Author’s Accepted Manuscript

Incorporation of Waste Materials in the

Manufacture of Masonry Bricks: An Update
Review

Amin Al-Fakih, Bashar S. Mohammed, Mohd

Shahir Liew, Ehsan Nikbakht
www.elsevier.com/locate/jobe

PII: S2352-7102(18)30203-1
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2018.09.023
Reference: JOBE595
To appear in: Journal of Building Engineering
Received date: 23 February 2018
Revised date: 26 September 2018
Accepted date: 26 September 2018
Cite this article as: Amin Al-Fakih, Bashar S. Mohammed, Mohd Shahir Liew
and Ehsan Nikbakht, Incorporation of Waste Materials in the Manufacture of
Masonry Bricks: An Update Review, Journal of Building Engineering,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2018.09.023
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for
publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of
the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form.
Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which
could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 Incorporation of Waste Materials in the Manufacture of
Masonry Bricks: An Update Review

Amin Al-Fakih1*, Bashar S. Mohammed1*, Mohd Shahir Liew1, Ehsan Nikbakht1

1
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS,
32610, Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia.
*
Correspondence: alfkih_amin@yahoo.com, bashar.mohammed@utp.edu.my

Abstract

Conventional bricks are made off from clay with high firing temperature or from cement

concrete, but these consume and emit high energy and have environment shortcoming like

carbon footprint and raw materials depletion. Researchers have utilized various types of waste

materials in the production of bricks to protect the environment and contribute towards

sustainable development. This study presents the latest research updates on utilizing waste

materials in bricks manufacturing. The study categorized into two groups based on

manufacturing method: fired and unfired methods. The review of literature exhibited an

obvious potential of the waste materials as partial or total replacement of conventional raw

materials where the produced bricks fulfilled the standards requirements. Additional research

work is required, not just in the properties and economical parts but also on educating and

aware the public about the advantages of utilizing waste materials in bricks manufacturing as

well as on developing codes of practices and standards.

Keywords:

Waste materials, Burnt Bricks, Unburnt Bricks, Sustainability

1
1.0 Introduction

Masonry brick is an ancient and one of the most significant construction and building

materials worldwide. It was an essential earth material in the period of Egyptian,

Mesopotamian, and Roman dating back to 8000BC [1, 2]. The compressive strength and

durability to weathering of fired-clay bricks have made them a widely used construction

material for thousands of years [3]. The ancient and conventional procedures of brick

making were by mixing the earth-based materials (raw materials), molding the bricks,

drying and then firing them till they obtain a certain level of strength [4, 5] or by using

ordinary Portland cement (OPC) to produce concrete bricks. In contrast, the excessive

usage of earth materials the manufacturing of fired bricks resulted in a massive depletion of

raw resources and high energy consumption - almost 300% higher than the energy

consumption of concrete blocks [6]- thus, it is responsible for a serious environmental

degradation due to the high greenhouse gas emissions [7]. On the other hand, the concrete

bricks are manufactured from cement and sands. The cement (OPC) considers as

environmentally un-friendly where the production of cement consumes a great amount of

energy (one ton of cement required 4 GI of energy), emits significant amount of CO2

(approximately one ton) and other greenhouse gas emissions [8, 9].

Moreover, Current global waste generation volumes are approximately 1.3 billion tons

per year and are expected to increase to approximately 2.2 billion tons per year by 2025

[10]. Rates of wastes growth are fastest in China, other parts of East Asia, and parts of

Eastern Europe and the Middle East (Fig. 1). According to [11] 12.8 million tons of waste

is produced in 2015 in Malaysia. However, this volume is expected to increase up to 15.6

million tons by the year 2020. The most Malaysian waste is organic and plastic wastes

2
which contribute about 45% and 24%, respectively, of the total generated waste as shown

in Fig.2.

Africa
5%
South Asia 5%
6%
Middle East and North Africa
7%
Eastern and Central Asia 44%

Latin America and the 12%

Caribbean
East Asia and the Pacific

Organisation for Economic Co- 21%

operation and Development

Fig. 1. Total waste generated (kg/capita/day) worldwide by region [10]

Others
15%
Glass
3%
Metal
6% Organic
45%
Paper
7%

Plastic
24%

Fig. 2. Total waste generated in Malaysia by waste materials [11]

To diminish the environmental pollution, reduce the amount of generated wastes and

protect the raw materials from depletion, thereby contributing to sustainability and more

eco-friendly approaches, researchers have made remarkable efforts to develop different

types of bricks from various types of waste and byproducts materials. Therefore, the

manufacturing process of bricks on the last two decades trended to utilize waste materials

to reduce the shortcoming of the conventional manufacturing method of making bricks.

3
 In this review paper, the latest research updates on utilizing waste materials to produce

bricks are presented. The mechanical and physical properties of the bricks incorporating

waste materials are highlighted as well.

2.0 Review of studies on the incorporation of waste materials in brick making

The wide studies and research for the incorporation of waste materials in manufacturing

and producing bricks are going to be characterized into two common forms according to

the manufacturing method namely burnt bricks and unburnt bricks. The burnt bricks have

been subcategorized based on the type of waste into organic and inorganic waste, as

detailed below.

2.1 Manufacturing of burnt bricks

The process of brick manufacturing from clay involves preparation of clay, molding,

drying, and finally firing them in a kiln at certain firing temperature. Numerous researchers

have studied the manufacturing of burnt bricks incorporating organic and inorganic waste

materials as shown and summarized in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively.

2.1.1 Manufacturing of burnt bricks incorporating organic wastes materials

Galán-Arboledas et al. [12] evaluated the utilization of diatomaceous earth residues

(DER, refining of vegetable oils and brewing) as raw materials for the production of bricks

as partial replacement of clay between 3 – 10% by weight. Samples were molded and burnt

at 850, 950 and 1050 oC firing temperature. The test results revealed that the addition of the

diatomaceous earth residues in brick making increased the porosity by 37 vol % and

reduced the bulk density by about 10% compared to the conventional clay bricks. On the

other hand, the tensile strength increased from 7 MPa to 7.8 MPa at the first 3% addition of

4
the waste and then decreased steadily to 5 MPa at 10% addition of the waste. Meanwhile,

there is a decrease of the compressive strength to 9.5 and 11.7 MPa at 10% addition of

DER at 950 oC and 1050 oC firing temperature. At the same time the thermal conductivity

of the produced bricks decreased with increasing the proportion of residues and increasing

the sintering temperature. Thus, allowing the products to be utilized in construction.

Goel & Kalamdhad [13] demonstrated the possibility of utilizing degraded municipal

solid waste (DMSW) as a raw material in the manufacturing of burnt bricks by 5 to 20 wt

% and the final product was burnt at 850 and 900 oC. The laboratory results revealed that

the incorporation of 20% of DMSW in the constituent of bricks was the most appropriate

and significant constituent mix. Brick samples incorporating DMSW exhibited lower firing

linear shrinkages and lower bulk density up to 16% than control bricks at any firing

temperature with no visible cracks and efflorescence. Moreover, the results showed a

significant increase of water absorption (up to 11%) with the increase of DMSW

proportion. Thus, the addition of DMSW increased the porosity of the manufactured brick

which reduced the mass density (1511 – 1211 kg/m3) and hence a dramatic reduction (up to

78%) in compressive strength was observed.

Juel et al. [14] assessed the suitability of utilizing tannery sludge (TS) in the production

of clay bricks. Various proportions (10, 20, 30 and 40 wt%) of tannery sludge were

replaced the clay. The test results exhibited that water absorption increased from 7.2% -

20.9% and the compressive strength decreased up to 56% with increasing TS contents and

firing temperature. However, 10% of TS by weight concluded to be an optimum constituent

for TS-amended. Firing shrinkage, weight and bulk density were decreased with increase of

TS proportions and firing temperature. Moreover, the firing energy was confirmed to be

5
saved up to 15–47% by incorporating 10–40% TS content. The study concluded that

incorporating tannery sludge is promising to manufacture decent quality bricks that can

fulfill all the requirements prescribed in ASTM standards.

Mohajerani et al. [15] utilized the recycled cigarette butts (CBs) in the production of

burnt clay bricks with contents of 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, and 10% by weight. The specimens

were prepared and dried for 24h at 105 oC and then burnt at firing temperature of 1050 oC.

The results revealed a lighter clay brick with increasing CBs contents where the density

decreased up to 30% over the conventional clay bricks. At the same time the water

absorption dramatically increased, but not more than 20%. However, the increasing of CBs

content resulted in more visible cracks and larger size and number of pores which induced

lesser strength. Moreover, the compressive strength diminished by 88% (from 25.65 MPa

at 0% of CBs to 3.00 MPa at 10% of CBs) and flexural strength reduced by more than

50%. However, the optimum compressive strength of the manufactured bricks was

obtained with 1% of CBs to be 19.53 MPa. Firing energy could potentially be saved up to

58%.

Eliche-Quesada et al. [16] analyzed the possibility of utilizing rice husk ash (RHA) and

wood ash (WA) wastes (10 - 30 wt%) in the production of fired clay bricks. The brick

specimen was compressed and then fired in different temperatures (900 – 1000 oC) for four

hours. Results exhibited that the addition of RHA or WA increased the linear shrinkage,

water suction, open porosity (up to 10.8 vol% for RHA and 7.3 vol% for WA), and water

absorption (up to 21.2% for WA and 32.9% for RHA) of the manufactured bricks

significantly regardless of firing temperature. On the other hand, bulk density decreased up

to 25.1% and 9.8% by the addition of RHA and WA, respectively. Also, the compressive

6
strength was reduced to 13.5 and 17.5 MPa for 30 wt% of RHA bricks fired at 900 and

1000 ºC, respectively while the addition of 30 wt% of WA reduced the compressive

strength to 34.3 and 42 MPa at 900 and 1000 ºC firing temperature, respectively. It’s

concluded that 10 wt% RHA and 20 wt% WA is the optimal proportion of biomass ash

waste that met the properties specified by standards for clay masonry units.

Adazabra et al. [17-19] examined the utilization of spent shea waste (SSW, 5-20 wt%)

in the manufacturing of clay bricks (mold compressed/ fired / 900-1200 oC for 1 h). The

increasing incorporation of spent shea waste content into the clay material caused an

increase in water absorption values in all scenarios. Compressive strength test indicated

lower strength of the produced brick incorporated SSW and categorized as non-load-

bearing structural construction.

Kadir et al. [20] reported on the utilization of sewage sludge waste (SSW, 0 -20 wt%)

in the manufacturing of burnt clay bricks (compacted/ fired/ 1050 oC). Results revealed that

shrinkage (1.63 – 6.18%) and water absorption (8.22% - 19.69%) of the manufactured

brick specimens increased with increase of sewage sludge waste content while density

(1610 -1204 kg/m3) and compressive strength (27.1 – 2.1 MPa) decreased. The study

concluded that addition of up to 5% of sewage sludge waste could produce bricks satisfied

the standards.

Kazmi et al. [21, 22] reported on the thermal performance of burnt clay bricks

incorporating sugarcane bagasse ash (SBA) and rice husk ash (RHA) as a partial

replacement of clay ( 5, 10 ,15 wt%). Physico-mechanical and thermal properties of brick

specimens were investigated. Bricks specimens were prepared and fired in furnace at 800
o
C for one and half days. It was reported that incorporating SBA and RHA in the

7
production of clay bricks resulted in light-weight bricks (up to 1060 kg/m3 and 1130 kg/m3,

respectively) with cost saving. Moreover, compressive strength (up to 5.53 MPa), flexural

strength (up to 0.83 MPa) and thermal conductivity (up to 0.37 W/mK) were decreased

with increasing the proportion of SBA and RHA in fired clay bricks. On the other hand,

brick specimens exhibited high porosity (up to 40%) with increasing content of SBA and

RHA, thus revealing increase in water absorption (up to 23.86%) as compared with brick

specimens without addition of waste. However, the study stated that the produced brick

satisfied the minimum requirements indicated by ASTM C67 [23].

Ukwatta & Mohajerani [24] investigated the properties of fired clay bricks incorporated

biosolids (5 – 25 wt%), from Melbourne Water’s Western Treatment Plant (WTP).

Manufactured bricks were burnt at 1050 oC for 3 hours. Test results showed that the

compressive strength of the manufactured bricks reduced (from 29.50 MPa to 10.50)

compared to the conventional fired clay bricks (30.50 MPa). Regardless of the heating

rates, the increase of the WTP biosolids content resulted in gradual increase in cold and hot

water absorption (11.8% and 14.98%, respectively) and higher initial shrinkage and

volumetric shrinkage. On the other hand, the dry density (2024.2 – 1714.3 kg/m3) of the

amended-clay bricks was steady decreased with increase the WTP biosolids. It’s

recommended the usage of up to 25% biosolids to produce a non-load bearing fired clay

bricks and subordinate applicable proportions of biosolids for load bearing.

Abdrakhimov & Abdrakhimova [25] utilized waste coal (30 wt%) as a partial

replacement of natural conventional materials in the production of ceramic light weight

bricks (burnt/1000 oC). Four types of coal waste were utilized namely coal flotation waste

(CFW), coal flotation sludge (CFS), coal concentration waste I (CCWI) and coal

8
concentration waste II (CCWII). Results revealed that the addition of the above mentioned

wastes (up to 30 wt%) increased the porosity of the brick samples and contributed to the

constant sintering of lightweight brick crock. The density of the brick products is found to

be categorized as class B construction light weight bricks (1040 – 1250 kg/m3). The results

of compressive strength (up to 13.2 MPa), flexural strength (up to 3.2 MPa), shrinkage (up

to 7.5 %), heat resistance (up to 21) and thermal conductivity (up to 0.23 W/m oC) for the

manufactured ceramic lightweight bricks met the requirements of the lightweight brick

standards.

Abbas et al. [26] studied the mechanical and durability properties of the fired clay

bricks (fired/800 oC) manufactured using fly ash (FA, 0- 25 wt%). Results indicated that

the incorporation of fly ash significantly reduced the compressive strength and bending

strength, of the produced brick, by more than 50% compared to the conventional clay

bricks. Moreover, the density decreased up to 18% with the increase of fly ash content and

resulted in lightweight bricks while the porosity and water absorption (15% - 24%)

increased with the increase of fly ash percentage and thus resulted in low compressive

strength (about 8 MPa) and low bending strength (3 MPa). However, compressive and

bending strength of bricks incorporating up to 20% of fly ash satisfied the minimum

requirements of the Pakistan Building Code [27]. Efflorescence (3.6% of surface area)

performance was enhanced with the increase of fly ash content.

Sutcu et al. [28] analyzed the influence of the addition of olive mill waste (OMW, 0 –

10 wt%) in the physico-mechanical and thermal parameters of porous clay bricks

(fired/850, 950 and 1050 oC). Experimental results revealed that the incorporation of 10%

olive mill waste decreased the bulk density of the specimens up to 1450 Kg/m3. As the

9
olive mill waste content increased from 0% to 10% and the firing temperature increased,

the water absorption increases gradually to up to 32.5%, thus porosities of the

manufactured specimens increased from 30.8 to 47.0 percent respectively. In contrast, the

compressive strengths diminished from 36.9 MPa to 10.26 MPa at burning temperature of

950 oC. The study showed that the olive mill waste could be used as a pore maker in brick

production.

Leiva et al. [29] studied the possibility of using co-combustion fly ash (CFA) to

substitute clay (0-100 wt%) for the manufacturing of eco-friendly fired bricks

(fired/800,900 and 1000 oC). All the produced specimens showed lower shrinkage (less

than 4%) while the density increased up to 2000 kg/m3 with the increase of fly ash content

at 1000o C firing temperature. However, they found that the water absorption is inversely

proportional to the firing temperature and directly proportional to the fly ash content. The

compressive strength decreased (12.5 – 2 MPa) with increasing of fly ash amount, except at

1000 °C firing temperature where it increased gradually from 13.5 MPa to 47 MPa for fly

ash content 0% – 100%, respectively.

Eliche-Quesada & Leite-Costa [30] investigated the properties of fired bricks mixed

with olive pomace bottom ash (OPBA) as partial replacement of clay (10-50 wt%). Results

revealed that considerable reduction in density, compressive strength and thermal

conductivity were observed with the increasing proportion of the waste mentioned above

due to the increase in porosity. On the other hand, developed bricks characteristics

including water suction (2.2-4.38 kg/m2), apparent porosity, linear shrinkage (0.07-0.63%),

loss on ignition (11.25-20.61%) and water absorption were increased with increasing

OPBA proportion compared to the fired clay bricks. Thus, the substitution of 10 and 20

10
wt%, the best mix, of OPBA manufactured fired bricks with density of 1635 and 1527

kg/m3, compressive strength of 33.9 MPa and 14.2 MPa and thermal conductivity of 0.143

W/mK and 0.166 W/mK, respectively. The study revealed a feasible utilization of olive

pomace bottom ash (up to 20 wt%) as partial replacement of clay to produce good quality

bricks.

Velasco et al. [31] studied the thermal and mechanical properties of the fired clay

bricks incorporated with kindling from vine shoots (KVS) (5,11 and 17 wt%). The results

revealed an obvious increase, from 16.93% to 36.04%, in the water absorption of the

developed fired clay bricks due to the increase on the open porosity of the additives with

respect to the waste percentages. Therefore, the thermal conductivity (0.738 W/m.K to

0.208 W/m.K ) and bulk density (1684 kg/m3 to 1124 kg/m3) tended to decrease with the

increase of waste percentage from 0% to 17%, respectively. Finally, results showed a

dramatically reduction in compressive strength (38.04 – 1.556 MPa) of the newly fired clay

bricks with the increase of vine shoots contents. However, the usage of the vine shoots is

limited to 11% whereby the developed bricks comply with standards for structural masonry

clay bricks.

Bories et al. [32] investigated the impacts of the addition of renewable pore-forming

agents on the properties of fired bricks. Various incorporations have been conducted which

are wheat straw (WS, 4% and 8 wt%), sunflower seed cake (SSC, 4 wt%) and olive stone

flour (OSF, 4 & 8 wt%). The results showed increase in porosity, water absorption and

thermal insulation of the produced bricks for all renewable pore-forming agents. Whereas,

a noticeable reduction of the bulk density and the flexural strength were observed.

However, the best compromise is to incorporate 4 wt% of sunflower seed cake, with the

11
lowest grinding, leading to an increase of 23% of porosity and decreases of 17% of the

bending strength and 61% of the thermal conductivity.

Velasco et al. [33] utilized spent mushrooms compost (SMC, 0-17 wt%) in the

manufacturing of better insulation fired bricks. The linear shrinkage (5.50% to 6.40%) and

weight loss (12.50% to 14.0%) of the specimens was slightly increased by the addition of

SMC, while on the other hand, the bulk density of the developed bricks decreased from

1700 kg/m3 to 1500 kg/m3 which implies lighter weight building bricks. It was observed

that the apparent porosity of the specimens was increased with increase in SMC content

from 27.5% to 33% as well as the water absorption was obviously increased up to 22.5%,

thus resulted in reduction in compressive strength up to 65% where the addition of 17% of

SMC produced a brick with a compressive strength of about 14 MPa.

Ornam et al. [34] studied the influence of sago husk waste (SHW) in the production of

fly ash bricks. The specimens were molded and left under the sunlight to dry then burnt at

550 oC by stove zinc plate and aluminum foil for 2h. The brick samples exhibited gradual

decrease in compressive strength with increasing the sago husk contents. On the other

hand, the higher the sago husk content (up to 3.1 vol%) the lower the density of the

specimen could be (1810 kg/m3). The initial rate of absorption of the modified fly ash brick

attained the lowest value which is still within the specifications and requirements of ASTM

C67 [23].

Silva & Perera [35] studied the potential use of rice husk ash (RHA, 0-10 wt%) on the

manufacturing of fried clay bricks. The results showed that RHA improved the brick

properties where the maximum compressive strength of 3.55 MPa (32.7% higher than

conventional fired cay brick) and water absorption of 19% at 4 wt% RHA was obtained.

12
The density of the bricks decreased from approximately 1450 kg/m3 at 0% RHA to about

1220 kg/m3 at 10% RHA. Study concluded that the optimum amount of the waste RHA

that could be replaced with the clay to produce fired clay bricks was 4% by weight.

The above-mentioned studies focused on analyzing the effects of utilizing organic

waste materials on the compressive strength, water absorption and bulk density of burnt

brick manufactured at different firing temperature between 550 oC and 1200 oC as shown in

Fig. 3, Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, respectively. Fig.3 shows that the incorporating increasing

contents, up to 60%, of most of the organic waste reduce the compressive strength of the

manufactured bricks. Meanwhile, some of them increase the compressive strength with

increasing the waste contents. However, the compressive strength of the most

manufactured bricks, at contents up to 40% of various wastes, is still within the minimum

limits stated in ASTM C62 [36] for building bricks.

13
 Fig. 3. Compressive strength of burnt brick incorporated various organic waste

Fig. 4 illustrates the water absorption of burnt bricks, at amounts up to 60% of various

wastes, at firing temperature ranged between 600 oC to 1200 oC. All developed bricks

showed increasing water absorption with increasing organic waste content except for co-

combustion fly ash (CFA) fired at 1000 oC where it decreased. The results conclude that

the utilization of organic waste lead to categorized the water absorption of the

manufactured bricks into the same grade limits prescribed in ASTM C62 [36], where Grade

SW (Severe Weathering), Grade MW (Moderate Weathering) and Grade NW (Negligible

14
Weathering), must present water absorption levels lower than 17%, 22% and no limit,

respectively.

Fig. 4. Water absorption of burnt brick incorporated various organic waste

Fig. 5 presents the comparison of bulk density of different manufactured bricks made of

various organic waste, at contents up to 80%, at firing temperature between 550 oC to 1200
o
C. It’s obviously clear that the inclusion of organic waste lead to enhance the density of

15
 the developed bricks in comparison with the control specimens. The results illustrate that

incorporating increasing organic waste contents (5% and above) yielded to produce

lightweight bricks as per the requirements of American standard ASTM C90 shown in Fig.

5.

Fig. 5. Bulk density of burnt brick incorporated various organic waste

Table 1 Burnt bricks incorporated with organic wastes materials

Compressive
Waste Bulk strength Water
material & Production Unit Size Density (CS) and absorption Other
No. Ref.
Content Method (mm) (BD), flexural (WA) and properties
(wt%) kg/m3 strength Porosity
(FS)
CS ranged
Molded and
from 12.7 - Porosity
Diatomaceous burnt under 120 x 28 Thermal
1 1770 - 9.5 MPa increased [12]
earth residues 850, 950 and conductivity
x 18 1670 FS ranged by 37
(3 – 10%) 1050 oC firing decreased
from 7.8 - vol%
temp.
5.0 MPa

16
 WA
increased
Molded + by 9%
No visible
Municipal oven dried and 8% in
61 x 29 x CS ranged cracks, no
2 solid waste (105 oC) and 1511 - laterite [13]
from 27.2 - efflorescence
(MSW) (5 - then burnt 19 1211 soil and
9.96 MPa and lower
20%) under 850, 900 by 11%
o linear shrinkage
C firing temp. and 10%
in alluvial
soil
Hand holding,
then 24 hr
WA: Firing
natural drying,
Tannery 120 x 60 CS: ranged increased shrinkage
3 48 hr of oven 1850 - [14]
sludge (10 - from 10.98 – from decreased and
drying (105 x 35 1400
40%) o 29.61 MPa 7.2% - no
C) and heated
20.9% efflorescence.
at 900, 950,
and 1000 oC
Oven drying CS: ranged WA:
Recycled for 24 hr at from 12.57 – ranged
300 x 100 Firing energy
4 cigarette butts 105 oC and 1941 - 3.0 MPa from 9% - [15]
saved up to
(2.5, 5, 7.5, then burnt at x 50 1482 FS: ranged 18%.
58%
and 10 %) 1050 oC firing from 2.48 – Porosity:
temp. 1.24 MPa increased
WA
increased
up to
Compressed at 21.2% Thermal
Rice husk (10
54.5 MPa and CS ranged and conductivity
5 – 30%), wood - 1839 – [16]
fired at 900 or from 53.4 - 32.9% (up to 0.68
ash wastes 1394
1000 °C for 4 13.5 MPa. Porosity W/mK/ 15-30%
(10 – 30%)
hr increased reduction)
up to 10.8
vol% and
7.3 vol%
mold
Spent shea compressed CS ranged WA [17-
6 - 1800 -
waste (5- then fired at from 11 - 4 increased -
1220 19]
20%) 900 or 1200 MPa up to 32%
o
C for 1 hr
Air drying for
24 hr then WA
Linear
Sewage oven drying at CS ranged increased
7 - 1610 - shrinkage [20]
sludge waste 105 oC for 24 from 27.1 – from
1204 increased from
(0 - 20%) hr, compacted 2.1 MPa 8.22% to
1.63% to 6.18%
and then fired 19.69%
at1050 oC
WA IRA ranged
Sugarcane varied between 0.55 -
CS ranged
bagasse ash 10 d of sun- between 0.805
from 5.53 -
(5-15%), Rice drying and 228 x 114 1220 – 23.8 – g/cm2/min [21,
8 7.18 MPa
husk ash (5 – then 36 hr of 17.5% Non-
x 76 1060 FS ranged 22]
15%), and firing in kiln at Porosity Efflorescence
from 0.83 –
Lime (3 - 800 °C increased Optimum
1.27 MPa
18%) from 36% moisture
to 44% content

17
 increased from
13.1 – 18.3%
Room temp.
drying for 48 WA Initial
hr, oven CS ranged increased shrinkage and
9 Biosolids (5- Cylinder 2024 – [24]
drying at105 from 29.5 – from volumetric
25%) o 105 x 55 1714
C for 24 hr, 10.5 MPa 11.8% - shrinkage
burnt at 1050 14.98% increased
o
C for 3 hr
Shrinkage
CS ranged ranged between
from 11.8 to 7.3% – 7.5%
Air drying,
10 Waste coal 250 x 120 1040 - 13.2 MPa Porosity Thermal [25]
fired at 1000
(up to 30 %) o x 65 1250 FS ranged increased conductivity
C firing temp.
from 2.7 to ranged from
3.1 MPa 0.19 to 0.23
W/(m °C)
CS ranged WA
Sun drying for from 19 - increased Efflorescence
11 Fly ash (0 - 4-5 d, fired at 225 x 112 1610 - 8.0 MPa from 15% decreased to [26]
25%) 800 oC in kiln x 75 1530 FS ranged to 24% 3.6% of surface
for 3 d from 5.7 - Porosity area
3.0 MPa increased
WA
Compressed at
ranged
20 MPa, oven
between
drying at 40 Thermal
o CS ranged 14.5% to
Olive mill C for 12 hr conductivity
12 20 mm 1920 - from 36.9 - 32.5% [28]
waste (0, 5, and 110 oC for decreased from
(diameter) 1450 10.26 MPa Porosity
and 10%) 24 hr, fired at 0.638 to 0.436
increased
850,950, and W/mK
from
1050 oC for 2
30.8% to
hr
47.0%
CS
Compressed at
decreased
10 MPa, oven WA
Co- (12.5-2.0
drying at 60 ranged Lower
13 combustion o Cylinder 1500 - MPa) and at [29]
C, fired at between shrinkage (<
fly ash (0 - 32.5 x 50 2000 1000 oC it
800, 900, and 5.9% - 4%)
100%) increased
1000 oC in 18.2%
from 13.5 –
kiln.
47 MPa
WA
ranged
Thermal
Olive pomace Molded and from 19%
CS ranged conductivity
14 bottom ash pressed at 54.5 60 x 30 x 1635 - to 31.5% [30]
from 33.9 - reduced from
(10, 20, 30, MPa, burnt at 10 1278 Porosity
10.5 MPa 0.143 to 0.166
40, and 50%) 950 oC for 4 hr ranged
W/mK
28.2% to
39%

Drying at 25 WA Thermal
Kindling o
C and 90% CS ranged increased conductivity
15 from vine 1684 - [31]
humidity, - from 38.04 – from decreased from
shoots (5, 11, 1124
drying again at 1.556 MPa 16.93% to 0.738 to 0.208
and 17%)
100 °C and 36.04% W/m.K

18
 5% humidity, Porosity
fired at 900 oC increased
WA
ranged Linear
Wheat straw,
between shrinkage
olive stone
Dried up to 17.8% to decreased from
flour (4% and FS ranged
16 105 oC, fired 175 x 79 1700 - 30% 5.8% to 3.3% [32]
8%), and from 5.3 –
up to 920 oC x 17 1460 Porosity Thermal
sunflower 10.9 MPa
for 1 hr increased conductivity
seed cake
from reduced up to
(4%)
25.6% to 61%
43.5%
WA
increased
up to
Spent Oven-dried at Linear
CS ranged 22.5%
17 mushrooms 110 oC, fired 300 x 300 1700 - shrinkage [33]
from 39.5 – Porosity
compost (0, 5, at 950 oC in a x (20-30) 1500 increased from
12.5 MPa increased
11, and17%) tunnel kiln 5.50% to 6.40%
from
27.5% to
33%
Moulded, sun- Initial rate of
Sago husk dried, and then absorption
(1.3, 1.7, 2, burnt at about CS ranged varied from
18 200 x 110 1810 - [34]
2.3, 2.6, 2.9, 550 oC by from 21.4 – - 0.014
x 40 2010
3.1, and stove zinc 16 MPa gr/mm2/minute
3.3%) plate and to 0.028
aluminum foil gr/mm2/minute.

Moulded and
Rice husk ash WA Thermal and
fired in an CS ranged
19 (0, 2, 4, 8, 6, 195 x 95 1450 - reached acoustic [35]
industrial scale from 3.7 –
10%) by x 50 1220 19% at properties
Kiln (600-850 1.9 MPa
weight o 4% RHA improved
C)

Table 2 Burnt bricks incorporated with inorganic waste materials

Compressive
Waste Bulk strength Water
Unit
material & Production Density (CS) and absorption Other
No. Size Ref.
Content Method (BD), flexural (WA) and properties
(mm)
(wt%) kg/m3 strength Porosity
(FS)

19
 IRA- 0.3
CS ranged WA varied g/cm2/min
Undergone sun
from 10.0 - from 19.8 to Non-
Waste glass drying for 3 d [37,
1 228 x 1350- 12.56 MPa 17% Efflorescence
sludge (5 – and then burnt in
114 x 76 1375 FS ranged Porosity UPV 38]
25%) a kiln at 850 °C
from 1.09 – decreased increased
for 36 hr
2.07 MPa (46 - 39%) from 1,643–
1,809 m/s
Pressed at 15
Diatomite MPa, Oven
Cubic
(6%) and drying at 100 oC FS increased Porosity
2 shaped 1375 - [39]
sugar filter for 12 hr, and up to 12.9 increased up -
60 x 8 x 1010
mud (30- then fired at 700, MPa to 50.39%
6
0%) 800, and 900 oC
in kiln for 2 hr
Rice husk
Reduction in
ash (5, 10, Sun drying for 5-
dry shrinkage
15, and 20 6 d, oven drying CS ranged
3 77 x 38 1730 - Porosity (5.12-1.5%), [40]
vol%), Brick at 120 oC for 6 hr, from 17.5 –
x 26 1530 increased and firing
waste (5, 10, fired at 800 oC in 12.5 MPa
shrinkage
15, and 20 kiln for 4 hrs
(4.9-1.12%),
vol%),
WA
Air drying for 24
decreased
hr, oven drying at Shrinkage
Waste glass CS ranged from
4 110 oC for 24 hr, 140 x 65 1700 - reduced from [41]
(0, 5, and from 19.3 – 18.66% to
fired at 900,950, x 40 1760 4.34% to
10%) 24.65 MPa 14.78%
and 1000 oC for 1 3.41%
Porosity
hr
decreased
Semi-pressed at
pressure
WA ranged
Marble from 10.9% Thermal
of 40 MPa, air
powder (0, CS ranged to 26.9% conductivity
5 drying for 24 hr, Cylinder 2050 - [42]
5, 10, 15, from 34.2 - Porosity decreased
oven drying at 40 20 x 10 1590
20, 25, 30, o 8.2 MPa increased from 0.97 to
C for 12 hr and
and 35%) from 22.0% 0.40 W/mK.
110 oC for 24 hr,
to 42.8%
fired at 950, and
1050 oC for 2 hr
WA reduced
from 16.4%
Galvanic Linear
Oven drying at to 15.46%
sludge CS ranged shrinkage
6 110 °C for 24 hr, 60 x 30 1760 - Porosity [43]
wastes (1, 2, from 65.2 – reduced from
fired at 950 °C x 10 1450 decreased
3, 4, and 86 MPa -0.265 to -
for 1 hr from 28.86
5%) 0.485%
vol% to
22.43 vol%
Pressed under 2
WA
MPa pressure, CS
increased up Water
oven drying at 100 x increased to
7 Gangue (60 to 12.5% permeability [44]
100 oC for 12 hr, - 40 MPa then
– 90%) 200 x50 Porosity increased to
burnt at 1100 – decreased to
increased up 0.085 cm/s
1200 oC for 45 5 MPa
to 26.5%
minutes
8 Automotive Compressed at 3 60 x 20 FS ranged Firing [45]
- -
waste sludge MPa, oven drying from 4.07 – shrinkage

20
 (0-50%), at 100 oC, burnt x 10 8.14 MPa increased up
glass waste at 800-1000 o C to14.8%
(10 – 20%), for 6 hr
and wood
ash (0 -
10%),
WA
Oven drying at increased
Iron tailings
35 oC for 12 hr, from 16% to Low firing
(100, and CS ranged
9 and then at 105 2060 – 17.2% shrinkage [46]
80%), fly o - from 26.0 –
C for 8 h, fired 1860 Porosity (from 0.76%
ash (0%, 15.8 MPa
at 900, 950 and increased to 1.60%)
and 20%)
1000 oC from 28.5%
to 32.3%
Oven drying at WA
Arsenic-iron CS ranged
10 105 oC for 2 d, 250 x increased [47]
sludge (3, 6, - from 15.1 – -
fired at 1000 oC 125 x 75 from 15% to
9 and 12%) 7.1 MPa
in a kiln for 12 hr 20%
WA
Oven drying at
increased
Borogypsum 105 oC for, fired
CS ranged from 19.1%
11 (0, 2.5, 5, at 800, 900, 2100 - [48]
- from 46.0 to to 22.2% at -
7.5, 10, and 1000, and 1100 1540
o 7.0 MPa 1000 oC
15%) C in an electric
Porosity
furnace for 2 hr
increased

2.1.2 Manufacturing of burnt bricks incorporating inorganic wastes materials

Inorganic wastes are non-biodegradable materials that contain chemical substances of

mineral origin.

Kazmi et al. [37, 38] studied the potential use of waste glass sludge (WGS) in the

production of clay brick at varies percentage (5 – 25%) by weight. The molded bricks were

burnt in a kiln at 850 °C for 36h. The results indicated that, the higher replacement of WGS

content, the lesser unit weight of the brick could be. For instance, the partial replacement of

clay by 25% WGS resulted in 3% lighter brick. The compressive strength of manufactured

bricks was increased by 23% for the samples incorporating 25% replacement of clay by

21
WGS due to the reduction in porosity. Also, the flexural strength was increased by almost

100% by the addition of WGS. Moreover, with increasing of WGS content the water

absorption of brick samples decreased from 20% - 17% at 5 and 25% replacement of clay,

respectively. Non-efflorescence was observed on the manufactured brick which improve

the aesthetic of masonry structures.

Man et al. [39] studied the physical and mechanical properties of porous bricks

manufactured by mixing diatomite and sugar filter mud (SFM) in various proportions (0 –

30 wt%) at different firing temperature (700 – 900 oC). Bulk density decreased with

increase diatomite and SMF additions in parallel with the firing temperature, therefore the

flexural strength increases. Results revealed that the best mix of mechanical and physical

properties is accomplished for a blend of 70 wt% diatomite, 20 wt% SFM with the

additions of 6 wt% dolomite and 4 wt% sodium perborates burnt at 800 oC. therefore, based

on the mentioned optimal proportion of the waste materials mentioned above, the open

porosity (50.39%), bulk density (1.25 g/cm3), the flexural strength (10.05 MPa) were

higher than porous brick properties prescribed in Chinese national standard [49].

Sorna et al. [40] investigated the incorporation of rice husk ash (RHA, 5-20 vol%) and

brick waste (BW, 5-10 vol%), as a partial substitution of clay, in the production of

construction bricks (fired/1000 oC) . Test results on the developed brick revealed a decrease

in dry shrinkage (5.12-1.5%), firing shrinkage (4.9-1.12%), apparent density (1730-1530

kg/m3) and cold crushing strength (17.5-12.5 MPa). Thus, rice husk ash and brick waste

can be utilized as alternative raw materials to produce fired clay bricks with significant

properties and then contribute to sustainable development.

22
 Phonphuak et al. [41] investigated the use of waste glass (WG, 0-10 wt%) in the

production of fired clay brick (burnt/900, 950 and 1000 oC) to enhance the physico-

mechanical parameters and diminish the burning temperature. Results revealed a linear

reduction (4.34-3.41%) in the shrinkage as the content of waste class increased and showed

increment in the bulk density (1700-1760 kg/m3) as the content of waste glass increased.

On the other hand, water absorption (14.78-18.66%) and apparent porosity (35.17-29.71%)

showed similar trends where decreased with increase of waste glass and firing temperature

as well. Moreover, the result indicated that the compressive strength obviously enhanced

with increasing waste glass content and firing temperature, thus obtained a compressive

strength ranged between 19.3-24.65 MPa for the incorporation of 5-10% of waste glass,

respectively. The study concluded that the waste glass could be utilized as a potential

replacement material for clay to produce fired clay bricks with good physical and

mechanical properties.

Mucahit Sutcu et al. [42] replaced the clay by waste marble powder (WMP, 0 – 35

wt%) to produce lightweight fired clay bricks (semi-pressed and fired/950-1050 oC).

Results indicated that the addition of waste marble powder decreased the bulk density of

the fired clay bricks from 2050 kg/m3 to 1590 kg/m3 with respect to waste proportions and

firing temperature. Thus, the apparent porosity increased (22.0% - 42.8%) with decreasing

of the bulk density of the bricks for both burning temperature. Similarly, the water

absorption was linearly increased from 10.9% to 26.9% with increasing waste marble

powder content from 0% to 35%, respectively on both firing temperatures, whereas their

compressive strength decreased to 8.2 MPa at 30% addition of waster marble powder.

23
 Pérez-Villarejo et al. [43] studied the potential use of galvanic sludge wastes (GSW, up

to 5 wt%) in the production of ceramic clay bricks (fired/950 oC). The results revealed that,

the addition of galvanic sludge wastes obviously diminished the linear shrinkage (-0.265 to

-0.485%) and bulk density (1760-1450 kg/m3) of the developed bricks whereas, it showed

slightly higher closed porosity values compared to the control clay bricks. Moreover, the

water absorption showed slight reduction from 16.4% to 15.46% which doesn’t reflect

much change as well as the open porosity (28.86 vol% - 22.43 vol%). The ultimate

compressive strength (86 MPa) of the produced bricks was obtained by the addition of 2-3

wt% GSW, nevertheless, in all cases, compressive strength values were always higher than

the minimum value required by the EN 772-1:2011 [50].

Zhu et al. [44] utilized solid waste named gangue (60 – 90 wt%) as partial replacement

of aggregate, and added tailings (10 - 40 wt%) as binder agents to produce a permeable

bricks under firing temperature of 1140 – 1200 oC for 45 minutes. Results revealed that

with increasing the proportion of gangue the permeability and apparent porosity increased

and exhibited the highest water permeability of 0.085 cm/s and highest apparent porosity of

26.5% at 90 wt% of gangue contents. On the other side, the compressive strength decreases

with the increasing gangue content. It reaches a peak of nearly 40 MPa with 60 wt%

gangue additions and decreases dramatically to 22 MPa when the content of gangue is 70

wt%. Finally, water absorption increased with the increase gangue content and firing

temperature from 3% to 12.5%.

Wiemes et al. [45] evaluated the utilization of automotive waste sludge (AWS, up to 50

wt%), glass waste (GW, 10 – 20 wt%), and wood ash (WA, 10 wt%), all generated from

Brazilian industrial companies, as raw materials in the manufacturing of clay bricks

24
(compressed/800-1000 oC). The optimal results were obtained at the total of 60% of

industrial waste incorporated in brick making at all firing temperatures, thus the flexural

strength increased to 6.72 MPa for 40% AWS, 10% GW and 10% WA incorporation at

1000o C. Similarly, firing shrinkage of specimens showed significant increased up to

14.8% with the increase of industrial wastes content up to 70% (50% AWS, 10% GW and

10% WA) as well as with increase firing temperature.

Yang et al. [46] studied the utilization of iron tailings (IT) as 100% by weight raw

materials in the production of fired bricks. Fly ash (FA) was added with proportion of 0%

to 20% by weight to increase the quality of the produced bricks at 900 oC to 1000 oC firing

temperature. The results showed that, regardless of the firing temperature, the open

porosity and water absorption of the produced fired bricks was related where they increased

with increase in fly ash content which found to be increased from 28.5% to 32.3% at and

from 16% to 17.2%, respectively at 950 oC firing temperature. Moreover, results revealed a

low firing shrinkage of all specimens which varies from 0.76% to 1.60%. Similarly, a

reduction in bulk density (2060-1860 kg/m3) and compressive strength (26-15.8 MPa) were

measured with the increase in fly ash content but they are still within the requirements of

the building bricks codes. The study revealed that it is possible to utilize the iron tailings

wastes as a substitution of normal clay and shale to produce building bricks.

Hassan et al. [47] studied the potential use of arsenic-iron sludge (AIS, 3-12 wt%) as a

partial replacement of clay in the production of fired brick. Results indicated that the

compressive strength of the produced bricks increased from 14.1MPa to 15.1MPa, at first

two mix proportions, and then diminished to 7.1MPa with the increase of iron sludge

percentage. Consequently, the water absorption was increased from 15% to 20% with

25
increase of arsenic-iron sludge content. The study concluded that the optimal content of

arsenic-iron sludge to manufacture good bonding of clay-sludge bricks was found to be 6

wt%.

Emrullahoglu Abi [48] evaluated the feasibility of utilizing boric acid production waste

(borogypsum (BG): produced from industry in Emet-Turkey) as a raw material for brick

making. The proportion of 2.5 to 15% by weight of borogypsum was added to the brick

production and then tested in accordance to Turkish Standards for fired clay bricks. The

results showed a significant reduction (up to 16.47%) in the bulk density of the produced

bricks with increase in borogypsum content, regardless to the firing temperature. on the

other hand, the water absorption test revealed clear increments (from 19.1% to 22.2%) with

regards to borogypsum content at 1000 oC firing temperature. At the same firing

temperature, the compressive strength of the produced bricks decreased from 28.0 MPa to

21.0 MPa at the first BG proportion (2.5 wt%) and then increased with increase BG content

up to 30 MPa (at 10 wt% BG) and decreased again at 15% of BG content to be 24 MPa.

In section 2.1.2, it was observed that the utilization of inorganic waste materials in the

manufacturing of bricks effect mainly the compressive strength, water absorption, and bulk

density. Thus, Fig.6 presents the compressive strength of burnt bricks, in accordance with

ASTM C62 [36], manufactured with different types of inorganic waste, at amounts up to

35% and firing temperature between 800 oC to 1200 oC. Most of the results showed

decreasing strength with increasing inorganic waste content, where, in some cases,

increasing inorganic waste content, up to 10%, improved the bricks’ compressive strength

such as WG [41] and BG [48]. However, the inclusion of 25% inorganic waste produced

26
burnt bricks that fulfil the minimum compressive strength stated at ASTM C62 [36] as

shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. Compressive strength of burnt brick incorporated various inorganic waste

Fig. 7 exhibits the water absorption results of several samples from various studies at

section 2.1.2 which contain increasing contents of inorganic waste (0 – 35%) and subjected

to firing temperatures (800 oC to 1200 oC). overall, the results conclude that it is possible to

produce inorganic waste containing bricks exhibiting water absorption levels similar to the

typical range of grade SW and grade MW stated in ASTM C62 [36] (Fig. 7).

27
 Fig. 7. Water absorption of burnt brick incorporated various inorganic waste

It is observed from the results obtained from the various studies in section 2.1.2 that the

bulk density of inorganic waste containing bricks generally improved with increasing the

replacement percentages and so for lower firing temperature between 800 oC to 900 oC as

shown in Fig. 8. Fig. 8 also shows the density classification of masonry brick according to

ASTM C90 [51], where, the manufactured bricks containing 35% of inorganic waste can

categorized as lightweight products except iron tailings [46] which categorized as medium

weight.

28
 Fig. 8. Bulk density of burnt brick incorporated various inorganic waste

Other several researches have also carried out to examine the feasibility use of waste

materials in manufacturing of burnt clay, including paper waste [52], shale, fly ash, crushed

bricks and waste paper [53], waste sugarcane bagasse coal mine wastes [54], [55],saw dust

[56], and paper mill sludge [57]. They found that all these waste materials meet the

minimum requirements and they are a promising and sustainable materials. Moreover,

Silva et al. [58] reported an extensive review on the utilization of glass waste in the

production of ceramic bricks.

2.2 Manufacturing of unburnt bricks incorporating wastes materials

The above-mentioned production method of bricks incorporating waste materials

required high firing temperature which still has the shortcoming of high-energy

29
consumption and large quantity of greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, researchers have

studied production of bricks from waste materials based on unburnt method as shown in

Table 3. This category does not require firing temperature for the production but then

depends on cementing method.

Torkaman, et al. [59] investigated the utilization of wood fiber waste (WFW), rice husk

ash (RHA), and limestone powder waste (LPW) as partial replacement of cement (25%

each) to produce lightweight concrete blocks. The compressive strength of the concrete

block incorporated with 25% of WFW and LPW was considerably decreased due to the

low specific gravity of the two recycled waste materials. While, the replacement of 25% of

RHA showed an increase in the compressive strength of the concrete block compared to

other studied waste materials. Also, the water absorption was decreased from 11.8%, for

the control, to 6.6%, 6.3%, and 4.7% for the 25% replacement of WFW, LWP, and RHA,

respectively. The bulk density of specimens was also decreased to attain 30% lighter than

the weight of the conventional concrete blocks. The study revealed that innovative

lightweight concrete block could be produced from the above mentioned waste materials.

Cheah et al. [60] investigated the performance of the building blocks incorporated with

pulverized fuel ash (PFA) and high calcium wood ash (HCWA) as a total replacement of

cement. The content of the above mentioned wastes was from 0 to 100% by weight. The

compressive and flexural strength of the specimens were significantly increased with

increasing the contents of PFA up to 60% and HCWA up to 40%, which attained the

maximum strength of 30.0 MPa and 1.55 MPa, respectively. As a result, the combination of

wood ash and fuel ash waste can be used in block production. Therefore, the produced

30
hollow concrete block satisfied the requirements prescribed in ASTM C90 [51] which can

be categorized as load-bearing units with normal weight.

Martín-Morales et al. [61] evaluated the feasibility of utilizing recycled aggregates

(RA) in the production of concrete hollow blocks (CHB). Concrete recycled aggregate

(CRA) and mixed recycled aggregate (MRA) were added as partially replacement of

aggregate by weight with varied proportions (50 – 100%). The results showed that the

density of CHB incorporated recycled aggregate decreased up to 16.51% in relation to the

control blocks. Besides, compressive strength, water absorption was obviously increased by

the substitution of fine and coarse recycled aggregate. However, the manufacturing of CHB

incorporated with above mentioned waste showed an appropriate performance which meet

the requirement of the Euro code EN 771-3 [62] and classified as non-structural block.

Eliche-Quesada et al. [63] used two industrial waste materials (biomass ash (BA) and

dust filter from gases purification (DFGD)) to produce a sustainable masonry unit called

silica–calcareous unburnt bricks by cementing method. Bricks were produced by mixing

the biomass ash and dust filter by proportion of (100- 50%) and (0 – 50%) by weight,

respectively. The results revealed that the increase of dust filter waste resulted in higher

water absorption (up to 26.7%), and lower bulk density of silica–calcareous bricks leading

to lighter bricks. Thus, the bulk density of the produced bricks containing only biomass ash

was about 1514 kg/m3 while for the bricks having 50% by weight of dust filter wastes was

1346 kg/m3. The study concluded that, bricks incorporating 90% and 10% by weight of

biomass ash and dust filter, respectively satisfied the criteria prescribed in EN 771-2: 2011

[64] with the declared values of bulk density (1471kg/m3), compressive strength (17.3

MPa), water absorption (24.2%), and thermal conductivity (0.48 W/mK).

31
 El-Attar et al. [65] investigated the utilization of cement kiln dust (CKD) as partial

replacement (0%, 30% and 50%) of cement in the manufacturing of solid cement brick.

Brick samples were prepared and cured by spraying water two times a day for 28 days.

With increasing CKD content and decreasing cement content, the unit weight was slightly

decreased (from 1.97 to 2.22 t/m3) and clearly observed an increase in water absorption

percentage by 1.20 - 5.40% and 7.80 - 11.40% for the addition of 30% and 50% cement

kiln dust, respectively. Moreover, the compressive strength of the brick showed

systematical reduction (12.8% - 50%) with increase of CDK, regardless of cement type and

bricks age. Besides, the manufactured solid cement brick exceeded the minimum strength

limit prescribed in ASTM C90 [51] which is classified as load-bearing brick with 30% cost

saving.

Kumar et al. [66] assessed the properties of cement stabilized masonry blocks (CSMB)

incorporated with brick powder (BP, 70 wt%) and fine recycled concrete aggregate (FRCA,

30 wt%) as partial replacement of sand and the addition of silica fume (SF, 2 wt%), fly ash

(FA, 2 wt%) and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS, 2 wt%) as partial

replacement of cement. Test results revealed that the dry density of the manufactured

CSMB units at 28 days ranged between 1758 kg/m3 and 1875 kg/m3 where the lower and

higher density was obtained with the addition of GGBS and SF, respectively. Moreover,

the wet compressive strength (6.6 MPa – 4.38 MPa) of all tested specimens met the

minimal strength value (3.5 MPa) prescribed in Indian standard [67]. Tests on water

absorption after 24h of immersion exhibited that no significant effect of the addition of SF

or FA into the mixes was noticed in comparison with the control mix while the highest

percentage of water absorption (16.5%) was recorded with the addition of GGBS, but, still

32
within permissible limit of 18% by weight. Thus, the desirable mix for the production of

CSMB is measured to be 6% cement content with 2% SF or FA.

Poinot et al. [68] studied the utilization of boiler ash (BA) in the formulation of alkali-

activated bricks. According to the tests results, higher compressive strengths were achieved

in the brick manufactured with all above mentioned wastes, thus a brick made with a solids

phase weight ratio of ash (70): clay (20): lime (10), liquid to solid ratio of 0.45, and 2M

NaOH produced bricks with compressive strengths between 11 MPa and 15 MPa after 28

days curing at 30 °C. Furthermore, early strength development was perceived, as more than

55% of the 28-days strength was achieved after one day curing.

Raut & Gomez [69] developed an eco-friendly brick by incorporating glass powder

(GP, 20 – 35 wt%) and palm oil fly ash (POFA, 20 – 35 wt%) as partial replacement of

cement and using oil palm fibers ( 0.5 – 1% wt of binder) and lime as binder. The

developed eco-friendly brick had a diverse correlation of porosity (19 - 27%) and bulk

density (1628 – 1338.7 kg.m3). Water absorption exhibited the same trend as that of

porosity, but it’s still within the limit prescribed in ASTM C67 [23]. Moreover, as the oil

palm fiber proportion increases the initial rate of absorption (0.2 – 5 kg/m2) increases.

Results revealed that utilizing fiber contents, as binder decreased the compressive strength

(15.39 MPa – 7.21 MPa) of manufactured brick. It can also be observed that compressive

strength increases with increase of glass powder content at the same fibre content. On the

other hand, the flexural strength (1.12 – 1.625 MPa) increases with the increase of fiber

contents in the newly developed bricks, thus the highest flexural strength was obtained at

the mix of 35% of glass powder, 35% palm oil fly ash and 15% crushed dust with 0.75% of

33
oil palm fibers. Thus, it can be construed that glass powder is more substantial than palm

oil fly ash for the strength enhancement.

Nagaraj & Shreyasvi [70] studied exploratory utilization of iron mine spoil waste

(MSW, 30 -50 wt%) and quarry dust ( 40 -62 wt%), as replacement of sand, and lime (2

wt%) as partial replacement of cement in the production of compressed stabilized earth

blocks (CSEB). Blocks were molded and pressed by toggle lower mechanism and the

undergone a moist curing for 1 month. Results revealed that the optimal compressive,

flexural strength and water absorption were achieved at 30% of mine spoil waste contents,

60% of quarry dust and 2% of lime, thus found to be 5 MPa, 1.12 MPa and 12%,

respectively at six months of ageing.

Madrid et al. [71] investigated the feasibility of utilizing by product materials to

produce a greener concrete masonry unit. Sawdust (SD, 5 -20 vol%) was used as partial

replacement for sand and then the cement was partially replaced by lime mud (LM, 5 -15

vol%) and wood ash (WA, 5 -15 vol%). The density of all specimens was obtained to be in

the range of 1380 kg/m3 to 2080 kg/m3, however the increase of the proportions of sawdust

and wood ash reduced the density and increased water absorption (sawdust/ (11.5 - 24%),

wood ash/ (11.5 – 17.1%)). On the other hand, the incorporation of lime mud in the

specimens reduced the water absorption (11.5 – 10%) and slightly increased the density at

the optimal percentage of 6.1% of cement content. The incorporation of sawdust and wood

ash reduced the compressive strength by up to 86% and 17.7%, respectively while the

addition of lime mud increased the compressive strength by 23.2% compared to the control

specimens. In conclusion, the optimal replacement percentage of sawdust, wood ash, and

34
lime mud were found to be 0%, 10%, and 15%, respectively to produce concrete masonry

units that meet the requirements for load-bearing walls.

Sodupe-Ortega et al. [72] evaluated the utilization of crumb rubber (CR, 10-40 vol%)

as a partial substitution of fine aggregate to manufacture rubberized long hollow blocks and

bricks using an auto compacting machine with varied percentage of w/c ratio (0.7-0.9).

The results showed that the dry density of the rubberized specimens decreased up to 16%

as crumb rubber increases, thus attained density ranged from 2042 kg/m3 to 1724 kg/m3.

Hence, compressive strength exhibited dramatic reduction at 0.8 w/c ratio with an increase

in rubber content (19.24-7.56 MPa) at 28 days of curing, particularly the incorporation of

more than 20% of crumb rubber. The study recommended the optimal percentage of crumb

rubber to be not more than 20% for w/c ratio of 0.9.

Sakhare & Ralegaonkar [73] presented the utilization of bio-briquette ash (BBA) as

partial replacement of sand (5-55 wt%) to produce masonry bricks. Test results found that

as the content of BBA increases, the density decreases from 1470 kg/.m3 at 5% of BBA

replacement to 1170 kg/.m3 at 55% BBA replacement. In contrast, with the increase of

BBA contents the compressive strength increased from 3.64 MPa at 5% to 4.19 MPa at

35% BBA and water absorption increased from 13% at 5% to 25% at 55%. The research

revealed that the optimal mix proportion of BBA to be 35% and the developed BBA bricks

to be used for non-load bearing walls.

Mohammed & Aswin [74] presented the feasibility of utilizing sawdust (SD, 10-100

vol%) in the production of interlocking bricks with the incorporation of cementitious

material (15-60% fly ash (FA) and 5% silica fume(SF)). Tests results revealed an increase

in the compressive strength of the developed interlocking bricks and found to be 10.43

35
MPa. Also, Initial rate of absorption was enhanced with the addition of sawdust and

attained to be 65.5 kg/m2 per minute which fulfilled the requirements stated in ASTM C67

[23]. In contrast, the water absorption result was found to be 10% which exceeds the

minimum percentage stated in the above mentioned standard. The study confirmed the

potential use of the sawdust mixed with fly ash and silica fume in brick production.

Mahoutian & Shao [75] explored the utilization of steel slag (SS) as a total replacement

of cement and blast furnace slag (BFS) as a total replacement of fine aggregate in making a

clean and eco-friendly construction concrete block. Based on the test results, blocks

incorporated with 100% steel slag and 100% blast furnace slag had higher density (2545

kg/m3) compared with the commercial cement concrete (2255 kg/m3), thus resulting in

slightly higher water absorption (6.7%). The produced concrete block exhibited dry and

wet compressive strength similar to that of the dry commercial cement block which

attained to be 23.6 MPa. Also, its weight decreased by only 17% after 20 cycles of freeze

and thaw which indicated a good resistance against the freeze and thaw. The results

demonstrated that the developed eco-friendly bricks contributed no waste, consumes no

natural resources and thus is a clean product with cost saving.

Ismail et al. [76] determined the potential use of recycled fine aggregate (RFA, 25-100

wt%) obtained from waste residual wall to substitute normal sand in the manufacturing of

concrete bricks. Test results revealed a reduction (up to 3.5%) in bulk density of the

developed bricks, except for the incorporation of 50% RFA as a replacement of normal

sand, which showed 1.7% higher bulk density than control brick. Results also showed

increases in compressive strength with increases in the proportion of RFA up to 50% and

then it tends to decrease with increases of RFA contents. However, a significant

36
compressive strength was achieved when the specimen was incorporated with 50% FRA,

which was 20.98 MPa. At the same proportion of FRA, flexural strength was obtained to be

5.35 MPa which is higher than the flexural strength of the control bricks (2.93%).

Similarly, the water absorption increased (from 9.53 to 11.46 %) with increase of the above

mentioned waste, except at the proportion of 50% RFA which indicated slightly less water

absorption (9.33%).

Holmes et al. [77] studied the performance of masonry block incorporated with

incinerator bottom ash (BA, 0-100 wt%) as a substitution of fine aggregate. Results showed

direct effects in the mechanical properties of the developed bricks where compressive

strength (10.7-4.0 MPa), flexural strength (2.3-1.0 MPa) and density (2214-2009 kg/m3)

decreased with the increase of incinerator bottom ash content. In contrast, the permeability

of water was increased with increases of incinerator bottom ash content which increased

from 7.0% to 20.4%. The study concluded that the optimal proportion of incinerator bottom

ash should not be more than 20% of the total fine aggregate.

Contreras et al. [78] utilized the construction and demolition waste (CDW), in Brazil,

as partial replacement for aggregate (65-90 wt%) to produce new concrete brick

(compacted using uniaxial hydraulic press). Cement and lime were used as additives. Thus,

the optimal mix was found to be 70% of CDW for both binders, cement and lime. The

compressive strength, water absorption, apparent porosity and density were found to be

7.39 MPa, 19.09%, 32.11% and 1800 kg/m3, respectively at the proportion of 70% CDW

with cement binder. Moreover, the use of CDW reduced the cost of the bricks and attained

sustainable and environmental friendly products to be used as load-bearing materials.

37
Table 3 Unburnt bricks incorporated with waste materials
Compressive
Waste Bulk strength
Water
material & Production Unit Size density (CS) and Other
No. absorption Ref.
Content Method (mm) (BD), flexural properties
(wt%),(WA)
wt% kg/m3 strength
(FS)
Molded and
Wood fiber, CS
vibrated for 1
Rice husk decreased WA
min, pressed, 2200-
1 ash, and 150 x 150 from 6.29 decreased to [59]
and then cured 1400 -
Limestone x 150 MPa to 1.61, 6.6, 6.3, and
at 25 ± oC and
powder 1.43, and 4.7%
65 ± 5% RH
(25%) 2.87 MPa
for 28 d
Pressed, air
Pulverized CS ranged
dried for 24 hr
fuel ash, and from 2.5 to Ultrasonic
at 28 ± 5 oC
2 high 290 x 140 Normal 30 MPa WA pulse velocity [60]
and 80 ± 5%
calcium x 100 Weight FS ranged decreased (UPV)
RH, and then
wood ash from 0.2 to increased
cured for 7, 28,
(0-100%) 1.55 MPa
90, 280, 360 d
Pressed by
Concrete
vibro- WA
recycled CS ranged Adequate
compressor 2045- increased
aggregate from (13.83 durability
with 4000 1856, from
3 (50 -100%), 400 x 200 – 18.81) against [61]
r.p.m, cured by and (7.79% to
and mixed x 200 MPa, and freeze-thaw
the water vapor 1891- 10.05%),
recycled (14.01 – and salt
for 1 hr, and 1816 and (7.65 to
aggregate 17.28) crystallization
then cured in 11.81%)
(50 -100%)
water chamber.
Molded,
pressed at 10 WA
MPa, air dried increased
Biomass ash Thermal
for 1 day, from 19.8%
(100- 50%), CS varied conductivity
4 cured at room 60 x 30 x 1471 - to 27.5% [63]
and dust from 17.3 – decreased
temperature for 15 1346 Porosity
filter (0 – 5.9 MPa from 0.655 to
28 d., and then increased
50%) 0. 42 W/mK
oven drying at from 29.4%
105 °C until to 37.9%
constant mass.
Cement kiln Air drying for Water
dust (0%, 1 day, and then absorption
CS varied
5 30%, and cured by 250 x 120 2220 - increased by Cost saving [65]
from 26.5 –
50%) with spraying water x 60 1970 percentage up to 30%
17.4 MPa
150 kg/m3of two times a from 1.2%
PC day for 28 d to 11.4%
Brick
powder Dried, covered
(70%) and by wet gunny
CS varied WA varied
6 fine bags, and then 190 × 90 × 1758 - [66]
from 6.6 – from 9.7% -
recycled cured by 90 1875
4.38 MPa to 16.5%
concrete praying water
aggregate for 28 d
(30%)

38
 CS varied
Cured in water
7 Boiler ash 230 x 100 from 11 [68]
at 30 oC for 28 1360 - -
(70%) x 65 MPa to 15
d
MPa
WA ranged
Glass CS ranged between
Molded, air
powder (20 from 15.39 – 11.48% - Thermal
dried for a
8 – 35%) and 210 x 100 1628 – 7.21 MPa 18.5% conductivity [69]
couple of d,
palm oil fly x 100 1338.7 FS ranged Porosity reduced up to
and then cured
ash (20 – from 1.12 – increased 0.39 W/mK
for 28 d.
35%) 1.625 MPa from 19% to
27%
Iron mine WA ranged
CS ranged
spoil waste Pressed, from (12.0 -
from 3.5 –
(30 -50%), covered by 14.7%),
9 230 x 110 5.4 MPa [70]
quarry dust gunny bags and - (15.9 - -
x 75 FS ranged
(40 -62%), sprayed for 28 49.9%), and
from 0.74 –
and lime d (14.8 –
1.12 MPa
(2%) 4.5%)
Sawdust (5 -
20 vol%), Thermal
CS varied WA
wood ash (5 o conductivity
10 Cured at 20 C 2080 - from 0.83 increased [71]
-15 vol%), Various varied from
for 28 d 1380 MPa to 7.56 from 11.5%
and lime 0.55 – 1.12
MPa - 24%
mud (5 -15 W/mK
vol%),
Pressed at 69
kPa for 5 s, and
Crumb then water- CS ranged
11 2042 - WA [72]
rubber (10- cured Various from 19.24- -
1742 increased
40 vol%) automated tray 7.56 MPa
system at room
temp. for 28 d.
Thermal
Pressed at 14
conductivity
MPa, dried for WA
Bio- CS ranged lowered by
12 3 d, water- 230 x 100 1470- increased [73]
briquette ash from 3.64 - 59 and 52%
cured for 7 d, x 85 1170 from 13% to
(5 – 55%) 4.19 MPa compared to
and then sun 25%
clay and fly
drying for 7 d.
ash brick
CS up to
10.43 MPa Initial rate of
Added 60% fly
FS ranged absorption
Sawdust ash and 5%
13 from WA reached increased up [74]
(10-100 silica fume as - -
0.00107 10% to 6.55
vol%) cementitious
MPa to g/cm2per
materials,
0.02128 minute
MPa
Molded and CS ranged
Steel slag pressed at 12.5 from 4.1 to WA
Clean and
14 and blast MPa, placed in 2255– 35.9 MPa increased [75]
Various cost saving
furnace slag the carbonation 2545 FS ranged from 5.5%
product
(100%) activation for 2 from 0.5 – to 6.7%
or 24 hr 8.9 MPa

39
 Pressed at 140
CS ranged
N/mm2, dried Thermal
Recycled 12.75 – WA
for 24 hr, cured conductivity
15 fine 216 x 97 x 1968– 20.98 MPa increased [76]
by water decreased up
aggregate 68 1962 FS ranged from 9.33 to
spraying, and to 0.82
(25-100%) from 2.11 – 11.46 %
then open air W/mK
5.35 MPa
dried for 28 d.
Molded, placed
CS ranged
at polythene
from 10.7- WA
Incinerator sheet for 24 hr,
16 440 x 215 2214– 4.0 MPa increased [77]
bottom ash demolding then -
x 100 2009 FS ranged from 7.0%
(0-100%) cured in water
from 2.3-1.0 to 20.4%
tank at 20 oC
MPa
for 28 d.
Compacted
Construction
using a WA varied
and CS ranged
17 uniaxial 1720– from [78]
demolition - from 4.12 – -
hydraulic 1850 19.09% to
waste (65- 7.73 MPa
press, and then 13.60%
90%)
cured for 21 d.
Pressed by 18
Municipal MPa uniaxial
CS ranged WA
18 sludge pressure, cured 1965– [79]
- from 5.23 - increased up -
(WTPW, 0- at 24 oC and 1925
4.25 MPa to 21.7%
5%) 95% RH for 28
d
Moulded,
covered with
Ultrasonic
wet clothes for
CS ranged pulse velocity
2 d in lab
from7.13 - WA varied ranged from
Fly ash and temp.,
19 200 x 90 x 1665– 17.36 MP between 2.2 to 2.96 [80]
bottom ash demolded and
60 1340 FS ranged 12.6% and km/s.
(0 – 75%) then cured
from 1.21 to 29.2%. IRS increased
partially in
2.34 MPa from 0.83-1.8
water tank at
kg/mm2 min
22 oC and 95%
RH
Compacted,
cured at 80 oC
CS ranged
Recycled and 95% RH WA varied
from 6.2 –
20 calcined for 7d, and 240 x 115 2127– between [81]
25.3 MPa -
oyster-shells then placed in x 53 2189 8.3% to
FS increased
ash (0-20%) air at 24 oC for 11.7%
by 23%
14, 28, and 108
d.
CS ranged
Fly ash (0- Molded and from 16.10
WA varied
15%) and compacted at to 22.10
21 220 x 105 1950- between [82]
rice husk 35 MPa and MPa -
x 60 1725 9.2% to
ash (10- then cured for FS ranged
14.8%
20%) 28 d. from 2.80 to
3.50 MPa,
Formed by
Fly ash CS 7.5 MPa
22 hydraulic press WA rated of [83]
(88%) and Various 970 FS: 0.55
at 6.13 MPa 60.87%
lime (12%) MPa
and then cured

40
 for 7 hr at
autoclave

Compacted,
stored for 24
Fine quarry CS ranged
hr, cured in Cubic
23 waste (0, 10, 2370- from 25 [84]
water tank for 50 x 50 x - -
20, 30, 40 2220 MPa to 9
28 up to 100 d, 50
and 50%) MPa
and then air
drying for 1 d
Moulded,
pressed by
WA was
compaction CS reduced
24 Palm oil fuel 200 x 100 2120– 0.1% higher No [85]
machine, and from 16-7.5
ash (0-60%) x 70 1980 than control efflorescence
then cured at MPa
sample
control room
for 28 d to 56 d
Moulded,
compacted by
hydraulic jack CS ranged
25 Oil palm 220 x 110 1800– [86]
machine, and from – 22 - -
kernel shell x 80 1300
then cured for MPa
28 d at
humidity room
Fly ash (0 – CS in range
casted and Shrinkage
100%) 21- 43 MPa WA varied [87]
cured for 7, 28 100 x 20 x 1657– varied
26 Brick FS in range from 38 to
and 90 d at RH 20 1756 between 1.1.9
powder (0 – 1.8 – 10.5 110 kg/m3
of 50% to 5.7%
100%) MPa
Optimum
Moulded in
MgO rich 1890- moisture
cylindrical At 90 d and Optimum
kiln dust (3 - 2000 content
mould, and 15% dosage, WA at 28 d [88]
27 18%), and - and increased
then cured in CS is 9.9 ranged from
Lime (3 - 1890– from 12.6 –
water tank for MPa 12% - 14%
18%) 1800 15.7% and
28 and 90 d
13.1 – 18.3%,
Lime (4%,
8%, 10%) Moulded and
Cylindrical
coal fly ash then cured
60 mm CS varied WA ranged
(10%, 12%, under room 1600- [89]
28 diameter between 7.6 from 11% - -
16%) and temp. (about 1620
and 85 mm and 8.2 MPa 16%
wood 21.5 oC for 28
height
aggregate d.
(1.5%, 3%)

41
 Rodrigues & Holanda [79] utilized municipal sludge from a water treatment plant waste

(WTPW, up to 5 wt%) in the manufacturing of soil cement bricks. A reduction in the

compressive strength of the soil cement bricks incorporated the above mentioned waste

were decreased with increase of the waste contents. The strength was found to be 4.25 MPa

at 5% municipal sludge which are greater than the minimum strength prescribed in the

Brazilian Standard [90]. Results revealed that the apparent density of the innovated brick

was slightly decreased with increase of waste contents to be 1925 kg/m 3 while their water

absorption increased up to 21.7%.

Naganathan et al. [80] carried out an experimental study on the bricks performance

constructed using fly ash (FA) and bottom ash (BA) as partial replacement of cement.

Pressing and firing processes were eliminating during the production of the bricks. Results

showed a good performance on the tested properties compared to the conventional bricks

where the compressive strength increased from 7.13 MPa to 17.36 MPa with the best

mixing ratio of 1:1:0.45 (bottom ash: fly ash: cement). Flexural strength also increased with

the increase of above mentioned wastes which varied from 1.21 to 2.34 MPa whereas the

fresh density decreased (up to 1340 kg/m3). Moreover, results revealed that increase in fly

ash decreased the water absorption (up to 15.2%). The study concluded that utilizing fly

ash and bottom ash on brick making led to bulk consumption of wastes and contributed to

sustainable development.

Li et al. [81] incorporated the recycled calcined oyster-shells ash (OSA) as a partial

replacement (0-20 wt%) of lime in the making of unburnt fly ash bricks. Test results

indicated that increase oyster-shells up to 15% and lime up to 5% increased the

compressive and flexural strength of the produced samples by 16% and 23%, respectively

42
thus further addition of oyster-shells decreased the mechanical strengths. However, the

recycled oyster-shells have a substantial influence in strength increases and durability of

unburnt fly ash bricks. The study concluded that calcined oyster-shells ash could produce a

good quality bricks that satisfied the Chinese national standards [49].

Hwang & Huynh [82] studied the potential use of fly ash (FA) and rice husk ash (RHA)

as partial replacement of aggregate (10-20 wt%) in the production of unfired brick. Results

showed that, increase in the above mentioned waste increased the compressive and flexural

strength from 16.10 to 22.10 MPa and 2.80 to 3.50 MPa, respectively. At the same time,

water absorption of the produced bricks increased to reach 14.8% which is within the

Vietnamese standard limits [91, 92]. Remarkable reduction on the bulk density of un-fired

building bricks incorporated with fly ash and rice husk ash were recorded to be more than

1600 kg/m3 which classified the produced bricks as a solid construction brick.

Çiçek & Çinçin [83] investigated the incorporation of fly ash (FA, 88 wt%) and lime

(12 wt%), produced from the Seyitömer power plant in Turkey, to produce fly ash/lime

bricks cured under high pressure steam. Compressive and flexural strengths were

conducted and found to be 7.5 MPa and 0.55 MPa, respectively, which fulfilled the

minimum limits stated in EN 771-4 [93].

Teerajetgul & Sinthaworn [84] investigated the mechanical properties of the

interlocking bricks made of fine quarry waste (FQW) as partial replacement of cement (0-

50 wt%). Results indicated lowest density of the specimens at 20% replacement of cement

by fine quarry dust which found to be 2220 kg/m3. Moreover, results revealed high

reduction in the compressive strength with the increase of the fine quarry dust which

ranged from 25 MPa to 9 MPa at age of 28days. However, compressive strengths at the age

43
of 28 days of all mixes integrating with fine quarry dust are higher than the compressive

strength prescribed in standards.

Rahman et al. [85] studied the performance of masonry incorporated palm oil fuel ash

(POFA) as partial substitution of cement (0-60 wt%). The results showed a reduction in the

compressive strength (16-7.5 MPa) and dry density (2120-1980kg/m3) of the developed

masonry block with increase in palm oil fuel ash replacement. However, it fulfilled the

requirements of Class 1 and Class 2 load-bearing block in accordance to Malaysian

Standard MS76:1972 [94]. Regarding to the durability of the block, water absorption (0.1%

higher than control specimen) for all the specimens satisfied the requirements of ASTM

C55-11 [95] and there is no any indication of efflorescence on the produced blocks.

Muntohar & Rahman [86] investigated the physico-mechanical behavior of masonry

block incorporated with oil palm kernel shell (PKS) at different sizes and proportions. The

results revealed that the bulk density of the samples reduced up to 31% over the control

samples. Thus, the bulk density of the developed bricks ranged from 1800 kg/m3 to 1300

kg/m3 at the mix proportion of 1 cement: 1 sand: 1 PKS and 1 cement: 1 sand: 3 PKS,

respectively with the smallest size of PKS (2.36-4.75mm). On the other hand, the results

confirmed that water absorption of the samples increased from 40% at the mix proportion

of 1 cement: 1 sand: 1 PKS to 90% at 1 cement: 1 sand: 3 PKS at the smallest size of

2.36mm. Results also demonstrated remarkable characteristic for the samples having a

small size of PKS (2.36 mm) where the mix proportion of 1:1:2 produced the maximum

compressive strength (17 MPa) if compared to 1:1:1 and 1:1:3 mix proportions that

produced compressive strength of 15 MPa and 7 MPa, respectively. Similarly, the flexural

strength decreased with the increase of PKS content where the optimum flexural strength

44
(2.22 MPa) was achieved at the mix proportion of 1:1:1. Therefore, study recommended a

mix proportion of 1 PC:1 Sand:2 PKS as an optimum mix design for eco-friendly

shellcrete.

Rovnaník et al. [87] studied the utilization of fly ash (FA) and brick powder waste

(BPW) as raw materials to produce geopolymer brick. Samples were casted and tested after

7, 28 and 90 days. At 28 days, the bulk density and shrinkage exhibited an increment due to

the different specific gravity of the fly ash and brick powder, which attained (1657 – 1756

kg/m3) and (1.9 – 5.7%), respectively. Moreover, the compressive and flexural strength of

samples mixed with fly ash and brick powder showed significant increments at all ages.

Espuelas et al. [88] investigated the feasibility of magnesium oxide (Mgo) byproduct as

a binder for the manufacturing of unburnt clay brick. The observed results exhibited that an

Mgo rich kiln dust enhanced the mechanical and durability behavior of the clay bricks

similar to the way as lime does. The compressive strength reached a maximum value at 9.9

MPa at 90days for the usage of 15% of Mgo kiln dust as well as lime. Water absorption

tests on bricks incorporated with Mgo showed very significant enhancement of the

durability properties of unburnt clay bricks over lime. However, the water absorption for

Mgo and lime additives reduced as their usage amount increased. The test results revealed

the potential use of MgO based additives as alternative binders to the calcium-based ones

which resulted in reducing the environmental impact related with the use of fired clay

bricks.

Masuka et al. [89] evaluated the effects of the addition by weight of lime (4%, 8%,

10%) coal fly ash (10%, 12%, 16%) and wood aggregate (1.5%, 3%) mixtures on

engineering properties of unfired earth bricks (UEBs). Compressive strength and water

45
absorption of UEBs increased significantly with an increase in the lime-coal fly ash ratio

while wood aggregate had no significant effect on the dry compressive strength and dry

density. However, significantly higher compressive strength was observed for UEBs

stabilized with 10% lime, 10% coal ash and 1.5% wood aggregates than for those stabilized

with 10% cement. Dry density values varied significantly among the UEBs but were all

within acceptable ranges according to British Standards.

The main information summarized in Table 3 and stated in section 2.2 conclude that the

incorporation of waste materials effects the properties of manufactured unfired bricks such

as compressive and flexural strength, water absorption and bulk density. The results

conducted by the studies mentioned in section 2.2 showed that higher waste contents can

results in lower compressive strength as shown in Fig. 9. However, in some cases, the

compressive strength increases with increase waste contents up to 50%. Fig. 9 also shows

the compressive strength limits of loadbearing and non-loadbearing in accordance to

ASTM C90 [51] and ASTM C129 [96], respectively. Loadbearing and non-loadbearing

bricks must present compressive strength greater than or equal to 13.8 MPa and 4.14 MPa,

respectively.

Fig. 10, which illustrates the flexural strength of several unburnt bricks incorporating

increasing waste materials, at contents up to 100%, suggests that inclusion of waste content

up to 40% leads to improve the flexural strength. In some cases, the flexural strength of

bricks containing waste decreases with increase waste content.

Moreover, the other main property, that studies focused on, is water absorption. This is

shown in Fig. 11, which exhibits the effects of utilizing waste contents (up to 100%), from

different sources, on the water absorption of bricks. The results showed that, the addition of

46
residues into the manufacturing of unburnt bricks increase the water absorption with the

increase of waste contents. In some cases, the water absorption decrease with the increase

of waste contents as reported by Torkaman, et al. [59]. It is observed that the water

absorption results of most of the waste containing bricks is lower that the requirements

proposed by ASTM C90 [51] as shown in Fig.11. The proposed water absorption values by

ASTM C90 for load bearing concrete bricks are 18%, 15%, and 13% for lightweight,

medium weight and normal weight concrete brick, respectively.

Fig. 9. Compressive strength of unburnt brick incorporated various waste materials

47
 Fig. 10. Flexural strength of unburnt brick incorporated various waste materials

Fig. 11. Water absorption of unburnt brick incorporated various waste materials

48
 Results, reported by researchers in section 2.2, of bulk density for unburnt bricks

containing different waste materials are illustrated in Fig. 12. It shows a significant

reduction in bulk density of waste containing bricks when compared to that of the control

bricks except for steel slag and blast furnace slag, which gave higher density at 100%

replacement. Overall, the results confirmed that the manufactured bricks mixed with

different waste materials satisfied and fulfilled the density requirements of American

standard ASTM C90 [51] for loadbearing structural applications as shown in Fig. 12.

Fig. 12. Bulk density of unburnt brick incorporated various waste materials

Moreover, several researches have investigated the potential use of many other waste

material in the production of unburnt brick, including electrolytic manganese solid waste

[97, 98], crumb rubber [99-104], brick dust waste [105], stone powder sludge waste [106],

rice husk ashes [107-109], iron ore waste [110], reservoir sediment [111, 112], pumice ,

49
 sewage sludge ash [113], steel slag waste [114], recycled glass cullet [113], plastic bottles

[115], and waste glass sludge [38], polypropylene fibers [116], straw, wood chips, rice

husk and palm fibers [117], rice husk, corncob, sawdust and coconut coir [118, 119], Class

F fly ash, granite dust, saline sand [120], and pulverized fly ash [121]. They concluded that

these materials can be utilized in brick production for a sustainable solution of the

environmental contamination issues worldwide. Finally, waste materials, can also be

utilized in the production of different concrete applications [122, 123].

3.0 Discussion

Properties of burnt and unburnt masonry bricks incorporating varied types of waste

materials were reviewed in this research. Utilization of waste materials in the production of

masonry units can be used as an effective way to discard off this plentiful waste which lead

to protect the depletion of the natural resources and enhance the properties of the produced

brick.

It is obvious from the extensive review of the literature that different types of waste

materials in varied amounts have been utilized by the researchers in brick’s making by

burnt and unburnt methods. Various properties of the produced bricks were evaluated by

distinctive tests following the different accessible standards. For instance, Table 4 shows

the density classification requirements based on ASTM standards. Also, Table 5 shows the

minimal unit compressive strength and maximum water absorption for concrete masonry

units based on weight classification as per ASTM standards.

Compressive strength (CS), bulk density (BD) and water absorption (WA) are the most

common properties and characteristic considered by most of the studies, however the two

50
 properties stated most in different accessible standards are compressive strength and water

absorption (see Table 5).

Table 4 ASTM density classification requirements of masonry units

Density classification Oven-dry density (kg/m3)
Ave. of 3 units
Lightweight < 1680
Medium weight 1680 - 2000
Normal weight ≥ 2000

Table 5 ASTM specification requirements of masonry bricks

Standard Specification Title ASTM Grade Min. UCS Max.
Designation (MPa) WA (%)
Loadbearing Concrete Masonry C90-16a Lightweight 12.4 18
Units Medium 12.4 15
Normal 12.4 13
Nonloadbearing Concrete Masonry C129-17
Units 3.45 No limit

Concrete Building Brick C55-17 Na 20.7 15sw

Na 20.7 13mw
Na 20.7 10nw
Sb 13.8 18sw
Sb 13.8 15mw
Sb 13.8 13nw
Calcium Silicate Brick (Sand-Lime C73-17 SW 31 15
Brick) MW 20.7 18
Concrete Facing Brick C1634-17 SW 20.7 15
MW 20.7 13
NW 20.7 10
Clay Building Brick C62 [36] SW 20.7 17
MW 17.2 22
NW 10.3 No limit
Na veneer and facing use
Sb general use
SW Severe weathering
MW Moderate weathering
NW Negligible weathering
WA water absorption
UCS unit compressive strength

51
 Even though very limited commercial fabrication and application of bricks made from

waste materials, the review of literature exhibits an obvious potential and versatility of the

waste materials as partial or total replacement of conventionally utilized raw materials

where the produced bricks fulfilled the requirements stated in different standards. The

limited fabrication and utilization of masonry bricks from waste materials is associated to

the nonexistence of the related standards as well as the slow acceptance and moderate

acknowledgment by factories, industries and public. As mentioned by Sanjuán et al. [124]

that code of practice plays an vital role in spreading knowledge, utilizing study results and

decreasing the marketing time for innovations. Therefore, to advance the manufacturing

and utilization of masonry units made of waste materials, applicable and related guidelines

ought to be produced. Moreover, additional work is required, not just on the practical, cost-

effective and environmental parts but also on making rules and policies from the

governments to educate the public and aware them about reusing and recycling of waste

and the importance of sustainable development.

More skills and understanding are vital for scaling up the promising outcomes by

researchers, thus can be done by including all the required information and methodologies

and to be prepared and designed with taking into consideration the manufacturing

procedures adhered by industrial manufacturers. From this perspective, future studies need

to be conducted in corporation with local manufacturers by using their manufacturing

procedures, especially those procedures and methods related to the formation, burning and

testing phases. Additionally, more researches are necessary for conducting characterization

of raw and waste materials so as to compare and scale up the results.

4.0 Conclusion

52
 According to the existing literature about the utilization and incorporation of various

kinds of waste materials for manufacturing of masonry bricks, the following points can be

concluded.

 A wide variety of the latest studies on the production of bricks incorporating

various waste materials as partial or total replacement of the raw materials have

been extensively presented.

 The most common methods studied for manufacturing brick incorporating waste

materials are to be categorized into two methods namely burnt and unburnt

methods.

 The most common tests were compressive strength, water absorption and bulk

density. For these, results have shown a good agreement between the produced

brick and the specifications prescribed in the relevant standards.

 Various studies concluded that utilizing waste materials to produce masonry

bricks can contribute to sustainable construction materials and eco-friendly

building products.

 For extensive manufacturing and usage of bricks from waste materials,

additional research work in terms of educating and aware the public is required.

Moreover, standards and code of practices for products made of waste materials

is needed.

Acknowledgment

Authors are grateful to the department of civil engineering, Universiti Teknologi

PETRONAS, Malaysia for providing the facilities and support during this research work.

53
References

[1] F.M. Fernandes, P.B. Lourenço, F. Castro, Ancient clay bricks: manufacture and properties,
Materials, Technologies and Practice in Historic Heritage Structures (2010) 29-48.
[2] L. Zhang, Production of bricks from waste materials – A review, Constr. Build. Mater.
47(Supplement C) (2013) 643-655.
[3] F. Pacheco-Torgal, Introduction to eco-efficient masonry bricks and blocks, Eco-efficient
Masonry Bricks and Blocks: Design, Properties and Durability (2014) 1.
[4] E. Allen, R. Thallon, Fundamentals of residential construction, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
[5] G.J. Venta, P. Eng, Life cycle analysis of brick and mortar products, Athena [TM]
Sustainable Materials Institute, 1998.
[6] B.V. Reddy, K. Jagadish, Embodied energy of common and alternative building materials
and technologies, Energy Build. 35(2) (2003) 129-137.
[7] A.A. Shakir, A.A. Mohammed, Manufacturing of Bricks in the Past, in the Present and in the
Future: A state of the Art Review, Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. 2(3) (2013) 145-156.
[8] P.K. Mehta, Greening of the concrete industry for sustainable development, Concr. Int. 24(7)
(2002) 23-28.
[9] K.P. Mehta, Reducing the environmental impact of concrete, Concr. Int. 23(10) (2001) 61-66.
[10] D. Hoornweg, P. Bhada-Tata, What a waste: a global review of solid waste management,
(2012).
[11] P. Agamuthu, Policy evolution of solid waste management in Malaysia, (2011).
[12] R.J. Galán-Arboledas, M.T. Cotes-Palomino, S. Bueno, C. Martínez-García, Evaluation of
spent diatomite incorporation in clay based materials for lightweight bricks processing, Constr.
Build. Mater. 144 (2017) 327-337.
[13] G. Goel, A.S. Kalamdhad, Degraded municipal solid waste as partial substitute for
manufacturing fired bricks, Constr. Build. Mater. 155 (2017) 259-266.
[14] M.A.I. Juel, A. Mizan, T. Ahmed, Sustainable use of tannery sludge in brick manufacturing
in Bangladesh, Waste Manage. 60 (2017) 259-269.
[15] A. Mohajerani, A.A. Kadir, L. Larobina, A practical proposal for solving the world's
cigarette butt problem: Recycling in fired clay bricks, Waste Manage. 52 (2016) 228-44.
[16] D. Eliche-Quesada, M. Felipe-Sesé, J. López-Pérez, A. Infantes-Molina, Characterization
and evaluation of rice husk ash and wood ash in sustainable clay matrix bricks, Ceram. Int. 43(1)
(2017) 463-475.
[17] A.N. Adazabra, G. Viruthagiri, N. Shanmugam, Infrared analysis of clay bricks
incorporated with spent shea waste from the shea butter industry, J. Environ. Manage. 191
(2017) 66-74.
[18] A.N. Adazabra, G. Viruthagiri, N. Shanmugam, Management of spent shea waste: An
instrumental characterization and valorization in clay bricks construction, Waste Manage. 64
(2017) 286-304.
[19] A.N. Adazabra, G. Viruthagiri, P. Kannan, Influence of spent shea waste addition on the
technological properties of fired clay bricks, J. Build. Eng. 11 (2017) 166-177.

54
[20] A.A. Kadir, N.S.A. Salim, N.A. Sarani, N.A.I. Rahmat, M.M.A.B. Abdullah, Properties of
fired clay brick incorporating with sewage sludge waste, AIP Conference Proceedings, 2017, p.
020150.
[21] 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).
[22] M.A. Saleem, S.M.S. Kazmi, S. Abbas, Clay bricks prepared with sugarcane bagasse and
rice husk ash–A sustainable solution, MATEC Web of Conferences, EDP Sciences, 2017, p.
03001.
[23] ASTM C1314-14, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Masonry Prism,
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014.
[24] A. Ukwatta, A. Mohajerani, Characterisation of fired-clay bricks incorporating biosolids
and the effect of heating rate on properties of bricks, Constr. Build. Mater. 142 (2017) 11-22.
[25] V.Z. Abdrakhimov, E.S. Abdrakhimova, Promising use of waste coal in the production of
insulating material without the use of traditional natural materials, Inorg. Mater. Appl. Res. 8(5)
(2017) 788-794.
[26] S. Abbas, M.A. Saleem, S.M.S. Kazmi, M.J. Munir, Production of sustainable clay bricks
using waste fly ash: Mechanical and durability properties, J. Build. Eng. 14 (2017) 7-14.
[27] N.E.S.o. Pakistan, Building Code of Pakistan – Seismic Hazard Evaluation Studies,
Ministry of Housing and Works, Government of Pakistan, Pakistan (2007).
[28] M. Sutcu, S. Ozturk, E. Yalamac, O. Gencel, Effect of olive mill waste addition on the
properties of porous fired clay bricks using Taguchi method, J. Environ. Manage. 181 (2016)
185-192.
[29] C. Leiva, C. Arenas, B. Alonso-fariñas, L.F. Vilches, B. Peceño, M. Rodriguez-galán, F.
Baena, Characteristics of fired bricks with co-combustion fly ashes, J. Build. Eng. 5 (2016) 114-
118.
[30] D. Eliche-Quesada, J. Leite-Costa, Use of bottom ash from olive pomace combustion in the
production of eco-friendly fired clay bricks, Waste Manage. 48 (2016) 323-333.
[31] P.M. Velasco, M.P.M. Ortiz, M.A.M. Giró, D.M. Melia, J.H. Rehbein, Development of
sustainable fired clay bricks by adding kindling from vine shoot: Study of thermal and
mechanical properties, Appl. Clay Sci. 107 (2015) 156-164.
[32] C. Bories, L. Aouba, E. Vedrenne, G. Vilarem, Fired clay bricks using agricultural biomass
wastes: Study and characterization, Constr. Build. Mater. 91 (2015) 158-163.
[33] P.M. Velasco, M.P.M. Ortiz, M.A.M. Giro, M.C.J. Castelló, L.M. Velasco, Development of
better insulation bricks by adding mushroom compost wastes, Energy Build. 80 (2014) 17-22.
[34] K. Ornam, M. Kimsan, L.O. Ngkoimani, Santi, Study on Physical and Mechanical
Properties with Its Environmental Impact in Konawe - Indonesia upon Utilization of Sago Husk
as Filler in Modified Structural Fly Ash - Bricks, Procedia Comput. Sci. 111(Supplement C)
(2017) 420-426.
[35] G.H.M.J.S. De Silva, B.V.A. Perera, Effect of waste rice husk ash (RHA) on structural,
thermal and acoustic properties of fired clay bricks, J. Build. Eng. 18 (2018) 252-259.
[36] A. C62-17, Standard Specification for Building Brick (Solid Masonry Units Made From
Clay or Shale), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017.
[37] S.M. Kazmi, S. Abbas, M.L. Nehdi, M.A. Saleem, M.J. Munir, Feasibility of Using Waste
Glass Sludge in Production of Ecofriendly Clay Bricks, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering
29(8) (2017) 04017056.

55
[38] S.M.S. Kazmi, M.J. Munir, Y.-F. Wu, A. Hanif, I. Patnaikuni, Thermal performance
evaluation of eco-friendly bricks incorporating waste glass sludge, J. Cleaner Prod. 172 (2018)
1867-1880.
[39] J. Man, W. Gao, S. Yan, G. Liu, H. Hao, Preparation of porous brick from diatomite and
sugar filter mud at lower temperature, Constr. Build. Mater. 156 (2017) 1035-1042.
[40] S.M. Sorna, S.E. Anjum, S.B. Ashraf, R. Haque, Effects of Rice Husk Ash and Brick Waste
on the Properties of Construction Bricks, Appl. Mech. Mater. 860 (2016) 81-86.
[41] N. Phonphuak, S. Kanyakam, P. Chindaprasirt, Utilization of waste glass to enhance
physical–mechanical properties of fired clay brick, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 3057-3062.
[42] M. Sutcu, H. Alptekin, E. Erdogmus, Y. Er, O. Gencel, Characteristics of fired clay bricks
with waste marble powder addition as building materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 82 (2015) 1-8.
[43] L. Pérez-Villarejo, S. Martínez-Martínez, B. Carrasco-Hurtado, D. Eliche-Quesada, C.
Ureña-Nieto, P.J. Sánchez-Soto, Valorization and inertization of galvanic sludge waste in clay
bricks, Appl. Clay Sci. 105-106 (2015) 89-99.
[44] M. Zhu, H. Wang, L. Liu, R. Ji, X. Wang, Preparation and characterization of permeable
bricks from gangue and tailings, Constr. Build. Mater. 148 (2017) 484-491.
[45] L. Wiemes, U. Pawlowsky, V. Mymrin, Incorporation of industrial wastes as raw materials
in brick's formulation, J. Cleaner Prod. 142 (2017) 69-77.
[46] C. Yang, C. Cui, J. Qin, X. Cui, Characteristics of the fired bricks with low-silicon iron
tailings, Constr. Build. Mater. 70 (2014) 36-42.
[47] K.M. Hassan, K. Fukushi, K. Turikuzzaman, S.M. Moniruzzaman, Effects of using arsenic-
iron sludge wastes in brick making, Waste Manage. 34(6) (2014) 1072-8.
[48] C.B. Emrullahoglu Abi, Effect of borogypsum on brick properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 59
(2014) 195-203.
[49] GB/T2542-2012, Standard Specifications for Fly Ash Wall Bricks. National Standard of the
People's Republic of China (in Chinese), (2012).
[50] S. British, Methods of test for masonry units. Determination of compressive strength,
British Standard Institution, London, UK (2011).
[51] ASTM C90-16a, Standard Specification for Load-Bearing Concrete Masonry Units, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016.
[52] M. Sutcu, J.J. del Coz Díaz, F.P. Álvarez Rabanal, O. Gencel, S. Akkurt, Thermal
performance optimization of hollow clay bricks made up of paper waste, Energy Build. 75
(2014) 96-108.
[53] J. Wu, G.-l. Bai, H.-y. Zhao, X. Li, Mechanical and thermal tests of an innovative
environment-friendly hollow block as self-insulation wall materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 93
(2015) 342-349.
[54] Y. Taha, M. Benzaazoua, R. Hakkou, M. Mansori, Coal mine wastes recycling for coal
recovery and eco-friendly bricks production, Miner. Eng. 107 (2017) 123-138.
[55] O. Gencel, Characteristics of fired clay bricks with pumice additive, Energy Build. 102
(2015) 217-224.
[56] A.K. Mandal, H.R. Verma, O.P. Sinha, Utilization of aluminum plant's waste for production
of insulation bricks, J. Cleaner Prod. 162 (2017) 949-957.
[57] G. Goel, A.S. Kalamdhad, An investigation on use of paper mill sludge in brick
manufacturing, Constr. Build. Mater. 148 (2017) 334-343.
[58] R.V. Silva, J. de Brito, C.Q. Lye, R.K. Dhir, The role of glass waste in the production of
ceramic-based products and other applications: A review, J. Cleaner Prod. 167 (2017) 346-364.

56
[59] J. Torkaman, A. Ashori, A. Sadr Momtazi, Using wood fiber waste, rice husk ash, and
limestone powder waste as cement replacement materials for lightweight concrete blocks,
Constr. Build. Mater. 50(Supplement C) (2014) 432-436.
[60] C.B. Cheah, W.K. Part, M. Ramli, The long term engineering properties of cementless
building block work containing large volume of wood ash and coal fly ash, Constr. Build. Mater.
143 (2017) 522-536.
[61] M. Martín-Morales, G.M. Cuenca-Moyano, I. Valverde-Espinosa, I. Valverde-Palacios,
Effect of recycled aggregate on physical-mechanical properties and durability of vibro-
compacted dry-mixed concrete hollow blocks, Constr. Build. Mater. 145 (2017) 303-310.
[62] E. N771–3, Specification for masonry units. Part 3: Aggregate concrete masonry units
(Dense and lightweight aggregates), Bruxelles. (2011).
[63] D. Eliche-Quesada, J. Sánchez-Martínez, M.A. Felipe-Sesé, A. Infantes-Molina, Silica–
Calcareous Non Fired Bricks Made of Biomass Ash and Dust Filter from Gases Purification,
Waste Biomass Valorization (2017).
[64] E. 771-2, Specifications for Mansonry Units-Part 2: Calcium Silicate Mansory Units,
(2011).
[65] M.M. El-Attar, D.M. Sadek, A.M. Salah, Recycling of high volumes of cement kiln dust in
bricks industry, J. Cleaner Prod. 143 (2017) 506-515.
[66] B.M.V. Kumar, H. Ananthan, K.V.A. Balaji, Experimental studies on cement stabilized
masonry blocks prepared from brick powder, fine recycled concrete aggregate and pozzolanic
materials, J. Build. Eng. 10 (2017) 80-88.
[67] I.S. 1725, Stabilized Soil Blocks Used in General Building Construction-specification,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India, (2013).
[68] T. Poinot, M.E. Laracy, C. Aponte, H.M. Jennings, J.A. Ochsendorf, E.A. Olivetti,
Beneficial use of boiler ash in alkali-activated bricks, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 128 (2018) 1-10.
[69] A.N. Raut, C.P. Gomez, Development of thermally efficient fibre-based eco-friendly brick
reusing locally available waste materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 133 (2017) 275-284.
[70] H.B. Nagaraj, C. Shreyasvi, Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks Using Iron Mine Spoil
Waste - An Explorative Study, Procedia Eng. 180 (2017) 1203-1212.
[71] M. Madrid, A. Orbe, E. Rojí, J. Cuadrado, The effects of by-products incorporated in low-
strength concrete for concrete masonry units, Constr. Build. Mater. 153 (2017) 117-128.
[72] E. Sodupe-Ortega, E. Fraile-Garcia, J. Ferreiro-Cabello, A. Sanz-Garcia, Evaluation of
crumb rubber as aggregate for automated manufacturing of rubberized long hollow blocks and
bricks, Constr. Build. Mater. 106 (2016) 305-316.
[73] V.V. Sakhare, R.V. Ralegaonkar, Use of bio-briquette ash for the development of bricks, J.
Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 684-689.
[74] B. Mohammed, M. Aswin, Properties and structural behavior of sawdust interlocking
bricks, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Civil, Offshore and Environmental
Engineering, Kuala Lumpur-Malaysia, 2016, pp. 437-442.
[75] M. Mahoutian, Y. Shao, Production of cement-free construction blocks from industry
wastes, J. Cleaner Prod. 137 (2016) 1339-1346.
[76] S. Ismail, Z.A.H. Anas, Y. Zaiton, Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Brick Produced
Using Recycled Fine Aggregate, Key Eng. Mater. 706 (2016) 112-116.
[77] N. Holmes, H. O'Malley, P. Cribbin, H. Mullen, G. Keane, Performance of masonry blocks
containing different proportions of incinator bottom ash, Sustainable Mater.Technol. 8 (2016)
14-19.

57
[78] M. Contreras, S.R. Teixeira, M.C. Lucas, L.C.N. Lima, D.S.L. Cardoso, G.A.C. da Silva,
G.C. Gregório, A.E. de Souza, A. dos Santos, Recycling of construction and demolition waste
for producing new construction material (Brazil case-study), Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016)
594-600.
[79] L.P. Rodrigues, J.N.F. Holanda, Recycling of Water Treatment Plant Waste for Production
of Soil-Cement Bricks, Procedia Mater. Sci. 8 (2015) 197-202.
[80] S. Naganathan, A.Y.O. Mohamed, K.N. Mustapha, Performance of bricks made using fly
ash and bottom ash, Constr. Build. Mater. 96 (2015) 576-580.
[81] G. Li, X. Xu, E. Chen, J. Fan, G. Xiong, Properties of cement-based bricks with oyster-
shells ash, J. Cleaner Prod. 91 (2015) 279-287.
[82] C.L. Hwang, T.P. Huynh, Investigation on the Use of Fly Ash and Residual Rice Husk Ash
for Producing Unfired Building Bricks, Appl. Mech. Mater. 752-753 (2015) 588-592.
[83] T. Çiçek, Y. Çinçin, Use of fly ash in production of light-weight building bricks, Constr.
Build. Mater. 94 (2015) 521-527.
[84] W. Teerajetgul, S. Sinthaworn, Effects of Using Fine Quarry Waste as Cement Replacement
Material on the Compressive Strength of the Mixture of Interlocking Block, Adv. Mater. Res.
1030-1032 (2014) 2348-2353.
[85] M.E. Rahman, A.L. Boon, A.S. Muntohar, M.N. Hashem Tanim, V. Pakrashi, Performance
of masonry blocks incorporating Palm Oil Fuel Ash, J. Cleaner Prod. 78 (2014) 195-201.
[86] A.S. Muntohar, M.E. Rahman, Lightweight masonry block from oil palm kernel shell,
Constr. Build. Mater. 54 (2014) 477-484.
[87] P. Rovnaník, B. Řezník, P. Rovnaníková, Blended Alkali-activated Fly Ash / Brick Powder
Materials, Procedia Eng. 151 (2016) 108-113.
[88] S. Espuelas, J. Omer, S. Marcelino, A.M. Echeverría, A. Seco, Magnesium oxide as
alternative binder for unfired clay bricks manufacturing, Appl. Clay Sci. 146 (2017) 23-26.
[89] S. Masuka, W. Gwenzi, T. Rukuni, Development, engineering properties and potential
applications of unfired earth bricks reinforced by coal fly ash, lime and wood aggregates, J.
Build. Eng. 18 (2018) 312-320.
[90] B.S.N. ABNT, Soil Cement Brick: Determination of Compressive Strength and Water
Absorption, Rio de Janeiro, (1994a).
[91] T. 6477:201, Concrete bricks. Ministry of Construction, Vietnam., (2011).
[92] T. 1451:1998, Solid clay bricks. Ministry of Construction, Vietnam, (1998).
[93] S.B.B.E. 771-4, Specification for masonry units. Autoclaved aerated concrete masonry
units, British Standard Institution, London, UK (2011).
[94] M. Standard, Specifications for bricks and blocks of fired brick-earth clay or shale. Part 2:
Metric units, MS, 1972.
[95] ASTM C55-17, Standard specification for concrete building brick, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA, 2017.
[96] ASTM C129-17, Standard Specification for Nonloadbearing Concrete Masonry Units,
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017.
[97] B. Du, C. Zhou, Z. Dan, Z. Luan, N. Duan, Preparation and characteristics of steam-
autoclaved bricks produced from electrolytic manganese solid waste, Constr. Build. Mater. 50
(2014) 291-299.
[98] R. Taurino, E. Karamanova, L. Barbieri, S. Atanasova-Vladimirova, F. Andreola, A.
Karamanov, New fired bricks based on municipal solid waste incinerator bottom ash, Waste
Manage. Res. 35(10) (2017) 1055-1063.

58
[99] N. Mahamood, B. Mohammed, N. Shafiq, S. Eisa, Development of nano silica modified
solid rubbercrete bricks, Engineering Challenges for Sustainable Future: Proceedings of the 3rd
International Conference on Civil, Offshore and Environmental Engineering (ICCOEE 2016,
Malaysia, 15-17 Aug 2016), CRC Press, 2016, p. 443.
[100] B.S. Mohammed, A.B. Awang, S.S. Wong, C.P. Nhavene, Properties of nano silica
modified rubbercrete, J. Cleaner Prod. 119 (2016) 66-75.
[101] B.S. Mohammed, K.M. Anwar Hossain, J.T. Eng Swee, G. Wong, M. Abdullahi,
Properties of crumb rubber hollow concrete block, J. Cleaner Prod. 23(1) (2012) 57-67.
[102] D.M. Sadek, M.M. El-Attar, Structural behavior of rubberized masonry walls, J. Cleaner
Prod. 89 (2015) 174-186.
[103] A. Al-Fakih, B.S. Mohammed, M.S. Liew, W.S. Alaloul, Physical properties of the
rubberized interlocking masonry brick, Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 9(6) (2018) 656-664.
[104] B. S Mohammed, M.S. Liew, W. S Alaloul, A. Al-Fakih, W. Ibrahim, M. Adamu,
Development of rubberized geopolymer interlocking bricks, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 8 (2018)
401-408.
[105] J.E. Oti, J.M. Kinuthia, R.B. Robinson, The development of unfired clay building material
using Brick Dust Waste and Mercia mudstone clay, Appl. Clay Sci. 102 (2014) 148-154.
[106] 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.
[107] S.M.S. Kazmi, S. Abbas, M.A. Saleem, M.J. Munir, A. Khitab, Manufacturing of
sustainable clay bricks: Utilization of waste sugarcane bagasse and rice husk ashes, Constr.
Build. Mater. 120 (2016) 29-41.
[108] S.Minhaj S. Kazmi, S. Abbas, M.J. Munir, A. Khitab, Exploratory study on the effect of
waste rice husk and sugarcane bagasse ashes in burnt clay bricks, J. Build. Eng. 7 (2016) 372-
378.
[109] S. Mayooran, S. Ragavan, N. Sathiparan, Comparative study on open air burnt low- and
high-carbon rice husk ash as partial cement replacement in cement block production, J. Build.
Eng. 13 (2017) 137-145.
[110] S.R. Lamani, A. Mangalpady, H. Vardhan, Investigating the Utility of Iron Ore Waste in
Preparing Non-fired Bricks, J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. D 98(2) (2017) 239-250.
[111] J.L. Ooi, L.W. Ean, B.S. Mohammed, M. Malek, L.S. Wong, C.W. Tang, H.Q. Chua,
Study on the Properties of Compressed Bricks Using Cameron Highlands Reservoir Sediment as
Primary Material, Appl. Mech. Mater. 710 (2015) 25-29.
[112] H.Q. Chua, L.W. Ean, B.S. Mohammed, M.A. Malek, L.S. Wong, C.W. Tang, Z.K. Lee,
A.F. Lim, Y.Y. See, J.L. Ooi, Potential Use of Cameron Highlands Reservoir Sediment in
Compressed Bricks, Key Eng. Mater. 594-595 (2014) 487-491.
[113] Z. Chen, J.S. Li, C.S. Poon, Combined use of sewage sludge ash and recycled glass cullet
for the production of concrete blocks, J. Cleaner Prod. 171 (2018) 1447-1459.
[114] B.S. Mohammed, M. Fadhil Nuruddin, K.Z. Ku Shaari, Geopolymer Steel Slag Brick,
Appl. Mech. Mater. 754-755 (2015) 296-299.
[115] S. Safinia, A. Alkalbani, Use of Recycled Plastic Water Bottles in Concrete Blocks,
Procedia Eng. 164 (2016) 214-221.
[116] P. Donkor, E. Obonyo, Compressed soil blocks: Influence of fibers on flexural properties
and failure mechanism, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 25-33.

59
[117] A. Vatani Oskouei, M. Afzali, M. Madadipour, Experimental investigation on mud bricks
reinforced with natural additives under compressive and tensile tests, Constr. Build. Mater. 142
(2017) 137-147.
[118] A.C. Abdullah, C.C. Lee, Effect of Treatments on Properties of Cement-fiber Bricks
Utilizing Rice Husk, Corncob and Coconut Coir, Procedia Eng. 180 (2017) 1266-1273.
[119] N. Sathiparan, H.T.S.M. De Zoysa, The effects of using agricultural waste as partial
substitute for sand in cement blocks, J. Build. Eng. 19 (2018) 216-227.
[120] T.-C. Ling, K.H. Mo, L. Qu, J. Yang, L. Guo, Mechanical strength and durability
performance of autoclaved lime-saline soil brick, Constr. Build. Mater. 146 (2017) 403-409.
[121] R. Mohamad Nidzam, I. Norsalisma, J.M. Kinuthia, Strength and environmental evaluation
of stabilised Clay-PFA eco-friendly bricks, Constr. Build. Mater. 125 (2016) 964-973.
[122] R. Kurda, J. de Brito, J.D. Silvestre, Combined influence of recycled concrete aggregates
and high contents of fly ash on concrete properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 157 (2017) 554-572.
[123] R.V. Silva, J. de Brito, C.J. Lynn, R.K. Dhir, Use of municipal solid waste incineration
bottom ashes in alkali-activated materials, ceramics and granular applications: A review, Waste
Manage. 68 (2017) 207-220.
[124] M.A. Sanjuán, A. Zaragoza, J.C. López Agüí, Standardization for an innovative world,
Cem. Concr. Res. 41(7) (2011) 767-774.

Highlights
 An update review on waste incorporation into production of masonry bricks is discussed.
 Production methods of bricks from waste materials can be categories into burnt and unburnt.
 Commercialization of bricks incorporated waste materials still very limited due to some
barriers.
 Standards and specifications for bricks made of waste materials is needed.

60