| Literature DB >> 30465029 |
Mary Lissy P N1, Carolin Peter1, Kavya Mohan1, Shone Greens1, Sneha George1.
Abstract
Clay brick manufacturing is a sector which involves a lot of firing processes requiring higher temperature. To maintain this temperature, large amount of fuel in the form of wood, coal, biomass etc. need to be burnt in the kiln causing serious issues of air pollution. Also, with the increase in the number of industries coming up, large amount of un-disposable waste gets accumulated. If suitable remedies are not adopted for its safe disposal, it may pollute the water bodies through runoff. This project is an effort to reduce the brick firing temperature in the kiln to about 600 °C thereby reducing the cost of production and making the whole process environmental friendly. This work will put forward a suitable alternative for the safe disposal of industrial debris like quarry dust and glass powder by incorporating them as a partial substitute for river sand which is one of the costly constituent of clay brick and thereby further reducing the cost of production. Experimental results showed higher compressive strength of 21.31 N/mm2when the brick was casted with mix proportion of Cement: Sand: Red earth: Glass Powder: Quarry Dust = 4:1:1:1.5:2.5. The strength measured at temperature 600 °C met the requirements of the National Standards.Entities:
Keywords: Civil engineering
Year: 2018 PMID: 30465029 PMCID: PMC6236011 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00891
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Fig. 1(a) sand (b) glass powder (c) red earth (d) quarry dust (e) clay.
Fig. 2(a) mixing of materials (b) filling into the mould (c) levelling of surface.
Fig. 3(a) Raw brick (b) Sun dried brick (c) Brick in muffle furnace (d) Fired brick.
Fig. 4(a) Testing for compressive strength (b) Test for water absorption.
Brick sample proportions.
| Proportion no: | Clay (%) | Sand (%) | Red earth (%) | Quarry dust (%) | Glass powder (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 40 | 10 | 10 | 35 | 5 |
| 2 | 40 | 10 | 10 | 25 | 15 |
| 3 | 40 | 10 | 10 | 15 | 25 |
| 4 | 40 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 30 |
Observation table of proportion 1.
| Sample no. | Load (N) | Length (mm) | Width (mm) | Area (mm2) | Compressive strength (N/mm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40000 | 75 | 37 | 2775 | 14.41 |
| B | 40000 | 76 | 38 | 2888 | 13.85 |
| C | 35000 | 77 | 38 | 2926 | 11.96 |
| D | 45000 | 75 | 39 | 2925 | 15.38 |
| E | 0 | 75 | 37 | 2775 | 0 |
Average compressive strength = 11.12 N/mm2.
Sample standard deviation = 6.33.
Fig. 5Graph showing compressive strength of proportion no: 1.
Observation table of proportion 2.
| Sample no. | Load (N) | Length (mm) | Width (mm) | Area (mm2) | Compressive strength (N/mm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 55000 | 74 | 38 | 2812 | 19.55 |
| B | 55000 | 75 | 36 | 2700 | 20.37 |
| C | 60000 | 75 | 36 | 2700 | 22.22 |
| D | 63000 | 76 | 38 | 2888 | 22.50 |
| E | 60000 | 74 | 37 | 2738 | 21.91 |
Average compressive strength = 21.31 N/mm2.
Sample standard deviation = 1.28.
Fig. 6Graph showing compressive strength of proportion no: 2.
Observation table of proportion 3.
| Sample no. | Load (N) | Length (mm) | Width (mm) | Area (mm2) | Compressive strength (N/mm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 50000 | 76 | 38 | 2888 | 17.313 |
| B | 50000 | 78 | 38 | 2808 | 17.80 |
| C | 50000 | 78 | 36 | 2808 | 17.80 |
| D | 54000 | 77 | 37 | 2849 | 18.95 |
| E | 55000 | 76 | 38 | 2888 | 19.04 |
Average compressive strength = 18.18 N/mm2.
Sample standard deviation = 0.77.
Fig. 7Graph showing compressive strength of proportion no.3.
Observation table of proportion 4.
| Sample no. | Load (N) | Length (mm) | Width (mm) | Area (mm2) | Compressive strength (N/mm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 35000 | 77 | 39 | 3003 | 11.65 |
| B | 25000 | 77 | 38 | 2926 | 8.54 |
| C | 30000 | 74 | 35 | 2590 | 11.58 |
| D | 45000 | 76 | 38 | 2888 | 15.58 |
| E | 50000 | 74 | 37 | 2738 | 18.26 |
Average compressive strength = 13.12 N/mm2.
Sample standard deviation = 3.8.
Fig. 8Graph showing compressive strength of proportion no.4.
Fig. 9Comparative study of average compressive strength.
Observation table for water absorption.
| Sample | Initial weight (gm) | Final weight (gm) | Water absorption (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 188.4 | 214.6 | 13.906 |
| B | 188.2 | 214 | 13.70 |
| C | 189.6 | 215.3 | 13.55 |
| D | 186.8 | 211.9 | 13.43 |
Fig. 10Graph showing water absorption.