Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Experimental investigation on compressive behaviour of plastic brick

using M Sand as fine aggregate
S.M. Leela Bharathi, V. Johnpaul, R. Praveen Kumar, R. Surya, T. Vishnu Kumar
Department of Civil Engineering, Karpagam Academy of Higher Education, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India

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

Article history: The increasing usage of non-biodegradable material plastic causes hazardous effects on the environment
Received 29 September 2020 while disposing of. By considering these effects, the waste plastic materials started to use in construction
Accepted 10 October 2020 in various forms. In this paper, the plastic waste is added to M Sand to fabricate Plastic M Sand bricks. The
Available online xxxx
dosage of plastic addition (Waste plastic: M Sand) is varied from the ratio 1:1 (C1 type) to 1:2 (C2 type).
The mix ratios are fixed based on the trial casting. The behaviour of the Plastic M Sand bricks tested for
Keywords: Compression, Water absorption, soundness, and hardness test to ensure the performance in strength and
Waste plastic
durability checks. The performance under various tests conducted on plastic M Sand bricks has been
M Sand
Water absorption test
compared with the standard bricks. In the compression test, the mix combination C2 type bricks show
Soundness the highest strength of 55.91 MPa, which is 88.59% higher than standard bricks and 18.7% higher than
Hardness C1 type bricks. On the other hand, the result of the Water absorption test shows that C1 type bricks per-
Durability checks form better than the C2 type bricks and standard bricks. By interpreting the test results, the increase in
the addition of plastic with M Sand increases the performance of the Plastic M Sand bricks in the water
absorption test, but the behaviour of bricks under compression improved upto the dosage of 1:2 (C2
type).
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Emerging Trends in
Materials Science, Technology and Engineering.

1. Introduction 2. Material testing

Plastic is a very hazardous material and very difficult to decom-
pose. It is a central problem in the world. The use of plastic is high
in our daily life, such as polythene bags, disposals, furniture, pack-
ing food packets, and other accessories. Plastic is varying in broad
and various types according to their chemical composition. The
separation of plastic wastes is a mainly big problem in front of
us. The use of plastic could not be stopped entirely, but the plastic
can be recycled and reused. Recycle plastic is used in various
industries such as construction, transportation, manufacturing. In
the construction industry, a more massive cost of the project
includes materials up to 60% to 70% of the total cost of the project.
In this paper, the waste plastic is used to manufacture the bricks,
and the behaviour of such Plastic bricks is tested under compres-
sion, water absorption, soundness, and hardness test. The perfor-
mance of the plastic mixed M Sand bricks is compared with the
standard bricks. Fig. 1
2.1. Specific Gravity of M Sand
The empty weight of the pycnometer is measured, and it is
taken as M1. One-third of the pycnometer is filled with M Sand,
and the current weight is taken as M2. Then the remaining portion
of the pycnometer is filled with water and the weight is M3 as in
Fig. 2 (i). Now the pycnometer is cleaned and filled with water
and the weight is known as M4. The calculation of the specific
Gravity of M Sand is listed in Table 1.
2.2. Bulk density
Bulk density of M Sand in the loose state is 1832.83mkg3 and in the
rodded state is 1786.45 mkg3 Moreover, calculation steps are given in
the following (as in Fig. 2 (ii)).
W1 = Empty weight of metal container = 1.180 kg
W2 = weight of container with rodded fine aggregate = 4.250 kg

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.10.252
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Emerging Trends in Materials Science, Technology and Engineering.

Please cite this article as: S.M. Leela Bharathi, V. Johnpaul, R. Praveen Kumar et al., Experimental investigation on compressive behaviour of plastic brick
using M Sand as fine aggregate, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.10.252
S.M. Leela Bharathi, V. Johnpaul, R. Praveen Kumar et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig 1. Particle Size Distribution.

Fig 2. Material Property Testing (a) Batching (b) Melting (c) Mixing (d) Moulding.

Table 1
Calculation of Specific Gravity.

S.No M 1 (gm) M2 ðgmÞ M 3 (gm) M4 (gm) Specific Gravity of M Sand

606 1066 1713 1421 M 2M1
Specific gravity= ½ðM 2M1 Þ - ðM 3M4 Þ
1066606
=ð1066606 Þð17131421Þ
specific gravity = 2.73 (no unit)

W3 = weight of rodded fine aggregate = 1.07 kg Volume of container, V = 3.84
104 m3

W4 = weight of container with loose fine aggregate = 3.885 kg Bulk density in loose state (wv5 ) = 1832.83mkg3
W5 = weight of loose fine aggregate = 0.705 kg
Bulk density in rodded state (wv3 ) = 1786.45 kg
m3

2
S.M. Leela Bharathi, V. Johnpaul, R. Praveen Kumar et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

2.3. Water absorption of M Sand Table 2

Liquid Limit.

The water absorption percentage of M Sand can be calculated by S.no Water content (%) (w) No. of blows (N)
using the weight of air-dried and oven dried M Sand sample as 1. 12 28
given below. 2. 14 17
A = Weight of air-dried sand (after 24 h soaking) = 1.145 kg 3. 16 16
B = weight of oven dried sand = 0.935 kg 4. 18 13
5. 20 4
AB
Water absorption percentage ¼
100
B
1:145  0:935 The casting of Plastic M Sand bricks includes batching of mate-
¼
100
0:935 rials (plastic waste and M Sand), melting of waste plastics, mixing
The percentage of water absorption of M Sand is 14.5%. of plastic with M Sand, mouldinginto the wooden block of size
23 cm
11.3 cm
7.6 cm and drying process as shown in Fig. 3.
2.4. Particle size Distribution
4. Testing of bricks
Initial mass of soil sample (g) = 1000 gm (shown in Fig. 2 (iv))
Co – efficient of uniformity C u = DD60
10
4.1. Water absorption
D230
Coefficient of Curvature C c = D10 XD60 The bricks specimens are taken and weighed initially. Then the
Co– efficient of permeability K = 100
D210 bricks are immersed in water for 24 h. The final weight of bricks is
From Graph, (from Fig) measured. From the observations taken, the water absorption per-
D10 = 0.63 mm; D30 = 1.05 mm; D60 = 1.4 mm centage has been calculated, as shown in Table 4.‘
Coefficient of uniformity C u = DD60
10
1:4
= 0:63 Percentage of Water Absorption = w2ww
1
1
x100
C u = 2.22 w1 = Dry brick weight and w2 = wet brick weight
D230 W1 = weight of the dried brick; W2 = weight of the wet brick
Co – efficient of Curvature C c = D10 XD60
C c = 1.25
Co– efficient of permeability K = 100
D210 4.2. Strength in compression
K = 39.69 mm2
v e%retained The Bricks are tested in a compression testing machine, and the
Fineness modulus = Cumulati100
maximum crushing strength has been observed, as in Fig. 4. The
= 4.798%
compressive strength for various mix combinations is listed in
Table 5.
2.5. Liquid limitand flow index
Applied max loadx1000ðNÞ
StrengthinCompression ¼
LiquidlimitðW L Þ = Watercontentfor25blows (Fig. 2 (v)) crosssectionalareaðmm2 Þ
ðw1  w2 Þ
Flow indexðIÞ ¼
logðN2 =N1 Þ 4.3. Hardness test on bricks

ð12  14Þ ð14  16Þ

From Table; I1 ¼ ¼ 9:22; I2 ¼ ¼ 75:96 While applying the scratch on the brick specimens of various
logð17=28Þ logð16=17Þ mix combinations, there is no visible scratch on any one of the
combinations as listed in Table 6.
ð16  18Þ ð18  20Þ
I3 ¼ ¼ 22:17; I4 ¼ ¼ 3:907
logð13=16Þ logð4=13Þ
4.4. Soundness test of BRICKS
I = I1 þ I2 þ I3 þ I 4
I = 27.81 After the brick specimens are dried for 2 days, the specimens
The liquid limit of a given sample is 12.6%, and the flow index is are tested for soundness. The specimens are allowed to hit each
27.81. other, and it is noted that all the mix combinations produced ring-
ing sound.
2.6. Calculation of plastic limit
5. Results and discussion
To calculate the plastic limit of M Sand, initially, the empty
weight of the pan is noted (W 1 = 32 g). The weight of wet soil
The results of the various tests conducted for Plastic M Sand
(W 2 = 38 g) and dry soil have been noted (W 3 = 34 g), as in Fig. 2
Bricks and standard bricks were compared in table 7. From the
(vi). The value of the plastic limit is calculated as follows.
various tests conducted on plastic M Sand bricks (C1 and C2)
2 W 3
Plastic limit (W P Þ ¼ W
W 2 W 1
X100 and standard bricks, Combo C2 performs better than C1 type plas-
(W P Þ ¼ 66.6 % tic M Sand bricks and standard bricks in the strength test, but the
combo C1 perform better than other proportions in water absorp-
3. Casting tion test. The Percentage of Water Absorption is 0.452%, 4.16%,
and 19.8% for C1, C2, and standard bricks, respectively. The
The casting process of Plastic M Sand bricks is followed by fixing results of the strength test in compression show that combo C2
the mix combinations. The mix ratio has been fixed based on the has a higher compressive strength of 55.76 MPa while the stan-
trial and error process, and the details of the Table 2 final mix ratio dard bricks have a strength of 6.36 MPa and the C1 type bricks
are showed in Table 3. have the strength of 45.45 MPawhich is shown in Fig. 5. More-
3
S.M. Leela Bharathi, V. Johnpaul, R. Praveen Kumar et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 3
Mix Proportions of Plastic M Sand Bricks.

Combo.no Mix ratio Plastic (kg) M sand (kg) No. Of specimen

C1 1:1 2.5 2.5 3
C2 1:2 1.5 3 3

Fig 3. Casting Process of Plastic Bricks.

Table 4 Table 5
Percentage of Water Absorption. Strength in Compression for various mix combinations.

S.No Mix Combinations Percentage Water Absorption S.No Mix Combinations Compressive Strength (N/mm2)
C1 0.452% C1 45.45
C2 4.160% C2 55.91
NORMAL BRICK 19.8% NORMAL BRICK 6.36

over, in the Hardness test and Soundness test, all specimens per-
Table 6
form in the same manner. Hardness test on bricks.

S.No Mix ratio Result

6. Summary and conclusions
C1 No Scratchis visible
C2 No Scratch is visible
To reduce the dumping of plastic waste and to reuse the waste NORMAL BRICK No Scratch is visible
plastic bags in construction, the plastic waste is added with M Sand
to produce Plastic M Sand bricks. The dosage of Plastic material: M
Sand by weight is used in the ratio of 1:1 (C1) and 1: 2 (C2) from
various mix trials conducted experimentally. The performance of
⁶ It is concluded that the addition of plastics in M Sand increases
C1 and C2 brick specimens are tested under compression, water
the strength when compared with standard bricks. The opti-
absorption, hardness, and soundness test and compared with the
mum dosage for better performance in the strength aspect is
behavior of standard clay bricks. The following conclusions are
1:2 (C2 type).
made from the test results.
⁶ In C1 type bricks, the compressive strength is improved when
compared with standard clay bricks, but the strength is lower
⁶ Plastic M Sand bricks increase strength in compression 88.59%
than the C2 type bricks.
(C2) and 86% (C1) when compared to standard bricks (as shown
⁶ However, in the case of the Water absorption test, C1 type
in Fig. 5) and reduce the water absorption percentage
bricks show better performance than the other two mix
by19.348% in the case of C1 type specimen and 15.64% in case
combinations.
of C2 type specimens.

Fig 4. Strength in compression.

4
S.M. Leela Bharathi, V. Johnpaul, R. Praveen Kumar et al.
Table 7
Comparison of various test results of normal and Plastic M Sand Bricks.
S.no Testing of Bricks
Compressive strength test
Water absorption
Hardness test
Soundness test
Fig 5. Strength in compression for various mix proportions.
⁶ Hence for the strength aspect, the optimum dosage is 1:2 (C2
type), and for the durability aspect, in the case of water absorp-
tion, the optimum dosage is 1:1 (C1 type).
⁶ That is, the addition of Plastic with M Sand performs better upto
40% by weight of M Sand in case of compressive strength and
upto 50% by weight of M Sand in case of the percentage of water
absorption.
⁶ In the dosage range between 40 and 50 %, the optimum value
can be found out by extending this research work.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
S.M. Leela Bharathi: Supervision. V. Johnpaul: . : Resources. R.
Praveen Kumar: Writing - original draft. R. Surya: Data curation.
T. Vishnu Kumar: .
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Further Reading
[1] LairenlakpamBillygraham Singh et al., Manufacturing Bricks from Sand and
Waste Plastics, International Journal of Mechanical and Production
Engineering 5 (10) (October 2017).
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Clay brick Plastic Msand brick
C1 type C2 type
6.36 N/mm2 45.45 N/mm2 55.76 N/mm2
19.8% 0.452 4.160%
No scratch is visible No scratch is visible
Bell sound Bell sound
[2] Johnpaul.V Rama dharan .K Determination of Optimum Percentage
Replacement of Fine Aggregate in Concrete Using GBFS (Granulated Blast
Furnace Slag) Volume 2 Issue No.3 Pages 89 – 94, 2014
[3] Dr. M.Mageswari, J.S. Chiranjeevi. ‘‘Plastic Bricks”. International Research
Journal in Advanced Engineering and Technology (IRJAET), Vol 4, Issue 2
(2018), Page 3167 – 3172, April 2018.
[4] M.K. Sahu, L. Singh, Critical Review on Types of Bricks Type 14: Plastic Sand
Bricks, International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering 5 (11)
(November 2017).
[5] Mohammed Jalaluddin. ‘‘Use of Plastic Waste in Civil Constructions and
Innovative Decorative Material (Eco friendly)”. MOJ Civil Eng. 2017, 3(5):
00082, Vol 3, Issue 5 – 2017, December 2017.
[6] S.M. RajarapuBhushaiah, D. Srinivasa Rao, Study of Plastic Bricks Made from
Waste Plastic, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology
(IRJET) 06 (04) (April 2019).
[7] Ms.Rambha Thakur, ‘‘Manufacturing and testing of plastic sand bricks”. Journal
of Engineering Technology and Innovative Research. (JETIR), Vol 1, Issue 7,
December 2014
[8] ShikharShrimali. ‘‘bricks from waste plastic”, International Journal of Advanced
Research (IJAR), Vol 02, Issue 04, January 2017.
[9] Siti Aishah Wahid, NorliaMdDesa SullyfaizuraMohdRawi, Utilization of Plastic
Bottle Waste in Sand Bricks, Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research 06
(04) (December 2014).
[10] Siti Nabilah Amir, et.al, ‘‘Plastic in Brick Application”. IOSR Journal of
Engineering (IOSRJEN), (p):2278-8719, Vol 08, Issue 8, August 2018.
[11] Vilas M. Patil, Rahul Bhoge- ‘‘Utilization of waste material in Burnt clay bricks”.
International Journal of Technology Enhancements and Emerging Engineering
Research, Vol 2, Issue 4, ISSN 2347-4289, December 2018.
[12] Yogesh Singh, Shubham Papal, Pravin Dhumal, Bhaskar Kunjeer, Savita Jangale.
‘‘Literature Review on Use of Plastic Bottles for construction of Water Tank as a
Sustainable Material”. 11th International Conference on Recent Development
in Engineering Science, Humanities and Management, Vol 02, Issue 04, March
2018.