Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Development of thermal insulation sandwich panels containing

end-of-life vehicle (ELV) headlamp and seat waste
Yee Choong Wong a,b,⇑, Norhayati Mahyuddin a,⇑, Asrul Mahjuddin Ressang Aminuddin a
a
Centre for Building, Construction & Tropical Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
Department of Architecture and Sustainable Design, Lee Kong Chian Faculty of Engineering and Science, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, 43000 Kajang, Selangor, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Recycling automotive waste has increasingly become an alternative solution towards producing sustain-
Received 9 June 2020 able materials given the rising issue of raw material shortages and waste management challenges at glo-
Revised 5 August 2020 bal level. The improper end-of-life vehicle (ELV) waste management poses detrimental impacts on the
Accepted 23 August 2020
environment. This paper proposes a novel method to develop thermal insulation sandwich panels using
Available online 16 September 2020
ELV waste, motivated by the critical needs of creating high-performance thermal insulation for buildings.
Six sandwich panels (P1-P6) of different weight and ratio of shredded ELV particles were manufactured.
Keywords:
The sandwich panels structure was made of three layers: a core, and a glass face sheet bonded to each
End-of-life vehicle waste
Recycling
side. The core structure composed of Polycarbonate (PC) from headlamp lenses and polyurethane (PU)
Sandwich panel from seat, bonded using resin casting approach. Thermal conductivity of the samples was measured using
Thermal insulation guarded hot-plate apparatus. Results corroborated that thermal conductivity of ELV-based sandwich pan-
Thermal conductivity els reduced remarkably compared to panel without ELVs, recorded at 15.51% reduction. Composition
Transparency test gives the best thermal performance was made of mixed ELV core materials of ratio 50%PC:50%PU, it
has a thermal conductivity value of 0.1776 W/mK. The transparency data were obtained using Haze-
gard plus haze meter. The best luminous transmittance value was exhibited by P2 (100% PC), 67.47%.
The best clarity value and haze value were shown by P6 (25% PC: 75% PU), 55.13% and 52.6% respectively.
ELV waste can be recycled to develop useful sustainable thermal insulation to improve thermal and opti-
cal transparency performance of buildings as a substitute for conventional materials which have a rele-
vance for future façade concepts.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
1.1. ELV waste context
End-of-Life vehicle (ELV) waste has incrementally become a
major global issue impacting many aspects of society and economy
given their non-biodegradability and expected growth of produc-
tion quantity. The poor management of ELV waste has profound
ramifications on the environment, human health and climate
change. The aftermath is the growing ecological damages such as
resource shortages and wastages, high carbon footprints and
immeasurable pollutions (ECOSCO, 2019).
Currently, automotive industry generates about 5% of the global
industrial waste, from cars and the manufacturing plants that pro-
⇑ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: wongyc@utar.edu.my, ycwong82@gmail.com (Y.C. Wong),
hayati@um.edu.my (N. Mahyuddin), asrulmahjuddin@um.edu.my (A.M.R.
Aminuddin).
duce them (Zorpas and Inglezakis, 2012). About 5.3 million passen-
ger cars and light good vehicles weighed a total of 5.7 million
tonnes were scrapped in the EU in 2017. The total weight of ELVs
were peaked at 7.1 million tonnes in 2009 (Eurostat, 2020). In Asia,
approximately 5 million vehicles are disposed annually (JETRO
Japan Economic Report, 2006).
Landfilling of ELVs is truly unsustainable, the available landfill
sites worldwide are running out, the new ones cannot be located.
Without a systematic separation, collection and treatment of ELV
waste often leads to further contamination with other types of
waste categories when it is openly dumped (Salem, 2008). ELV
recycling level worldwide remains lacklustre because of the diffi-
culties in processing and lack of incentives (Nikles and Farahat,
2005). Substantial quantities of valuable parts and components
end up downcycled or even worse accumulated as debris in nat-
ural habitats due to a desynchronisation between automakers
and ELV recyclers. The most downcycled parts are accessories,
electrical and electronic components, and engines (Ortego et al.,
2018).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.08.036
0956-053X/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415
In recent years, EU implemented ELV Directive (2000/53/EC) to
regulate automotive and material manufacturers to meet specific
targets, a wide range of recycling activities to tackle ELV challenges
have been carried out. Sustainable waste management measures
are taken by several automakers worldwide to optimise ELV recy-
cling in a closed-loop supply chain (CLSC), taking responsibility for
their own products. Resource efficiency programmes to recycle
ELVs have been developed by several automakers to utilise recy-
clable car components and green parts. Re-manufacturing of used
merchandise by channelling them back to Original Equipment
Manufacturers (OEMs) provides vehicles production costs cutting
within the automotive industry itself (Hatcher et al., 2011).
Nissan promotes the use of reusable parts under the name Nis-
san Green Parts. There are 31 different reusable parts that are
prone to collisions, including headlamps, combination lights, and
other front and back vehicle components (Nissan Environmental
report, 2004). Ford has been a leader in using recycled materials
in its cars. Since 2011, all seat cushions made from soy foam for
vehicles built in North America have reduced the company’s yearly
CO2 emissions by 20 million pounds. In 2010, Chrysler estimated
the process of using recycled PU foam save 180,000 lb of foam
going to landfills per year (Sanchez, 2015).
A study suggests that plastics represents the third highest in
percentage by weight, approximately 7–9.3% of the average com-
position of an ELV weight, after ferrous metal 65.4–71% and non-
ferrous metal 7–10% (Vermeulen et al., 2011). From the total shred-
ded output of an ELV, approximately 70–75% represents ferrous
fraction, 5% non-ferrous metals and the remainder 20–25% referred
as automotive shredder residue (ASR). In the composition, the per-
centage by weight of ASR, textiles and foam represents about 27–
27.2%, while plastics 19–20.2%. Due to ASR heterogenous and com-
plex mixtures, it is currently largely landfilled (Cossu and Lai,
2015). In order to meet future ELV targets and escape fiscal penal-
ties, plastics and composites have to be greener, more recyclable
and sustainably sourced (Frost and Sullivan, 2010).
In terms of recycling technology, welding and composite mate-
rials cause difficulties in dismantling ELVs (Tian and Chen, 2014).
The joint characteristics of a vehicle part can influence the valuable
material losses and leads to impurities, influencing material sepa-
ration practices of multi-material vehicle design (Soo et al., 2017).
Numerous mechanical methods have been used to separate and
recycle ASR such as polyurethane and ABS using Changing World
Technologies (CWT) thermal process (Winslow and Adams,
2004). Currently, the separation of plastics that is done efficiently
from ASR is not widely applied (Davies, 2012; Passarini et al.,
2012). The non-ferrous fraction in a heavy and light fraction is sep-
arated using air classification, magnetic and eddy current, screen-
ing or trommel separation methods (Ferrao and Amaral, 2006;
Cossu and Lai, 2015). Sink/float separation is most commonly
applied in mixed plastics separation basing on density difference.
Froth flotation, static hydrodynamic separation or thermo mechan-
ical sorting have been developed (Miller et al., 2014; Hopewell
et al., 2009; Vermeulen et al., 2011)
In construction industry context, initiative to utilise ELV waste
for manufacturing building materials is limited. There is very little
evidence suggesting that any of these are being used in construc-
tion industry and commercially available today. Part of the reasons
is due to building user requirements that are difficult to meet or
time consuming (Hatcher et al., 2011; Wong et al., 2018). The
low recycling level can be reversed if high-value products can be
generated from ELV waste (Thai et al., 2019). If the building user
requirements are fully understood, the recycling of ELVs to create
building products can be more effectively developed in the future
(Wong et al., 2018).
Multiple waste utilisation projects have given good impacts in
construction industry: Recycling, opting for low technology meth-
403
ods and sustainable materials that are renewable, reusable and
abundant. Several authors have conducted research using agricul-
tural wastes (Paiva et al., 2012), newspaper residue (Ng and Low,
2010), polymeric wastes (Quaranta et al., 2010), textile wastes
(Dissanayake et al., 2018) in the development of building compo-
nents such as sandwich panels, particle boards, and composite
panels, focusing on thermal insulation performance evaluation
and characterisation.
1.2. Development of sandwich panels
A lot of research is being carried out worldwide to study sand-
wich panels. Sandwich panels are made of multi-layer construc-
tion. It is usually composed of two face sheets (or skins) of rigid
surface layer bonded either mechanically or chemically by a thick
core. There are two groups of sandwich core materials, homoge-
nous and structured cores (Pflug et al., 2002). A huge variety of
cores can be utilised in sandwich structures from foams to struc-
tured (non-homogenous) support (Allen, 1969). The skin materials
and core can vary widely, the core may be a solid filing or a honey-
comb. The most common core materials are foam core, plastic hon-
eycomb, wood core and mineral wool while face sheets are usually
made of aluminum, steel, ABS, plywood, MDF and plexiglass
(Kleiberit, 2020). Homogenous core material such as PU foam is
widely used in the automotive industry. Structured core material
such as honeycomb core is often used in aerospace industries for
buckling and bending sensitive panels while corrugated core has
been commonly used in headliners, cabin floor and car roofs
(Pflug et al., 2002). The development of sandwich panels has been
extensive in many sectors, it has many applications and come in
many forms. German automaker Karmann presented a concept of
sandwich panels made of aluminium foam. The technology was
improved in automotive sectors such as ship building, aircraft
and railway industry (Qingxian et al., 2015). Sandwich panels
may be used for building external walls and interior partition walls
for vertical and horizontal installations as well as roofs. It can also
be used to build enclosures for industrial equipment and air condi-
tioning devices (Izopanel, 2020).
Oliveira investigated a sustainable sandwich panel manufac-
tured from aluminum skins encapsulated with recycled thermo-
plastic bottle caps core proved that the discarded bottle caps is
a promising lightweight and cheap honeycomb component for
structural applications (Oliveira et al., 2018). An on-field experi-
ment conducted using the honeycomb sandwich panels inserted
with chinese plywood found that the test room walls installed
with chinese plywood reinforced sandwich material reduced elec-
tricity consumption by 0.17 kw compared with the conventional
walls (1.07 kw) (Reengwaree et al., 2013). The PU roof sandwich
panels product manufactured by BRDECO are composed of 3 lay-
ers, the face sheet layer is two dyed galvanised corrugated plates
and the core is made of density 40 kg/m3 PU foam. The thermal
conductivity value of 50 mm thick sandwich panel is 0.022 W/
mK, it is widely used in steel structure factory building, offices
and commercial buildings (Brdeco, 2020). Teknopanel produces
several sandwich panels products. The 50 mm thick PU/PIR insu-
lated sandwich wall panels made of prepainted galvanized steel
inner and outer sheet has a thermal conductivity value of
0.027 W/mK while the 50 mm thick rockwool insulated sandwich
wall panel has a thermal conductivity value of 0.0345 W/mK
(Teknopanel, 2020).
Glass sandwich panel GSP was first developed by Iconic Skin
Seele group in Germany. It is a 3-in-1 product which combines a
glass, wall and insulation in one construction element as building
façade material. The face sheet is a 6 mm thick pane of glass
bonded on the sandwich panels. The insulating core is made of
polyurethane (PU) or mineral wool (MV). The glass sandwich panel
404 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415

can be integrated with conventional window and façade systems Manufacturing process
for offices, public buildings and industrial buildings. The panel is flow
also UV and weather resistant printed based on design specifica-
tions (Brucha, 2020). Vitale et al. manufactured several sandwich ELV waste collection 1
panels made of glass fiber and vegetable (jute) fiber composite face
sheets and different cores: honeycomb cores made of glass fiber
polyester composites to evaluate their thermal properties (Vitale ELV headlamp ELV seat
et al., 2017). AungYong fabricated green sandwich panels by incor-
porating polyurethane-based foams with incorporated waste glyc-
erol and agricultural waste residues, i.e., rice hulls as filler. The
Manual dismantling 2
findings show that the foams increase the strength of the panels,
it can be used as non-load bearing panels to construct green build-
ings (AungYong, 2014). Manual materials
Another study by Wang et al. focused on the development of
3
separation
sandwich panels made of aluminium alloy face sheets and a hier-
archical composite square-honeycomb sandwich core to study the
vibration characteristics/performance of the sandwich structures PC PU
using experimental tests under clamped-free boundary condi-
tions. The results indicated that geometric parameters have an
impact on the vibration characteristics and performance of the Granulator crushing/ Manual cutting/
4a 4b
sandwich panels (Wang et al., 2019). Petrone et al. manufactured shredding shredding
and tested sandwich panels consist in a three-layer composite
made of recyclable pre-preg compatible foam core and two differ-
Glass face sheet/
ent face sheets, flax-PE foam and glass-PP foam to evaluate vibra- 5
container fabrication
tional characteristics and the damping and mode shape ratio
using roving hammer method (Petrone et al., 2014). Lisicins PC & PU core
materials insert 6
et al. investigated sandwich wall panels based on cellular core
made of perforated steel tapes and plates from waste materials
using stamping method. The proposed sandwich panels could
be used as supporting or decorative structures. The thermal insu- Resin casting/bonding 7
lation property of the sandwich panels is improved by filling the
cellular structure with insulation filler materials (Lisicins et al.,
2015). Waste automotive plastic (WAP) and non-metallic waste Sandwich panels
from printed circuit boards (PCBs) were used by researchers to
Fig. 1. Flow chart of manufacturing process of the proposed sandwich panels.
develop sustainable composite panels, medium density fibreboard
for wide range of uses. The composite panels made of various
proportions of PCBs and WAP were fabricated using hot press i. ELV components needed in this research were selected
method (Rajagopal et al., 2017). based on their characteristic and suitability. They were col-
In Colombia, Changemakers has reported projects to recycle lected from the local ELV recycling centres and sent to ded-
plastic and rubber waste to create sandwich panel by melting icated recovery plant for processing.
and pouring into a mould to produce building blocks which func- ii. ELV headlamp and seat components were dismantled man-
tion like Lego pieces with the participation of whole communities ually to extract useful materials.
in the construction of their own dwellings. Additives were added to iii. Manual ELV materials separation was conducted to sort sin-
the blocks to make them resistant to fire and earthquake resistant gle type of material for crushing and shredding.
(Mendez, 2017). iv. Crushing and shredding of ELV PC and PU waste into fine
In this study, a method to develop thermal insulation sandwich particles.
panels based on glass face sheets and sustainable core made of ELV v. Fabrication of clear glass container of dimension
waste was presented, as an innovative system for energy efficient 300 mm
300 mm
18 mm (L
W
T) to encapsulate
building that can be applied internally and externally. Six types the shredded PC and PU particles.
of sandwich panels were designed and manufactured with differ- vi. ELV shredded particles were inserted into the glass contain-
ent weights and ratios of shredded ELV PC and PU. The developed ers according to predetermined compositions, weights and
sandwich panels were subjected to thermal conductivity testing ratios.
using guarded hot-plate apparatus and transparency measurement vii. Epoxy resin was used to cast the sandwich panel and bond
using Haze-gard plus haze meter. This paper is organised in few the ELV waste particles together.
sections. It begins with an introduction, the second section pre-
sents the materials and methods used to develop the sandwich In this study, six different types of sandwich panels were man-
panels and the laboratory testing set-up, the third section presents ufactured and tested in laboratory as highlighted below (Type P1 -
the results and discussion, and the fourth section presents P6). Each panel was designed to have different weight and ratio of
conclusions. PC and PU (Table 1). The sandwich panels consist of 10 mm thick
core that were sandwiched by 4 mm thick glass face sheets. The
total thickness of the sandwich panels is 18 mm (Fig. 2).
2. Materials and methods
i. Control panel, no ELVs material (P1)
The manufacturing process to recycle ELVs to produce sandwich ii. 100%PC (P2)
panels is summarised schematically in Fig. 1, it constituted of 7- iii. 100%PU (P3)
step process. iv. 50%PC:50%PU (P4)
 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415 405

Table 1
(a) Measured thermal conductivity data of the proposed sandwich panels in different compositions using guarded hot-plate apparatus; (b) Measured statistical transparency data
of the proposed sandwich panels using Haze-gard plus apparatus.

(a)
Panel Panel composition Thickness Total Amount of Amount of Ratio of Area, Measured Percentage reduce
type of sample sample ELV waste epoxy resin ELV waste A thermal in thermal
(mm) weight (g) used (g) used (g) used (m2) conductivity (W/ conductivity
mK)
P1 Sandwich panels (air cavity, 18 1587 – – – 0.09 0.2102 –
without ELVs) and clear glass
face sheets
P2 Sandwich panels (ELV PC 18 2490 100 g PC 803 100% PC 0.09 0.1895 9.85%
particles core) and clear glass
face sheets
P3 Sandwich panels (ELV PU 18 2447 8 g PU 852 100% PU 0.09 0.1867 11.18%
particles core) and clear glass
face sheets
P4 Sandwich panels (ELV PC and PU 18 2473 50 g PC_4g 832 50% 0.09 0.1776 15.51%
particles core) and clear glass PU PC_50%PU
face sheets
P5 Sandwich panels (ELV PC and PU 18 2485 75 g PC_2g 821 75% 0.09 0.1785 15.08%
particles core) and clear glass PU PC_25%PU
face sheets
P6 Sandwich panels (ELV PC and PU 18 2452 25 g PC_6g 834 25% 0.09 0.1778 15.41%
particles core) and clear glass PU PC_75%PU
face sheets
(b)
Panel type Measuring point Luminous transmittance (%) Haze (%) Clarity (%)
Test value SD Test value SD Test value SD
P1 1 83.00 0.45 3.19 0.38 99.20 0.10
2 82.60 3.80 99.30
3 83.50 3.09 99.40
P2 1 67.10 1.48 58.90 4.80 53.20 1.90
2 69.10 59.30 55.10
3 66.20 67.40 51.30
P3 1 53.20 0.72 78.90 1.07 19.70 3.21
2 54.40 78.80 22.40
3 54.50 77.00 26.10
P4 1 59.70 3.96 58.80 0.70 50.60 0.93
2 66.40 59.50 51.10
3 59.40 58.10 49.30
P5 1 53.60 2.51 71.80 2.70 45.80 0.59
2 58.40 73.60 46.70
3 57.30 68.30 46.90
P6 1 47.10 4.01 54.30 2.52 57.90 3.29
2 53.50 49.70 56.00
3 46.10 53.80 51.50

SD = standard deviation.

v. 75%PC:25%PU (P5)
vi. 25%PC:75%PU (P6)
2.1. Collection of ELV waste materials
ELVs are usually collected by the licensed recyclers or disman-
tlers in authorised treatment facilities (ATFs) from the ELV last
owners, car dealers or at auctions from insurance companies
(Ferrao and Amaral, 2006). From the observation, the ELV waste
materials will normally be disposed to landfill site, incineration
facility or dumped by roadside especially parts that are broken or
dysfunctional which cannot be directly recycled or reused by the
end users or ELV collectors. The heterogenous materials often
regarded as no economic value or classified as materials that are
difficult to recycle due to multi-material system and the issue of
commingled materials. The selection of polymeric wastes for this
research considered the fact that ratio of polymeric waste recycled
from ELVs is low compared to other materials. It is also worth not-
ing that the increasing amounts of thermoplastic polymers con-
sumption in the manufacture of new vehicles in the future.
In this study, ELV materials were selected by considering crite-
ria of thermal insulation. Polycarbonate used in engineering sec-
tors are strong and tough, its demand is increasing by a 7% per
year. Some grades are optically transparent. PC is easy to mould
and thermoform. PC has density of 1.2 g/cm3 maintains toughness
up to 140 °C and down to 20 °C, it is virtually unbreakable. PC is
an extremely clear plastic that allow transmission of 90% of light as
good as glass. PC thermal conductivity is about 0.19, melting tem-
perature about 265 °C. PC is the dominant material for creating
transparent parts (i.e., headlamp lenses and windows) of automo-
biles and trains as well as civil construction. Some small motorised
vehicles such as motorcycles utilise PC to make windscreens. Typ-
ical applications of PC on buildings include the safety and security
glazing as well as overhead glazing (Zhang and Xu, 2019).
PU is the polymer that is formed by the reaction between the
OH (hydroxyl) groups of a polyol with the NCO (isocyanate group)
groups of an isocyanate (Ashida, 2007). PU is manufactured by
reacting polyols and diisocyanates derived from crude oil. PU foam
is lightweight, it offers same mechanical properties even though its
density has been reduced by 30%. PU is also good in reducing noise
which has the excellent sound-absorbing and vibration dampening
406 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415
Fig. 2. (a) Proposed sandwich panels composition; (b) vehicle headlamp components; (c) ELV headlamps; (d) dismantled PC; (e) shredding of PU from ELV seat; (f) crushed
PC; (g) shredded PU.
qualities that offer high safety levels and comfortability. PU is not
prone to corrosion throughout their life, it ensures stability even it
is under severe conditions. PU possesses high tear resistance along
with high tensile properties (Euro moulders, 2014). PU foam cores
have been a prime choice for thermal insulation due to low ther-
mal conductivity as well as materials for noise abatement, it is also
cheaper and easy to manufacture than honeycomb cores (Gibson
and Ashby, 1999).
ELV materials that are suitable for thermal insulation have
undergone some screening. Two types of ELV materials were iden-
tified and used to manufacture the sandwich panels: PC from ELV
headlamp lenses and PU from ELV seats. Both are under shredder
light fraction SLF category, they are abundantly available and have
longer lifespan compared with other materials. The required PC
and PU waste materials were extracted from retired ELVs of
approximately 12 years of age. A total of nine headlamp compo-
nents were collected from the licensed ELV recycling centres in
Kuala Lumpur. The headlamps collected for this research were
faulty and cracked headlamps that cannot be reused anymore in
another vehicle as spare-part. The headlamp is manufactured by
bonding various composites: PC, PP, ABS and PMMA and seat:
PU, PVC and metals (Zhang and Chen, 2014). An abandoned ELV
rear seat was collected from a local dumping ground. These two
ELV components were transported to treatment facility and labora-
tory for further processing and investigation to produce core
materials.
2.2. Dismantling of ELV components
2.2.1. Manual dismantling method
During the dismantling stage, useful ELV components (i.e. head-
lamps and seats) were disconnected from the ELV and sent to ded-
icated manufacturing plant. ELV headlamp consists of multi-
material components (i.e., lens, projection modules, reflector, and
 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415 407

housing). The collected headlamps composed of few materials: PC,

polypropylene PP, polybutylene terephthalate PBT and polyethy-
lene terephthalate PET and metal accessories, bracket, fasteners
and steel bolt screws. It needs to be dismantled manually to sepa-
rate the PC lenses from other materials using tools to achieve high-
est purity to prevent mixture contamination of different materials
(Fig. 2).

2.3. Manual ELV materials separation

In this study, manual separation technique was employed as it

gives an advantage for full material separation and achieve a
higher recoverability rate of the ASR (Fig. 2). The dismantled com-
ponents were separated according to similar type of materials in
order to obtain pure resources and remove impurities as the ELV
components contain multi-materials that complicates the recy-
cling process. Pure PC was extracted as a material to be crushed
and used to manufacture the sandwich panels.

2.4. Crushing and shredding of ELV waste

2.4.1. Crushing of ELV headlamp PC with granulator

The PC materials dismantled previously were crushed to the
proper size (3 mm particles) using granulator at the manufacturing
plant of V.P. Plastics Sdn. Bhd., Malaysia (Fig. 3). A CHESO CN gran-
ulator model CN-5 of dimension 860 mm
570 mm
1340 mm
(L
W
H) (410 kg) was used as it is suitable for crushing runner
and semi-products. The granulator comes with durable claw steel
blades and 6 rotary blades. The input speed is 360 rpm/min and
a capacity of 150–250 kg/hr.

2.4.2. Shredding of PU foam

PU foam from the rear seat of an ELV was shredded manually
into fine shreds using blade (Fig. 2). This method is sustainable
as it does not consume any energy to process the waste material.

2.5. Fabrication of glass container

The glass container with an enclosed air cavity size set at

10 mm was fabricated using 4 mm thick clear glass sheets with a
thermal conductivity value of 1.0 W/mK. The clear glass sheets
were cut to form a glass container sized
300 mm
300 mm
18 mm (L
W
T). The sandwich panels
were fabricated based on the recommended dimensions to fit the
standard size of a test cell metering in the GHP apparatus. Alley
Seal high performance Grade 107A silicone sealant was used to
bond the glass sheets as it offers excellent adhesion to wide range
of materials such as glass, plastic and steel. When applying silicone
sealant, all surfaces of the glass sheets were cleaned. The tack-free Fig. 3. (a) Crushing of ELV PC into fine particles using CN granulator; (b) Crushed
ELV PC; (c) epoxy resin AB glue set; (d) mixing of epoxy resin and catalyst; (e)
time for silicone sealant application on glass and plastic surfaces is
spreading over of epoxy resin to glass container to bond crushed ELV PC.
approximately 30 min.

2.6. ELV core materials insert
The shredded ELV PC and PU particles were inserted in the
18 mm thick glass container according to the predetermined
weight and ratio (Table 1). The shredded particles were sand-
wiched between the glass face sheets. Epoxy resin was used as bin-
der to bond the shredded particles together and protect them from
damage. Several criteria to determine the weights and ratios of ELV
core materials insert were considered. The amount of ELV materi-
als used dependent upon the amount of void space within the glass
container which needs to be filled and surface area which needs to
be covered for the best thermal and optical-transparent perfor-
mance. The surface area covered by the ELV materials insert of
the sandwich panels was kept at 50%. The weight-percentage rela-
tionships were established in the mixture proportioning of ELV
materials to ensure they are evenly distributed into the glass con-
tainers (i.e., 100 g PC = 100% PC; 50 g PC = 50% PC; 8 g PU = 100%
PU; 4 g PU = 50% PU).
2.7. Resin bonding and casting
Resin bonding method was employed to bond the ELV waste
materials together in the glass container to form a sandwich panel.
It is a method of plastic casting where a mould is filled with a liq-
uid synthetic resin, which then cured for 1 day under room tem-
perature. During the setting process, the liquid monomer
polymerises into the polymer, thereby hardening into a solid. In
408 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415

such cases, the curing agent mixed with resin contains what is
loosely referred to as a catalyst at room temperature and normal
pressure.
The selection of this particular process considered several crite-
ria. The process should minimise the change in physical mechani-
cal properties of ELV materials that will affect its final appearance
and performance: colour, transparency, structure and grade. It is
important to maintain the capacity of internal transmission of light
passing through the sandwich panels. This method takes into
account eco-design requirements which contributes in reducing
carbon footprint and minimising waste production. The production
cycle of this method is much shorter and cost-effective compared
to other methods.

2.7.1. Preparation of resin binder

It is important to choose a resin binder which does not emit
VOCs. 2 kg ultra-clear transparent strong hardness epoxy resin
AB glue set was used to bond the shredded ELV waste within the
glass container since the resin binder is hard as rock after drying
(Fig. 3). The drying took less than 24 hr at 25 °C. The epoxy resin
is crystal clear, moisture resistant, waterproof and chemical resis-
tant and resistant to yellowing from UV exposure. The resin is self-
levelling, self-degassing and odour free. Degassing is important to
remove dissolved gas bubbles when the resin is cured. The resin is
commonly used to coat tables and encapsulate objects. The volume
ratio is set at 25 ml (A glue): 10 ml (B glue). The epoxy resin and
catalyst were measured using respective cups 5 cc. The 2 mediums
were mixed and stirred thoroughly in the 250 ml measuring cup
(mixture ratio = dosage 2 parts catalyst:10 parts epoxy resin) to
ensure it is evenly cured on all surfaces. The simplest method is
gravity casting where the resin is spread over the glass container
and pulled down into all parts by gravity.
The whole curing process occurred in the laboratory under
room temperature. During the curing process, the catalysed epoxy
resin went through several stages from a liquid form to soft gel in
20 min and click-hard (cured stage) in 1 day. The panel samples
were completely dried during the laboratory tests.

2.8. Methods for measuring thermal conductivity

Steady-state method was employed to measure thermal con-

ductivity (k) of the developed sandwich panels using guarded
hot-plate GHP method which conforms to standard ISO 8302.
Steady-state method performs when the tested material is in com-
plete equilibrium and does not change with time. GHP method is
widely employed to measure thermal conductivity of commercial
products such as building thermal insulation, low-density insula-
tion for refrigerators and certification of reference materials of
low conductivity (Carollo et al., 2012). GHP method can be per-
formed either with two-sample apparatus or with a single-
sample apparatus. The GHP apparatus experiment is usually per-
formed according to standard ISO 8302 (Jones and Brischke, 2017).
2.8.1. Measuring procedures of GHP apparatus
A guarded hot-plate GHP apparatus in civil engineering labora-
tory Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia was adopted to
conduct the thermal conductivity experiment. Three Type-J ther-
mocouples with Teflon casing were affixed on the hot plate surface
and cold plate surface respectively. The thermocouples were con-
nected to AM25T 25-channel Solid State Multiplexer, and CR800
Datalogger (Fig. 4). Thermocouple is thermoelectric device for
measuring temperature, consisting of two wires of different metals
connected at two points, a voltage being developed between the
two junctions in proportion to the temperature difference.
The investigated sandwich panels (P1-P6) were tested sepa-
rately. These samples are shown in Fig. 5. A continuous data acqui-
Fig. 4. (a) Sectional illustration of the guarded hot-plate apparatus; (b) Guarded
hot-plate apparatus interior with 6 thermocouples; (c) Guarded hot-plate apparatus
experimental set-up in civil engineering laboratory Universiti Tunku Abdul
Rahman, Malaysia; (d) P2 sample tested using Haze-gard plus haze meter; (e)
Measuring points; (f) Measurement principle according to ASTM D1003: A beam
strikes the sample and enters an integrating sphere.
sition during the tests was performed in which the values of the
heat flow across the panel measured by thermocouples. The cold
plate temperature was kept almost uniform, at 20 °C approxi-
mately while hot-plate temperature was kept at 40 °C, in all cases
(Fig. 4). Each sandwich panel was sandwiched between the cold
plate and hot plate for consecutive 24 hr to collect the surface tem-
perature data and the amount of electricity used in amps to cool
the cold plate. A total of 20 hr of data were used in calculations
and analysis. A continuous data acquisition during the tests was
performed in which the values of the heat flow across the panel
measured by thermocouples. The surface temperatures of the
guarded hot-plate and cold plate were recorded at 1 min interval,
24 hr a day. The results were transferred from the datalogger to a
computer. The data collected from the GHP apparatus were shown
in Table 1.
 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415 409

Fig. 5. Samples of the investigated sandwich panels (L: 300 mm; W: 300 mm; T: 18 mm) in different compositions.

The equation in accordance with standard ISO 8302 was used to
calculate thermal conductivity (k) K-value (ISO, E., 1991. 8302.,
1991):
D
K¼ / ðT1  T2 Þ
A passing through the sample which deviates from the incident
/ average power supplied to the metering section of the heating
unit.
D = average sample thickness.
A = metering area.
T1 = average temperature on hot side of sample.
T2 = average temperature on cold side of sample.
2.9. Transparency measurement
Transparency of a material is influenced by the absorption and
scattering behavior of the sample. Visually transparency is
described by two phenomena: haze and clarity. Essential criteria
of transparency are luminous transmittance, haze and clarity.
Luminous transmittance is the measure of the total incident light
compared to the light that is actually transmitted. For instance,
the incident light is 100%, but the total transmittance may only
be 91% due to absorption and reflection (BYK-Gardner, 2020).
Haze is measured with a wide-angle scattering test in which
light is diffused in all directions results in a loss of contrast. Haze
has no specific unit, it is measured as the percentage % of light
beam by more than 0.044 rad (2.5°) on average (ASTM D1003-13,
2013). Clarity or known as see-through quality is measured using
narrow angle scattering test in which light is diffused in a small
range with high concentration. Finer details can be seen through
if the material tested possesses clarity quality (BYK-Gardner,
2020).
Clarity can be evaluated at angle of less than 2.5°. Factors
responsible for light scattering include impurities contained in
the material, internal optical irregularities caused by crystallisa-
tion, porosity, density difference, inhomogeneities of pigments/-
particles. As a general rule, a correlated haze value of 0%
indicates complete transparency. The perceived quality of a trans-
parent material is judged based on its clarity, how well we can see
through the material. i.e., clear sample (0% haze and 100% clarity);
milky/hazy appearance (high haze value); unsharp appearance
(low clarity value) (BYK-Gardner, 2020).
410 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415
In this research, a BYK Gardner Haze-gard plus haze meter was
used to measure the three transparency parameters: luminous
transmittance, haze and clarity. Haze-gard plus apparatus displays
the results in accordance to the ASTM D1003 standard test meth-
ods (Fig. 4). The dimension of Haze-gard plus apparatus is
62 cm
33 cm
22 cm and weight 18 kg. The measurement area
is ø18 mm, measurement range 0–100% and operating tempera-
ture +10 to 40 °C. The apparatus test conditions shall be set up in
an atmosphere at 23 ± 2 °C (73.4 ± 3.6 °F) and 50 ± 10% relative
humidity (ASTM D1003-13, 2013). Data acquisition for trans-
parency measurement was conducted by placing the samples
(P1-P6) perpendicular to the haze port and clarity of Haze-gard
plus. The sample surface was illuminated perpendicularly, and
the transmitted light was measured photoelectrically, using an
integrating sphere (0° /diffuse geometry) (Fig. 4). The spectral sen-
sitivity conforms to CIE standard spectral value function y, under
standard light C resp. A. The samples must have plane-parallel sur-
faces free of dust, scratches, grease and blemishes as specified in
standard ASTM D1003 (ASTM D1003-13, 2013). Three sets of trans-
parency data were collected from the 3 measuring points of each
sample as depicted in Fig. 4. The data obtained by Haze-gard plus
apparatus are reported in Table 1.
3. Results and discussion
The results of the investigated sandwich panels are presented in
Fig. 5. The thermal conductivity data obtained were analysed by
comparing them with the existing conventional thermal insulation
materials and established sandwich panel products developed by
others (Table 2).
3.1. Effects of ELV waste on thermal conductivity
Table 1 summarises thermal conductivity data of all sandwich
panels tested using GHP apparatus. The results show that sand-
wich panels with ELV waste were effective in reducing thermal
conductivity.
Thermal conductivity was improved from P1 (control panel
without ELV material) to P2 (with 100% PC), it reduced from
0.2102 W/mK to 0.1895 W/mK (9.85% reduction). The thermal con-
ductivity value was further reduced to 0.1867 W/mK (P3 with
100% PU) and 0.1776 W/mK (P4 with 50%PC _50%PU). Thermal
conductivity values for P5 and P6 were 0.1785 W/mK and
0.1778 W/mK respectively, slightly higher than P4. The thermal
conductivity value did not decrease when the percentage of PU
increased in the samples. It could be due to the number and size
of pores in between the PU foams were reduced during the manu-
facturing process, its porosity was reduced and density increased.
These result in low absorption of heat.
Comparing P2 and P3 that were made of homogenous ELV
materials, P3 shows much better thermal performance compared
to P2 probably because PU has far better thermal conductivity
value than PC (0.026 W/mK against 0.22 W/mK) due to its low den-
sity and high porosity. Moreover, the ELV material surface property
(smoothness/roughness) directly impacts its thermal performance.
The rough surfaces of PU have more frictions between; it increases
thermal absorptivity and reduces heat flux across more efficiently
than PC.
The thermal conductivity of P4-P6 were improved when the
cores have a mixture of heterogenous ELV materials, slightly better
than those made of homogenous ELV material (P2 and P3). This
implies that thermal conductivity value of the samples is greatly
improved when more than one type of ELV material is used in
the sample. The thermal conductivity value highly dependent on
the structure and arrangement of each sample. The way structure
of the sandwich panels was arranged contributes to significant
change in thermal conductivity value.
The irregularities of the shredded PU and PC in P4 was the
greatest among all samples which may have contributed the best
in heat absorbance. The primary heat transfer path across the sam-
ple may be weakened when the irregularities of materials
increased.
It is possible to conclude that the presence of air space may
speed up the heat transfer across the P1 sample via convection
which contributes to the highest thermal conductivity value
among all samples.
3.2. Comparison with conventional thermal insulation materials and
sandwich panels
There are many established commercial industrialised sand-
wich panel products in the market. Table 2 summarises the ther-
mal conductivity of the conventional materials and results
obtained from the proposed sandwich panels. These panels were
manufactured using different core and face sheet materials,
designs and methods.
The measured thermal conductivity of the glass fiber honey-
comb core bonded with glass fiber honeycomb was 0.123 W/mK
(Vitale et al., 2017). As can be observed in Table 2, the trend was
very similar among the conventional sandwich panels made of
PU core in terms of thermal conductivity, ranged between 0.019
and 0.027 W/mK. Thermal conductivity of sandwich panels made
of PU core was much lower compared with other core materials.
Sandwich panels product made of stiff polyurethane foam PU core
and stiff polyisocyanurate foam IPR core have thermal conductivity
rating of 0.022 W/mK and 0.020 W/mK respectively (Izopanel,
2020). The sandwich panels product manufactured using 6 mm
thick float glass outer skins encapsulated with 140 mm thick PU
core has a K-value of 0.04257 W/mK and U-value of 0.18 W/
(m2K) while the other panel with 100 mm thick PU core has a K-
value of 0.038 W/mK and U-value of 0.25 W/(m2K) (Brucha, 2020).
The comparison was performed between sandwich panels with
similar characteristics (Table 2). A value of 0.1895 W/mK of ther-
mal conductivity was obtained for P2 sandwich panels (100% PC
core) which is higher than 0.153 W/mK of clear PC honeycomb core
sandwich panels indicated in (Surface products inc, 2020) (i.e.,
170% higher). This difference may be related to the amount of PC
core materials encapsulated within P3 is much denser. The thermal
conductivity value of P3 sandwich panels (100% PU core) was
0.1867 W/mK which is higher compared to 0.4257 W/mK from
industrialised commercial sandwich panels made of PU core and
float glass sheets manufactured by (Brucha, 2020) (i.e.,128%
higher).
3.3. Transparency data
The measured transparency data are presented in Table 1 and
Fig. 6. The three readings collected from measuring point 1–3 of
the samples achieved a low standard deviation (less than 5%), indi-
cates that the obtained values tend to be close to the mean. The
obtained results corroborated that all samples have tendency in
light transmittance. The luminous transmittance mean value for
ELV-based samples P2-P6 did not differ very much statistically,
their mean values were slightly more or less than 50%.
Among all ELV-based sandwich panels (P2-P6), P2 (100% PC)
demonstrates the best light transmittance performance, its lumi-
nous transmittance value was 67.47%. This may be due to its opti-
cal properties and homogeneity of the sample composition. P6 (25
%PC: 75%PU) is the clearest ELV-based sandwich panel, it has
55.13% clarity value and 52.6% haze value. For clarity, narrow-
angle scattering deflects light in small angles, so that the light
 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415 411

Table 2
(a) Comparison of thermal conductivity of proposed sandwich panels with conventional thermal insulation materials; (b) comparison of proposed sandwich panels with
conventional sandwich panels used in construction industry.

(a)
Material Thermal conductivity (W/mK) Reference
Wood fiber (Rigid) 0.038 (Greenspec, 2018)
Wool 0.038
Cellulose (blown/sprayed) 0.038–0.040
Hemp 0.039–0.040
Hempcrete 0.060
Cellular glass 0.041
Straw 0.08
Glass mineral wool 0.035
Icynene H2FoamLite/LD-C-50 0.039
Phenolic foam 0.020
Polyisocyanurate (PIR) 0.023–0.026
Polyurethane foam (PU) 0.023–0.026
Expanded polystyrene (EPS) 0.034–0.038
Extruded polystyrene (XPS) 0.033–0.035
Aerogel 0.014
Mineral wool (quilt) 0.042 (Thorpe et al., 2017)
Urea formaldehyde (UF) foam 0.04
Blown fibre 0.04
Polyethylene (PE) Plastic (recycled) 0.01443 mm thick 0.4 (Din et al., 2015)
Bagasse (recycled) 0.01618 mm thick 0.046
Oil palm leaf (recycled) 0.01515 mm thick 0.00365
Textile (recycled) 0.0145 mm thick 0.230
Twigs (recycled) 0.01548 mm thick 0.130
Corn cob (recycled) 0.01528 mm thick 0.096
Rubber: Polypropylene (recycled) 0.01923 mm thick 0.130
Kenaf hibiscus cannabicus (recycled) 0.01645 mm thick 0.0208
Coconut fiber (recycled) 0.01435 mm thick 0.140
Granules of clay, vermiculite or expanded perlite 0.060–0.160 (Briga-Sa et al., 2013)
Polyurethane soy-based 0.026–0.038 (Thorpe et al., 2017)
Foil-faced Polyurethane with pentane up to 32 kg/m3 0.020
Sheep’s wool [25 kg/m3] 0.034–0.054
Cotton 0.039–0.040
Cork slab [120 kg/m3] 0.041–0.055
Vermiculite 0.039–0.060
Strawboards [420 kg/m3] 0.081
Air 0.026 (Palomar et al., 2019)
Glass (borosilicate flint glass) 0.85
Glass (heavy flint glass) 0.6–0.65
Glass (Soda-lime silicate) 0.95
Control sandwich panels (without ELVs, air filled core) -P1 0.2102 (Authors)
New sandwich panels (ELV PC particles core) - P2 0.1895
New sandwich panels (ELV PU particles core) - P3 0.1867
New sandwich panels (ELV PC and PU particles core) - P4 0.1776
New sandwich panels (ELV PC and PU particles core) - P5 0.1785
New sandwich panels (ELV PC and PU particles core) - P6 0.1778
(b)
Sandwich panel Core material Face sheet Total panel Thermal Reference
thickness conductivity (W/
(mm) mK)
PU roof sandwich panels made of PU Dyed galvanised corrugated 50 0.022 (Brdeco,
two dyed galvanised corrugated plates 2020)
plates
Sandwich panels made of stiff PU Steel sheet – 0.022 (Izopanel,
polyurethane foam PU core 2020)
Sandwich panels made of stiff PIR Steel sheet – 0.020 (Izopanel,
polyisocyanurate foam IPR core 2020)
PU/PIR insulated sandwich wall PU/PIR Prepainted galvanised steel 50 0.027 (Teknopanel,
panels prepainted galvanised sheet 60 0.0225 2020)
steel sheet 80 0.0219
Rockwool insulated sandwich wall Rockwool Prepainted galvanised steel 50 0.0345 (Teknopanel,
panel with prepainted sheet 60 0.0347 2020)
galvanised steel sheet
EPS insulated sandwich wall panel EPS Prepainted galvanised steel 50 0.0368 (Teknopanel,
sheet 60 0.0364 2020)
80 0.0364
Sandwich panel made of float glass PU Float glass 152 0.04257 (Brucha,
face sheets encapsulated with 2020)
140mm thick PU core
UV-protected clear four-walls Four wall PC sheets PC sheet 18 0.0541 (Saining,
polycarbonate hollow core 2020)
sandwich panels

(continued on next page)

412 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415

Clear translucent polycarbonate PC-TRIcore spy honeycomb Translucent coloured 19 0.513 (Surface
panels with PC honeycomb core polycarbonate products inc,
2020)
Glass fiber vacuum-infused Glass fiber honeycomb Glass fiber sheet 12 0.123 (Vitale et al.,
honeycomb cores 2017)
PU roof sandwich panel, coloured PU Coloured steel sheets 60–100 0.019–0.023 (SQGP, 2020)
steel sheet
Hollow glass magnesium oxide Air cavity Glass MGO 50–150 0.041 (SQGP, 2020)
(MGO) sandwich panel
Glass magnesium rock wool Rockwool Glass MGO 50,75,100,150 0.039 (SQGP, 2020)
insulated wall sandwich panel
for cleanroom
Fiber glass wool sandwich exterior Fiber glass wool Coloured steel sheet 50,75,100, 0.039 (SQGP, 2020)
wall panel with coloured sheets 150
Propor and prepainted steel sheet Propor Prepainted steel sheet 50 0.039 (SQGP, 2020)
sandwich panels
PU sandwich panel for wall PU foam 2 layers coloured steel sheets 50,75,100 0.019–0.023 (SQGP, 2020)
cladding system with coloured 0.7mm
steel sheets
EPS cement sandwich panel with EPS, cement and sand Calcium silicate board 50 0.042–0.055 (SQGP, 2020)
calcium silicate board
Cryogenic sandwich-type PVC foam 2 mm thick E-glass/epoxy – 0.018 (Choi and Yu,
insulation board composed of E- composite box-type faces 2013)
glass/epoxy composite and
polymeric foams
Lightweight precast concrete Phenolic foam PF, vacuum insulated Concrete wythes 150 0.02 (O’Hegarty
sandwich cladding panels with panels VIP & Carbon fiber reinforces et al., 2020)
phenolic foam, VIP & CFRP polymer (CFRP) grid connectors
Newspaper sandwiched aerated Tabloid newspaper (dimension Portland cement mortar paste – 0.509 (1700 kg/m3); (Ng and Low,
lightweight concrete panel 580mm
395mm) with countless of pinhole size 0.394 (1500 kg/m3); 2010)
(0.3–0.8mm diameter) air 0.310 (1100 kg/m3)
bubbles
Control sandwich panels (Air- Air cavity 4mm thick clear glass face sheet 18 0.2102 (Authors)
filled) - P1
New sandwich panels (ELV PC 100% PC particles 4mm thick clear glass face sheet 18 0.1895 (Authors)
particles core) - P2
New sandwich panels (ELV PU 100% PU particles 4mm thick clear glass face sheet 18 0.1867 (Authors)
particles core) - P3
New sandwich panels (ELV PC and 50%PC_ 50%PU 4mm thick clear glass face sheet 18 0.1776 (Authors)
PU particles core) - P4
New sandwich panels (ELV PC and 75%PC_ 25%PU 4mm thick clear glass face sheet 18 0.1785 (Authors)
PU particles core) - P5
New sandwich panels (ELV PC and 25%PC_ 75%PU 4mm thick clear glass face sheet 18 0.1778 (Authors)
PU particles core) - P6

Luminous transmittance Haze Clarity

Mean value (%) - ASTM D1003

Mean value (%) - ASTM D1003

Mean value (%) - ASTM D1003

99.3
100 83.3 100 78.23 100
67.47 71.23
80 61.83 56.43 80 61.87 58.8 80
54.03 48.9 52.6 53.2 50.33 46.47 55.13
60 60 60
40 40 40 22.73
20 20 3.36 20
0 0 0
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6
Sample Sample Sample

Fig. 6. Measured mean values (%) of the transparency parameters: luminous transmittance, haze and clarity of the investigated sandwich panels.

intensity is concentrated within this narrow angular range. As the particles in the sandwich panels can be used for solar shading and
percentage of clarity value increased, the resolution of fine details partially control glare when it is applied to a facade.
of the observed object is also increased.
The highest haze level was exhibited by P3 (100% PU) with
78.23% haze value, it is possible that wide-angle scattering diffused 3.4. Potential applications of the proposed method
light uniformly in all directions, and the light intensity per angle is
small as the intensity of the transmitted light diminished by the The proposed method provides a significant achievement as lit-
inherent absorbance of the PU materials and pigments. The parti- tle or no research has utilised ELV headlamp waste to produce
cles inside the material on its surface may act as scatterers, the building products. There is no specific recycling method and tech-
more scatterers are present, the greater the amount of scattered nology for ELV headlamp and seat have been proposed locally and
light. This effect reduces contrast and results in a cloudy/hazy abroad in the construction industry. This study generates new
appearance. The haze and luminous transmittance data presented understanding and identifies recycling possibilities for research
are useful specification for quality control of sandwich panels. ELV and practice. It can be adopted to reduce ELV waste with better
 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415
eco-design where the production process consumes less energy
while maintaining resources available for further use.
The proposed sandwich panels are sustainable, low-cost and
easy shaping for wide range of building applications including
walls, windows, sun screens, facades and roof skylights, charac-
terised by their low thermal conductivity while its transparency
may allow daylight to penetrate through to elevate interior bright-
ness. Furthermore, it can be retrofitted as external cladding or infill
precast panels fixed in the structural frame and combined with
conventional window, façade and interior partition systems as
shading and privacy devices (Fig. 5). The proposed sandwich panels
are reliable considering long run in the building industry. PC struc-
tures are characterised by high durability which the expected use-
ful life is over 30 years. PU has the ability to withstand external
impacts such as moisture ingress or air movement, its useful life
is more than 60 years. PU performs well for hardness, high tensile
and compression strength, impact resistance and abrasion resis-
tance. The sandwich panels containing ELV PC and PU will remain
functional over many years and water-proof as well as mechani-
cally reliable.
There are possible improvements that can be made to the pro-
posed method to develop the concerns of the study. Apart from
using manual approach to decouple ELV materials, there are sev-
eral emerging technologies that can be used to efficiently separate
the highly commingled ELV materials. For instance, sensor-based
sorting (SBS) technologies have been used for materials recycling
for the last two decades to optimise the recycling of ASR. The
sensor-based sorting of diverse plastics or recovering of non-
ferrous metal from car shredding operations can be done using
automated sensor-based sorting machine, this innovative technol-
ogy results in systems that can recognise the smallest input parti-
cles (Tomra, 2019). Huang et al. established a pilot sorting system
which consists of a 3-dimensional visual sensor and an acoustic
sensor to test vehicle PC, ABS and PP plastics. The separation effi-
ciency could achieve a 70.8% for ABS/PC scraps (Huang et al., 2017).
Mechanical process to shred PU foam such as foam shredding
machine is also suitable for PU foam shredding for a large-scale
production at industrial scale due to its high efficiency and capac-
ity. The advantage of using foam shredder machine is the size of
output particles can be adjusted by inserting required diameter
of mesh.
The method proposed in this research is potential to become
operational on an industrial scale by employing efficient moulding
technology for large production runs (i.e., compression moulding).
Compression moulding method to mould ELV waste is applicable
as it can produce high-volume materials and suitable for moulding
complex thermoplastics. Both cold press and hot press of compres-
sion moulding utilised moulding compound. Pressure is applied for
cold press method and cure under room temperature but pressure
and temperature are required for the hot press method (Hashmi,
2016; Elshabini et al., 2017). However, it should be noted that
impurities exist in ELV waste materials can be an issue to mould
ELV waste using the typical compression moulding machine as it
would provide poor product consistency and difficult to control
its physical appearance (i.e., colour and transparency). Hence,
appropriate heating technique and pressure is important to ensure
ELV materials would not be downgraded when its polymer and
mechanical characteristics are changed.
3.5. Recommendations
This work as the pilot study for more comprehensive research
in the future. It is expected to have further research to improve
the overall performance and serviceability of the sandwich panels.
Numerous research works are required to qualify the usage of the
proposed sandwich panels and for commercialisation purpose.
413
Several technical challenges may exist in the products that need
to be overcome to elevate the circularity of ELV materials at the
highest value and quality requirements. PU usage in construction
industry may sometimes cause hazards in case of fire. Further
research is recommended to reduce the flammability of the pro-
posed sandwich panels to meet the local and international regula-
tions of construction authority.
In addition, proper evaluation should be carried out on chemical
processes to reduce the hazard levels to comply the building mate-
rial standards to eliminate possible toxic chemicals. In fact, the
future research and development in the automotive industry
should focus on the sustainably grown plastics such as renewable
high-performance Polyurethane bioplastic for manufacturing car
components are even more promising to move away from our
overreliance on petrochemical plastics. For instance, Toyota has
achieved great success in utilising bio-based plastics in the seat
of Corolla, Prius, RAV4 and Matrix. The plastics are derived wholly
from plant materials. On the other hand, Ford teamed up with
Coca-Cola in using plant-based renewable material from recycled
Coke bottles for the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) seats
(Sanchez, 2015).
It is recommended that new vehicle productions could use
single-family plastic and favourite dismantling through smart fas-
tening systems in future. The improvement in ELV recycling tech-
nology, rapid assembly and disassembly joining solutions can
facilitate efficient recycling of ELVs across all industries.
A lot of research can be explored using other automotive com-
ponents/parts such as door panels and dashboard. ELV waste can
also be combined with other types of industrial waste or agricul-
tural waste for better performance and results. This study focuses
on post-consumer ELV waste, same concept can be applied by recy-
cling natural ELVs rejected during the inspection process when
manufacturing new vehicles which are recommended as further
research.
4. Conclusions
This paper comprehensively describes the development of a
novel method to produce thermal insulation sandwich panels
using recycled PC from ELV headlamp and PU from ELV seat. It pre-
sents results of thermal performance and transparency level of the
developed sandwich panels.
Six sandwich panels (P1-P6) were produced in manufacturing
plant and tested in laboratory to verify the proposed development
process. Steady-state laboratory tests using guarded hot-plate
apparatus to measure thermal conductivity were performed
according to standard. The experimental work showed that P4
composed of 50% PC mixed with 50% PU exhibits the best thermal
performance, it has a thermal conductivity value of 0.1776 W/mK,
reduced 15.5% against P1. In terms of transparency, Haze-gard plus
haze meter was used to quantify the visual perception with objec-
tive measurement criteria in %: Luminous transmittance, haze and
clarity. Results corroborated that all sandwich panels have light
transmission potential. P1 exhibits the highest luminous transmit-
tance (83.3%) while P6 the lowest (48.9%). All sandwich panels
allow light to filter through, potential in providing effective interior
lighting. P3 exhibits the highest haze value (78.23%) while P1 the
lowest (3.36%). The hazy appearance of the sandwich panels
dependent on their light scattering behaviour. Each panel presents
considerable level of visibility, the clarity value for P1 is the highest
(99.3%), while P3 is the lowest (22.3%).
This method offers sustainable approach to produce energy-
saving and low-cost thermal insulation for wide range of building
applications (i.e., wall, façade and roof system). It requires minimal
processing of the ELV waste. From environmental sustainability
414 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415
point of view, this method is sustainable as the recycling rate is
nearly 100%. It can recycle 100% ELV PC and PU. Furthermore, the
ELV waste materials collected were free of charge. In order to pro-
duce 1 m2 sandwich panel with 8 mm thickness, approximate 8 kg
of ELV waste material is required.
In terms of social sustainability, this approach will benefit the
societies at large when the concerned industries embrace the cir-
cular economy model to reduce virgin material consumption
which may have positive implications on the reduction of carbon
footprint and cleaner environment for habitation. It fulfils the Sus-
tainable Development Goal 12 - Responsible Consumption and
Production advocated by United Nations.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Ministry of Higher Educa-
tion, Malaysia University of Malaya (FP054-2017A). The authors
would like to thank Dr. Siong-Kang Lim and Mr. Leong-Tatt Loh
for their kind supports in setting up data acquisition of the guarded
hot-plate apparatus. The assistance offered by Plasmost Enterprise
Sdn. Bhd. in the transparency data acquisition is greatly appre-
ciated. We also thank V.P. Plastics Sdn. Bhd. for the help in crushing
ELV headlamps needed in this research. Finally, we are grateful for
technical supports and laboratory facilities provided by Universiti
Tunku Abdul Rahman.
References
Allen, H.G., 1969. Analysis and Design of Structural Sandwich Panelsn. Pergamon
Press, New York.
Ashida, K., 2007. Polyurethane and Related Foams Chemistry and Technology.
Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
ASTM D1003-13, 2013. Standard Test Method for Haze and Luminous
Transmittance of Transparent Plastics.
AungYong, L., 2014. Fabrication of green sustainable sandwich panels by synthesis
of polyurethane-based foams with incorporated‘‘ waste” glycerol and
agricultural‘‘ waste” residue. California State University, Long Beach.
Brdeco, 2020. PU sandwich wall panel. Retrieved 26 April 2020, from http://
brdeogroup.com.
Briga-Sa, A., Nascimento, D., Teixeira, N., Pinto, J., Caldeira, F., Varum, H., Paiva, A.,
2013. Textile waste as an alternative thermal insulation building material
solution. Construction and Building Materials 38, 155–160.
Brucha, 2020. Glass sandwich panel. iconic skin GmbH. Retrieved 26 April 2020,
from https://www.iconic-skin.com/.
Cossu, R., Lai, T., 2015. Automotive shredder residue (ASR) management: An
overview. Waste Manage. 45, 143–151.
Carollo, L.F.S., e Silva, e Silva, S.L., 2012. Applying different heat flux intensities to
simultaneously estimate the thermal properties of metallic materials. Measur.
Sci.Tech. 23, (6) 065601.
Choi, I., Yu, Y.H., 2013. Cryogenic sandwich-type insulation board composed of E-
glass/epoxy composite and polymeric foams. Compos. Struct. 102, 61–71.
Davies, G., 2012. Materials for automobile bodies. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Din, A.T., Hafiz, N.M., Rus, A.Z.M., 2015. Exploration to Find Green Building Materials
from Recycled Solid Wastes. J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci. 47, 35–44.
Dissanayake, D.G.K., Weerasinghe, D.U., Wijesinghe, K.A.P., Kalpage, K.M.D.M.P.,
2018. Developing a compression moulded thermal insulation panel using
postindustrial textile waste. Waste Manage. 79, 356–361.
ECOSOC, U., 2019. Special Edition: Progress towards the Sustainable Development
Goals Report of the Secretary-General. Advanced unedited version. United
Nations, New York (US).
Elshabini, A.A., Barlow, F., Wang, P.J., 2017. Electronic packaging: semiconductor
packages.
Euro moulders, 2014. Polyurethane foam. Europeans association of manufacturers
of moulded polyurethane parts for the automotive industry. Retrieved 12 July
2020, from https://www.euromoulders.org/polyurethane-foam/what-is-
polyurethane-foam.
Eurostat, 2020. End-of-life vehicle statistics. Retrieved 23 July 2020 from eurostat
Statistics Explained. http://ec.europa.eu/Eurostat/statistics-explained/index.
php/End-of-life_vehicle_statistics.
Ferrao, P., Amaral, J., 2006. Assessing the economics of auto recycling activities in
relation to European Union Directive on end of life vehicles. Technol. Forecast.
Soc. Chang. 73 (3), 277–289.
Frost & Sullivan., 2010. Greener cars=new markets for chemical companies.
Retrieved 26 March 2020, from http://www.frost.com.
Gibson, L.J., Ashby, M.F., 1999. Cellular solids: structure and properties. Cambridge
University Press.
Hashmi, S., 2016. Comprehensive materials finishing. Elsevier.
Hatcher, G.D., Ijomah, W.L., Windmill, J.F.C., 2011. Design for remanufacture: a
literature review and future research needs. J. Cleaner Prod. 19 (17–18), 2004–
2014.
BYK-Gardner, 2020. Haze-gard plus Cat. No. 4725 and 4726. Operating instructions
user manual. Retrieved 20 July 2020, from https://
www.manualsdir.com/manuals/659552/altana-haze-gard- plus-operating-
instructions.html? Page=32.
Greenspec (2018). Insulation materials and their thermal properties. Retrieved 31
March 2019, from. http://www.Greenspec.co.uk/building-design/insulation-
materials-thermal-properties.
Hopewell, J., Dvorak, R., Kosior, E., 2009. Plastics recycling: challenges and
opportunities. Philosoph. Trans. Roy. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 364 (1526), 2115–2126.
Huang, J., Tian, C., Ren, J., Bian, Z., 2017. Study on impact acoustic—Visual sensor-
based sorting of ELV plastic materials. Sensors 17 (6), 1325.
ISO, E., 1991. 8302. (1991) Thermal insulation- Determination of steady-state
thermal resistance and related properties-Guarded hot plate apparatus.
International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Izopanel, 2020. Sandwich panels technical catalogue. Retrieved 26 April 2020, from
http://www.izopanel.org.
JETRO Japan economic report, 2006. Car Recycling Business in Japan.
Jones, D., Brischke, C., 2017. Performance of bio-based building materials.
Woodhead Publishing.
Kleiberit, 2020. Innovative Adhesive Systems for Sandwich Production. Retrieved 26
April 2020, from https://www.kleiberit.com/en/fields-of-application/sandwich/.
Lisicins, M., Mironovs, V., Boiko, I., Lapkovskis, V., 2015. Sandwich wall
constructions made of perforated metallic materials. Agronomy Research 13
(3), 662–670.
Mendez, O., 2017. Changemakers. Re-Cycled House. Closing the cycle of plastic:
Decent housing solutions from recycled plastics. Retrieved 29 July 2020, from
https://www.changemakers.com/globalgoals2015/entries/re-cycled-house-
closing-cycle-plastic.
Miller, L., Soulliere, K., Sawyer-Beaulieu, S., Tseng, S., Tam, E., 2014. Challenges and
alternatives to plastics recycling in the automotive sector. Materials 7 (8),
5883–5902.
Nikles, D.E., Farahat, M.S., 2005. New motivation for the depolymerization products
derived from poly (ethylene terephthalate) (PET) waste: A review. Macromol.
Mater. Eng. 290 (1), 13–30.
Nissan Environmental Report, 2004. Recycling End-of-Life-Vehicles (ELV). ELV
recycling made possible through cooperation. doi: http://www.
nissanglobal.com/EN/DOCUMENT/PDF/ENVIRONMENT/ER/2004/en_er2004_19.
pdf.
Ng, S.C., Low, K.S., 2010. Thermal conductivity of newspaper sandwiched aerated
lightweight concrete panel. Energy Build. 42 (12), 2452–2456.
O’Hegarty, R., Reilly, A., West, R., Kinnane, O., 2020. Thermal investigation of thin
precast concrete sandwich panels. J. Build. Eng. 27.
Oliveira, P.R., Panzera, T.H., Freire, R.T., Scarpa, F., 2018. Sustainable sandwich
structures made from bottle caps core and aluminium skins: A statistical
approach. Thin-Walled Struct. 130, 362–371.
Ortego, A., Valero, A., Valero, A., Iglesias, M., 2018. Downcycling in automobile
recycling process: A thermodynamic assessment. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 136,
24–32.
Paiva, A., Pereira, S., Sá, A., Cruz, D., Varum, H., Pinto, J., 2012. A contribution to the
thermal insulation performance characterization of corn cob particleboards.
Energy Build. 45, 274–279.
Palomar, T., Silva, M., Vilarigues, M., Cardoso, I.P., Giovannacci, D., 2019. Impact of
solar radiation and environmental temperature on Art Nouveau glass windows.
Heritage Science 7 (1), 82.
Passarini, F., Ciacci, L., Santini, A., Vassura, I., Morselli, L., 2012. Auto shredder
residue LCA: implications of ASR composition evolution. J. Cleaner Prod. 23 (1),
28–36.
Petrone, G., D’Alessandro, V., Franco, F., Mace, B., De Rosa, S., 2014. Modal
characterisation of recyclable foam sandwich panels. Compos. Struct. 113,
362–368.
Pflug, J., Xinyu, F., Vangrimde, B., Verpoest, I., Bratfisch, P., Vandepitte, D., 2002.
Development of a sandwich material with polypropylene/natural fibre skins
and paper honeycomb core. Proceedings of 10th European Conference on
Composite Materials (ECCM-10).
Qingxian, H., Sawei, Q., Yuebo, H., 2015. Development on preparation
technology of aluminum foam sandwich panels. Rare Metal Mater. Eng.
44(3), 548–552.
Quaranta, N., Caligaris, M., López, H., Unsen, M., Lalla, N., Franzoy, M.L., Avendaño,
M., 2010. Addition of polymeric wastes as pore formers in ceramic lightweight
bricks. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 128, 447–458.
Rajagopal, R.R., Rajarao, R., Cholake, S.T., Sahajwalla, V., 2017. Sustainable composite
panels from non-metallic waste printed circuit boards and automotive plastics.
J. Cleaner Prod. 144, 470–481.
Reengwaree, A., Premanond, V., Torsakul, S., 2013. A study of energy saving in
building through thermal insulation with plywood inserted honeycomb
sandwich panels. Energy Procedia 34, 964–972.
Saining, 2020. Hangzhou Saining Polycarbonate Sheet Co., Ltd. Retrieved 26 April
2020, from http://www.hzsn.com.cn.
 Y.C. Wong et al. / Waste Management 118 (2020) 402–415
Salem, Z., Hamouri, K., Djemaa, R., Allia, K., 2008. Evaluation of landfill leachate
pollution and treatment. Desalination 220 (1–3), 108–114.
Sanchez, K., 2015. Earth Day Friendly: Cars That Use Recycled Materials.
Motor Trend. Motor Trend Group, LLC. Retrieved 14 July 2020, from
https://www.motortrend.com/news/earth-day- friendly-cars-that-use-recycled-
materials.
Soo, V.K., Compston, P., Doolan, M., 2017. The influence of joint technologies on ELV
recyclability. Waste Manage. 68, 421–433.
Surface products, 2020. Translucent clear-PEP Panels. Retrieved 26 April 2020, from
https://surface-products.com/polycarbonate-composite-panels/clear-pep-
polycarbonate-panels/
SQGP, 2020. PU roof sandwich panel. Retrieved 26 April 2020, from https://www.
sxggsteel.com/60mm-100mm-waterproof-pu-sandwich-panel-for-roof-
system_p47.html.
Thai, Q.B., Siang, T.E., Le, D.K., Shah, W.A., Phan-Thien, N., Duong, H.M., 2019.
Advanced fabrication and multi-properties of rubber aerogels from car tire
waste. Colloids Surf., A 577, 702–708.
Thorpe, D., Haggard, K., Bainbridge, D.A., Aljilani, R., 2017. Passive solar architecture
pocket reference. Routledge.
Tian, J., Chen, M., 2014. Sustainable design for automotive products: Dismantling
and recycling of end-of-life vehicles. Waste Manage. 34 (2), 458–467.
Teknopanel, 2020. Sandwich wall panels. PUR/PIR Insulated Standard Wall Panel
Retrieved 26 April 2020, from https://www.teknopanel.com/en-us/product-
detail/purpir-insulated-sandwich-wall-panels-standard-wall-panel.
Tomra, 2019. Tomra sorting solutions. Recover more resources with sensor-based
sorting. Retrieved 27 July 2020, from https://www.tomra.com/en/sorting/
recycling.
415
Vermeulen, I., Van Caneghem, J., Block, C., Baeyens, J., Vandecasteele, C., 2011.
Automotive shredder residue (ASR): reviewing its production from end-of-life
vehicles (ELVs) and its recycling, energy or chemicals’ valorisation. J. Hazard.
Mater. 190 (1–3), 8–27.
Vitale, J.P., Francucci, G., Stocchi, A., 2017. Thermal conductivity of sandwich panels
made with synthetic and vegetable fiber vacuum-infused honeycomb cores. J.
Sandwich Struct. Mater. 19 (1), 66–82.
Wang, Y.J., Zhang, Z.J., Xue, X.M., Zhang, L., 2019. Free vibration analysis of
composite sandwich panels with hierarchical honeycomb sandwich core. Thin-
Walled Structures 145.
Winslow, G.R., Adams, T.N., 2004. Recycling Automotive Shredder Residue and
Plastics Using the CWT Thermal Process. Global Plastics Environmental
Conference.
Wong, Y.C., Al-Obaidi, K.M., Mahyuddin, N., 2018. Recycling of end-of-life vehicles
(ELVs) for building products: Concept of processing framework from
automotive to construction industries in Malaysia. J. Cleaner Prod. 190, 285–
302.
Zhang, H., Chen, M., 2014. Current recycling regulations and technologies for the
typical plastic components of end-of-life passenger vehicles: a meaningful
lesson for China. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manage. 16 (2), 187–200.
Zhang, W., Xu, Y., 2019. Mechanical Properties of Polycarbonate: Experiment and
Modeling for Aeronautical and Aerospace Applications. Elsevier.
Zorpas, A.A., Inglezakis, V.J., 2012. Automotive industry challenges in meeting EU
2015 environmental standard. Technol. Soc. 34 (1), 55–83.