Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering

International Journal of
Pavement Research and Technology
Journal homepage: www.springer.com/42947

Assessment of the properties of bricks made from stone dust and

molten plastic for building and pedestrian pavement
J.O. Akinyele*, S.K. Oyelakin
Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Nigeria

Received 1 September 2020; received in revised form 29 December 2020; accepted 31 December 2020; available online 19 January 2021

Abstract

The importance of bricks and the need to conserve the environment has led to the use of different types of waste material to replace either cement, clay
or sand in the production of bricks. This study has looked into the use of molten plastic to replace Ce ment in sandcrete bricks. Molten plastic was mixed
with stone dust at ratio 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 and 1:4 by weight. Each sample was designated as P 1, P2, P3 and P4 respectively. The brick samples were subjected to
mechanical and water absorption tests. An investigation was conducted on the bricks microstructures. Results showed that sample P 1 is good for building,
facial bricks, pedestrian and light traffic pavement under moderate weathering conditions according to ASTM C67, while sample P2 is okay for building
bricks only under non-severe weathering condition. The remaining two bricks samples did not perform well under any conditions. The microstructural
analysis revealed the effects of micro-voids sizes on the properties of the bricks

Keywords: Brick; Stone dust; Molten Plastic; Sandcrete; Microstructures

Introduction
The world environment is been daily confronted with the
management of some hydrocarbon by-product such as plastic
(polythene) waste. This material is composed of various elements
such as carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, chlorine and sulphur.
Plastic has a high molecular weight and each molecule can have
thousands of atom [1]. The chemical composition of plastic has
made the breaking down of this material to be very difficult, hence;
it is non-biodegradable. Efforts are been put in place all over the
world for the proper management of this material. But this cannot
be said in most developing countries of the world, where these
non-biodegradable wastes are not been properly managed, such
waste products are found in water drains after use, the blocked
drains has led to flooding in some places, while these plastics
eventually end up in the marine environment.
Studies have been carried out to reverse this trend especially in
the use of this waste material for engineering purposes. The
protection of the environment has prompted many researchers into
the use of waste materials for brick production [2]. The use of
bricks as a building material is very popular all over the world;
* Corresponding author
E-mail address: akinyelejo@funaab.edu.ng (J.O. Akinyele).
Peer review under responsibility of Chinese Society of Pavement
Engineering.
ISSN: 1997-1400 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42947-020-1268-5
Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering. Production and hosting by Springer Nature
bricks are the product of clay (clay bricks), cement and sand-based
(Sandcrete). In recent times, different materials are now been used
or added to clay and sand to make a different variety of building
bricks. Among such materials are fly ash, agricultural waste ash,
slag, granulated plastics and many more.
Akinyele and Toriola [3] used crushed plastic waste with fine
aggregate in sandcrete bricks. The work involved mixing the
crushed plastic with cement and replacing sand (fine aggregate) at
0, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 100%. Compressive, flexural and water
absorption test were conducted on the bricks. The results showed
that the bricks mixed with 5% replacement of sand with plastic
performed better than all other mixes, which included the control,
the strength of the control sample was 13.15 N/mm2 while that of
the 5% replacement was 14.85 N/mm2 at the end of 28 days test.
The control also absorbs water more than the 5% plastic brick. The
work concluded that waste crushed plastic could be used in
sandcrete bricks at a maximum of 5% replacement of sand.
Roy el at. [4] investigated cement-gold tailing bricks; the work
concluded that the bricks with 20% cement at 14 days of curing
gave the most reliable result when mixed with gold mill tailings at
different proportion. Cost analysis was carried out and it revealed
that cement-tailing bricks were more expensive than the normal
soil-tailing bricks.
Akinyele et al [5,6] investigated waste plastic and glass powder
as materials in burnt (fired bricks), these waste materials were
added to clay bricks at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5%, and fired in a kiln at a
temperature of 800°C for over 3 hours. Engineering tests were
772 J.O. Akinyele and S.K. Oyelakin / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 771-777
conducted on the fired bricks to determine its strength, water
absorption and microstructural analysis were also carried out. The
work concluded that 5% glass waste and 1% of plastic waste could
be used in fired bricks.
In another work, Malhotra and Tehri [7] developed bricks from
granulated blast furnace slag. Hydrated lime was mix with slag,
and the mixture was added to Bardarpur sand. These bricks were
cured at room temperature for 28 days after which they were tested
for compressive strength in saturated conditions. The study
concluded that good quality bricks could be made from slag-lime
mixture and sand.
Poon et al [8] used recycled aggregates from construction to
produce concrete bricks and paving blocks. Tests were carried out
to determine the properties of these bricks, the results revealed that
coarse and fine aggregate can be replaced by used recycled
aggregate between 25 and 50% level; any value above this result
will lead to a reduction in strength. Kumar [9] produce brick and
hollow blocks by using fly ash together with calcined
phosphogypsum and mineral lime, the percentage of fly ash used
was between 60-90%, calcined phosphogypsum was between 5-
30%, while mineral lime was also between 5-30%. The brick and
blocks were cured at room temperature in sulphate solution, the
study revealed that the bricks and hollow blocks had sufficient
strength for their use in the construction industry.
Li and Lin [10] mixed class C fly ash with water to produce
compacted bricks, tests such as compressive strength, modulus of
rupture, freeze-thaw resistance and water absorption were carried
out on the bricks. The result obtained showed that compacted
bricks with fly ash had higher strength than ordinary bricks, but
the freeze-thaw resistance was very low. Copper mine tailing was
mixed with different amount of ordinary portland cement by
Morchhale et al [11], the compressive strength of the bricks and
water absorptions were tested, the results from the two test showed
that the copper mine tailing-cement bricks conform to the
minimum standard required for bricks by the Indian Standard (IS).
Cicek and Tanrverdi [12] used class F fly ash, sand and hydrated
lime to produce lightweight bricks, the bricks were subjected to
different conditions so that the variation in the result was studied,
the optimum raw material composition was found to be 20% sand,
12% hydrated lime and 68% fly ash. The study concluded that
good quality lightweight bricks can be produced from fly Ash.
Turgut and Algin [13] investigated the use of wood sawdust and
limestone powder with Portland cement in the production of
lightweight bricks, the brick samples were prepared by mixing all
these components at different proportion and the mixture was
compacted in a mould for 4 hours under controlled pressures. The
28 days curing at room temperature was done and later dried in a
ventilated oven at 105°C for 24 hours. Compressive and flexural
strength tests, water absorption and ultrasonic pulse velocity of the
bricks were carried out. The result revealed that the bricks
containing these mixtures did not exhibit a sudden brittle fracture
beyond the failure loads; this led to high-level energy absorption
capacity and reduced unit weight when compared with regular
bricks.
The use of cotton waste, limestone powder and cement was
investigated by Algin and Turgut [14].Waste glass powder,
limestone powder and cement were also used to make bricks by
Turgut [15-17]. All these results revealed that the investigated
waste materials are very good in the production of bricks.
The use of plastic and rubber crumbs as binders in asphalts have
been investigated by many researchers [18-20] but there is almost
no literature for it use as binders in bricks and concrete to the best
of the authors' knowledge.
Some school of thought believes that if the indiscriminate
dumping and non-recycling of plastics and other non-
biodegradable materials should continue without control, there
will be more plastics in the oceans of the world more than fishes
by the year 2050 [21]. This thought has provoked and motivated
the research into finding another means of recycling this plastic
waste.
This research aims to investigate the use of plastic as binder and
stone dust as the aggregate in the production of sand bricks. This
plastic waste was used to replace Ordinary Portland Cement in
sandcrete bricks, the plastic was fired to a molten state under
controlled environmental conditions before the addition of the
stone dust to the mixture. Compressive, flexural, water absorption
and abrasion tests were carried out on the brick sample.
Research methodology
2.1. Materials
The plastic used in this research were waste plastic bags
(polyethene) with an average density of 940 kg/m3, this was
obtained from street wastes and dustbins, these waste plastic
products were washed and dried to remove any form of impurities.
The fine aggregate material used was stone dust with an average
density of 1680 kg/m3, with particles distribution ranging between
4.5 mm and 150 microns sieve size. This was obtained from a
quarry; both materials were collected within the vicinity of
Abeokuta, southwestern Nigeria.
Stone dust has been proofed to be an alternative to fine aggregate
or river sand both in the production of bricks and concrete. It is a
by-product of quarry activities, which if not well utilized may
serve as waste. Stone dust is commonly used in the production of
sandcrete bricks (Bricks made from cement and sand) in this part
of the world. This research has used it as an alternative to sand.
2.2. Mixing of brick material
The composite material used in the production of the bricks were
batched by weighing, the design mix ratio used in the course of
this research was 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 and 1:4, the bricks were designated
as P1, P2, P3 and P4 respectively. For every 50 kg of plastic waste,
equivalent 50 kg weight of stone dust was used for brick P 1, this
procedure was used for an equivalent weight of plastic and stone
dust for all the other brick samples (P1 = 50:50, P2 = 33.4:66.6,
P3= 25:75, P4= 20:80 ). Water was not used in the mixing of the
bricks since the melted plastic served as the binding agent in place
of the conventional cement. The dimension adopted in this work
for the brick size was 150 x 100 x 50 mm.
The laboratory pyrolysis plants where there was adequate control
over temperature, air and pressure was to be used for the melting
of the plastic waste, but the non-availability of this equipment
resulted in the use of a modified pyrolysis plant.
The weighed plastic materials were placed in the modified
pyrolysis barrel that has been designed for this purpose. The plastic
waste bags were placed and fired inside the modified drum at a
temperature above 450°C. At an average of 45 minutes under
normal atmospheric pressure. A gas burner was used during the
firing to control the intensity of the fire. The waste bags were
allowed to melt into a molten form before the addition of stone
dust into the firing barrel and stirred, the paste-like material was
mixed thoroughly with a trowel, shovel and a rod before it hardens.
 J.O. Akinyele and S.K. Oyelakin / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 771-777 773

2.3. Moulding

Metal moulds were used for the bricks, before placing the
mixture into the moulds, the sides of the moulds were oiled for
easy removal of bricks. The mixture was then poured into the
mould in layers and compacted using a tamping rod, the surface
was finished using a trowel. The cooling and de-moulding of the
brick were carried out 24 hours after casting. Fig. 1 showed some
sample of the bricks after the cooling process.

2.4. Compressive strength test

(a) (b)
To determine the load-bearing strength of the brick samples, the
compressive test was carried out using a Universal Testing Fig. 1. Brick samples (a) P1 and (b) P2.
Machine (UTM). The procedure followed was based on ASTM
C67 [22]. The load-bearing surface of the compressive testing
machine was clean from any dirt; the brick was placed on its face
having the 150 mm x 100 mm area sitting on the loading surface.
The axis of the specimen was carefully aligned with the centre of
the lower pressure plate of the compression-testing machine. The
upper-pressure plate was gradually lowered until it gets to the brick.
The load was applied without shock and increased gradually until
the specimen was crushed. Three samples per brick specimen were
tested and the average strength from the three tests per brick types
was obtained for the individual brick sample. Compressive
strength is the most reliable mechanical test in the determination
of the load-bearing capacity of any engineering material.
The compressive strength was determined using Eq. (1) below.
𝐹
𝑃= (1)
𝐴
Fig. 2. Abrasion test on brick samples.
where, F = failure load (N); A=cross sectional area (mm2).
process using an abrasive disc. The abrasion method adopted was
2.5. Flexural strength test
the grinding method according to DIN 52108 [23].
The abrasion resistance was determined by measuring the groove
Like the compressive strength test, flexural strength was carried
length and depth formed on the surface of the specimen by a
out according to the ASTM C67 [22], the three points loading was
rotating disc at a constant speed of 140 cycle /min. The brick
adopted. The brick was simply supported on rollers at both ends of
samples were weight before and after the test to determine weight
the brick. The brick was marked at the centre for proper alignment
loss. The final thickness of the tested wearied surface was taken to
of the load, the point load was then lowered on to the top of the
determine wear depth for each number investigated. Fig. 2 showed
brick after which the load were gradually increased until failure of
abrasion activity.
the brick samples, three samples were replicated for each brick and
the average results were recorded for the individual specimen.
2.7. Water absorption test
The flexural strength of the bricks was expressed as the modulus
of rupture fb was calculated to the nearest 0.05 MPa. The flexural
or modulus of elasticity was obtained from Eq. (2), while shear The purpose of this test method is to provide a means for
stress generated during the test was obtained using Eq. (3) below. comparing relative water absorption tendencies between bricks
with different mix proportions. These specimens were air-dried
1.5𝑃𝐿
𝑓𝑏 = (2) and weighed, this weight was noted as the dry weight (W1) of the
𝑏𝑑 2
bricks, and the bricks were then immersed in water at room
𝑃𝑎𝑦
𝜏𝑥𝑦 = (3) temperature of 25± 2°C for 24 hours. The bricks were then
𝐼𝑏
removed from the water and wiped with a dry cloth. The bricks
where, b = measured width in cm of the brick; d = measured depth were then weight and this was noted as the wet weight (W2) of the
in cm of the brick; L = length in cm of the span on which the brick brick. ASTM C67 [22].
was supported and; I = Moment of inertial; τxy = shear stress of 𝑊2 −𝑊1
the material; a = area under consideration; y = depth of neutral 𝑤𝑎𝑡e𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛(%) = 𝑥 100 (4)
𝑊1
axis; P = maximum failure load in kN applied to the brick.
2.8. SEM analysis
2.6. Abrasion test
The Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) was used to
Abrasion is the process of scuffing, scratching, wearing down, investigate the microstructures of the brick samples, this test is to
marring, or rubbing away. It is normally imposed in a controlled determine the voids space and cracks within the bricks. Fragments
774 J.O. Akinyele and S.K. Oyelakin / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 771-777

of the bricks were cut into a small size of 5mm x 10 mm, and
mounted on the SEM stub, electron beam from the microscope was
focused on the polished surface of the bricks, and this allows the
evidence of the microstructural composition of the bricks to be
revealed. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)-based high-
resolution images came from scanning electron microscopy
machine VEGA3 TESCAN, located in the Engineering Laboratory
of the University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
Results and discussions
3.1. Compressive strength test
Results from Fig. 3 showed that the compressive strength of
sample P1 was the highest at 17.78 N/mm2, followed by P2 at 9.91
N/mm2; samples P3 and P4 have 6.50 N/mm2 and 5.64 N/mm2
respectively. The more stone dust that was added to the plastic, the
less compressive strength was obtained. This phenomenon can be
attributed to the reduction in the bond strength within the brick
mixtures as a result of the increased in the amount of stone dust in
the samples, at this saturated point the stone dust was acting as an
impurity instead of aggregate material. The plastic being the binder
losses its binding ability when more dust was added to the mix.
This result is in agreement with previous research work where
plastic was used to replace aggregate in sandcrete bricks [3], the
more plastic waste added to the sandcrete, the less compressive
strength obtained. The same condition was applicable in the
mixture of plastic and glass in fired bricks [5,6].
The compressive strength obtained by [3] for bricks made from
cement without plastic was 13.15 N/mm2. This value is small when
compared to the 17.78 N/mm2 obtained for P1 in this experiment.
These brick results can be classified according to the technical
report of the Brick Industry Association [24], which was also based
on ASTM C67 [22] designations. The brick classification in Table
1 showed that sample P1 can be used for building and facing bricks
and pedestrian bricks because of its low compressive strength
when compared to the usage. Both bricks P3 and P4 did not qualify
for any of the conditions recommended by the ASTM standard.
3.2. Flexural strength and shear stress test
The flexural strength or modulus of rupture is the reaction of
engineering materials to external load before the rupturing of the
material. This involved the development of both compressive,
tensile and shear stresses in the material. Flexural stresses (bending
stress or modulus of rupture) will develop in response to an
external load. Normally in reinforced concrete section, the
reinforcement will first respond to this eternal load through the
development of internal flexural stresses, when the loading
continues, the surrounding concrete elements will join in the
resistance of the load. This phenomenon will continue until the
reinforcement reaches it stress-strain limits first before the
concrete will reach its limits since steel is more ductile than
concrete [25].
In this research, the brick samples used did not contain
reinforcements, hence the brick material was subjected to direct
stress-strain condition, but the ability to resist the external load was
depended on both the plastic and stone dust materials with the
bonds holding the two materials together.
The flexural test results from Fig. 4 showed that sample P 1 has
the highest value of 11.57 N/mm2, while samples P2, P3, P4 has
10.73 N/mm2, 10.27 N/mm2 and 10.19 N/mm2 respectively. The
gradual reduction in flexural strength as the number of stone dust
increases in the samples can be attributed to the reduction in bond
strength within the brick materials as more stone dust were added,
this confirmed the pattern of the result obtained during the
compressive strength test. These results are however very close to
Compressive strength

under severe weathering conditions, because of its compressive 20

strength that is higher than the recommended 17.20 N/mm2.
15
However, it cannot be used for pedestrian and light traffic under
(N/mm2)

severe weathering condition because it must attain a strength of

10
48.3 N/mm2 to qualify for this grade. Nevertheless, it can be used
effectively for the pedestrian and light traffic pavement when the 5
weathering condition is moderate.
The brick sample P2 will qualify for building brick if there is no 0
weathering conditioning in the area where it has to be used, this is P1 P2 P3 P4
because the 9.91 N/mm2 compressive strength attained is greater Series1 17.78 9.91 6.5 5.64
than the 8.2 N/mm2 recommended for a building brick under no
weathering condition. However, it cannot be used for both facing
Fig. 3. Compressive strength test.
Table 1
Classification of bricks to ASTM standard [26-28].
Brick grade ASTM Compressive strength Cold water absorption Volume abrasion loss, max.
designation (N/mm2) (%) (cm3)
C62 (Building brick) SW 17.20 - -
MW 15.29 - -
NW 8.60 - -
C216 (Facing bricks) SW 17.20 - -
MW 15.20 - -
C 902 (Pedestrian and light SX   1.7(Ty I)
traffic bricks) MX 17.20 17.00 2.7(Ty II)
NX 17.20 No. Limit 4.0(Ty III)
SW/SX=, Severe weathering, MW/MX= is moderate weathering, NW/NX= no weathering.
 J.O. Akinyele and S.K. Oyelakin / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 771-777 775

each other when compared to the compressive strength results;
this outcome has revealed that there were very strong tensile or
bending stresses generated on each brick samples during the
flexural test. The shear stress results from Table 2 also followed
the same pattern with sample P1 having the highest value. The
bending stress is the ability of the materials to resist bending due
to the effect of the external load. During this period, shear cracks
are developed from the area of the brick with the highest bending
stress, it is when the bending stress values for each material was
exceeded that the brick material will fail or rupture. The shear
stresses arise from the shear force generated in the brick materials
during the application of external load, this action will results in
opposing forces acting within the material, the stress generated
during this process caused the development of shear cracks.
3.3. Abrasion test results
The material strength, types of aggregates used, binding
materials, surface finish and exposure condition affect the abrasion
resistance of engineering materials. [29,30]. The abrasion volume
in this work increased as the volume of stone dust used in the
bricks were increasing, correspondingly both the compressive and
flexural strength was decreasing. The volume of stone dust used
and the strength of the bricks have a very strong influence on the
abrasion of the samples. This phenomenon implies that the bonds
between the brick materials were decreasing as the number of
stone dust used in the samples were increasing. The results from
Table 2 showed that brick samples P1 and P2 has 0.64 and 1.75 cm3
volume abrasion loss respectively, these two values are within the
range recommended for pedestrian pavement and light traffic
conditions for grade type I bricks by ATSM C 902 [25].
The weight loss during the test was measured at the end of the
test; the weight lost by samples were 50 g, 200 g, 160 g and 100 g
by P1, P2, P3, and P4 respectively. Brick sample P1 has the lowest
weight loss; this can be attributed to the strong bond in the brick
sample which was as a result of the amount of plastic present in
the brick, less stone dust was lost. The other samples weight loss
were reducing as more stone dust was added in proportion. P 4 had
the second least weight loss of 100 g despite having the highest
abrasion volume of 28.35 cm3, this can be attributed to the
lightweight of the materials lost during the abrasion test, which
consist mainly stone dust.
3.4. Structural efficiency and density
The structural efficiency is the ratio of the compressive strength
to the density of the bricks, the brick density depends on the
compactness of the brick samples and the number of voids presents
within the materials, while the compressive strength depending on
the material properties and the type of bond that exists within the
material. The result from Table 2 revealed that the structural
efficiency of brick sample P1 was the highest at 1.27 x 103m, while
the lowest was that of P4 at 0.34 x 103m. The difference between
sample P1 and P2 efficiency was about 57%.
The efficiency of material will predict the endurance level of the
bricks under sustained load over a very long period and it is used
to predict the lightweight nature of the material in supporting a
heavy load.
The density of the brick samples increased as more stone dust
was added to the bricks. Sample P1 had an average density of
14,000 kg/m3 while P2, P3, and P4 had 16,400 kg/m3, 16,600 kg/m3
and 16,700 kg/m3 respectively. The low density in sample P1 could
be attributed to the high volume of molten plastic that was present
in the bricks since the density of plastic was low when compared
with that of stone dust. It was observed that the densities of bricks
P2, P3 and P4 were very close despite the increase in the amount of
stone dust being added to each sample. This could be attributed to
the large voids that were formed in each sample as evident in the
SEM images. The more the stone dust added, the larger the voids
and crack widths created within the brick samples.
3.5. Cold water absorption

The brick samples were immersed in water at room temperature

Flexural Strength (N/mm2)

for 24 hours, the weight of the samples before and after immersion
12
was determined, and the percentage difference in the result are
11.5 showed in Table 2. Sample P1 has 1.67% water absorbed rate at the
end of 24 hours. The ASTM C62 [26] recommendation in Table 1
11 did not place a limit to water absorption for both building and
10.5 facing bricks, but place 11% and 17% for pedestrian and light
traffic bricks for severe and medium weathering respectively. The
10 result in Table 2 showed that the brick samples performed well in
9.5 the water absorption test judging by the ASTM C62 [26] standard.
P1 P2 P3 P4 The sample P4 high water absorption over other samples can be
Series1 11.57 10.73 10.27 10.19 related to the very high amount stone dust present in it, this sample
has more stone dust than others do, and the dust has high affinity
for water more than the plastic that is insoluble in water. The more
Fig. 4. Flexural strength test.
the stone dust added to the bricks, the more water it can absorb.
When this result was compared with bricks made from cement, the
Table 2 result for sandcrete brick was 16.96%, according to Akinyele and
Test results for all brick samples. Toriola [3]. It can be inferred that brick made with plastic binder
Brick Density Structural Shear Abrasion Coldwater has low water absorption than brick samples made with cement.
samples (kg/m3) efficiency stress (cm3) absorption
(x 103 m) (N/mm2) (%) 3.6. SEM analysis
P1 14,000 1.27 7.71 0.64 1.67
P2 16,400 0.67 7.15 1.75 4.05 The microstructures in Figs. 5-7 showed the size of micro-voids,
P3 16,600 0.39 6.91 24.32 8.10 and micro-cracks formed within the brick samples, Fig. 5 showed
P4 16,700 0.34 6.82 28.35 10.40 the microstructures of sample P1, the average area of the micro-
776 J.O. Akinyele and S.K. Oyelakin / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 771-777
Fig. 5. Microstructure for brick P1.
Fig. 6. Microstructure for P3.
Fig. 7. Microstructure for P4.
voids was 201.22 μm2 and crack width was 8.27 μm. The crack
width for sample P3 was 25.27 while P4 was 31.20 μm, while the
void area was 2225.07 μm2. The stone dust particles were very
visible in the P4 samples as showed by the arrows in Fig. 7. The
size of the micro-voids and crack widths in the samples confirms
the pattern of results obtained for the strength of the brick samples,
the large-sized cracks and voids in sample P4 might have
contributed to its poor strength performance and the large amount
of water absorbed by the sample. The visible stone dust in the
sample confirmed the high volume of abrasion loss. The cracks
are a potential weak point for bonding in the bricks, hence this
contributed to the strength properties of each brick sample.
Conclusion
This study has looked into the mechanical and physical test on
plastic bricks, made from mainly stone dust and molten plastic that
served as the binder. The results revealed that brick samples P1 has
the highest compressive strength, this value qualified it for both
building and facing bricks under severe weathering conditions.
Sample P1 also qualified for pedestrian and light traffic pavement
under medium weathering condition. Brick P2 is qualified for
building bricks under a non-severe weathering condition based on
the recommendation of ASTM C62. The other two samples (P3 and
P4) could not be classified due to their low strength properties. The
cold water absorption test revealed that all the bricks performed
well based on the code recommendations.
Abrasion test results also showed that samples P1 and P2 are
within the ASTM C902 recommendation for abrasiveness. Brick
sample P1 and P2 showed good endurance ability under sustained
load through the structural efficiency analysis. The SEM analysis
revealed the sizes of micro-cracks and voids in the brick samples,
which showed the reason why the bricks have different structural
properties and varying densities. This research can conclude that
the use of molten plastic as a binder in bricks at a maximum of 33%
with stone dust is good for building bricks and pedestrian traffic
pavements. Although the limitation of this research is the inability
to control the toxic gases that are likely to have been emitted
during the burning of the plastic waste, efforts are been made to
control these toxic gases in subsequent research by using the
pyrolysis plants.
References
[1] American Chemistry Council, Plastic Industry Producer
Statistic Group, (American Chemistry, 2005).
www.americanchemistry.com. Assessed 1 December 2020.
[2] L. Zhang, Production of bricks from waste materials: a
review, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 643-655.
[3] J.O. Akinyele, I.O. Toriola, The effect of crushed plastics
waste on the structural properties of sandcrete blocks,
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innov. Develop. 10
(6) (2018) 709-713.
[4] S. Roy, G.R. Adhikari, R.N. Gupta, Use of gold mill tailings
in making bricks: a feasibility study, Waste Manage. Res. 25
(2007) 475–482.
[5] J.O. Akinyele, U.T. Igba, T.O. Ayorinde, P.O. Jimoh,
Structural efficiency of burnt clay bricks containing waste
crushed glass and polypropylene granules, Case Studies
Constr. Mater. 13 (2020) 1-11.
[6] J.O.Akinyele, U.T. Igba, B.G. Adigun, Effect of waste PET
on the Structural Properties of Burnt Bricks. Scientific
African, 7 (2020) 1-8.
[7] S.K. Malhotra, S.P. Tehri, Development of bricks from
granulated blast furnace slag, Constr. Build. Mater. 10 (1996)
191-193.
[8] C.S. Poon, S.C. Kou and L. Lam, Use of recycled aggregates
in moulded concrete bricks and blocks, Constr. Build. Mater.
16 (2002) 281– 289.
[9] S. Kumar, A perspective study on fly ash–lime–gypsum
bricks and hollow blocks for low-cost housing development,
 J.O. Akinyele and S.K. Oyelakin / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 771-777
Constr. Build. Mater. 16 (2002) 519–25.
[10] Y. Li and Y. Lin, Compacting solid waste materials
generated in Missouri to form new products. Final technical
report to the solid waste management program, Missouri
Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Contact no.
MDNR 00038-1, submitted by Capsule Pipeline Research
Center, University of Missouri-Columbia, MO, USA, 2002,
p. 90.
[11] R.K. Morchhale, N. Ramakrishnan and N. Dindorkar, Bulk
utilization of copper mine tailings in the production of bricks,
J. Instit. Eng. Indian Civ. Eng. Division 87 (2006) 13–16.
[12] T. Cicek and M. Tanrverdi, Lime based steam autoclaved fly
ash bricks, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (2006) 1295–300.
[13] P. Turgut, H.M Algin, Limestone dust and wood sawdust as
brick material, Build. Environ. 42 (2006) 3399–3403.
[14] H.M Algin and P. Turgut, Cotton and limestone powder
wastes as brick material, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 6 (2007)
1074–1080.
[15] P. Turgut, Research into artificial limestone composites with
cotton waste, Jordan J. Civ. Eng. 7 (1) (2013) 126–131.
[16] P. Turgut, Limestone dust and glass powder wastes as new
brick material, Mater. Struct. 41 (5) (2008) 805–813.
[17] P. Turgut, Properties of masonry blocks produced with waste
limestone sawdust and glass powder, Constr. Build. Mater.
22 (7) (2008) 1422–1427.
[18] J. Yin, The feasibility of waste nylon filament used as
reinforcement in asphalt mixture, Inter. J. Pavement Res.
Technol. 13 (2) (2020) 212-221.
[19] M. Javani, E. Kashi, and S. Mohamadi. Effect of
polypropylene fibers and recycled glass on AC mixtures
mechanical properties, Inter. J. Pavement Res. Technol. 12
(5) (2019) 464-471.
[20] H.T. Tai Nguyen and T. Nhan Tran. Effects of crumb rubber
content and curing time on the properties of asphalt concrete
and stone mastic asphalt using dry process, Inter. J.
Pavement Res. Technol. 11 (3) (2018) 236-244.
777
[21] R. Harrington, By 2050, the oceans could have more plastic
than fish. (Business Insider, 2017).
www.businessinsider.com. Accessed 5 January 2020.
[22] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Test
Methods for Sampling and Testing Brick and Structural Clay
Tile. ASTM C67. ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, USA, 2006.
[23] German Institute for Standardization, Testing of inorganic
non-metallic materials- Wear test using the grinding wheel
according to Böhme.- Grinding wheel method. DIN 52108.
DIN, Berlin, Germany, 2010.
[24] Brick Industry Association, Technical notes on brick
construction, 1850 Centennial Park Drive, Reston, Virginia
20191. (BIA, 2007)| www.gobrick.com. Accessed 6 May
2015.
[25] N. Rajagopalan, Prestressed concrete, Second Edition,
Narosa Publishing House PVT Ltd. Delhi, India, 2007.
[26] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard
Specification for Pedestrian and Light Traffic Paving Brick.
ASTM C 902. ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, USA, 2006.
[27] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard
Specification for Building Brick (Solid Masonry Units Made
From Clay or Shale). ASTM C 62. ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2006.
[28] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard
Specification for Ceramic Glazed Structural Clay Facing
Tile, Facing Brick, and Solid Masonry Units. ASTM C 216.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2006.
[29] A.P. Adewuyi, I.A. Sulaiman, J.O. Akinyele, Compressive
Strength and Abrasion Resistance of Concretes under
Varying Exposure Conditions, Open J. Civ. Eng. (7) (2017)
82-99.
[30] T.R. Naik, S.S. Singh, M.M. Hossain, Abrasion Resistance
of High-Volume Fly Ash Concrete System. Rep. No. 176
Prepared for EPRL, Center for By-Products Utilization,
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, WI, USA, 1995.