Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Properties and environmental impact of the mosaic sludge incorporated

into fired clay bricks
Noor Amira Sarani a, Aeslina Abdul Kadir a,⇑, Ahmad Shayuti Abdul Rahim a, Abbas Mohajerani b
a
Department of Water and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, 86400 Batu Pahat, Johor, Malaysia
b
School of Civil, Environmental and Chemical Engineering, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

h i g h l i g h t s

 Comparison between clay brick and mosaic brick were made at different ratio waste.
 The effects of physical and mechanical properties were examined.
 We analyzed the environmental leaching effects from manufactured brick.
 Gases emit from manufactured brick were identified through indoor air quality test.
 Indoor air quality test was done with controlled temperature and relative humidity.

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

Article history: This paper presents fundamental information on the utlization of mosaic sludge waste from industrial
Received 25 November 2017 mosaic activities into building materials. The study greatly benefits solid waste management and indus-
Received in revised form 12 May 2018 tries that produce waste with high heavy metal concentration by providing insights on ways to dispose
Accepted 19 June 2018
waste by minimizing heavy metal leaching potential whilst providing a new formulation of low-cost and
environmentally friendly building materials. Therefore, an alternative disposal method is to incorporate
mosaic waste such as bodymill sludge (BS) and polishing sludge (PS) into fired clay brick. The bricks were
Keywords:
incorporated with different percentages (0%, 1%, 5%, 10%, 20% and 30% by weight) of sludge waste and
Fired clay brick
Mosaic sludge
fired at 1050 °C (0.7 °C/min heating rates). The optimization results showed that the incorporation of
Physical and mechanical properties up to 30% of mosaic sludge into fired clay bricks is capable of improving its physical and mechanical prop-
Leachability erties. Moreover, the incorporation of mosaic sludge waste into clay bricks has a positive effect on firing
Indoor air quality shrinkage, density and compressive strength. However, a decreased performance was reported for certain
Building material aspects. Hence, this study demonstrated that BS and PS can be alternative low-cost and environmentally
friendly which can be used to improve the physical and mechanical properties of fired clay bricks.
Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction moisture. Glaze and screening applications are important stages

Mosaic is known as small coloured pieces made of hard materi-
als such as stones or glass. It is made to provide a durable form of
decoration for walls and pavements. Today, mosaics are usually
made of clay, sand, feldspar, quartz and water [1]. The raw material
is mixed with water before transforming into a slurry mixture. The
slurry is transferred to a storage tank fitted with an atomizer which
turns into atomized powder after being blown by hot air. The
powder slurry is then moved to a tray and pressed by a hydraulic
press which eventually transforms powder into a solid mass. After
a while, the drying process is performed to remove the remaining
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: aeslina@uthm.edu.my (A.A. Kadir).
because they will provide aesthetic beauty, water repellency,
durability and hygienic properties of mosaic. Once the glaze has
been applied, the mosaic was fired in a kiln at a temperature of
1050 °C to 1300 °C [2].
During the fabrication process of mosaic, various types of
wastes including sludge, dust and solid waste are generated. How-
ever, only mosaic sludge, namely bodymill sludge and polishing
sludge was used in this study. Bodymill sludge comes from the
body milling process during tiles manufacturing. The process
involves crushing hard materials and dry mill. Throughout the
process, the mill continues to be stored in an underground tank.
The tile-colouring process also occurs during this stage. Waste
water produced during the milling process is handled into a
recovery tank and wastewater treatment plant for treatment. The

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.06.171
0950-0618/Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310 301

residue that remains is called bodymill sludge. Concurrently, pol-

ishing sludge is produced during the polishing process. During this
stage, a few procedures such as glazing and printing take place.
Finishing tiles are subjected to glaze in order to give texture to
the colours in ceramic tiles. Therefore, a large amount of water is
used to complete the process. Excess water from this process is
transferred to a recovery tank and treated at a wastewater treat-
ment plant. The residue on this process is called polishing sludge.
Globally, 119 thousand tons of industrial sludge (in dry sub-
stances) is generated annually from industrial activities. These
include mineral sludge, heavy metal sludge, dross, slag, clinical
waste, clinker, ash, gypsum, oil and hydrocarbon [3]. It is expected
that the amount of sludge produced is quite high compared to
other types of waste. Due to the huge amounts of industrial sludge
generated, an alternative disposal method is essential as landfills
are no longer an ideal disposal method for this type of waste [4].
In addition, landfills have also been regarded as one of the contrib-
utors to the negative impact on the environment [5]. Therefore, an
alternative disposal method for sewage sludge is highly required
because most landfills are no longer effective for the disposal of
this hazardous waste. Another concern is that industrial sludge
could be in either organic or inorganic form [6,7]. Inorganic content
is always threat because harmful heavy metals which require spe-
Fig. 1. Mosaic sludge.
cial treatment to avoid environmental pollution [8]. Additionally,
mosaic sludge usually contains chemical pollutants from mosaic
colouring substances which will lead to environmental pollution
if it is not managed in a proper manner.
tests, which include the Atterberg Limit test, specific gravity test,
Due to high demand, the flexibility and success of sludge waste
standard proctor test and loss of ignition are carried out to deter-
incorporation into fired clay bricks, more and more researchers are
mine the general characteristics of raw materials used in this
driven to further investigate the potential of different types of sludge
study. The Atterberg limit and specific gravity were determined
to be incorporated into bricks. Recycling and reusing sludge by
according to BS 1377-2 [16] while a standard proctor test was per-
incorporating them into fired clay brick could improve brick proper-
formed to determine the optimum moisture content (OMC) of con-
ties and offer environmentally-friendly disposal alternative. Exam-
trol bricks and clay-sludge bricks in accordance with BS 1377-4
ples of sludge include marble sludge and stone sludge [9], water
[17]. The loss of ignition was determined by igniting raw materials
treatment sludge [10,11], sewage sludge [12,13] and textile sludge
at 1000 °C in a laboratory furnace for 4 h in accordance with BS
[14]. Researchers have found that the incorporation of sludge waste
1377-3 [18].
into fired clay a brick helps reduce transportation and handling
costs. Moreover, this method is also able to reduce clay content in
2.3. Methods for the preparation of brick samples
fired clay bricks which results in lower manufacturing cost [15].
Nevertheless, most researchers only focus on the physical and
Two types of bricks were manufactured, namely control bricks
mechanical properties of bricks. There is a lack of investigation so
and clay-mosaic sludge bricks. The control brick was designed
far on the use of mosaic sludge waste as an alternative material in
without sludge material (0%) while the clay-mosaic sludge brick
brick production especially from the environmental aspect. Conse-
was formulated with different sludge content (1%, 5%, 10%, 20%
quently, this study attempts to investigate the utilization of mosaic
and 30% by weight) as tabulated in Table 1. The bricks were man-
sludge for low-cost brick production in terms of physical, mechani-
ufactured by mixing clay soil with different mosaic sludge content
cal and environmental impacts on indoor air quality.
with a predetermined amount of water in a 10 L mechanical mixer.
After the mixture was satisfactorily homogenized, it was
2. Materials and methods compressed into mould with the following size; 215 mm 
102.5 mm  65 mm and compressed at 3000 psi. The bricks were
2.1. Raw materials and their preparation then dried at room temperature for 24 h to reduce its initial mois-
ture content then dried for another 24 h in a ventilated oven at
Mosaic sludge waste was obtained from the mosaic industry 105 °C. Proper drying is compulsory as it allows a slow loss of
located in Johor, Malaysia. The mosaic sludge was collected in a moisture from the bricks without disintegration. After that, the
semi-solid condition (Fig. 1). Meanwhile, clay soil was supplied bricks were fired in the furnace and gradually heated at
by a brick company located in Johor, Malaysia. The mosaic sludge
and clay soil were kept properly in a closed container before being
used. Upon delivery, the clay soil and mosaic sludge were oven
Table 1
dried at 105 °C for 24 h. Both were grounded and crushed manually Mixture identification of mosaic sludge brick.
and sieved with sieve sizes from 3 mm to 5 mm to yield a homoge-
neous size distribution. Mixture Clay (g) Sludge (g) Water (mL)
CB-0% 3000 0 450
BS/PS-1% 2970 30 480
2.2. Chemical and geotechnical properties BS/PS-5% 2850 150 520
BS/PS-10% 2700 300 540
The chemical composition of raw materials was tested using the BS/PS-20% 2400 600 570
BS/PS-30% 2100 900 600
X-ray fluorescence method (XRF, Philips, PW1840). Geotechnical
302 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310

0.7 °C/min until a final temperature of 1050 °C. The heating rate
and firing temperature were selected based on the current
industrial practice which is widely used for firing bricks. Moreover,
several studies have reported that the ideal firing temperature of
1050 °C could reach the optimum vitrification point thus produc-
ing bricks with high strength through particle bonding and densi-
fication [19–21]. Therefore, the final results obtained in this study
could be comparable to common bricks in the industry. The same
method was also applied for the control bricks with 0% of waste,
which prepared for control purposed.

2.4. Testing Procedure.

Microstructure characteristic and surface area analyses were

performed using an SEM machine (ZEISS EVO LS10, Germany)
and a Brunauer Emmett Teller (BET) Machine (Micrometric ASAP
2020, USA). The physical and mechanical properties of the speci-
mens such as shrinkage, density, initial rate of suction [22] and
compressive strength [23] were tested.
The leachability test was carried out according to the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) as described in Method
1311 [24], the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP)
as described in Method 1312 [25] and the Static Leachate Proce-
dure (SLT) modified from USEPA Method 1312 [25]. The leachabil-
ity test was prepared to meet the requirements by United State
Environment Protection Agency [26] and Environment Protection
Agency Victoria [27]. The Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Proce-
dure (TCLP) was conducted to stimulate the potential of brick to
release toxic constituents in sanitary landfills and to classify
wastes according to their toxicity level. To meet the 1:20 solid-
to-liquid ratio as required by the method, 20 g of the sample was
placed in a 500 mL high-density polyethylene plastic bottle with
400 mL of extraction fluid. The extraction fluid used in this study
was glacial acetic acid. Meanwhile, the Synthetic Precipitation
Leaching Procedure (SPLP) leaching fluid stimulates the condition
of clay bricks exposed to acid rain. It was conducted by diluting
sulfuric and nitric acid (60/40 wt% mixture) H2SO4/HNO3 in dis-
tilled water until the pH was 4.2 ± 0.05. Both TCLP and SPLP sam-
ples were agitated in a rotary extractor end-to-end at 30 rpm for
18 ± 2 h (at 22 °C to 24 °C) (Fig. 2a). After an agitation period, the
extraction of the sample mixture was filtered through a 0.7 mm
glass fiber filter. Finally, the samples were analyzed for heavy
metal content using Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrome-
ter (ICPMS).
The Static Leachate test in Fig. 2b, also known as a non-agitated
extraction test, was conducted to check the maximum concentra-
tion of leachate in static condition without renewing and changing
the leachate (SPLP leachate fluid with a pH of 4.2 ± 0.05) [26]. The
samples were in solid condition without being pulverized as they
tend to be more representative of actual field conditions [28]. In Fig. 2. Set up for a) TCLP and SPLP test, b) Static Leachate Procedure (SLT) test.
general, SLT is conducted for long-term durations ranging for more
than three months up to one year where data is collected
continuously. 3. Results and discussion
Indoor air quality (IAQ) is the quality of air inside a building
related to resident or inmate health and comfort due to chemical, 3.1. Properties of raw materials
physical and biological contamination. IAQ was conducted in Walk
in Stability Chamber (WiSC) to evaluate the performance of the Table 2 shows the chemical composition of raw materials used
bricks according to the European Standard by Determination of in this study. As shown in Table 2, the chemical composition clay
the Emission of Volatile Organic Compound from Building Products soil and mosaic sludge exhibited a high percentage of silica
and Furnishing-Emission Test Chamber Method [29]. The temper- (SiO2), alumina (Al2O3) and ferric oxide (Fe2O3) which was consis-
ature and relative humidity are set at 25 °C and 52% respectively tent with the results of previous studies where the presence of sil-
according to the standards [30]. The building prototype sample ica and alumina in raw materials can improve brick refractoriness
of fired clay bricks were built in cube patterns (Fig. 3a), column and increase the mechanical strength of bricks [31,32]. Meanwhile,
patterns (Fig. 3b) and wall patterns (Fig. 3c) which represent the a significant amount of ferric oxide contributes to the reddish
most common patterns of building structures. colour of bricks after firing. Besides these main compositions, the
 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310 303

Table 2
Chemical composition of raw materials.

Oxide Raw clay soil (%) Bodymill sludge Polishing sludge

content (%) (%)
SiO2 55.77 62.37 61.83
Al2O3 24.40 20.55 15.50
Fe2O3 5.06 1.05 2.28
CaO 0.25 1.08 1.18
MgO 1.20 1.35 1.45
K2O 1.93 1.02 2.06
Na2O 0.30 1.40 2.30
LOI 7.72 7.01 7.92

The loss on ignition (LOI) values (Table 2) showed that clay soil,
BS and PS contained high organic matter of about 7.72%, 7.01% and
7.92%, respectively. With respect to the chemical composition
obtained, both types of mosaic sludges were categorized as organic
sludge.
The concentrations of trace heavy metals in the raw materials
are recorded in Table 3. The results indicate that raw materials
contain a certain amount of heavy metals such as Zr, Ba, Cr, Fe,
Cu, Zn, Mn, V, As and Ni. As aforementioned, the level of heavy
metal concentration in raw materials differs due to the chemical
composition of raw materials and different processing technique.
In some cases, the presence of heavy metal is also affected by the
amount of SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O, CaO and MgO, as reported by [37].
The BS and PS contained Zr of up to 2507 ppm and 2738 ppm,
respectively compared to clay soil (358 ppm). This high Zr content
might be due to the manufacturing process of mosaics in the cera-
mic industry. Meanwhile, BS (1232 ppm) and PS (1242 ppm) also
recorded higher Ba concentrations compared to clay soil (179
ppm). Similar to other metal elements, BS and PS seem to dominate
almost all metal elements detected such as Cu, Zn, Mn, As, and Ni
except for Fe and V. This was due to the different colouring and
glazing procedures of the PS mosaic during the manufacturing pro-
cess. On the other hand, the presence of Fe and V in clay soil was
due to the natural properties of clay itself. Thus, some elements
such as Cd, Mn, Fe, Cr, Cu, Pb, V, Ni, Zn, As and Ba exceeded the
standard set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
[26] and Environment Protection Agency Victoria [27]. Therefore,
some improvements need to be done to reduce the heavy metal
concentration in waste sludge in a sustainable way.
The geotechnical properties of clay soil used in this study are
presented in Table 4. From this data, the liquid limit for clay soil
was 28.7% while the plasticity index was 13.4%. The results
obtained in this study were in good agreement with the recom-
mendation by technical memorandum on small-scale brickmaking,
which suggested that good clay brick must have an ideal Atterberg
limit value in the range of 12% to 22% (plastic limit) and 7% to 18%

Table 3
Heavy metals of raw materials.

Heavy Clay soil Bodymill Polishing USEPA EPAV

metals (ppm) sludge (BS) sludge (PS) (ppm) (ppm)
(ppm) (ppm)
Zr 358 2507 2738 n.a n.a
Fig. 3. Prototype of a) cube pattern; b) column pattern and c) wall pattern. Ba 179 1232 1242 100 280
Cr 30 971 915 1.3 8
Fe 556 105 136 5 2.8
presence of minor components in terms of fluxing agents (K2O,
Cu 15 234 255 100 800
CaO, Na2O and MgO) effectively reduce energy consumption dur- Zn 22 195 210 500 1200
ing firing by decreasing the firing temperature, similar to that Mn 90 97 89 n.a n.a
reported in previous studies [33,34]. Although the chemical com- V 57 35 36 n.a n.a
As 11 30 26 5 20
position of raw materials used in this study is slightly different,
Ni 5 29 29 1.3 8
there is a great potential for sludge to be incorporated into clay
bricks due to the clay flexibility [31,35,36]. n.a : not available.
304 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310

Table 4 who incorporated textile sludge into clay bricks and found that a
Geotechnical properties of raw clay soil. good quality brick must have shrinkage below 8%. Furthermore,
Properties Clay soil Karaman, Ersahin & Gunal [41] also claimed that the drying and
Specific gravity 2.6 (Clay soil), 2.4 (sludge) firing of the brick influence shrinkage behaviours.
Liquid limit (%) 28.7 The trend in Fig. 5 shows that the dry density of manufactured
Plastic limit (%) 15.3 bricks decreases with the increasing sludge content. The dry den-
Plasticity index (%) 13.4 sity for all bricks tested showed values between 1665 kg/m3 to
Degree of plasticity Medium plastic
Type of soil Silt clay or clayey silt
1698 kg/m3 for BS brick and 1661 kg/m3 to 1698 kg/m3 for PS brick
(Table 5). BS-30% and PS-30% showed the lowest density at 1665
kg/m3 and 1661 kg/m3, respectively. This trend was supported by
previous studies which indicated that the incorporation of waste
(plasticity index) [38]. Therefore, the clay used in this study was
in the production of bricks could reduce its weight [42,43]. Weng
classified as silty clay with a medium degree of plasticity.
et al. [42] revealed that the particle density of bricks is inversely
proportional to the quantity of sludge added into the mixture. As
3.2. Mechanical properties of manufactured bricks a result, the mixture absorbs more water due to a larger pore size
in bricks, resulting in lightweight density. Other than that, the
Firing shrinkage is defined as the contraction of a hardened specific gravity (SG) value of waste materials also contributes to
mixture due to the loss of capillary water. Shrinkage rate normally lower density [41]. The SG result in Table 4 for clay soil was found
depends on a few factors. These factors include the characteristics to be higher compared to sludge waste. Therefore the incorpora-
of the ingredient, the proportion of the ingredient, processing man- tion of sludge into clay brick is able to produce lighter bricks. Other
ner, amount of moisture content and dry condition [39]. In this than the above, the development of microstructure inside the brick
study, firing shrinkage was calculated after bricks were fired at body also influences the density of bricks. In this study, the devel-
1050 °C. The results show that the lowest shrinkage percentage opment of mesopores in the brick body was measured using the
occurred at BS-1% and PS-1% at about 0.26% and 0.27% (Table 5). Brunauer Emmett Teller (BET) test. The results showed that the
Low firing shrinkage is the main requirement to determine the qual- pore size of clay-sludge brick body was smaller compared to the
ity of bricks. Meanwhile, the trend of shrinkage is shown in Fig. 4 pore size of control brick. Nevertheless, the volume of the cumula-
where the percentage of shrinkage increased proportionally with tive pores was higher at 0.005 cm3/g compared to control bricks at
the increment of sludge content. For instance, BS-20% and PS-20% only 0.002 cm3/g. The advantages of lightweight fired clay bricks in
produced shrinkage up to 0.67% and 0.65%, respectively. The same construction include lower structure dead load, lower transport
trend has also been reported by Baskar, Begum & Sundaram [40] costs, lower thermal conductivity, easier handling, and higher pro-
ductivity as more bricks can be produced per ton of raw materials
[44–47].
Table 5
Summary of test results on control brick and mosaic sludge brick.
The initial rate of suction (IRS) is also a crucial factor that affects
the durability of bricks. Table 5 showed that the manufactured BS
Bricks Firing Dry Initial rate of Compressive and PS bricks recorded a lower value of IRS when they were incor-
shrinkage density suction strength
% kg/m3 g/mm2 MPa
porated with a high content of mosaic sludge waste. The trend in
Fig. 6 shows that IRS decreases with increasing sludge content.
CB-0% 0.20 1698 12.9 15.3
The utilization of mosaic sludge waste up to 30% decreased the
BS-1% 0.26 1688 12.7 17.9
BS-5% 0.31 1683 7.9 24.8 IRS value significantly from 12.65 g/mm2 to 3.75 g/mm2. Based
BS-10% 0.52 1679 7.5 25.8 on the BET test results, the average pore sizes of mosaic sludge
BS-20% 0.67 1677 4.0 26.2 were significantly smaller at 13.396 nm for BS-30% and 15.918
BS-30% 0.56 1665 3.9 26.6
nm for PS-30% compared to CB-0% which had a pore size of
PS-1% 0.27 1690 11.6 15.4
PS-5% 0.31 1689 9.4 19.5
123.221 nm. Therefore, bricks with a higher pore size absorb more
PS-10% 0.54 1687 8.5 19.8 water compared to bricks with low porosity. This phenomenon is
PS-20% 0.65 1678 4.4 21.9 due to the pore formation getting smaller and most of the macro-
PS-30% 0.60 1661 3.8 23.5 pores turning into micropores [48]. As investigated by Jahagirdar
et al. [49], general increase in the number of pores developing

Fig. 4. Firing shrinkage of clay brick as a funtion of sludge content. Fig. 5. Dry density of clay brick as a funtion of sludge content.
 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310
Fig. 6. Initial rate of suction of clay brick as a funtion of sludge content.
inside a brick normally result from organic matter volatilization
during the firing process. Similar to a study by Alonso et al. [19],
recycling sludge in the production of ceramic bricks will lower
IRS to below 3% because of the ceramization process that reduces
pore size production.
The trend in Fig. 7 shows that the compressive strength value
increases with the increment of mosaic sludge content in bricks.
From Table 5, the highest compressive strength of 26.58 MPa was
obtained by BS-30%. The increment in compressive strength value
in brick manufacturing is due to the crystallization process of clay
minerals during the firing process [50,51]. In fact, increasing the
sludge ratio in general would decrease the development of macro-
pores and thus increase the compressive strength value of the sam-
ples. The same trend was also reported by Hegazy et al. [52] who
found that increasing the amount of sludge into fired clay brick
would also increase the value of compressive strength.
3.3. Microstructure analysis of bricks
SEM was conducted to obtain a better understanding of the
influence of microstructure on porosity. Fig. 8 illustrates the SEM
images of the control bricks and mosaic sludge bricks (BS and PS)
according to the percentage ratio. Overall, it was found that the
surface structure appearances of the brick incorporated with
mosaic sludge were finer compared to CB-0% (Fig. 8a). Further-
more, the images illustrate more coarse surfaces of bricks with
0% (Fig. 8a), 1% (Fig. 8b), 5% (Fig. 8c) and 10% (Fig. 8d) sludge
compared to bricks with 20% (Fig. 8e) and 30% (Fig. 8f) sludge.
Fig. 7. Compressive strentgh of clay brick as a funtion of sludge content.
305
CB-0% showed pore sizes between 45 mm and 50 mm. The BS brick
containing 1% to 10% of sludge had pore size between 18 mm and
44 mm. Meanwhile, for bricks containing 20% and 30% of sludge,
the pore sizes were between 1.9 mm and 3 mm.
The PS brick showed the same trend where the incorporation 1%
to 10% (Fig. 8g to Fig. 8i) of sludge into clay bricks resulted in larger
pore sizes compared to PS-20% (Fig. 8j) and PS-30% (Fig. 8k). This
was because the texture of mosaic sludge powder is finer com-
pared to clay soil and this enables the mosaic sludge to cover
and fill gaps between the clay soils in the mixture [53]. In this
state, the mosaic sludge bricks (20% and 30%) have a smooth sur-
face but the texture is brighter and there is less cohesion between
the soil particles. Furthermore, BS and PS bricks incorporated with
up to 40% of sludge during the preliminary test disintegrated after
firing which was similar to the study done by Ingunza et al. [54]
which reported that the bricks containing up to 35% of sludge were
very brittle and fractured in handling.
A BET test was conducted to understand the specific surface
area of bricks via nitrogen absorption. The average pore sizes of
mosaic sludge were significantly smaller up to 13.40 nm for BS-
30% and 15.92 nm for PS-30% compared to CB-0% at 123.22 nm.
Consequently, BS-30% and PS-30% are categorized as mesoporous
(pore size 2 nm to 50 nm) while the control bricks were catego-
rized as macroporous as they have a pore size greater than 50
nm [55]. However, the volume of the cumulative pores of BS and
PS bricks was higher at about 0.005 cm3/g compared to control
bricks (0.002 cm3/g). Due to these mesaporous formations, the
bricks become lighter and in the meantime produce higher
strength after being incorporated with 30% of BS and PS.
3.4. Leachability analysis of bricks
The Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure and Synthetic
Precipitation Leaching Procedure were carried out on crushed sam-
ples in a short-term period while the Static Leaching Procedure
was applied in a long-term period which is up to 95 days using
whole solid brick samples. The selection of heavy metals (V, Cr,
Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, As, Ba, Cd, Mn, Fe and Pb) in this study was adapted
from previous research [56,57].
The results in Tables 6 and 7 showed that several parameters of
heavy metals in CB-0%, BS bricks and PS bricks incorporated with
1% to 30% were below 1 mg/L for both TCLP and SPLP testing meth-
ods. The results were found to have decreased when the bricks
were incorporated with up to 30% of sewage sludge which were
also consistent with the results by Geric et al. [58]. Most of the
heavy metals were oxidized at higher temperatures during the fir-
ing process which eventually reduced the toxicity level in the
bricks [37,59,60]. According to Lin et al. [61] and Yassien et al.
[20], heavy metals can be immobilized at a high firing temperature
during the manufacturing of bricks. Other than that, high silica
content in raw materials had reduced heavy metal leachate in
bricks. Kuo et al. [62] mentioned that the presence of silica could
enhance the formation of bonding and contributes to metal immo-
bilization. The pH of leachate during TCLP and SPLP tests also con-
tributed to the reduction of heavy metals in leachate [63,64].
Meanwhile, the comparison between the heavy metals concen-
tration levels in the TCLP and SPLP tests were described in Fig. 9 for
bricks incorporated with 0% and 30% of sludge waste. The TCLP
results showed that the heavy metal leached was higher compared
to the SPLP results due to the different acid used. The TCLP test
used acetic acid in the fluid reagent which causes the heavy metals
to bind and leach more [65].
The SLT tests showed that by incorporating mosaic sludge up to
30% into fired clay bricks, the V concentration increases up to
3 mg/L but then decreases and remain constant untill day 95.
Vanadium is a common element that normally occurs in clay as a
306 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310
complex mineral which is used for colour production [66]. Similar
to V, another element that appears in most of bricks is Fe. Based on
the XRF results, the Fe element in clay soil was higher compared to
BS and PS sludge. The main function of Fe is to increase the imper-
meability and durability of bricks [67]. This situation could be due
to the reaction between the leaching fluid and the brick samples.
The trend has shown that the heavy metal started to leach out of
the samples in the first few weeks continued to decrease further
until day 95. According to Stringfellow et al. [68], this process is
called an active phase where it decreases to the end of the phase
because of the maturing progress. Founded by Zorpas [69], the
heavy metal concentration was reduced by exposing the sludge
to acid fluid for an extended period of time. In addition, Zorpas
[69] also mentioned that the changes in heavy metal concentra-
tions depend on metal loss through leaching activities and organic
matter destruction. Qio and Ho [70] and Liu et al. [71] claimed at
increasing pH values could reduce the exchangeable metal concen-
tration in brick samples due to ion-exchange. According to the SLT
results, there was an increase in pH from 4.28 to 6.00 but the acidic
condition remained. In summary, most of the elements in short-
term and long-term tests were identified as Va, Fe, As, Ba and Zn.
Thus, by incorporating mosaic sludge into fired clay bricks, the
concentration of heavy metals complied with the USEPA and EPAV
45.71µm
50.21µm
46.75µm
44.79µm
(a)
29.67µm
35.23µm
40.80µm
38.94µm
(c)
3.217µm
3.217µm
3.313µm
3.412µm
(e)
Fig. 8. SEM result of mosaic sludge waste as a brick materials. a) CB-0%, b) BS-1%, c) BS-5%, d) BS-10%, e) BS-20%, f) BS-30%, g) PS-1%, h) PS-5%, i) PS-10%, j) PS-20%, k) PS-30%
standards, except for the SPLP result which did not fulfill the WHO
requirements.
3.5. Indoor air quality analysis of bricks
Currently, providing a comfortable, safe and healthy indoor air
quality is a requirement which has become a major concern. Incor-
porating mosaic sludge (BS and PS) into fired clay bricks resulted in
better air quality compared to control bricks. The bricks incorpo-
rated with 5% and 30% both types of sludge were selected during
the IAQ testing since they yielded better performance in terms of
physical and mechanical properties. Different patterns of fired clay
bricks (cube, wall and column) which are common building pat-
terns for brick structure were tested [71]. Therefore, Total Volatile
Organic Compound (TVOC), Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Carbon Monox-
ide (CO), Ozone (O3), Formaldehyde (HCHO) and Particulate Matter
(PM10) were measured as they are listed in the Industry Code of
Practice on Indoor Air Quality Standard [30]. All the results
obtained from the analysis are presented in Table 8.
Based on the Industry Code of Practice on Indoor Air Quality
standard, all the brick samples complied with the standard
requirements. As for the TVOC analysis, the results showed that
the amount of TVOC was not significantly different between
33.70µm
44.94µm
44.07µm
43.07µm
(b )
18.54µm
27.82µm
18.54µm
22.25µm
(d )
1.997µm
2.552µm
2.219µm
2.419µm
(f)
 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310 307

35.70µm
34.42µm

29.96µm
40.85µm
33.42µm
55.71µm 33.70µm

35.58µm

(g) (h )

4.549µm

24.47µm 6.213µm
26.13µm

4.882µm
31.73µm
32.73µm 5.325µm

(i) (j)

1.313µm

2.995µm

2.895µm

2.627µm

(k)
Fig. 8 (continued)

Table 6
Heavy metals leachability concentration using TCLP method.

Heavy metals Control Brick Bodymill sludge brick (BS) (ppm) Polishing sludge brick (PS) (ppm)
0% 1% 5% 10% 20% 30% 1% 5% 10% 20% 30%
V 0.512 0.419 0.330 0.015 0.238 0.204 0.217 0.128 0.357 0.089 0.124
Cr 0.020 0.023 0.023 0.058 0.012 0.001 0.009 0.008 0.025 0.019 0.010
Co 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.030 0.002 0.003 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.002
Ni 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.008 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.002
Cu 0.014 0.013 0.017 0.084 0.006 0.011 0.008 0.010 0.010 0.018 0.022
Zn 0.353 0.268 0.242 0.504 0.163 0.292 0.263 0.108 0.395 0.117 0.123
As 0.296 0.443 0.343 0.011 0.077 0.085 0.187 0.130 0.416 0.152 0.059
Ba 0.448 0.196 0.312 0.379 0.237 0.317 0.231 0.127 0.306 0.092 0.223
Cd 0.017 0.024 0.024 0.028 0.029 0.035 0.020 0.022 0.024 0.024 0.026
Mn 0.174 0.072 0.142 0.243 0.095 0.000 0.068 0.009 0.077 0.059 0.065
Fe 0.196 0.035 0.239 0.652 0.019 0.000 0.068 0.217 0.235 0.099 0.095
Pb 0.065 0.060 0.029 0.019 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.099 0.002 0.003

control bricks, BS bricks and PS Bricks. This could occur when the
organic compounds that exist in brick were eliminated during
the firing process. All emission of TVOC gases recorded was below
the required limit. The CO2 analysis revealed that BS-30% was more
acceptable and outstanding compared to the control bricks since
all patterns showed lower concentration values. Meanwhile, the
analysis of the CO results recommended that the CO value of BS-
30% in a wall pattern was more stable than other patterns. In the
meantime, the analysis for O3 revealed that the results for all types
of bricks were lower compared to the standard limit. BS-5% in a
308 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310

Table 7
Heavy metals leachability concentration using SPLP method.

Heavy metals Control Brick Bodymill sludge brick (BS) (ppm) Polishing sludge brick (PS) (ppm)
0% 1% 5% 10% 20% 30% 1% 5% 10% 20% 30%
V 0.634 0.353 0.204 0.007 0.218 0.133 0.229 0.137 0.137 0.088 0.214
Cr 0.015 0.002 0.000 0.021 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.004 0.001
Co 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000
Ni 0.009 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.001 0.008 0.001
Cu 0.008 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.004 0.001 0.003 0.003
Zn 0.651 0.427 0.173 0.171 0.132 0.126 0.146 0.145 0.024 0.117 0.146
As 0.156 0.201 0.115 0.002 0.038 0.023 0.108 0.089 0.077 0.081 0.032
Ba 0.430 0.248 0.204 0.192 0.154 0.148 0.140 0.152 0.025 0.113 0.145
Cd 0.014 0.016 0.019 0.022 0.024 0.030 0.017 0.020 0.021 0.022 0.026
Mn 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.024 0.160 0.013 0.021 0.021 0.026 0.027
Fe 0.055 0.042 0.043 0.052 0.039 0.056 0.002 0.008 0.028 0.037 0.029
Pb 0.031 0.023 0.022 0.018 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.044 0.002 0.001

Fig. 9. Comparison between TCLP and SPLP test on CB-0% and mosaic sludge brick (30%).

Table 8
Summary of gas emission in terms of indoor air quality.

Parameter Pattern Units Acceptable Limit Control Brick BS Brick BS Brick PS Brick PS Brick
0% 5% 30% 5% 30%
TVOC Wall ppm 3 0.67 0.72 0.63 0.69 0.82
Column 0.58 0.68 0.80 0.72 0.90
Cube 0.92 0.71 0.91 0.63 0.63
CO2 Wall ppm 1000 381 342 323 337 329
Column 357 330 330 334 329
Cube 349 342 340 329 334
CO Wall ppm 10 0.18 0.08 0.01 0.09 0.07
Column 0.20 0.11 0.05 0.08 0.05
Cube 0.18 0.08 0.04 0.07 0.04
O3 Wall ppm 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02
Column 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02
Cube 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03
HCHO Wall ppm 0.1 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02
Column 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Cube 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
PM10 Wall mg/m3 0.15 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.13
Column 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.13
Cube 0.143 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.13

TVOC = Total Volatile Organic Compound (ppm).

CO2 = Carbon Dioxide (ppm).
CO = Carbon Monoxide (ppm).
O3 = Ozone (ppm).
HCHO = Formaldehyde (ppm).
PM10 = Particulate Matter (mg/m3).
 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310
wall pattern released the lowest O3 inside the chamber. The HCHO
results showed that both types of bricks did not exceed the limit
recommended by the IAQ standard. However, BS-5% in a wall pat-
tern emitted the lowest HCHO. The observation of mosaic sludge
bricks indicated that the levels of PM10 for every pattern were
slightly lower and also complied with the IAQ standard. The lowest
PM10 was emitted by PS-5% in a column pattern.
Therefore, BS bricks with 5% of sludge are more acceptable and
safer compared to other bricks specimens. Thus, BS-5% was recom-
mended to be used as building material as it produces lower gas
emissions and complies with the Industry Code of Practice on
Indoor Air Quality standard. Since the level for all parameters in
each pattern did not show much contrast with the limit set by
the Industry Code of Practice on Indoor Air Quality, all patterns
can be accepted. Nevertheless, the overall results obtained indi-
cated that the wall pattern is the most recommended pattern as
the cube and column patterns could not really meet the IAQ stan-
dard limits set by Industry Code of Practice on Indoor Air Quality
standard.
4. Conclusion
The incorporation of mosaic sludge into fired clay bricks could
provide a new cost effective construction product with improved
properties as well as an environmentally friendly disposal method
for waste. Therefore, the results presented here may facilitate
improvements in the use of mosaic sludge as brick material. The
following conclusions can be drawn from this study.
1. The incorporation of up to 30% of mosaic sludge can be regarded
as a potential cost-effective addition to the raw materials used
in the brick manufacturing.
2. Increasing the sludge ratio in general decreases the develop-
ment of macropores and thus increases the strength of bricks.
Bricks which have a higher pore size could absorb more water
compared to bricks with low porosity. However, because of
pores become smaller in size, most of the macropores turned
into micropores.
3. Most of the heavy metal leachability in this study reduced up to
90% after being incorporated into fired clay bricks. This com-
plies with the USEPA and EPAV standards. This significant
reduction is due to the heavy metals being immobilized at high
firing temperature (1050 °C) during the firing stage.
4. The incorporation of 5% mosaic sludge into bricks was recom-
mended to be used for building materials as it had lower gas
emissions and complied with the Industry Code of Practice on
Indoor Air Quality standards compared to CB-0%.
5. Lightweight fired mosaic bricks produced were suitable to be
used as conventional bricks for non-load bearing as well as load
bearing purposes such as low-cost housing, landscape usage,
and interlocking blocks for pedestrian. To conclude, the incor-
poration of sludge waste in brick manufacturing does not criti-
cally affect the properties of fired clay bricks and significantly
reduces environmental pollution.
Conflict of interest
None.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to thank the technical staff of Microp-
ollutant Research Center (MPRC) and Research Center for Soft Soils
(RECESS), for their support in the experimental work. The financial
funding was made possible by the Multidisciplinary Grant (MDR)
309
U089 by Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia and MyBrain15
(KPM) from Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
References
[1] P.C. Varghese, Building materials, 2nd, Prentice-Hall of India, 2015.
[2] P. Boch, J.C. Niepce, Ceramic Materials. Processes, Properties and Application,
2001.
[3] OECD, Sewage Sludge Production and Disposal (in Dry Substance), Organ. Econ.
Co-Operation Dev., 2018.
[4] A.A.A. Latiff, A.T.A. Karim, A.S. Ahmad, M.B. Ridzuan, Y. Hung,
Phytoremediation of metals in industrial sludge by Cyperus Kyllingia-Rasiga,
Asystassia Intrusa and Scindapsus Pictus Var Argyaeus Plant Species, Int. J.
Integr. Eng. 4 (2012) 1–8.
[5] H.H. Lau, A. Whyte, P.L. Law, Composition and characteristics of construction
waste generated by residential housing project, Int. J. Environ. Res. 2 (2008)
261–268.
[6] J.A. Labrincha, J.I. Marques, W. Hajjaji, L. Senff, C. Zanelli, M. Dondi, F. Rocha,
Novel inorganic products based on industrial wastes, Waste Biomass
Valorization. 5 (2014) 385–392.
[7] S. Werle, M. Dudziak, Analysis of organic and inorganic contaminants in dried
sewage sludge and by-products of dried sewage sludge gasification, Energies. 7
(2014) 462–476.
[8] European Commission, Best Availabe Techniques. Waste Incineration, 2006.
[9] H. Park, Y. Jeong, Y. Jun, J.E. Oh, Production of price-competitive bricks using a
high volume of stone powder sludge waste and blast furnace slag through
cementless CaO activation, Constr. Build. Mater. 122 (2016) 343–353.
[10] A.N. Victoria, Characterisation and performance evaluation of water works
sludge as bricks material, Int. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 3 (2013) 69–79.
[11] S.N. Monteiro, J. Alexandre, J.I. Margem, R. Sánchez, C.M.F. Vieira,
Incorporation of sludge waste from water treatment tlant into red ceramic,
Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (2008) 1281–1287.
[12] J.A. Cusidó, L.V. Cremades, Environmental effects of using clay bricks produced
with sewage sludge: leachability and toxicity studies, Waste Manag. 32 (2012)
1202–1208.
[13] Y.M. Zhang, L.T. Jia, H. Mei, Q. Cui, P.G. Zhang, Z.M. Sun, Fabrication,
microstructure and properties of bricks fired from lake sediment, cinder and
sewage sludge, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 154–160.
[14] L.C.S.S. Herek, C.E. Hori, M.H.M. Reis, N.D. Mora, C.R.G. Tavares, R. Bergamasco,
Characterization of ceramic bricks incorporated with textile laundry sludge,
Ceram. Int. 38 (2012) 951–959.
[15] A.A. Kadir, A. Mohajerani, Physical and mechanical properties of fired clay
bricks incorporated with cigarette butts: comparison between slow and fast
heating rates, Appl. Clay Sci. 421 (2013) 201–204.
[16] BS 1377-2, Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes, Part 2:
Classification Tests, 1990.
[17] BS 1377-4, Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes – Part 4:
Compaction-Related Tests, 1990.
[18] BS 1377-3, British Standard (BS). Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering
Purposes – Part 3: Chemical and Electro-Chemical Tests, 1990.
[19] R. Alonso-Santurde, A. Coz, J.R. Viguri, A. Andrés, Recycling of foundry by-
products in the ceramic industry: green and core sand in clay bricks, Constr.
Build. Mater. 27 (2012) 97–106.
[20] Y. Taha, M. Benzaazoua, R. Hakkou, M. Mansori, Natural clay substitution by
calamine processing wastes to manufacture fired bricks, J. Clean. Prod. 135
(2016) 847–858.
[21] A. Bennour, S. Mahmoudi, E. Srasra, S. Boussen, N. Htira, Composition, firing
behavior and ceramic properties of the Sejnène clays (Northwest Tunisia),
Appl. Clay Sci. 115 (2015) 30–38, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2015.07.025.
[22] BS EN 772-11, Methods of Test for Masonry Units Part 11: Determination of
Water Absorption of Aggregate Concrete , Manufactured Stone and Natural
Action and the Initial Rate of Water Absorption of Clay Masonry Units, BSI
Stand. Publ., 2011, pp. 1–12.
[23] BS EN 772-1, Methods of Test for Masonry Units Part 1: Determination of
Compressive Strength, BSI Stand. Publ., 2011, pp. 1–18.
[24] USEPA Method 1311, Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure, 1992, pp. 1–
35.
[25] USEPA Method 1312, Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure, 1994, pp. 1–
30.
[26] USEPA, Hazardous Waste Characteristics Scoping Study, 1996.
[27] EPAV, Guidelines for Hazard Classification of Solid Prescribed Industrial Waste,
2005.
[28] L.J. Blythe, E.F. Arniella, Leachate tests for solidified hazardous waste, in: Proc.
1991 Georg. Water Resour. Conf., 1991: pp. 341–343.
[29] BS EN ISO 16000-9, Indoor Air - Part 9: Determination of the Emission of
Volatile Organic Compounds from Building Products and Furnishing-Emission
Test Chamber Method, BSI Stand. Publ., 2006.
[30] DOSH, Industry Code of Practice on Indoor Air Quality, Dep. Occup. Saf. Heal.
Minist. Hum. Resour. Malaysia, 2010.
[31] G. Goel, A.S. Kalamdhad, An Investigation on use of paper mill sludge in brick
manufacturing, Constr. Build. Mater. 148 (2017) 334–343.
[32] A. Ukwatta, A. Mohajerani, Effect of organic content in biosolids on the
properties of fired-clay bricks incorporated with biosolids, J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
29 (2017) 1–11.
310 N.A. Sarani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 183 (2018) 300–310
[33] M. Seynou, Y. Millogo, R. Ouedraogo, K. Traoré, J. Tirlocq, Firing
transformations and properties of tiles from clay from Burkina Faso, Appl.
Clay Sci. 51 (2011) 499–502.
[34] D. Tsozué, A.N. Nzeugang, J.R. Mache, S. Loweh, N. Fagel, A. Nzeukou, J. Richard,
S. Loweh, N. Fagel, Mineralogical, physico-chemical and technological
characterization of clays from Maroua (Far-North, Cameroon) for use in
ceramic bricks production, J. Build. Eng. 11 (2017) 17–24.
[35] K.Y. Chiang, P.H. Chou, K.L. Chien, J.L. Chen, C.C. Wu, Novel lightweight
building bricks manufactured from water treatment plant sludge and
agricultural waste, J. Residuals Sci. Technol. 6 (2009) 185–191.
[36] M. Arsenovic, Z. Radojevic, S. Stankovic, Removal of toxic metals from
industrial sludge by fixing in brick structure, Constr. Build. Mater. 37 (2012)
7–14.
[37] C. Li, Q. Wen, M. Hong, Z. Liang, Z. Zhuang, Y. Yu, Heavy metals leaching in
bricks made from lead and zinc mine tailings with varied chemical
components, Constr. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 443–451.
[38] R.G. Smith, M. Allal, Small Scale Brickmaking, International Labour Office,
1984.
[39] C.I. Nwoye, E.O. Obidiegwu, C.N. Mbah, Production of bricks for building
construction and predictability of its post-fired volume shrinkage based on
apparent porosity and water absorption capacity, Res. Rev. J. Mater. Sci. 2
(2014) 17–26.
[40] R. Baskar, K.M.M.S. Begum, S. Sundaram, Characterization and reuse of textile
effluent treatment plant waste sludge in clay bricks, J. Univ. Chem. Technol.
Metall. 41 (2006) 473–478.
[41] S. Karaman, S. Ersahin, H. Gunal, Firing temperature and firing time influence
on mechanical and physical properties of clay bricks, J. Sci. Ind. Res. 65 (2006)
153–159.
[42] C.H. Weng, D.F. Lin, P.C. Chiang, Utilization of sludge as brick materials, Adv.
Environ. Res. 7 (2003) 679–685.
[43] K.-L. Lin, L.-S. Huang, J.-L. Shie, C.-J. Cheng, C.-H. Lee, T.-C. Chang, Elucidating
the effects of solar panel waste glass substitution on the physical and
mechanical characteristics of clay bricks, Environ. Technol. 34 (2013) 15–24.
[44] S.M.S. Kazmi, M.J. Munir, I. Patnaikuni, Y.-F. Wu, U. Fawad, Thermal
performance enhancement of eco-friendly bricks incorporating agro-wastes,
Energy Build (2017).
[45] N.V. Boltakova, G.R. Faseeva, R.R. Kabirov, R.M. Nafikov, Y.A. Zakharov,
Utilization of inorganic industrial wastes in producing construction
ceramics. Review of Russian experience for the years 2000–2015, Waste
Manag. 60 (2017) 230–246.
[46] V. Mymrin, K. Alekseev, O.M. Fortini, R.E. Catai, A. Nagalli, J.L. Rissardi, A.
Molinetti, D.E. Pedroso, R.L.S. Izzo, Water cleaning sludge as principal
component of composites to enhance ecologically clean red ceramics, J.
Clean. Prod. 145 (2017) 367–373.
[47] H. Zouaoui, J. Bouaziz, Physical and mechanical properties improvement of a
porous clay ceramic, Appl. Clay Sci. 150 (2017) 131–137.
[48] F. Pacheco-Torgal, P.B. Lourenço, J.A. Labrincha, S. Kumar, P. Chindaprasirt,
Eco-Efficient Masonry Bricks and Blocks Design, Properties and Durability,
Woodhead Publishing, 2015.
[49] S.S. Jahagirdar, S. Shrihari, B. Manu, Utilization of textile mill sludge in burnt
clay bricks, Int. J. Environ. Protection 3 (2013) 6–13.
[50] B. Sena da Fonseca, C. Galhano, D. Seixas, Technical feasibility of reusing coal
combustion by-products from a thermoelectric power plant in the
manufacture of fired clay bricks, Appl. Clay Sci. 104 (2015) 189–195.
[51] O. Azeez, O. Ogundare, T.E. Oshodin, O.A. Olasupo, B.A. Olunlade, Evaluation of
the compressive strength of hybrid clay bricks, J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng.
10 (2011) 609–615.
[52] B.E.E. Hegazy, H.A. Fouad, A.M. Hassanain, Brick manufacturing from water
treatment sludge and rice husk ash, Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 6 (2012) 453–461.
[53] P. Muñoz, M.P. Velasco, M.A. Morales Ortíz, L. Mendívil Giró, Muñoz Velasco,
Fired clay bricks manufactured by adding wastes as sustainable construction
material - a review, Constr. Build. Mater. 63 (2014) 97–107.
[54] D. Ingunza, M. Del Pilar, L.A. Dantas, Use of sewage sludge as raw material in
the manufacture of soft-mud bricks, Int. Conf. Civil, Mater Environ. Sci. (2015)
31–33.
[55] Q. Xu, Nanoporous Materials. Synthesis and Applications, CRS Press Taylor &
Francis Group, 2013.
[56] E.M.A. El Lateef, J.E. Hall, S.R. Smith, B.A. Bakry, T.A. Elewa, A survey of heavy
metals content of soil and plants as affected by long-term application of
sewage water, A case study 1 (1997) 2–3.
[57] M.M. Weldemariam, Heavy Metal (Pb, Cd, Zn, Cu, Cr and Fe) Content in Almeda
textile industry sludge, Northern Tigrai, Ethiopia, Int. J. Sci. Res. Publ. 4 (2014) 1–3.
[58] M. Gerić, G. Gajski, V. Oreščanin, R. Kollar, V. Garaj-Vrhovac, Chemical and
toxicological characterization of the bricks produced from clay/sewage sludge
mixture, J. Environ. Sci. Heal. Part A. 47 (2012) 1521–1527.
[59] A. Islam, A. Mizan, T. Ahmed, M.A.I. Juel, A. Mizan, T. Ahmed, Sustainable use of
tannery sludge in brick manufacturing in Bangladesh, Waste Manag. 60 (2017)
259–269.
[60] A. Ukwatta, A. Mohajerani, Leachate analysis of green and fired-clay bricks
incorporated with biosolids, Waste Manag. 66 (2017) 134–144.
[61] D.-F. Lin, C.-H. Weng, Use of sewage sludge ash as brick material, J. Environ.
Eng. 127 (2001).
[62] Y.M. Kuo, T.C. Lin, P.J. Tsai, Effect of SiO2 on immobilization of metals and
encapsulation of a glass network in slag, J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 53 (2003)
1412–1416.
[63] A. Violante, V. Cozzolino, L. Perelomov, A. Caporale, M. Pigna, Mobility and
bioavailability of heavy metals and metalloids in soil environments, J. Soil Sci.
Plant Nutr. 10 (2010).
[64] F. Fu, Q. Wang, Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: a review, J.
Environ. Manage. 92 (2011) 407–418.
[65] D.V. Kerkez, M.R. Becelic-Tomin, M.B. Dalmacija, D.D. Tomasevic, S.D.
Roncevic, G.V. Pucar, B.D. Dalmacija, Leachability and physical stability of
solidified and stabilized pyrite cinder sludge from dye effluent treatment,
Hem. Ind. 69 (2015) 231–239.
[66] K. Dunham, Atlas of economic mineral deposits, Nature 281 (1979) 241.
[67] B.C. Punmia, A.K. Jain, A.K. Jain, Basic Civil Engineering, Laxmi Publications Pvt
Limited, 2003.
[68] A. Stringfellow, C.J. Banks, P.F. Hillman, The influence of composting on heavy
metal extractability from two sewage sludges, Recycl. Reuse Sew. Sludge
(2001) 111–123.
[69] A.A. Zorpas, Metals selectivity from natural zeolite in sewage sludge compost.
A function of temperature and contact time, Dyn. Soil, Dyn. Plant 5 (2011)
104–112.
[70] L. Qiao, G. Ho, The effects of clay amendment and composting on metal
speciation in digested sludge, Water Res. 31 (1997) 951–964.
[71] B. Liu, A. Ray, P.S. Thomas, Drying shrinkage of hydrothermally cured cements
with reactive magnesia and clay brick waste, in: Int. Inorg. Bond. Fiber
Compos. Conf., 2007: pp. 90–95.