7
8 79.6 82.9
9 72.7 83.6
10 80.4 88.3
Average 81.1 85.7

The typical experimental setup is shown in Figure 4. Furthermore, to ensure the

efficiency of the wall, noise reduction was recorded at varied location as in Figure 5.
The recorded noise level in the laboratory prior to conduct the experiment was almost
59 dB. To avoid any disturbance from surrounding noise and decaying of the
generated noise, the wall was barricaded with plywood as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 4. Typical experimental setup

Figure 5. Measurement at varied location

 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Figure 6: Measurement at varied location

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

1) Barrier wall without wing wall

Initially the noise reduction without the wing wall was conducted. As mentioned
earlier, the location of readings were manipulated at 3 different locations namely;
centre, right and left. The results are presented in Figure 7 to 9.

Figure 7. Graph of noise level at centre brick wall without wing wall vs. time

Figure 8. Graph of noise level at right brick wall without wing wall vs. time
 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Figure 9. Graph of noise level at right brick wall without wing wall vs. time

From the figures, it can be noted that, the generated noise level in average below
than 90 dB respectively and similar to the measured traffic noise. The average noise
reduction at three locations is 18.87 dB.

2) Barrier wall with wing wall

Identical method was adopted expect with wing wall at both sides. The results are
displayed in Figure 10 to 12.

Figure 10. Graph of noise level at centre brick wall with wing wall vs. time

Figure 11.: Graph of noise level at right brick wall with wing wall vs. time
 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Figure 12: Graph of noise level at left brick wall with wing wall vs. time

This time, the noise reduction is more consistent compared to barrier wall without
wing wall. This is probably due to the existence of the wing wall which may prohibit
any generated noise to influence the noise level behind the wall. However, the
difference between the three locations is not severe. The average noise reduction at
varied location is 19.87 dB and higher than barrier wall without wing wall. The field
measurement showed noise reduction of 9.5 dB, while the crumb rubber added brick
wall managed to get higher noise reduction. But however, the experiment was
conducted in control environment with single source noise only, which contradicts
with the actual barrier wall which is subjected to several of noise sources. Full scale
study must be conducted to enhance the noise reduction of the proposed wall.

CONCLUSION

Noise barrier are installed at highways or roads that neighboring residential areas. It
could not block all the noise but reduce the noise level by 5 to 10 dB depending on the
material used. Since the rubber is a sound insulator and enhances the sound absorption
at high noise frequency as traffic noise; the potential to replace conventional sound
barrier wall is greater. Apart from that, the achieved average compressive strength is
5.36 MPa and the minimum compressive strength for non-load-bearing concrete
masonry is 3.55 as stated in ASTM C129 [11]. Therefore, the bricks could be also
used to construct non-load bearing wall. Few conclusions are drawn from this study as
follow:

• The redundant scrap tires can be re-consumed to a newly product base such as
crumb rubber added brick
• The crumb rubber added brick wall posses high noise reduction due to the rubber
properties
• The promising sound barrier wall is the solution of abundant tires and encourage
greener world
 ASEAN Australian Engineering Congress 2011, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

REFERENCE

[1] Seishi, M. (2005). Technical Manual for the Use of Recycled Materials Generated
by Other Industries in Construction. Material & Geotechnical Research Group,
Public Works Research Institute (Taisei Publishing Inc.) Retrieved by April 2006
from:http://www.pwri.go.jp/team/zairyou/Technical%20Manual%20for%20the%2
0Use%20of%20Recycled%20Materials01.pdf
[2] U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. (2001).
Keeping the Noise Down: Highway Traffic Noise Barriers (Publication No.
FHWA-EP-01-004).Washington, D.C Author: Retrieved from
www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment [March 7, 2010]
[3] Zhu, H., & and Carlson, D.D. (1999). A spray based crumb rubber technology in
highway noise reduction application.
[4] Sukontasukkul, P. (2009). Use of crumb rubber to improve thermal and sound
properties of pre-cast concrete panel. Construction and Building Materials, Vol.
23, page: 1084-1092.
[5] Turgut, P., & Yesilata, B., (2008). Physico-mechanical and thermal performances
of newly developed rubber-added bricks. Energy and Buildings, Vol. 40, page: 679-
688.
[6] Ahmad, S., & Saiful Amin, A.F.M. (1998). Effect of curing conditions on
compressive strength of brick aggregate concrete. Journal of Civil Engineering,
The Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh. Vol. CE26, No.1.
[7] Manual Sheet of Noise Level Investigation Data Using Sound Level Meter (ONO
SOKKI Model LA-1240).
[8] Occupational Safety and Health Standards (OSHA) Standards. Monitoring noise
levels non-mandatory informational appendix. Standard Number: 1910.95 App G
[61 FR 9227, March 7, 2010]. Retrieved
from:http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STAND
ARDS&p_id=9742
[9] Specification Guideline for Sound Level Meter (ONO SOKKI Model LA-1240).
[10] ASTM C 129, Standard specification for non-load-bearing concrete masonry units.
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
[11] Ontario Ministry of Transportation. (1993). Potential Applications in Highway
Products of Rubber/Plastic Blends Based on Waste Materials. Published by
Research and Development Branch, MTO, Author: Redpath, A.E. Consulting.