Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

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

Short communication

Strength and durability performance of masonry bricks

produced with crushed glass and melted PET plastics
Aneke Frank Ikechukwu*, Celumusa Shabangu
College of Agriculture, Engineering and Science Howard College Campus, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 4004, South Africa

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Due to the seriousness of environmental pollution as well as the high energy-demand
Received 4 December 2020 associated with the production of construction materials. This study presents the rational
Received in revised form 13 March 2021 approach towards exploiting the conversion of wastes to energy-efficient construction
Accepted 23 March 2021
material. The current study deals with the development of waste masonry bricks produced
from PET plastic waste (PPW) and recycled crushed glass (RCG). The bricks were produced
Keywords: through varying ratios of 20 %, 30 %, and 40 % of the dry mass of RCG. The produced waste
Scrap plastic
masonry bricks (WMB) were tested for series of compressive and tensile strengths to
Waste
Recycled crushed glass
evaluate the load-bearing capacity of the WMB under compression and tension in
Strength indices compliance with South African National Standard SANS 227. The bricks (WMB) were tested
Fired clay bricks for durability through complete submersion in sulphuric acid solutions at different
molarities of 4.60E-02 M, 3.60E-03 M, 5.20E-04 M, and 2.30E0
5 M, respectively. Further,
durability tests were conducted through sodium sulphate solution wetting and drying over
8 cycles. Subsequently, after the wetting and drying cycles, the WM-bricks were tested for
compressive and tensile strength, to evaluate the performance of the WMB in acidic as well
as severe alkaline environments. The test results showed that the WM-bricks recorded an
average of 70.15 % and 54.85 % of tensile and compressive strength increase compared to
conventional clay bricks strength values. The splitting tensile strength of the WM-bricks is
relatively high than that of the conventional bricks for the given compressive strength. The
drying and wetting cycle in acidic solution caused a slight reduction of 12.4 % of the mass of
the clay bricks, whereas no loss of mass was observed in WMBs due to hydrophobic and
deformability characteristics of the RCG and scrap plastic. The relationship between the
tensile and compressive strength of the WM-bricks has straight proportionality beyond the
optimum strength index. The findings further demonstrated a reasonable methodological
approach towards the conversion of wastes into green-efficient masonry bricks that
complies with SANS 227 for load-bearing structures like retaining wall, multiple story
building.
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction

The advent of reinforced concrete and steel as a structural solution has caused the side-lined masonry structures for
decades. Masonry is typically considered as a material that is labour intensive associated with heavy environmental
consequences. The production process of fired clay masonry bricks is highly energy-intensive, non-eco-friendly, and acts as a

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: AnekeF@ukzn.ac.za (A.F. Ikechukwu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00542
2214-5095/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

source of consuming the dwindling natural resources without a form of replenishing them. Unsustainable development in
the construction industry is considered a major threat to the environment in many countries. For example, it is reported that
a brick kiln emits about 70–282 g of carbon dioxide, 0.001–0.29 g of black carbon, 0.29–5.78 g of carbon monoxide (CO) and
0.15–1.56 g of particulate matter per kilogram of brick fired, depending on the type of kiln and fuel used for the firing [1,2].
Also, some challenges are confronting the entire environment-friendliness of the material used in the construction of
masonry structures, particularly clay. With this in view, over the last decades researchers have been consistently sourcing for
auxiliary, alternative, and green-efficient construction materials that are sustainable towards resources efficiency through
redistribution, remanufacturing, recycling, as well as re-engineering of wastes materials [3–5]. Bricks is an inexorable
construction material, produced from the burning of clay, calcrete, and shale. Continuous removal of these natural earth will
lead to depletion of valuable resources. This situation has forced the researchers to shift their focus towards the development
of new materials or recycle waste materials produced from various industries. In the same context, various wastes including
rice husk ash and sugarcane bagasse ash have now been introduced in the production of bricks [6,7]. Despite the attempts to
produce masonry bricks from different recycled wastes, the produced waste bricks still require a huge amount of energy to
produce bricks with acceptable mechanical properties. Though, past studies have shown that bricks made from waste
materials, such as fly ash, construction dust, and demolition waste, limestone powder, cement kiln dust possess considerably
good characteristic strength properties [8,9].
Plastic waste production is constantly growing all over the world particularly in developing counties of the world.
According to the EPRO [10] report, global plastics production in 2017 turnout to 348 million Mg and increased by 4%
compared to 2016. With a 7.8 % share, Africa is the second-largest region in terms of plastic production, second only to Asia
with a whopping share of 86 %. The rapid development of the global industry, population growth, and consistent economic
growth in many countries have contributed to the improvement of the quality of life of the population. Though one of the
consequences of life improvement is the increase in manufactured products used, thus increases the generation of wastes
each day [11]. The rapid growth of solid waste and shortage of suitable land disposal of wastes implies that many countries in
Africa are running out of space for landfills. In South Africa, 80 % of 59 million tonnes of general waste generated ends up in
the seashores, whereas only 12 % of these wastes are recycled, leaving the remaining 8% to litter the seashore [12]. However,
the advocacy towards a paradigmatic shift from a non-renewable to green efficient construction material is gaining
momentum in contemporary times particularly in developing countries. Such momentum appears to be propelled by the
instrumentality of waste inclusion in the production of construction material to the attainment of sustainable development
goals [13–16]. Of interest to this study are the potential conversion of scrap plastic waste towards enabling resource-efficient
construction material for sustainability. In furtherance, it is estimated that approximately 275 million tons of plastic waste
were generated in 192 coastal countries in 2010, [17]. Amongst which 12.7 million tons of this plastic waste have been
dumped in the ocean causing catastrophic effects on the environment. Despite the benefits and need for recycling, studies
reported that as little as 5.2 % of household waste was recycled in 2015 according to [18].
An increasing interest in environmental issues has pressured industries to develop products and materials that are more
environmentally friendly. This interest drives material production and process development for more sustainable practices.
Shweta and Khandve [19] discussed on replacement of red bricks with ecofriendly AAC (Autoclaved Aerated Concrete)
blocks. The usage of AAC block reduces the cost of construction up to 20 % as reduction of a dead load of a wall on beam makes
it a comparatively lighter member. The use of AAC block also reduces the requirement of materials such as cement and sand
up to 50 %. As per the test results, the compressive strength of AAC blocks is comparatively more than traditional clay brick.
The utilization of fly ash leads to the reduction in cement consumption in production which results in a reduction of
greenhouse gases. Sahu et al. [20] Development of an eco-friendly brick using water treatment plant sludge and processed
tea waste. Based on the strength test results, the author concludes that the bricks can contribute up to 30 % as a partial
replacement of cement will be very effective in the construction industry.
The characteristic consistency of plastic wastes such as ductility, deformability, and hydrophobic properties, has made
this waste the most attractive waste material for greenfield construction. Also, the high thermal heat conductivity against
high temperatures qualifies plastic wastes for masonry bricks production. Subsequently, continuous utilization and
alternative innovative applications of plastic wastes waste will ease the backlog of plastic recycling to the benefit of
producing sustainable bricks masonry. Many documented research has shown that the re-use of waste plastics as
construction materials in developing countries are gaining tremendous scientific awareness [21–24], particularly solving the
problem of ineffective waste management. Other than the inclusion of waste plastic in masonry brick production, plastic
wastes have been used as an aggregate to form the asphalt pavement layer for a 10 % reduction in bitumen usage [25].
However, the use of plastic waste continues to spread across pavement and construction engineering. The PET fibre is been
used in concrete to provide a cost-effective, corrosion-resistant reinforcement option beyond which improves the
compressive strength and absorption capacity energy of soils [26].
Studies have shown that plastic waste is one of the major threats to the environment and its inhabitants, due to their high
generated quantities that eventually find their way to water bodies where they cause detrimental effects to aquatic lives.
However, the re-engineering of approximately half of this waste will enhance the production of energy-efficient
construction materials, also save the environment from the impending pollution threats [27]. In furtherance to these,
developing countries have an inadequate waste management system, due to low waste collection rates, disposal primarily by
dumping, and limited outlets for reuse and recycling [28]. However, waste materials can provide livelihoods and mitigate
housing challenges to a highly entrepreneurial informal sector [29]. Improper waste management system could trigger a

2
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

high profile, environmental, and public health hazard. And recycling infrastructure for these materials often does not exist in
Africa. As a result, waste plastics have little or no value, resulting in uncontrolled disposal in a landfill. However, it appears
that none of these studies considered aspects concerning combined resource use as described by [30] in the attempts to
achieve sustainable low-cost housing in developing countries.
In this study, two waste materials: PET plastic waste (PPW) and recycled crushed glass (RCG) were probed for masonry
brick production on large scale. The complete conversion of such wastes to brick production can lead to the contribution
towards bridging this gap between effective waste management, the production of energy-efficient masonry bricks,
problems of landfill space, and mitigation of housing challenges in South Africa [31]. The main objective of this study is to
experimentally explore the mechanical and durability of PPW and RCG produced masonry bricks compared to that of fired
clay bricks. Such that the performance assessment of strength and durability of masonry bricks produced from plastic waste
and the recycled crushed bottle was demonstrated on the probability utility in the development of sustainable load-bearing
masonry bricks in severe environment.

2. Materials acquisition and composite preparation

The waste plastic (WP) was sampled from Mariannhill Landfill site in Durban under strict Covid-19 protocols. The waste
material was taken to the University of Kwazulu Natal Civil Engineering Laboratory, where it was washed and sanitized
before usage. The pictorial view of the landfill site is shown in Fig. 1.
The waste plastic is polyethylene terephthalate with chains of hydrocarbons compounds. It contained carbon, hydrogen,
and oxygen ðC10 H8 O4 Þn whose molecular structure possesses ten atoms of carbon linked double bond of eight hydrogens and
four oxygen atoms respectively as presented in Eq. (1).

(1)

This type of plastic is often derived from natural gas or low-molecular-weight constituents of petroleum, i.e. ethylene,
propylene, and butene (butylene). The density of the waste plastic was determined to be 921 kg/m3 following ASTMD792
[32] testing procedures. The process of sanitizing the wastes was followed to eliminate any form of a virus that could come
from hospital wastes.
The recycled crushed glass used in this study was collected from the same landfill mentioned earlier. The RCG was
washed, sanitized, and allowed to dry in an open-air for 48 h. Subsequently, three particle sizes were selected for this study
i.e. 0.1 mm, 0.425 mm, and 2.4 mm according to ASTM (D1140-17) [33]. Different RCG particle sizes were selected to evaluate
the effect of aggregate size on the compressive strength of the produced waste bricks. Glass waste can be produced from
various sources including container glass used for packaging (bottles and jars), flat glass derived from windscreens, and

Fig. 1. Mariannhill Landfill site in Durban.

3
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Table 1
Chemical composition crushed glass.

Compounds Crushed glass Clay bricks

SiO2 74.11 60.14
Al2O3 11.18 23.18
Fe2O3 7.26 6.11
CaO 3.78 3.12
MgO 0.22 4.40
Others 3.45 3.05
Loss on Ignition (LOI) 0.084 0.012

windows, bulb glass (light globes), and cathode ray tube glass such as TV screens and monitors [34]. In this study, recycling
aspects of container glass, and beer bottles the term are referred to as “glass” hereafter refers to this type only.
A commercially available clay brick was obtained from corobrik Durban, it has the same size as that of the prepared SPW
bricks. The clay bricks used in this study is very hard, well-burnt, and it is uniform throughout, sound in texture and colour,
and sharp in shape and dimension. The bricks are not easily breakable when stuck against another or dropped from a height
of 1.5 m.
The same XRD equipment mentioned earlier was used to analyse the chemical composition of the clay bricks. In the
present testing programme, small fragments were chopped off from the collected clay bricks with the use of a hammer and a
rod. The sample fragments were collected from all the sides of the clay bricks to avoid result discrepancies. Subsequently, the
clay brick sample was subjected to drying at 110  C for 24 h, samples are finely milled to obtain a fine powder after which the
X-Ray Diffractometer testing commenced. The chemical compositions of the materials used in this study are presented in
Table 1.
The sulphuric acid solutions used in this study were supplied by Protea Chemical South Africa and were mobilised at
different molarities of 2 of 4.60E-02 M, 3.60E-03 M, 5.20E-04 M, and 2.30E0-5 M, respectively.

2.1. Composite preparation

The waste bricks composite produced in this study were produced using varying percentages of crushed glass with
corresponding percentages of waste plastic. The produced waste masonry bricks are in the ratios of 80 %:20 %, 70 %: 30 %, and
60 %: 40 % of RCG and SPW. For easy identifications of the prepared waste bricks, 80 %:20 % specimen is tagged WMB -1, 70 %:
30 %, is equal to WMB -2, whereas 60 %: 40 % is equivalent to WMB -3. The process flow diagram used to produce WM bricks is
shown in Fig. 2. However, it is worthwhile to mention that the WM bricks require no water to be prepared.
The SPW and RCG were dried for 3 days in the open air, following the washing and sanitizing process. Subsequently, the
SPW s were shredded, while the glass bottles were crushed having particles that range from 0.05 to 1.6 mm. Following the
shredding and crushing process, the waste plastic was heated to a controlled temperature of 220  C until a good viscous
consistency was achieved, then the recycled crushed glass was added. The composite was continuously mixed until a
homogenous blend of melted plastic waste and recycled crushed glass was attained. The mix was then cast into bricks mould
of 222 mm length x106 mm depth x73 mm height that had been coated with a silicone-based release spray to eliminate any
form of adherence to the walls of the mould. The samples were constantly tapped by the sides of mould to randomly reduce
voids with the bricks before cooling occurs at room temperature. A total of 56 WM bricks were produced in the laboratory,
whereas 32 pieces of fired clay bricks were obtained for comparison making it a total of 88 tested bricks. An average of two
bricks was tested each time and the mean average is recorded as the final answer.

3. Testing procedures

3.1. Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) test

The unconfined compressive strength test was carried out on the SPW bricks after the bricks were allowed to cool in the
open air for 2 days, followed by a series of cycles for wetting and drying. The bricks were tested at a displacement rate of 0.5
mm/min, according to ASTM D2166 [35] using Avery Dennison compressive machine. The two plates were carefully cleaned
before the bricks were placed in the testing chamber. Stress and deformation data were recorded through an electronic data
logger that has the appropriate accuracy specifications. The maximum load is recorded in Newtons with a 1% accuracy.
Finally, the unconfined compressive strength of the specimens was calculated using Eqs. (2)–(4).
P kN
 qu ¼ ¼ ð2Þ
A 6L2

4
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Fig. 2. Process flow diagram showing the method used to produce waste masonry bricks.

Where qu is the unconfined compressive strength in (kPa), kN is the load required to crush the bricks, and L2 is the surface
area of the bricks. The stress-strain values were calculated using Eq. (3).
e ¼ DL=Lo ð3Þ

where e is the axial strain for the given load, DL is the change in length of specimens,  Lo is the initial length of the specimen.
The cross-sectional area of the specimen was calculated using Eq. (4).
A ¼ Ao =ð1
eÞ ð4Þ
where A is the average cross-sectional area of the specimen, Ao is the Initial average cross-sectional area of the specimen, e is
the axial strain for the given load.

3.2. Splitting tensile strength (STS) test

The split tensile test was conducted under ASTM C1006 [36] testing protocols. Sets of the produced WM bricks were
tested for tensile strength after subjected to 15 cycles of wetting and drying. The bricks have the same dimensions similar to
the bricks tested previously for the compressive strength test. The bricks were placed between the bearing blocks of the
tensile testing machine. A piece of mild steel of 4 mm thickness, 90 mm wide, and 222 mm length are placed horizontally
along the upper and lower load-bearing length of the bricks to ensure uniform distribution of applied pressure. The test was
conducted using the tensile load rate of 0.5 mm/min, as the maximum load was recorded, and the split tensile strength was
calculated using Eq. (5)
2P
  s x ¼ ð5Þ
p:D:T
where P is the maximum recorded load, D is the width of the specimen, T is the equivalent to the length of the specimen. An
average of three specimens for each brick was tested and the final value was recorded as the split tensile strength.

3.3. Durability test

Prior to durability testing, immediately after the WM bricks were produced, the bricks were left to cool in open-air for 2
days. The durability test was conducted according to ASTM D559 / D559M [37]-procedures. The dry weight of bricks was
obtained before soaked in sodium sulphate solution for 24 h, after which the bricks were removed, cleaned up, and weighed

5
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Fig. 3. Soaked clay and WM-bricks for several wetting and drying cycles.

again. Following the weighing, the bricks were placed on a surface to enable the drying process for 48 h followed by another
soaking, making it one complete cycle of wetting and drying process. The procedures were repeated until no further moisture
could be absorbed by the bricks. Subsequently, the soaked bricks were subjected to compressive and tensile strength testing.
This test was done to determine the durability and effects of soaking on the strengths of the bricks. Bricks were submerged in
liquids containing acidic solution with different molarities of 2.30E0
8 M, 5.20E-07 M, 3.60E-05 M, and 4.60E-03 M, as
presented in Fig. 3.
The molarities were achieved through H2SO4 adjustment with four different quantities of water. The bricks composites
were submersion at each concentration value for 28 days as shown in Table 2. The response of the bricks submerged in four
different acidic concentrations was carefully monitored to evaluate the performance assessment of bricks composite under
acidic environments. The submerged bricks were left to dry for 24 h followed by tensile and compressive strength testing.

4. Results

4.1. Unconfined compressive strength bricks

The unconfined compressive strength of the WM-bricks and fired clay brick before the durability test is presented in
Fig. 4. The compressive strength of brick is an important material property for structural applications. Generally, an increase

Table 2
Bricks acidic submersion.

Series Molarities (M) H3O+ pH Time exposure (Days)

1 2.30E0-5 2.30  10
5 4.64 28
2 5.20E-04 5.20  10
4 3.28 28
3 3.60E-03 6.60  10
3 2.44 28
4 4.60E-02 4.60  10
2 1.34 28

Fig. 4. UCS and STS of the investigated bricks before acidic soaking.

6
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

in bricks compressive strength will virtually contribute to an increase in the masonry assemblage compressive strength and
flexural elastic modulus. The test results marked a difference in the observed strength between the WM-bricks and fired clay
bricks. It is noted that the strength of the produced bricks is 33.02 MPa, 42.01MPA, and 37.40 MPa for WM-B 1, 2, and 3
respectively compared to fired clay bricks that recorded an average compressive strength of 14 MPa. In furtherance, the
densities of 1784 kg/m3, 1887 kg/m3, 1828 kg/m3, and 1894 kg/m3 for WM bricks 1, 2, 3, and clay bricks, respectively. The
density of the bricks implies that the strength of the bricks is relative to stiffness invariably relative to density. The high
strength in WMB could be attributed to the viscoelastic properties of the PET under melting temperature, as well as the
percentage of recycled crushed glass. The effect of recycled crushed glass on the plastic ratio on the density and compressive
strength of the bricks reduce porosity and increase density, as increasing the amount of recycled crushed glass increased the
compressive and tensile strength for additions up to 70 % of the dry mass of the crushed glass [38]. It is also worthy to
mention that the compressive and tensile strength of the WM bricks produced in this study comply with South African
National Standard SANS 227:2007 [39] for burnt clay brick for the loadbearing capacity of retaining walls and story buildings.

4.2. Effect of wetting-drying cycles on qu

The produced WM-bricks were exposed to sodium sulphate solution through wetting and drying cycles to evaluate the
effect of moisture absorption and salt attack on the compressive strength of the produced bricks and burnt clay bricks as
presented in Fig. 5 a, b, and c. To evaluate the compressive strength of the brick, the axial load was applied on the bed face
(horizontally) of the bricks. The surface area in contact with the platens was thus very large having an aspect ratio of 0.48. The
aspect ratio was very small the aspect ratio is defined as the ratio between the thickness of a sample and the smallest
characteristic length of its surface). Bricks surfaces were sufficiently flat and parallel and no specific capping was necessary.
The influence of aspect ratio (height/least width) has an important influence in the testing of masonry bricks [40]. As such it
is important to note in this study that the effect of aspect ratio on the tested bricks is not considered since the bricks
investigated in this study are of uniform dimension.

Fig. 5. (a), (b), and (c). Variation of WMB compressive strength with cycles of wetting-drying.

7
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

The test result showed that WMB-2 bricks (RCG: SPW = 70 %: 30 %) rendered the highest strength of 43.14 MPa,
irrespective of the number of cycles. The WMB-1 bricks recorded an optimum strength value of 33.45 MPa. Whereas
compressive strength of 38.25 MPa was recorded for WMB-3, as no significant strength decrease was observed throughout
the entire cycle. It was observed that wetting and drying cycles of sodium sulphate solution exposure do not affect the WM-
bricks. All the produced WM bricks recorded 2–2.6 greater compressive strength compared to the fired clay bricks that
rendered an ultimate compressive strength value of 14.25 MPa. The ultimate strength recorded by the SPW bricks is the
associated ratio of recycled crushed glass, as well as the bond between the melted plastic and crushed glass particles. it was
noted that WM-bricks did not lose any particles during the wetting and drying cycles process. Unlike the fired clay bricks that
lost 12 % of their initial mass after the cycles. The wetting and drying procedures caused a 12.4 % decrease in strength. The
result of this study agrees with reports published elsewhere by [41].
The clay bricks absorbed 7.14 % water on average during wetting and drying procedures, whereas the procedures WM-
bricks in this study absorbed 2.7 % on average. The results indicate that the burnt clay bricks absorbed more water than the
WM-bricks due to the absorption capacity of clay used in the production of the bricks. It is noted that WM-bricks
demonstrated the lowest salt solution absorption capacity due to the hydrophobic characteristics of the waste plastic used to
produce the bricks.
According to Sharma and Batra [42], the moisture absorption capacity of bricks should not be more than 7% by mass, and
in individual samples; it should be limited to 8%. The higher porosity has direct proportionality with rapidly moisture
absorption moisture from the bedding mortar, particularly in warm weather causing it to stiffen quickly. This would result in
it losing the all-important characteristic of plasticity that would inhibit correct and accurate positioning to line and face-
plane and the provision of secure bedding, leading to poor adhesion with attendant negative consequences on aspects of
compressive and flexural strengths of the overall masonry walling [43,44]. During the wetting and drying procedures of salt
exposure, it is evident that no form of soluble salt was observed on the WM-bricks, whereas burnt clay bricks lost a slight
mass of their initial mass. The performance of WM-bricks under salt exposure is an indication of the WM-brick's potential to
resist sulphate attack.

4.3. Effect of wetting-drying cycles on qt

The tensile strength of any material is an important mechanical parameter that controls the resistance of modulus of
rapture and tension cracks. To evaluate the tensile strength of the brick, the axial load was applied on the long side of the
bricks. The split tensile strengths of WMB-1, WMB-2, WMB-3, as well as clay bricks are presented in Fig. 6 a through c. It is
also worthy of note that the tensile strength of the WMB tested bricks are markedly 4 times lower than the unconfined
compressive strength. Whereas the tensile strength of the burnt clay bricks is 8 times lower than its compressive strength.
This implies that the WMB bricks posse more tensile resistance compared to the clay bricks. The sodium sulphate exposure
through series of wetting and drying cycles of the bricks resulted in no decreased effect in tensile strength for WMB tested
bricks, as no loss of material loss was recorded for WM -bricks. Contrary to clay bricks, few masses of 12 % were lost during
wetting and drying procedures resulting in a lower tensile strength value. It was noted that the WM -bricks did not gain more
strength 72 h of casting. This is expected, as there is no available cementitious minerals presence to initiate the pozzolanic
reaction. This could be one disadvantage of WM -bricks, unlike clay bricks that possess the potentials of development
depending on the calcium content of the clay used for the bricks production. The high tensile strength values for WM-bricks
are associated with the ductile characteristics of the melted scrap plastic and recycled crushed glass. It was noted that the
pore spaces between the WMB-2 bricks are minimal compare to the other bricks, thus trigged high tensile strength. This
result could be attributed to the loss absorption capacity of the brick (see Table 3). The fired clay bricks rendered low yield
stress, once the limit stress was exceeded, and it portrayed brittle fracture resulting in a sudden instability of the bricks
structures as published elsewhere by [45,46].
It is worthy to mention that an average of 2 bricks is tested for strength at each cycle. This implies that 8 bricks were
soaked at the same time and at the end of each cycle 1 brick is also tested. The slight increase in the results was as a result of a
weighted average of bricks strength, not as a result of gained strength.

4.4. Effect of Acid Solution on the Bricks qu and qt

The performance assessment of WMB and clay bricks subjected to the different soaking of acidic concentrations are
presented in Fig. 7a and b. The effect of acid concentration on the tensile and compressive strengths of the bricks was
discussed herein. The WMB bricks survived long-term acidic exposure irrespective of concentration. No traces of decrease in
strength was recorded for the WMB bricks, whereas clay bricks were significantly affected by the long-term acidic soaking,
particularly with bricks soaked in 2.30E0
8 M and 5.20E-07 M of sulphuric acid concentrations. It is worthy to mention that
the acidic interaction with the fired clay bricks was mobilized by adsorption of the acid in the pore spaces of the bricks solid
leading to the replacement of exchangeable cations by protons. The adsorbed protons diffuse into the bricks void, where the
chemical reaction occurs which caused the alkalinity of the bricks to drastically decrease. The internal hydration of calcium
silicate and the calcium aluminate hydration lost their stability and accelerated their hydrolysis, destroying the internal
structure of the clay bricks leading to low compressive strengths [47,48].

8
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Fig. 6. (a), (b), and (c). Variation of WMB tensile strength with cycles of wetting-drying.

Table 3
Bricks and its sustainable status.

Bricks Compressive Time cost (Minutes) Absorption Average Density Price/energy cost Sustainability
strength (MPa) capacity (%) (kg/m3)
WMB-1 33.45 10 1–2.7 1784 R 0.36/bricks Favourable
WMB-2 43.14 10 0.8
1 1887 R 0.36/bricks Favourable
WMB-3 38.25 10 1
3 1828 R0.36/bricks Favourable
Clay bricks 14.34 15 -40 h 6- 10 1894 R 2.29/bricks Not Favourable

4.5. Correlation of compressive strength with tensile strength of the bricks

The correlation between the tensile and compressive strength of any construction material is important for the design of
basic structural elements. The structural elements such as beams, slabs, columns, footings, and walls. Among these elements,
masonry walls are often subjected to both compressive and tensile stresses as they are referred to as flexural structural
members. Thus, the structural members are designed to sustain both compressive as well as tensile stresses simultaneously [
49,50]. As such, the ratio of tensile to the compressive strength of construction material is important to study for designing
the flexural members. The correlation between tensile and unconfined compressive strength of clay and WM-bricks are
presented in Fig. 8a through c. The curves substantiate bi-linear proportionality claims between tensile and compressive
strengths, resulting in a coefficient of correlation (R2) of 0.93, 0.94, 0.96, and 0.85 for WMB-1, WMB-2, WMB-3, and clay
bricks, respectively. The correlation of the strength indices depends mainly on the percentages of recycled crushed glass,
melted plastics, and brick porosity. The proposed relationship between qt and qu is close to the suggested ratio of

9
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Fig. 7. (a). Effects of various acid concentration on strength for WMB-1 and WMB-2. (b). Effects of various acid concentration on strength for WMB-3 and
clay bricks.

compressive strength to tensile strength for concrete M20 grade. Various design codes suggest that tensile stresses are
designed to be carried by reinforced material like steel, as part of tensile stresses are transferred to the concrete [51,52]. It is a
well-established fact that the ratio of tensile to the compressive strength of concrete is 10 %, whereas the ratio of tensile
strength to compressive strength expressed in percentage for the bricks produced in this study is 14.3 % under dry testing
condition.

10
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Fig. 8. (a) and (b). Correlation of qt and qu of WMB-1 and WMB-2 bricks composites. (c) and (d). Correlation of qt and qu of WMB-3 and clay
bricks.

This is an indication that the WM-brick produced in this study will render greater suitability as a construction material
under flexural stress. In furtherance, the flexural tensile strength is an important design consideration for unreinforced
masonry as well, has great proportionality with a bond strength of masonry wall mortar. The flexural tensile strength is a
function of the type of unit, type of mortar, mortar materials, percentage of grouting of hollow units, and the direction of
loading. The workmanship is also very important for flexural tensile strength, as unfilled mortar joints or dislodged units
have no mortar-to-unit bond strength.

4.6. Load-deformation relationship and failure modes

The representative load-deformation relationships of the WMB and fired clay bricks under compressive stress are
presented in Fig. 9. It can be seen that the WM bricks under compression exhibit considerable stiffness relative to the
percentage of added melted plastics at axial strain beyond 4.1 mm, such that the stress relaxation is indicated between 1.0
mm–2.5 mm deformation strain. It is noted that fired clay bricks are associated with brittle compression failure immediately

11
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

Fig. 9. Load-deformation relationship of WMM and fired clay bricks.

after peak load as evidence by the macrostructure in the curve. The behaviour of WM-bricks under compression is
characterized by a linear relationship between load and deformation to some deformation level of 3.6 mm beyond which
strain hardening occurs. Furthermore, considerable post-peak ductility is exhibited for WMB bricks which are mobilized by
the elastic characteristics of the melted scrap plastics in the bricks. On the other hand, burnt clay bricks in compression
exhibit a low stiffness response compared to the WM- bricks. Considerable post-peak ductility is shown beyond the 3.6 mm
strain gauge for WM-bricks. Unlike the fired clay bricks that were completely crushed at 2.91 mm without any potential
residual strain. The compression failure mode for fired clay bricks is characterized by brittle crushing behaviour whereas
WM-B bricks show multiple planes of intended failures. The brittle behaviour of clay bricks was also reported elsewhere [53–
55]. Strain hardening of the WM- bricks were attributed to the resistance of the scrap plastic to deformation elongation. The
multiple planes of ductility for WMB bricks in tension and compression were due to the random distribution and percentages
of melted plastics and recycled crushed glass that caused a redistribution of the potential planes of ductility.

4.7. Sustainability and greenfield

Green-efficient construction is defined as an environmentally sustainable building constructed, operated with the basic
aim of mitigation of environmental impacts such as natural resource depletion as well as CO2 emission. In this study, the
inclusion of scrap plastics and recycled crushed glass in brick production, addresses sustainable site planning, energy
efficiency, conservation of material and resources by using renewable resources as well as recycling and reusing and indoor
air quality. Using renewable resources with some unusable materials in building construction can help in conserving the
non-renewable resources through improving green-efficient construction. Scrap plastic waste can be used in the production
of bricks and the bricks can subsequently be used in the construction of masonry structures such as retaining walls, bridges,
etc. The utilization of scrap plastic waste with recycled crushed glass in the production of bricks could aid in saving the
energy consumed in the firing of the clay brick, as well as reducing the CO2 emission by reducing the amount of cement and
natural soil usage in bricks production.
In furtherance, the price of electricity in South Africa is (Rands 2.172) 0.145 U.S. Dollar per kWh for households and (Rands
1.051) 0.070 U.S. Dollar for businesses which includes all components of the electricity bill such as the cost of power,
distribution, and taxes. For comparison, the average price of electricity in the world for that period is 0.140 U.S. Dollars per
kWh for households and 0.123 U.S. Dollars for businesses. Two data points at various levels of electricity consumption for
both households and businesses were used for this analysis. The business data point is considered for this calculation.
According to the ESKOM report on electricity consumption in June 2020, 1kwh of electricity cost 0.070 U.S. based on
commercial point data. However, 1 kW h is equivalent to 1895.63  C of heat. Therefore, 220  C is required to produce SWP
bricks, in that context it is calculated that the production of SWP will cost 0.0241 U.S. Dollar which equivalent to (0.38R/
bricks). On the other hand, 1.531 U.S. Dollars equivalent to 2.29R/bricks) is required to produce fired clay bricks. It is also
worth mentioning that the calculation presented in this study is based on electricity consumption cost, other costs are not
considered. The fired clay bricks require more time because the brick is fired between 10 and 40 h, depending upon kiln type
and other variables. Thus, the time required to produce SWP brick is the time required to melt PET plastic waste and get it to a
homogeneous viscosity. Based on the energy and time consumption analysis summarized herein, it is worth mentioning that
the SPW brick is qualified as a green-efficient masonry brick according to [56]. It is worthy to mention that the construction
industry has been identified as piloting tools in the achievement of green-efficient construction material aspirations through

12
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

the plethora of anthropogenic activities domiciled within the industry and the materials associated with such activities . The
WMB bricks produced in this study are associated with the sustainability concept within the construction industry as
summarized in Table 3. Towards mitigating the issues surrounding economic efficiency, social responsibility, environmental
performance, and material performance [57].
In summary, the utilization of wastes such as recycled crushed glass and scrap plastic to produce bricks was, to a great
extent, proven to be cost-effective and eco-friendly. It serves as a cost-reducing and eco-friendly material when
transformed into a useful green efficient construction material. It could also be a resource for carbon credit revenues, as
manufacturing of fired clay bricks requires using high energy, which is energy-intensive and costly. In contrast, the WMB
bricks produced in this study can be produced by using scrap tires as a source of energy for melting the scrap plastics.
Using only a fraction of this energy in the production of WMB bricks will save electricity, therefore, making the bricks to be
more cost-effective, as well as huge quantities of valuable topsoil that is traditionally used in clay brick production. The
study demonstrated an innovative method of replacing soil with scrap plastic as well as saving the environment and
ecosystems from waste littering. Putting scrap plastic to productive use, thus not only reduces water, air, and soil pollution
but also improves the health of populations and the surrounding environment. Thus, the estimated production cost of
waste masonry brick using scrap plastic and recycled crushed glass is estimated to be 15 times cheaper than that of
conventional clay-fired bricks.

5. Conclusions

In this study, a performance assessment of the strength and durability of converting waste plastic and recycled crushed
glass into green-efficient masonry bricks which could reduce pollution and further decrease the problem of littering the
environment with plastics is demonstrated. based on the findings, it was concluded that.
Results from this study are indicative of the satisfactory performance of WM bricks as a load-bearing masonry element,
especially the bricks with a mix ratio of 70 %:30 % and 60 %:40 % of recycled crushed glass to scrap plastic. It, therefore,
provides an appropriate channel for the disposal of PET waste plastics in a very efficient, useful, and profitable way.
The test results also indicate that the average compressive and tensile strength of 43.14 MPa and 9.89 MPa, for WM- bricks
complied with the SANS227 specification for a loadbearing structure like retaining walls, multistorey structures, etc. The
results showed that WM- bricks rendered compressive strength 2.5 and 3 times higher than that of fired clay bricks.
The WM- bricks are characterized by ductile response whereas, clay bricks are indicated with brittle behaviour. The
ductile response of the WM- bricks are mobilized by the viscoelasticity properties of PET scrap plastics, causing the bricks to
possess high strain energy under axial deformation load.
The resistance of the WM- bricks to repeated cycles of sodium sulphate exposure demonstrated zero loss of mass and
indicated excellent resistance when used in a saline environment. Furthermore, the soaking of the WM- bricks also showed
that the composite bricks portrayed significant resistance to long-term acidic soaking at different concentrations. The
particle sizes of the recycled crushed glass have a strong influence on the strengths of the WM-bricks such that the low
particle size rendered higher strength and vice-versa.
The process of manufacturing WM bricks indicates clearly that there are many savings to be made during the making of
the bricks. These savings arise mainly from the generation of waste materials and the reduction in firing time and energy
consumption as well as from doing away with whole processes of mining natural materials, transporting, grinding, which is
necessary in the case of the clays and shale-based bricks.
A significant timesaving in the manufacturing process is an added advantage, as they attain more than 80 % of their
ultimate strength within 12 h due to their fast curing and low water absorption. In fast construction and waterlogged acidic
environments, the WM bricks would have an advantage over those produced from burnt clay, due to their high hydrophobic
properties which relatively contributed to their resilient characteristics against chemical attack and less deformable under
tension stress.
Also, the fired clay bricks absorbed more moisture, and it requires water to attain the desired consistency during
production. Whereas the tests result revealed that WM- bricks could be made from scrap plastic waste and recycled crushed
glass without water. The plastic waste and crushed glass usage would serve another purpose of auxiliary green-efficient
construction material, as fired clay bricks require high energy of 1300  C compared to WM bricks that require 220  C to attain
3 times the strength of clay bricks.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors report no declarations of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the Geotechnical and Pavement Material Laboratory at the University of Kwazulu-
Natal Durban, South Africa.

13
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

References

[1] S. Maithel, R. Uma, Brick Kilns Performance Assessment, 2012, (2012) .

[2] S. Maithel, S. Kumar, D. Lalchandani, S. Kanungo, Factsheets About Brick Kilns in South and South-East Asia: Fixed Chimney Bull’s Trench Kiln, 2014,
(2014) .
[3] S. Clay, D. Gibson, J. Ward, Sustainability Victoria: influencing resource use, towards zero waste and sustainable production and consumption, J. Cleaner
Prod. 15 (8) (2007) 782–786 (2007).
[4] B. Christophe, C. Rebecca, D. Daphne, D. Tim, E. Katherine, Lim. Brendan, O. Erica, Y. Suzi, The Australian Recycling Sector, 2012 Report, E. Department of
Sustainability, Water, Population and Communities (Ed.), 2012 2012.
[5] F.I. Aneke, B. Awuzie, Conversion of industrial wastes into marginal construction materials, Acta Structilia 25 (2) (2018) 119–137, doi:http://dx.doi.org/
10.18820/8820/24150487/as25i2.5.
[6] M.S. Syed, S.A. Kazmi, A.S. Muhammad, J.M. Muhammad, Khitab. Anwar, Manufacturing of sustainable clay bricks: utilization of waste sugarcane
bagasse and rice husk ashes, Constr. Build. Mater. 120 (2016) (2016) 29–41, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.05.084 ISSN 0950-0618.
[7] C.A. Garcia-Ubaque, G. Liliana, C.M. Juan, Quality study of ceramic bricks manufactures with clay and ashes from the incineration of municipal solid
wastes, Afinidad LXX 561 (2013) (2013) 61–66.
[8] L. Zhang, Production of bricks from waste materials - A review, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 643–655.
[9] C. Ingrao, C. Arcidiacono, A. Bezama, G. Loppolo, K. Winans, A. Koutinas, S. Gallego, Sustainability issues of by-product and waste management systems,
to produce building material commodities: a comprehensive review of findings from a virtual special issue, Resour. Conserv. Recycle. 146 (2019) (2019)
358–365, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2019.04.001.
[10] V. Seebaluck, W.B. Koussa, Prospects for recycling of waste PET bottles in Mauritius, Univ. Maurit. Res. J. 2009 (15) (2009) 334–349.
[11] Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), National Waste Information Baseline Report, Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria, South Africa,
2012.
[12] M. Geissdoerfer, P. Savaget, N.M.P. Bocken, E.J. Hultink, The circular economy - A new sustainability paradigm, J. Clean. Prod. 143 (2017) 757–768, doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.
[13] K. Winans, A. Kendall, H. Deng, The history and current applications of circular economy concept, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 1 (2017) (2017) 825–833,
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. rser.2016.09.123.
[14] P. Schroeder, K. Anggraeni, U. Weber, The relevance of circular economy practices to the sustainable development goals, J. Ind. Ecol. (2018) (2018) 1–19,
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12732.
[15] A. Bruel, J. Kronenberg, N. Troussier, B. Guillaume, Linking industrial ecology and ecological economics: a theoretical and empirical foundation for the
circular economy, J. Ind. Ecol. (2018) (2018) 1–10, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12745.
[16] J.R. Jambeck, R. Geyer, C. Wilcox, T.R. Siegler, M. Perryman, A. Andrady, R. Narayan, K.L. Law, Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean, Science 347
(6223) (2015) 768–771 (2015).
[17] M. Afrika, S. Oelofse, W. Strydom, G. Mvuma, J. John, Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle, CSIR newsletter, 2016.
[18] O.S. Rathi, P.V. Khandve, AAC Block-A new eco-friendly material for construction, Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Dev. 2 (4) (2015) 2015.
[19] V. Sahu, R. Attri, P. Gupta, R. Yadav, Development of eco-friendly brick using water treatment plant sludge and processed tea waste, J. Eng. Des. Technol.
18 (3) (2019) 727–738, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-06-2019-0168.
[20] Z.Z. Ismail, E.A. AL-Hashmi, Use of waste plastic in concrete mixture as aggregate replacement, Waste Manage. 28 (2008) 2041–2047.
[21] A.M.H. Mansour, S.A. Ali, Reusing waste plastic bottles as an alternative sustainable building material, Energy Sustain. Dev. 24 (2015) 79–85.
[22] L. Gu, T. Ozbakkaloglu, Use of recycled plastics in concrete: a critical review, Waste Manage. 51 (2016) 19–42.
[23] Z. Lenkiewicz, M. Webster, Making Waste Work: a Toolkit, Community Waste Management in Middle- and Low-Income Countries, (2017) .
[24] R. Vasudevan, A.R.C. Sekar, B. Sundarakannan, R. Velkennedy, A technique to dispose waste plastics in an ecofriendly way–Application in construction
of flexible pavements, Constr. Build. Mater. 28 (1) (2012) 311–320, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.031.
[25] N.C. Consoli, A.D.R. Johann, E. A, Gauer, V.R. Dos Santos, R.L. Moretto, M.B. Corte, Key parameters for tensile and compressive strength of silt-lime
mixtures, Geotech. Lett. 2 (3) (2012) 81–85, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geolett.12.00014.
[26] L. Dong, Y. Wang, H.X. Li, B.Y. Jiang, M. Al-Hussein, Carbon reduction measures-based LCA of prefabricated temporary housing with renewable energy
systems, Sustainability 2018 (10) (2018) 718 [CrossRef].
[27] D.C. Wilson, L. Rodic, P. Modak, R. Soos, A. Carpintero, C. Velis, M. Iyer, O. Simonett, Global Waste Management Outlook. Report, UNEP DTIE, 2015 ISBN:
978-92- 807-3479-9.
[28] D.C. Wilson, C. Velis, C. Cheeseman, Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in developing countries, Habitat Int. 30 (2006) 797–808.
[29] D.F. Vivanco, R. Wang, S. Deetman, E. Hertwich, Unraveling the nexus: exploring the pathways to combined resource use, Int. J. Ind. Ecol. (2018) (2018)
1–12, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12733.
[30] F.I. Aneke, C. Shabangu, Green-efficient masonry bricks produced from scrap plastic waste and foundry sand, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 14 (2021) (2021)
e00515, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00515 ISSN 2214-5095.
[31] ASTM D1140, Standard Test Methods for Determining the Amount of Material Finer Than 75-mm (No. 200) Sieve in Soils by Washing 2017, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017. www.astm.org.
[32] J. Wartman, D.G. Grubb, A. Nasim, Select engineering characteristics of crushed glass, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 16 (6) (2004) 526–539 (2004).
[33] ASTM D2166 / D2166M, Standard Test Method for Unconfined Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soil 2016, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, 2016. www.astm.org.
[34] ASTM C1006 / C1006M-20a, Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Masonry Units 2020, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA,
2020. www.astm.org.
[35] J. Mitchell, L. Vandeperre, R. Dvorak, E. Kosior, K. Tarverdi, C. Cheeseman, Recycling disposable cups into paper plastic composites, Waste Manage 34
(2014) 2113–2119.
[36] South African National Standard SANS 227, Standard Specifications for Strength of Load-Bearing Bricks, (2007) .
[37] J.E. Aubert, A. Fabbri, J.C. Morel, P. Maillard, An earth block with a compressive strength higher than 45 MPa, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013) 366–369.
[38] D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, Compressive behaviour of fired-clay brick and lime mortar masonry components in dry and wet conditions, Mater. Struct.
60 (2020) (2020), doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1617/s11527-020-01493-w.
[39] P. Sharma, R.K. Batra, Cement concrete paver blocks for rural roads, Int. J. Curr. Eng. Sci. Res. (IJCESR) 3 (1) (2016) 115–121 (2016).
[40] A.M. Youssef, A. El-Gendy, S. Kamel, Evaluation of corn husk fibres reinforced recycled low-density polyethylene composites, Mater. Chem. Phys. 152
(2015) (2015) 26–33, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2014.12.004.
[41] P. Sharma, M. Sharma, Utilization of Quarry dust in cement concrete paver blocks for rural Roads, Int. Res. J. Adv. Eng. Sci. J. Adv. Eng. Sci. 2 (1) (2017)
118–124 (2017).
[42] R. Fedele, G. Milani, A numerical insight into the response of masonry reinforced by FRP-strips, Compos. Struct. 92 (2010) 2345–2357, doi:http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2010.03.014 2010.

[43] J. Witzany, T. Cejka, T. Zigler, Failure mechanism of compressed short brick masonry columns confined with FRP strips, Constr. Build. Mater. 63 (2014)
180–188, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.04.041 2014.
[44] S. Eyssautier-Chuine, B. Marin, C. Thomachot-Schneider, G. Fronteau, A. Schneider, S. Gibeaux, P. Vazquez, Simulation of acid rain weathering effect on
natural and artificial carbonate stones, Environ. Earth Sci. 75 (2016) 748–759.
[45] Z. Ge, Y. Wang, R. Sun, X. Wu, Y. Guan, Influence of ground waste clay brick on properties of fresh and hardened concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 98 (2015)
128–136 2015.

14
A.F. Ikechukwu and C. Shabangu Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00542

[46] A.H. Nilson, D. Darwin, C.W. Dolan, Design of Concrete Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2011.
[47] F.S. Merritt, Building Engineering and Systems Design, Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin, 2012.
[48] J.K. Wight, J.G. MacGregor, Reinforced Concrete: Mechanics and Design, Pearson Education, New Jersey, 2015.
[49] J.C. McCormac, R.H. Brown, Design of Reinforced Concrete, Wiley, Hoboken, 2015.
[50] H.H. Knutson, The stress-strain relationship for masonry, Masonry International 7 (1) (2003) 31–33 2003.View at: Google Scholar.
[51] B.D. Ewing, M.J. Kowalsky, Compressive behaviour of unconfined and confined clay brick masonry, J. Struct. Eng. 1304 (2004) 650–661.
[52] K.S. Gumaste, R.K.S. Nanjunda, R.B.V. Venkatarama, K.S. Jagadish, Strength and elasticity of brick masonry prisms and wallets under compression,
Mater. Struct. 40 (2007) 241.
[53] C. Peter, K. Mohan, S. Greens, S. George, Energy-efficient production of clay bricks using industrial waste, Heliyon 4 (10) (2018) p.e00891.
[54] E. Sfakianaki, Resource-efficient construction: rethinking construction towards sustainability, World J. Sci. Technol. Sustain. Dev. 12 (3) (2015) 233–
242, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/WJSTSD-03-2015-0016.
[55] ASTM D559 / D559M, Standard Test Methods for Wetting and Drying Compacted Soil-Cement Mixtures 2015, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, 2015. www.astm.org.
[56] ASTM D792-20, Standard Test Methods for Density and Specific Gravity (Relative Density) of Plastics by Displacement, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2020. www.astm.org.
[57] Plastics Europe, Plastics Europe—The Facts 2018, EPRO Report; Plastics Europe, Frankfurt, Germany, 2018 Available online: https://www.
plasticseurope.org/de (accessed on 11 March 2019).

15