Materials Today: Proceedings 72 (2023) 3509–3513

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

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

Machine learning forecasting of thermal, mechanical and

physicochemical properties of unfired clay bricks with plastic waste
additives
Houssame Limami a,⇑, Doha Guettioui a, Othmane Dahi a, El Mehdi El Boustani a, Imad Manssouri b,
Aymane El Alami a, Asmae Khaldoun a
a
Laboratory of Sustainable Energy Materials, Al Akhawayn University, Ifrane, Morocco
b
Laboratoryof Mechanics, Mechatronics, and Command, Team of Electrical Energy, Maintenance and Innovation, ENSAM-Meknes, Moulay Ismail University, Meknes, Morocco

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

Article history: Plastic wastes can be recycled and put into good use as construction material additives to improve clay
Available online 25 August 2022 bricks’ thermal, mechanical and physicochemical performances. This paper aims to design a forecasting
model to predict brick samples’ properties at different plastic waste (HDPE & PET) additive percentages.
Keywords: This model will enable doing so at a time and cost-efficient manner by circumnavigating the experimen-
Clay bricks tal protocol as well as detecting at what range maximum overall potential can be achieved, following
Thermal properties national and international building standards. This study will also investigate three comparative tech-
Mechanical properties
niques to assess the accuracy of the predicted findings. First, a trained model using machine learning
Physicochemical properties
Linear regression
algorithm via Scikit-Learn library in Python. Second, linear regression using Microsoft Excel correlating
Machine learning model between the additive percentage and the brick’s properties. Third, three experimental testings (7.5%,
9.5%, 20.5%) will be conducted to compare the theoretically predicted properties with their respective
experimentally measured ones. Collected findings showed a good correlation between the three tech-
niques, with a percentage error in the range of 1%, reflecting the accuracy of the trained model.
Copyright Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Fifth edition of the
International Conference on Materials & Environmental Science.

1. Introduction
During this COVID-19 era, lockdown has imposed a need for
packaging material which mostly contains plastic, this has led to
an exponential increase in the demand of plastic products which
aggravates the different uncontrollable waste problems [1]. As of
2021, it is found out that 27 ± 3.8 thousand tons of plastic waste
has been generated [2]; therefore, this brings a serious threat to
our environment since plastic waste contains mainly non-
biodegradable chemical components. We must also emphasize
the fact that plastic waste has an -underrated to some extent-
potential; for instance, one of the main applications of plastic
waste in civil engineering is related to construction materials such
as clay-bricks [3,4]. In Morocco, there have been enormous and
continuous efforts when it comes to exploiting the waste potential
to the fullest. In fact, Morocco has a high capita consumption of
single use plastic goods. Before the ban on plastic bags, Moroccans
⇑ Corresponding author.
used on average 900 plastic bags yearly per capita, the second
highest consumption internationally [5]. Morocco creates 0.55MT
of plastic trash each year, and 55 percent of this trash is leaked into
nature. Leakage is mostly the result of uncollected garbage (25 per-
cent of all waste) and openly discarded garbage (36 percent of all
waste) (36 percent of all waste) [6]. The bulk of controlled waste
is deposited in landfill, but only 8 percent is recycled [7,8]. In
2016, roughly 30kT of sewage leaked in Moroccan waterways, of
which 18 percent (5kT) leaked in the Mediterranean. Morocco’s
economy loses an estimated $26 M annually related to plastic
and organic pollution, since it affects the tourist, shipping and fish-
ing economies [9,10].
Many models based on machine learning and deep learning
algorithms were previously developed aiming to forecast differ-
ent variables. For instance, a conducted study [11] implements
a tool based on the use of artificial neural networks (ANN) to
predict the solar energy generation produced by photovoltaic
generators. This tool was developed using MATLAB software, it
aims to predict the parameters involved in solar energy

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.08.218
2214-7853/Copyright Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Fifth edition of the International Conference on Materials & Environmental Science.
H. Limami, D. Guettioui, O. Dahi et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 72 (2023) 3509–3513

production. Another study [12] investigates a new method to 2. Machine learning model
forecast the compressive length of brick aggregate concrete.
This paper presents three fuzzy-metaheuristic models based 2.1. Software and libraries
on adaptive neurofuzzy inference system (ANFIS). 132 datasets
were used for this study, where the model was trained with Throughout this research project, we will be working with
80 % and 20 % of these datasets respectively. Results showed Python as it includes some libraries that are very useful when it
that the model developed can forecast the compressive length comes to Machine Learning and data manipulation. We will be
in a satisfactory range in contrast with the experimental results. mainly working with sklearn (scikit-learn), pandas and NumPy.
Ying et al [13] presents a model to predict the time-dependent Scikit-learn is a Python module including a broad range of
hydro-thermo-mechanical properties of cement-based materials. Machine Learning algorithms for supervised and unsupervised
The results show a good correlation with the experimental data. problems [19], it has a very user-friendly user interface incorpo-
Furthermore, other machine learning algorithms were used to rated within the language. It includes various classification, clus-
predict the mechanical properties of different materials where tering and regression algorithms. However, in this paper we will
the sample spaces are small. Shang et al. [14] used decision be narrowing our scope as we are going to use only some of those
trees and AdaBoost machine learning models to predict the algorithms, namely: Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Support
compressive strength and splitting tensile strength of RCA- Vector Machines (SVM) and Random Forest Regression.
based concrete. On the other hand, (Lu et al., 2021) used a Pandas is a widely used Python library, it provides some data
combination of multi-objective grey wolf optimizer (MOGWO) structures and their operations; it also allows an easy manipula-
and support vector machine (SVM) to predict composite mate- tion of numerical tables. It is used in this paper for data manipula-
rial properties where they achieved a mean absolute percentage tion from CSV files.
error of the predictions ranging from 0.14 % to 5.574 %, and NumPy is a Python library used for working with arrays and
that in some cases where factors with weak linear correlation matrices which is the case for our input vectors.
are not used as input, the accuracy may be improved. Another
approach [15] analyzed the use of an artificial neural network 2.2. Data set
model to predict the effect of elements composition and density
on compressive strength of light weight brick. The optimal ANN Our dataset that will be used to train the model is composed of
model used 8 hidden nodes and proved accuracy with mean the additive percentage which is the input, and for each percentage
square error of 0.001605667 on training data and 0.01455 on of those with a corresponding brick size, the output is a vector of
validation. The research aims to find the key factor leading to size 6 representing the 6 brick properties to be predicted. The data
the high precision of approximating the underlying elastic is composed of 30 additive percentages (from 1 to 30 %), and we
phase transition as a smooth modification of lattice entropy aim to predict values from 1 to 40 % including float values with 1
between coexisting phases. This approach provides insight into decimal place.
how the thermal properties of electrocaloric materials vary
through the transition based on strain measurements. The total 2.3. Program data flow
entropy is approximated by the lattice entropy, which is pre-
compressed into a Debye approximation. This approach provides Since the GPR gave a bad accuracy for inputs of additive greater
insight into how the thermal properties of electrocaloric mate- than 35 % because the training data stops at 30 %, we are going to
rials vary through the transition. The model accurately fits the use GPR only to predict properties of additive less or equal to 35 %,
experimentally measured stress against the temperature and and predict properties of additive 36 % and more using linear
pressure data [16]. The paper shows as mortar strength decline, regression because it gave the higher accuracy. Fig. 1 summarizes
the relationship between stress and strain becomes progres- the program data flow:
sively non-linear. The experimental findings show that the
masonry elastic modulus ranges between 82 and 231 times
the brick-lime characteristic compressive strength. Due to the
low stiffness and high deformability of lime mortar masonry,
these values are lower than those reported for cement-bonded
brickwork [17]. The aim of this research paper is to reveal that
the aggregate inclusion up to 20 % improved the compressive
and tensile strength of the blocks and the increase in strength
is by about 9.02 %-63.22 %. It can be concluded that 20 %
and 30 % aggregate induced blocks possess higher stress and
strains respectively. The optimum aggregate content varies with
the soil, aggregate, and stabilizer type and has to be determined
individually for every soil type [18].
This paper aims to improve the use of additives to optimize the
overall cost and structure of clay bricks. We will use a machine
learning model that will forecast the different properties of the
brick given an input which is the additives. We will also see the
usefulness of this model by comparing it with the classical linear
regression approach, and to what extent it can give accurate
results. The novelty of this work is enabling researchers to predict
the behavior of studied building materials before going through
the experimental investigation in order to anticipate the additive
range at which the materials’ properties are optimal. This will pro-
vide a great time and energy saving tool to focus the experimental
investigation on the optimal additives’ range. Fig. 1. ML program data flow.

3510
H. Limami, D. Guettioui, O. Dahi et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 72 (2023) 3509–3513

Table 1 assumes that
has a Gaussian distribution with a mean of 0 and

Model vs MSE.
a variance of r2 .
Model Error Random Forest SVM GPR

Nð0; r2 Þ
Training Data 0.00341 0.0587 0.0037
Testing Data 0.00641 0.0556 0.0038 The marginal likelihood of the sample data is:

pðyjX Þ Nð0; K n þ r2 IÞ
2.4. Gaussian process regression where K n is the covariance matrix of the training set, and r2 is the
variance of
.
Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) is a prediction model that is The distribution for the predictions is:
widely used for problems with small datasets. Other methods like
Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Random Forest Regression are pðy
jX
; X; yÞ Nðly
; ry
2 Þ
also used for this category of problems. However, in our case, GPR
showed a higher accuracy.
where ly
is the expectation of y
and ry
2 is its variance.
The prediction function for GPR is:
3. Results & discussion
y
¼ f ðX
Þ þ

After creating the model with the most accurate algorithm, time
where X
and y
are the input and output vectors respectively while to visualize the results. For this, we will use the medium size, with

is additive Gaussian noise. The Gaussian Process Regression all the 6 properties.

Fig. 2. Graphs of Predicted and Experimental properties.

3511
H. Limami, D. Guettioui, O. Dahi et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 72 (2023) 3509–3513

Fig. 3. Graphs of Predicted using linear regression and Experimental properties for small size.

3.1. Data splitting

Table 2
Model Values vs Experimental Values.
For model validation, we choose to split the data to ¾ for train-
Experimental values Model values Difference percentage
ing and the remaining ¼ for testing. This is because the model has a
low number of input data points. The testing data is composed of 8 31 % 31,16 % 0,16 %
inputs, of additives 3, 7, 12, 14, 18, 23, 24, 29, and the remaining 22 32 % 32,19 % 0,19 %
33 % 33,22 % 0,22 %
points are used for training. 34 % 34,25 % 0,25 %
We choose to test the model’s accuracy using the metric of 35 % 35,28 % 0,28 %
mean squared error (MSE) as described in Table 1. The results 36 % 36,31 % 0,31 %
are presented in Figs. 2, 3. 37 % 37,34 % 0,34 %
38 % 38,37 % 0,37 %
39 % 39,40 % 0,40 %
40 % 40,43 % 0,43 %
3.2. Linear regression results
41 % 41,45 % 0,45 %
42 % 42,48 % 0,48 %
Linear regression is a method that aims to model the relation- 43 % 43,51 % 0,51 %
ship between two variables by fitting a linear equation to observed 44 % 44,54 % 0,54 %
data. In the case of the experiment presented by this paper, linear 45 % 45,57 % 0,57 %
46 % 46,60 % 0,60 %
regression is used to detect the homogeneity of the model results 47 % 47,63 % 0,63 %
and the experiment’s and to test the accuracy of the model devel- The average difference 0,40 %
oped. As it is shown in the plots, the correlation between the two
methods used is very strong plus the model has proven itself that is
accurate. designed model to predict the different thermal, mechanical and
For more clarification, Table 2 illustrates both the percentages physicochemical properties of investigated clay bricks. This type
given by both the experiment and the model and it shows an aver- of model can also be generalized for different building materials
age of difference of 0.40 % that denotes the success of the develop- such as blocks, mortar, fired bricks etc. to enable predicting the
ment of the model. building materials’ different properties as a function of the additive
Collected results in Table 2 showed a good correlation between percentage incorporated. In addition, the prediction is found to be
experimental results and theoretically predicted ones with very accurate up to a 17 % added additive range (from 30 % to 47 %),
low different percentages. This reflects the accuracy of the reflecting the flexibility of used model.

3512
H. Limami, D. Guettioui, O. Dahi et al.
4. Conclusion
This paper analysed the modelling of a forecasting technique to
predict building materials’ different properties and assess their
performances and potential as construction structures. The main
conclusions drawn from this work are as follow:
 Plastic pollution costs Morocco’s economy an estimated $26
million each year. Most chemical components in plastic garbage
are non-biodegradable. Therefore, the best approach to deal
with issue is to consider recycling such as the method of the
clay bricks stated above.
 The models and the linear regression aim to predict brick sam-
ples’ properties at different plastic waste additive percentages.
The results of both methods show a remarkable success of the
model, with prominent accuracy indicators of 0.40 %, which will
be helpful in encouraging the ecological and green initiative.
 The main drawn conclusion from this work is investigating the
suitability of having buildings that will meet the international
standards as well as reducing the plastics waste and promoting
a great start for cleaner world as a result.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Houssame Limami: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software.
Doha Guettioui: Visualization. Othmane Dahi: Data curation. El
Mehdi El Boustani: Writing – review & editing. Imad Manssouri:
Investigation. Aymane El Alami: Investigation. Asmae Khaldoun:
Supervision, Validation.
Data availability
All used data is presented in the article.
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.
3513
Materials Today: Proceedings 72 (2023) 3509–3513
Acknowledgements
This research has been conducted under the framework of the
Project ABC 21 (Africa-Europe BioClimatic buildings for XXI cen-
tury), funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research
and Innovation Program , Morocco, Grant agreement no. 894712
References
[1] H. Limami, I. Manssouri, K. Cherkaoui, A. Khaldoun, J. Build. Eng. 27 (2020)
100956.
[2] H. Limami, I. Manssouri, K. Cherkaoui, M. Saadaoui, A. Khaldoun, J. Build. Eng.
(2020) 101251.
[3] E.M. Saidi, A. El Baraka, H. Limami, A. Khaldoun, Design of an Efficient
Insulation System for a House in Zaouiat Sidi Abdeslam, 2019.
[4] H. Limami, I. Manssouri, K. Cherkaoui, L. Amazian, A. El Baraka, A. Khaldoun,
Unfired Clay Bricks with Additives and Mechanical Simulation of Perforated
Bricks, 2019
[5] American Chemistry Council; Association of Plastic Recyclers, National
Postconsumer Plastic Recycling Report, 2017
[6] H. Limami, I. Manssouri, K. Cherkaoui, A. Khaldoun, Clean. Eng. Technol. 2
(2021) 100050.
[7] H. Limami, I. Manssouri, K. Cherkaoui, A. Khaldoun, Clean. Eng. Technol. 2
(2021) 100037.
[8] L. Houssame, M. Imad, C. Khalid, K. Asmae, J. Energy Eng. 147 (2021) 4021020.
[9] H. Limami, I. Manssouri, O. Noureddine, Y. Lehleh, K. Cherkaoui, S. Erba, H.
Sahbi, A. Khaldoun, Int. J. Thermophys. (n.d.).
[10] H. Limami, I. Manssouri, K. Cherkaoui, A. Khaldoun, J. Build. Eng. (2020)
101867.
[11] F. Rodríguez, A. Fleetwood, A. Galarza, L. Fontán, Renew. Energy 126 (2018)
855–864.
[12] W.M. Shaban, J. Yang, K. Elbaz, J. Xie, L. Li, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 169 (2021)
105443.
[13] W. Ying, G. Zhang, Q. Liu, Y. Yang, Constr. Build. Mater. 276 (2021) 122155.
[14] M. Shang, H. Li, A. Ahmad, W. Ahmad, K.A. Ostrowski, F. Aslam, P. Joyklad, T.M.
Majka, Materials (Basel) 15 (2022) 647.
[15] Z. kifli, M. Absa, A. Musyafa, Asian J. Appl. Sci. (2017).
[16] L.D. Griffith, B.P. Alho, A. Czernuszewicz, P.O. Ribeiro, J. Slaughter, V.K.
Pecharsky, Acta Mater. 217 (2021) 117162.
[17] A. Costigan, S. Pavía, O. Kinnane, J. Build. Eng. 4 (2015) 283–294.
[18] S.S.D. Raavi, D.D. Tripura, Constr. Build. Mater. 298 (2021) 123840.
[19] F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, J. Mach. Learn
Res. (2011).