THE EFFECTS OF PLASTIC AND EGG SHELL WASTE

MATERIALS ON THE PHYSICAL AND STRENGTH

PROPERTIES OF FLOOR TILES

Julius Semanda

(CE300-0009/12)

A Thesis submitted to Pan African University Institute for Basic

Sciences, Technology and Innovation in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering

(Construction Engineering and Management Option)

2014
 Declaration

This thesis is my original work and has not been submitted to any other university for

examination.

……………………. ………………………..

Signature Date

Julius Semanda

This Thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as University

Supervisor

……………………. ………………………...

Signature Date

Eng. Prof. Raphael N. Mutuku

Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering Department, Jomo Kenyatta

University of Agriculture and Technology

……………………. ………………………...

Signature Date

Prof. James Wambua Kaluli

Department of Biomechanical and Environmental Engineering, Jomo Kenyatta

University of Agriculture and Technology

ii
 Dedication

This thesis is dedicated to my late Aunt Nakabugo Sylvia, my mother Judith, Granny

Margret, my wife Evelyn Kyarisiima, my son Semanda Julius Lennon and my daughters

Nampijja Patricia and Yvonne Semanda Bibiana.

iii
 Acknowledgements

First and foremost I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my supervisors

Professor Raphael Mutuku and Professor Wambua James Kaluli for their valuable

guidance that helped me to complete this thesis.

Secondly, I thank all my parents and my wife for bearing with my absence from home

during the period of study and taking good care of our children. As for my course mates

and friends, your love and advice played a bigger role in the accomplishment of this

great journey. Special appreciation goes to Okello Thomas Ekwang, Gavamukulya

Yahaya, Okello Joseph, Namugaya Jalira, Richard Shauibu Abubakar, Abraham

Mengesha, Ronoh Victor, Edwel Tafara Mharakurwa, and Damson Munyarandzi.

My deepest and sincere appreciation go to my sponsors the African Union for giving me

an opportunity to study a Masters degree in the prestigious Pan African University

based in Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Juja, Kenya.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Declaration ............................................................................................................................... ii

Dedication ................................................................................................................................ iii

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. iv

List of plates ............................................................................................................................. x

List of tables ........................................................................................................................... xii

Acronyms ............................................................................................................................... xiii

Abstract ................................................................................................................................. xiv

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Background .................................................................................................................. 2

1.3 Problem statement ........................................................................................................ 8

1.4 Research objectives ...................................................................................................... 8

1.4.1 Main objective ...................................................................................................... 8

1.4.2 Specific objectives ................................................................................................ 8

1.5 Justification .................................................................................................................. 9

1.6 Significance ................................................................................................................. 9

1.7 Scope .......................................................................................................................... 9

1.7.1 Contextual scope ................................................................................................... 9

1.7.2 Geographic scope ................................................................................................ 10

v
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 11

2.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 11

2.2 Solid waste reuse in concrete ...................................................................................... 11

2.3 Building finishing materials ....................................................................................... 14

2.3.1 Lime mortar as a component in lime and cement finishing material ..................... 14

2.3.2 Cement mortar as a finishing material ................................................................. 15

2.3.3 Ceramics as a finishing material .......................................................................... 15

2.3.4 Terrazzo floor finishing material ......................................................................... 16

2.4 Properties of finishing materials ................................................................................. 18

2.4.1 Mechanical properties of building finishing materials.......................................... 19

2.4.2 Physical properties of building finishing materials .............................................. 20

2.5 Properties of ceramic tile ............................................................................................ 21

2.6 Use of plastics in the construction industry ................................................................. 25

2.6.1 Generation and sources of plastic waste .............................................................. 26

2.6.2 Fundamental benefits of plastics in construction .................................................. 27

2.6.3 Polyethylene Grades............................................................................................ 28

2.7 Use of egg shell waste material in construction .......................................................... 29

2.8 Use of white cement as a binder to make building tiles ............................................... 29

2.9 Research gap .............................................................................................................. 30

vi
CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS ................................................................... 32

3.1 Determination of the optimum proportions of the waste materials for

maximum strength of building tiles ....................................................................................... 32

3.1.1 Collection and processing of solid waste materials .............................................. 32

3.1.2 Mixing the materials after proportioning ............................................................. 37

3.2 Testing tiles for physical and mechanical properties ................................................... 42

3.2.1 Physical properties of tiles................................................................................... 42

3.2.2 Mechanical properties of building tiles ................................................................ 44

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSIONS .............................................. 48

4.1 The effect of cement, plastics and egg shells on compressive strength of cubes .......... 48

4.2 Water absorption results of the cubes ......................................................................... 52

4.2.1 The effect of cement, plastics and egg shell contents on water absorption

rates of cubes .................. …………………………………………………………………..54

4.3 Density results of cubes .............................................................................................. 56

4.3.1 Effect of the ingredients on the density of cubes .................................................. 57

4.4 Surface abrasion results .............................................................................................. 59

4.4.1 Effect of plastics on surface abrasion................................................................... 59

4.5 Impact resistance test results ...................................................................................... 60

4.6 Economic consideration of tiles .................................................................................. 62

vii
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 65

5.1 Conclusions................................................................................................................ 65

5.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 67

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 68

viii
 List of figures

Figure 4.1: Effect of average cement on the average compressive strength………..48

Figure 4.2: Effect of average plastics on the average compressive strength.………49

Figure 4.3: Effect of average egg shells on the average compressive strength….....50

Figure 4.4: Compressive strength of cubes..………………………………………..51

Figure 4.5: Compressive strength of various grades of concrete……..…………….52

Figure 4.6: Water absorption of the cubes…………………………………….……53

Figure 4.7: Densities of different ratios of cubes…………………………..…….…54

Figure 4.8: Effect of Cement on the density…………….………………………….55

Figure 4.9: Effect of plastics on the density……………..………………………….55

Figure 4.10: Effect of egg shells on the density…………………………..……….…57

Figure 4.11: Effect of variation of cement content on the cube density………….….58

Figure 4.12: Effect of variation of plastics content on the density of cubes................58

Figure 4.13: Effect of variation of egg shells on the density……….………………..59

Figure 4.14: Effect of plastics on abrasion………….……………………………….60

ix
 List of plates

Plate 1.1: Plastic trash on an unauthorized dump in Kampala, Uganda, 2011…..…3

Plate 1.2: Waste transportation and disposal…………..…………………………...5

Plate 2.1: Terrazzo tile…………..………………………………………………...18

Plate 3.1: Sorted and crushed plastics………….…………………………………33

Plate 3.2: Egg shells during drying and after being processed………..…………..34

Plate 3.3: Researcher sieving the pounded egg shells………………………….…34

Plate 3.4: Motor and pestle for pounding the egg shells………………………….35

Plate 3.5: Milling machine in BEED used to crush the egg shell to powder……...35

Plate 3.6: White Cement……………………………..……………………………36

Plate 3.7: Porker Vibrator, trowel, trough and spades used during casting of

cube…………………………………………………………….……….38

Plate 3.8: Ingredients in the trough before and after mixing……..……………….39

Plate 3.9: Cast cubes…………..…………………………………………………..39

Plate 3.10: Cubes curing………………..…………………………………………..39

Plate 3.11: Compressive strength testing machine…………………………..……..40

Plate 3.12: Moulds used to make tiles…………………………….………………..41

Plate 3.13: Making the tiles with the moulds…………………………….………...41

Plate 3.14: Appearance of tiles..................................................................................42

Plate 3.15: 438g spherical steel bearing………….....…………...…………………45

Plate 3.16: Spherical steel bearing dropped through one meter…………….……...46

Plate 4.1: Shuttered ceramic tile………………………………………………..…61

x
Plate 4.2: Shuttered tile without plastics……………………...…………………..61

Plate 4.3: Shattered commercial ceramic tiles……………………...……………..62

xi
 List of tables

Table 1.1: Composition of solid wastes generated in East African urban centers….5

Table 1.2: Composition of egg shell……………………………..………………….7

Table 3.1: Quantities (kg) of different materials in each ratio……….……………37

Table 4.1: Average cube compressive strength (MPa)…………………………….51

Table 4.2: cube water absorption (%)…………………………………...…………53

Table 4.3: Density of cubes (Kg/m3)………………………………....……………56

Table 4.4: Tile information………………..……………………………………….63

Table 4.5: Cost of ceramic tiles in hardwares…………………..………………….63

Table 4.6: Unit cost for plastics, egg shells, cement and one m2 of tiles…….……63

xii
Acronyms

HDPE High density polythene

LDPE Low density polythene

ASTM American Standards of Testing Material

UHMWP High Molecular Weight Polyethylene

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

FDA Food and Drug Administration

JKUAT Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and technology

BEED Department of Biochemical and Environmental

Engineering

OPC Ordinary Portland cement

xiii
 Abstract

Human activities often generate solid wastes such as plastics and egg shell wastes.

Disposal of these wastes is usually a problem. The aim of this study was to investigate

the feasibility of using plastic and egg shell wastes together with white cement in the

production of floor tiles. The waste was collected from kitchens and waste disposal

facilities within Juja constituency, Kenya. The materials were cleaned and dried; and

plastics were shredded while egg shells were crushed. Waste materials were then mixed

with white cement in different proportions. Compressive strength tests were carried out

to determine the suitability of using such solid wastes in making floor tiles. Crushed egg

shells passing through the 1.2 mm sieve and shredded plastics with an average diameter

of to 1 to 2 mm were used. Cubes were cast and cured for 28 days. The compressive

strength of the cubes was tested using a universal testing machine. The study found that

addition of up to 50% cement resulted in more than 10 fold increase in the compressive

strength of the cast cubes. Addition of plastics decreased the compressive strength of

the cubes while addition of egg shells had insignificant effect on compressive strength.

Increasing the quantity of plastics and egg shells resulted in elevated water absorption,

while larger quantities of cement resulted in reduced water absorption. Increasing the

quantity of egg shells and plastics resulted in reduced density. With the presence of

plastics, abrasion resistance increased and the tiles became less brittle. It is concluded

that egg shells can be used as filler material in the manufacture of floor tiles. Because of

the tendency of plastics to reduce the compressive strength of tiles, they should be used

xiv
cautiously. The study has established that use of plastic and egg shell wastes in the

manufacture of floor tiles is a viable waste reduction option. However, further studies

are necessary to establish the chemical interactions involved in floor tile production

systems where household and industrial wastes such as plastics and egg shells are used.

xv
 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 Introduction

Growth of population, increasing urbanization, and rising standards of living due to

technological innovations have contributed to increase in the quantity of a variety of

solid wastes generated by industrial, mining, domestic and agricultural activities

(Safiuddin et al., 2010). Globally, the estimated quantity of solid wastes generation was

12 billion tons in the year 2002 (Pappu et al., 2007). Many authorities and investigators

are lately working to have the privilege of reusing the wastes in environmentally and

economically sustainable ways (Aubert et al., 2006). The utilization of solid wastes in

construction materials is one of such innovative efforts. Freire and Holanda, (2006)

previous study indicated that the egg shell waste samples were rich in CaCO3 (50.7%)

and may be used as an alternative raw material in the production of wall tile materials.

Use of floor tiles in construction is for decorative, protection and aesthetic purposes

(Kornmann and CTTB, 2007). The core material mostly used to produce floor tiles is

clay which may be glazed to improve the tile properties. Fiori and Brusa, (1983),

fabricated ceramic tiles in India using blast furnace slag with 0.1–2.5% water

absorption.

Tiles have to have a degree of impact resistance. Impact resistance of ceramic tiles is

important for their life in service. Floor tiles are expected to sustain many types of

loads, some of which may be static but impact loads also occur. Impact loads provide

the most usual way for breakages on walls (Harrison and Ralph, 1988).

1
Effect of water absorption on frost resistance of clay roofing tiles was studied and it was

stated that the relationship between the water absorption and frost resistance of brick

products cannot be precisely defined. Water absorption capacity identifies the nature of

the ceramic body in regard to internal structure, which is related to mechanical strength

(measured by modulus of rupture and breaking strength) and also other characteristics

that affect ceramic tile durability (particularly in unglazed tiles), such as resistance to

deep abrasion, stain resistance, and resistance to frost/thaw cycles, as well as to

dimensional quality (Sveda, 2003).

For glazed tiles intended for flooring, European standard EN 14411 makes it

compulsory to state the abrasion resistance class of the glazed surface as a whole

(glazes and decorations), after performance of the standard test according to ISO 10545-

7 (1999). In an effort to eradicate solid waste this study focuses on using solid waste in

form of egg shells and plastic as construction raw materials to develop floor building

tiles.

1.2 Background

Kampala city has been hit most by the effects of plastic wastes (see Plate 1.1 and Table

1.1). This has led to a lot of unpleasant sceneries in the city. This study aims at

investigating the possibility of how plastics can be applied in construction industry as a

way to reduce on plastic wastes in Kampala city especially in Kawempe and Rubaga

divisions so that to improve on the hygiene in the area. These areas have got a lot of

dumping areas and this has resulted into poor hygiene in the area, rampant flooding

2
especially when it rains in places like Bwaise and Kaleerwe. This has been greatly

caused by the blocking of water channels by plastics and Egg shell wastes, which are

the major components of all the wastes dumped.

Plate 1.1: Plastic trash on an unauthorized dump in Kampala, Uganda, 2011

Despite the attempts that the government has made to ban the use of these bags which

constitute a large percentage of the plastics, there has been continued use of this

material in Uganda today. Under the Solid Waste Management Ordinance, 2000, it is

illegal and punishable to dump garbage in places where it may be or become a public

health nuisance. Therefore, there is a need for engineering intervention so as to make

use of this material in applications that would reduce on the amounts disposed in the

environment.

Waste management in urban centers of East Africa has for a long time been centralized

(Liyala 2011), where use is made of the imported refuse trucks (see Plate 1.2) (Rotich et

3
al., 2006; Okot-Okumu & Nyenje 2011) to collect wastes from sources to designated

waste dumps. Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) system in East Africa has

changed from the colonial days when it was efficient because of the lower population

and adequate resources (Okot-Okumu & Nyenje 2011) as compared to the current status

that displays inefficiencies. The current waste management system has evolved from

centralized to a mixture of decentralized as well as the involvement of the private

sector.

Plate 1.2: Waste transportation and disposal (source: Solid Waste Management

Ordinance, 2000)

The persistent inadequacies in collection and disposal of waste of waste make it

impossible for the institutions to provide any reliable estimates. The storage, collection,

transportation and final treatment/disposal of wastes are reported to have become a

major problem in urban centers (ADB 2002; Kaseva & Mbuligwe 2005; Okot-Okumu

& Nyenje 2011; Rotich et al., 2006). Wastes generated by the East African urban

centers are mainly composed of decomposable organic materials (see Table 1.1),

4
(Oberlin, 2011; Okot-Okumu & Nyenje 2011; Scheinberg, 2011; Simon, 2008; Rotich

et al., 2006). Efficient collection system to avoid health, aesthetics and environmental

impacts is strongly called for.

Table 1.1: Composition of solid wastes generated in East African urban centers

(Source: Scheinberg et al., 2010)

Waste
Composition Kampala
(%) Dar es salaam Moshi* #+ Jinja Lira Nairobi*
Biowaste 71 65 77.2 78.6 68.7 65
Polythene Paper 9 9 8.3 8 5.5 6
Plastic 9 9 9.5 7.9 6.8 12
Glass 4 3 1.3 0.7 1.9 2
Metal 3 2 0.3 0.5 2.2 1
Others 4 12 3.4 4.3 14.9 14
kg/cap/day 0.4 0.9 0.59 0.55 0.5 0.6
Percent
40 61 60 55 43 65
collection
183,52 91,15 107,8 4,000,00
3,070,060 1,700,850
Population 0 3 09 0
Population
paying for
collection (%of ND 35 ND ND ND ND
total
population)

ND= Not determined, + KCC, 2006; #NEMA 2007

5
As plastics form a significant part of the wastes in the city, an engineering intervention

to make use of this material in applications that would reduce on the amounts disposed

in the environment is paramount.

Egg shells are waste materials from hatcheries, homes and fast food industries (Phil and

Zhihong, 2009; Amu et al., 2005) and can be readily collected in plenty. Egg shell

waste disposal contributes to environmental pollution. Challenges associated with

disposal of Egg shells include cost, availability of disposal sites, odour, flies and

abrasiveness (Phil and Zhihong, 2009). However, they can be processed into saleable

products like fertilizer, used in artwork, human and animal nutrition and building

materials and to produce collagen from the membranes (Phil and Zhihong, 2009; Amu

et al., 2005). The composition of the Egg shell is approximately 98.2%, 0.9%, 0.9%,

calcium carbonate, magnesium and phosphorous (phosphate) respectively (Romanoff et

al., 1949).Egg shells and shell membranes are non-edible by-products that have little

saleable value but may also contain biologically active compounds (Nakano et al.,

2003).

The chemical composition of the avian Egg shell waste sample shows that calcium

oxide (CaO) is the most abundant component (Table 1.2). The high amount of calcium

oxide is associated with the presence of calcium carbonate, which is the main

component of avian Egg shell. The sample also contained only small amounts of P 2O5,

Na2O, SrO, SiO2, MgO, Cl, Al2O3, Fe2O3, and NiO reporting less than 1.5% of the total

composition. Thus, the Egg shell waste sample can be considered from a chemical

viewpoint a pure relatively natural carbonate-based material, as well as its composition

6
is very similar to the calcitic calcareous. In addition, it was also observed that the loss

on ignition for waste sample was found to be 47.8%. This high value of Loi is caused

mainly by decomposition of the calcite with formation of CaO and carbon dioxide

(CO2).

Table 1.2: Composition of egg shell (Source: Freire and Holanda, 2006)
CaO 50.7
SiO2 0.09
Al2O3 0.03
MgO 0.01
Fe2O3 0.02
Na2O 0.19
P2O5 0.24
SrO 0.13
NiO 0.001
SO3 0.57
Cl 0.08
Loi 47.8
Loi = loss on ignition

The results from the study done by Freire and Holanda (2006) indicated that the Egg

shell waste sample rich in CaCO3 can be used as an alternative raw material in the

production of wall tile materials. The avian Egg shell waste sample studied in this work

is chemically constituted basically by calcium oxide (CaO), and is more pure than

traditional carbonate based materials used in ceramic industry.

7
1.3 Problem statement

Solid wastes including Egg shells & plastics, once used and dumped, can accumulate

without decomposing resulting in unsightly sceneries, blocking of water movement

channels, reduction of soil fertility by preventing moisture penetration into the soils and

wide spread of diseases like malaria and cholera as a result of creation of bleeding

grounds.. On the other hand, these materials may be useful for the construction industry.

The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of conserving the environment by

collecting such wastes and converting them into floor tiles.

1.4 Research objectives

1.4.1 Main objective

The main objective of this study was to assess the effect of plastic and eggshell waste

materials on the physical and mechanical characteristics of floor tiles.

1.4.2 Specific objectives

The specific objectives of the study are to:

1. To determine the optimum proportions of eggshells and plastics required for

maximum compressive strength of building tiles.

2. To determine the effect of proportions of Egg shell and plastic waste materials

on the physical (density, water absorption) and mechanical characteristics

(Surface abrasion, impact resistance) of floor tiles.

8
1.5 Justification

The wide spread of wastes around Kampala city, the occurrence of flooding especially

when it has rained due to the blocking of water movement channels and the wide

outbreak of diseases like malaria and cholera due to creation of bleeding grounds for

houseflies and stagnant water for mosquitoes, have justified this research to be carried

out to find a solution through the construction industry.

1.6 Significance

The research will help in the reduction of the amount of plastics and Egg shells

dumping in cities and towns, so that unpleasant sceneries, flooding due to blockage of

water movement channels, outbreak of diseases like cholera and malaria together with

environmental degradation are reduced.

Manufacturers of plastics as well as poultry farmers will have an alternative market and

source of money for their products due to the demand of their out puts in the

construction industry. As for the clients of the construction industry, alternative and

cheap finishing materials will be readily available once the project comes into force.

Additionally, means of recycling plastics and alternative building materials will be

achieved with the manufacturing of floor tiles from plastic and eggshell wastes.

1.7 Scope

1.7.1 Contextual scope

Contextually, the study focused on the process of making floor tiles from waste

materials like plastics and egg shells, which were collected from dumping sites.

9
1.7.2 Geographic scope

Geographically, the study was conducted in Nairobi and in the Administrative divisions

of Rubaga and Kawempe where plastic and egg shells wastes were collected.

10
 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

Daily generation and dumping of solid waste on authorized dumpsites like landfills and

unauthorized site like roadsides, side drains as well as undeveloped plots of land in

residential places bring about accumulation of solid waste in the environment which

results into unsightly surroundings, obstruction to pedestrians and traffic flow, air

pollution and groundwater pollution due to the leaching effect. Treatments as well as

disposal of solid waste to free the society and environment of the menace of

accumulated solid waste have been issues of serious concern to individual countries and

the entire world. Various researchers have attempted to convert solid waste to beneficial

applications, with a high level of success, as a way of reducing solid waste

accumulation.

2.2 Solid waste reuse in concrete

Several studies have been conducted on the use of plastic waste in concrete. These

include:

The works of Rebeiz showed that the resins based on recycled PET can be used to

produce a good quality of precast concrete (Rebeiz, 2007). Many studies have been

conducted on the use of scrap tire/rubber in mortar and concrete, and a research work

has been published by Siddique a review paper (2008) on the use of recycled plastic in

concrete (Siddique, Khatib & Kaur 2008). In the other study, Choi et al. (2005)

investigated the effect of plastic waste (PET bottles) as aggregate on properties of

11
concrete. The results obtained in this study showed that these wastes could reduce the

weight by 2–6% of normal weight concrete and the compressive strength was reduced

up to 33% compared to that of normal concrete. Sikalidis et al. (2002) investigated the

utilization of municipal solid wastes (MSW) for the production of mortar. Batayneh et

al. (2007) have shown, in their work that the decrease of compressive strength was in

function of increase in the content plastic content. For a 20% substitution of sand by the

waste, the compressive strength was reduced up to 70% compared to that of normal

concrete. Also, researchers (Remadnia et al., 2009, Yazoghli-marzouk et al. 2007) have

also studied the use of consumed plastic bottle waste as sand-substitution aggregate

within composite materials for building applications. These authors showed that the

density and compressive strength were decreased when the PET aggregates exceeded

50% by volume of sand. Also, It was found that the addition of plastic waste (fractions

< 10%) in volume inside of cementitious matrix does not imply a significant variation

of the concrete mechanical features.

Ghaly and Gill, (2004) did a study on compression and deformation performance of

concrete containing postconsumer plastics. It was observed that specimens containing

plastics failed at lower compressive loads as compared with those made of conventional

concrete. The decrease in strength may be attributed to the weak bond between plastics

and cement or the weak strength of the plastic. The effect of reducing the compressive

strength of concrete by the plastic aggregates is due to the fact that plastic particles

aggregates do not have the compression qualities of the conventional coarse aggregates.

Despite the lower compressive loads, these specimens underwent considerable

12
deformation and did not experience brittle failure. At failure, most of the specimens

were reduced to two pyramids in the vertical direction with the top one being upside

down.

Al-Jabir et.al (2009) investigated the properties of hollow sandcrete blocks made with

cement kiln dust (CKD) as an additive and as a replacement for ordinary Portland

cement. They observed that when CKD was used as a replacement for cement, the

compressive strength and density of blocks generally decreased with higher replacement

levels of cement by CKD. However, when CKD was used as an additive, within the

investigated levels, an improvement in the compressive strength of up to 54% was

observed.

ASTM C 270 focuses on the importance of lime and cement in defining the quality of

mortar in relation to water retention, air content, and compressive strength. These

parameters by themselves define the properties of good mortar using in masonry work,

making of concrete and interlocking tiles. Brown and Robinson (1986) wrote “The most

rigorous mortar requirements are to provide adequate and uniform bond strength and to

prevent wall leakage.” Other parameters, such as workability of the mortar and

durability are also important. Two types of properties should be considered. Plastic

mortar properties pertain to the mortar from the time of mixing until it chemically

hardens in the wall. Hardened mortar properties develop as the mortar cures after the

initial chemical set. Both types of properties are important in determining the quality of

the masonry application.

13
For glazed tiles intended for flooring, European standard EN 14411 makes it

compulsory to state the abrasion resistance class of the glazed surface as a whole

(glazes and decorations), after performance of the standard test according to ISO 10545-

7 (1999).

According to Cheng and Wei-Ting, 2014, the combination of silica fume and polyolefin

fiber in cement-based composites improved the strength properties and abrasion

resistance than only use of polyolefin fiber due to the pozzolanic and filler effect.

Cengiz et al., 2009, found that replacement of fly ash with cement reduced abrasion

resistance of concrete and inclusion of the steel fiber improved the abrasion resistance

of concrete. However, Using polypropylene fiber did not improve abrasion resistance of

concrete made with or without fly ash.

2.3 Building finishing materials

2.3.1 Lime mortar as a component in lime and cement finishing material

Lime mortar mixes, whether for building, re-pointing, rendering or plastering, are

essentially made from the same material. Building lime is produced by burning a

naturally occurring form of calcium carbonate (such as limestone, chalk or sea shells) to

form quicklime by driving off carbon dioxide. The quicklime is mixed with water (this

can produce a vigorous reaction which generates heat) to form lime putty in a process

poorly executed repairs in Portland cement known as slaking. Lime putty is most

commonly used for internal plastering, and the dry powder (more commonly known as

builders lime) is used as an additive to cement mortars to improve workability.

14
Hydraulic lime is produced from a limestone which contains clay-based minerals.

Hydraulic lime is available as a dry powder. It is commonly used for external work as it

can withstand more aggressive conditions.

2.3.2 Cement mortar as a finishing material

Ordinary Portland cement is made by heating limestone with clay or sand in a kiln in a

controlled manner to produce “clinker”. Varying amounts of the mineral gypsum are

added to this to give the desired setting properties. The material is supplied in bag form.

The addition of water causes a reaction and the cement to set. The combination of

cement, aggregate and water in different proportions forms concrete, cement plaster and

cement mortar. Putting additives into cement can increase the workability of the mix,

for example to allow its use as a render for external surfaces. Like lime mortars,

pozzolans can also be added to affect the setting characteristics. Color additives can also

be incorporated.

2.3.3 Ceramics as a finishing material

These are materials which are heated to high temperatures so as to obtain the

engineering properties suitable for construction purposes. Ceramics can be organized

into types or more categories in terms of composition (oxide, carbide and so on). The

characteristics of some of the more common are given below. Alumina (aluminum

oxide, Al2 O3) is by far the most commonly used engineering ceramic. Alumina has a

high hardness, is electrically insulating and can be produced in a wide variety of shapes

and purities (typically from 80 to 99% where the remainder is composed of a mixture of
15
inter granular glasses). Found predominantly as a substrate in the electronics industry,

alumina can be used up to 1500°C in a wide range of applications.

The core material mostly used to produce interlocking tiles is granite particles,

otherwise known as stone dust (pulverized granite). The word granite comes from the

Latin granum, which means a grain, in reference to the coarse-grained structure of such

a crystalline rock. Granite is a common and widely occurring type of intrusive, felsic,

igneous rock (Ohijeagbon et al., 2012. The aggregated materials of interlocking tiles are

usually bound together with cement. Cement is basically a binder which sets and

hardens independently, and can bind other materials together when hydrated. In India,

Fiori and Brusa, (1983), fabricated ceramic tiles the water absorption of which varied

between with 0.1% to 2.5%. Their tiles were made using blast furnace slag.

Investigation by Ramesh et al., (2013) found that using steel fiber content of 1.5% and

cement up to 30% by fly ash in concrete enhanced impact resistance. Steel fibers varied

from 0%, 0.5%, 1% and 1.5% by weight of cement and replacement of fly ash varied

from 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% by weight of cement.

2.3.4 Terrazzo floor finishing material

Terrazzo is a highly versatile solid surface material invented by Venetian mosaic

workers in the15th century. Traditionally, terrazzo is comprised of marble chips

embedded into a cement base, then ground flat and coated with a topical sealer (see

Plate 2.1). Although modern terrazzo can be made from a wider range of materials and

polished without coatings, the craft of installing it pretty much remains the same.

16
Today’s terrazzo is made with either Portland cement or epoxy as its base, then

combined with some type of aggregate to provide it's unique speckled look. Although

marble is still the aggregate of choice for most applications, terrazzo can also be made

from recycled glass and metals, as well as natural aggregates such as mother of pearl.

Terrazzo can also be set into precision cut forms to create logos, medallions, text, or any

abstract pattern imaginable.

Advancements in technology have provided methods for finishing terrazzo without the

use of coatings and sealers. Modern terrazzo is mechanically polished to a high-shine

without using any chemicals. For this reason, terrazzo is also environmentally friendly

and requires very little maintenance.

Terrazzo has been rediscovered by contemporary architects and designers because of its

timeless beauty and versatility. Not only does terrazzo make an impressionable floor,

but can also be used in the fabrication of counters, bars, table-tops and vanities.

Terrazzo is a craft that can be molded and created into anything imaginable.

a) Materials for making a terrazzo floor finishing material

Terrazzo is composed of two major materials: stone chips or aggregates of other

materials, and a binding material. The latter usually consists of finished concrete or a

synthetic such as epoxy resin. When resins are used, the finished product is known as

thin-set terrazzo. The more expensive types of terrazzo are normally composed of

finished concrete with fine marble chips or other stone. Most anything can be placed in

either, though, including glass, porcelain and metal.

17
 Plate 2.1: Terrazzo tile

b) Marble chips

Marble has been defined as a metamorphic rock formed by the recrystallization of

limestone. However, in recent decades, marble has been redefined to include all

calcareous rocks capable of taking a polish (such as onyx, travertine, and attractive

serpentine rocks). Marble is quarried, selected to avoid off color or contaminated

material, crushed and sized to yield marble chips for terrazzo. Excellent domestic and

imported marble chips are available for use in terrazzo in a wide range of colors and can

be combined in infinite varieties to create color harmonies of every description.

2.4 Properties of finishing materials

These properties include mechanical which describe a material's ability to compress,

stretch and bend physical and chemical properties. They affect how the material

functions and the durability of the material. They are given as below;

18
2.4.1 Mechanical properties of building finishing materials

a) Strength: The general ability of a material to withstand an applied force for

example tensile and compressive strength

b) Hardness: Hardness is a measure of how easily a material can be scratched or

indented. Hard materials are often also very brittle - this means they have a low

resistance to impact. Well known hard materials include diamond and hardened

high carbon steels.

c) Brittleness: A material that has a tendency to break easily or suddenly without

any extension first. Good examples are Cast iron, concrete, high carbon steels,

ceramics, and some polymers such as urea formaldehyde (UF).

d) Toughness: A material that absorbs impact (sudden forces or shocks such as

hammer blows) well is tough - this is the opposite of brittleness. [Units for

toughness are Joules/m²].

e) Plasticity: The materials which deform permanently when small forces are

applied show plasticity. Plastics and clay are good examples.

f) Elasticity: The ability of a material to return to its original form after a load has

been applied and removed. Good examples include rubber, mild steel and some

plastics such as nylon.

g) Stiffness: This means the ability of a material to resist bending.

h) Compressive strength: This is defined as the ability of a material to withstand

pushing or squeezing forces (compression).

19
 i) Tensile strength: This is the ability of a material to withstand pulling or

stretching forces (tension). Tensile strength is given in MN/m2.

j) Durability: This is the ability of a material to withstand wear and tear through

weathering and corrosive attack.

k) Stability: This is a general property of resistance to changes in shape or size.

2.4.2 Physical properties of building finishing materials

a) Conductivity: This is how well a material conducts heat. Majority of the metals

are good conductors of heat, more so copper and aluminum. Thermal

conductivity is given in W/mK. Copper, a good conductor has a value of 283

while lead has 35 and rubber (insulator) has a value of 0.15.

b) Electrical conductivity: This means how well the material conducts electricity.

Metals and graphite are good conductors. Insulators are materials that do not

conduct electricity - plastics (polymers), rubber (elastomers) and ceramics are

all insulators.

c) Magnetic: Some metals can be magnetized (most steels). Ferrous metals are

generally magnetic, that is, able to be attracted by a magnet. There are some

ceramic materials that have magnetic properties.

d) Corrosion resistance: This is the ability of a material to withstand

environmental attack and decay. Plastics are developed or modified to withstand

hostile environments For example; uPVC is resistant to the effects of UV light

which would quickly cause normal PVC to become brittle. A range of coatings

20
 and surface finishes are used to improve materials appearance and corrosion

resistance.

2.5 Properties of ceramic tile

Ceramic tiles possess a wide range of properties, and certain tiles are better suited for

some installations than others. Few tiles are suited for all types of installations;

consequently, precise knowledge of the properties is essential for the consumer to

achieve the desired and anticipated value of the tile (Michael, 2008). These include:

a) Water absorption

The ability of a tile’s bisque to absorb water or moisture. ASTM test method C373

measures the rate of absorption as a percent of the volume of the body of the tile, with

different designations for dust-pressed, extruded, and other body forms.

Water absorption capacity identifies the nature of the ceramic body in regard to internal

structure, which is related to mechanical strength (measured by modulus of rupture and

breaking strength) and also other characteristics that affect ceramic tile durability

(particularly in unglazed tiles), such as resistance to deep abrasion, stain resistance, and

resistance to frost/thaw cycles, as well as to dimensional quality (Sveda, 2003).

b) Visual abrasion resistance

A measure of the resistance of tile surfaces to visible surface abrasion. The ASTM

C1027 test applies to glazed floor, quarry, mosaic, or porcelain tiles only.

21
 c) Aesthetic class

This is a classification that has long been needed by the tile industry especially tile

show rooms to help educate tile consumers regarding color, blending, and shade

variations. On one hand (the most uniform), determination of class involves precise

testing (ASTM C609); but at the other extreme, the designation “Substantial Variation”

requires no testing, but rather a subjective call by the manufacturer. Consequently,

manufacturers and showrooms now have a positive standard and a simple classification

for both commodity and artisan tiles.

Chemical resistance

The chemicals comprising this class include the most popular cleaning solutions and

materials used for residential and light commercial tile installations.

d) Stain resistance

ASTM C1378 measures a tile’s resistance to the most common household stains.

e) Deep abrasion resistance

ASTM C1243 measures the resistance to wear of an unglazed tile intended for floor

covering. Values depend upon the type of tile tested.

f) Freeze/thaw resistance

ASTM C1026 measures a tile’s resistance to damage induced by cycles of freezing and

thawing, and rates 10 samples according to damage done at 5, 10, and 15 testing cycles.

g) Coefficient of friction

22
ASTM C1028 is a test to determine the coefficient of friction for manufactured tiles or

for installed tiles under both wet and dry conditions. A minimum ASTM C1028 test

value may be required as part of an engineer’s or architect’s project specification for

floor tile. A value of 0.5 is considered acceptable for most applications.

h) Bond Strength

A measure of the ability of a tile to be bonded with Portland cement paste, with test

values (ASTM C482) expressed in inch/pounds. The minimum value for this test is 50

psi. An especially important value for glass tiles, especially those with a smooth or

coated back.

i) Breaking strength

A measure of the breaking strength of tile with test values (ASTM C648) expressed in

pounds-force. Minimum value for glazed or unglazed mosaic, quarry, or paver tile is

250-pounds. Minimum value for glazed wall tile is 90-pounds. Samples of non-ceramic

tiles, made of stone, glass, metal, concrete, or other materials can be submitted for

ASTM C648 testing and evaluation.

23
 j) Crazing resistance

A one cycle pass-or-fail test (ASTM C424) to determine resistance to crazing. The test

uses staining dyes and steam to induce and identify thermal shock damage. Any tile

claiming craze or crackle resistance should be able to pass the ASTM C424. There is no

test value: The sample either passes or fails.

k) Thermal shock resistance

ASTM C484 measures glazed ceramic tiles resistance to thermal shock created by rapid

or severe temperature changes, as might be found near a fireplace or stove surround, for

example. The test uses staining dyes and approximate 300°F temperatures to induce and

identify cracks or other damage. There is no test value: The sample either passes or

fails.

l) Moisture expansion

A negative property, rarely found in ceramic tile, where prolonged moisture absorption

causes a tile to permanently grow in volume. ASTM C370 is the test used to reveal this

property. It is included here only to highlight that the moisture expansion phenomenon

exists.

m) Facial dimensions

A measure of the uniformity of size of a particular tile, determined by ASTM test C499

with values found, under “Nominal Size”, “Caliber Range”, and “Thickness”, in ANSI

A137.

24
 n) Warpage

The curving of a flat tile surface, as measured by ASTM C485, with values found,

under “Warpage Edge”, “Warpage Diagonal”, in ANSI A137.

o) Wedging

A change in edge dimension, from one tile to another, in a given lot, as measured by

ASTM C502, with values found, under “Wedging”, in ANSI A137.

p) Thermal Expansion

Linear thermal expansion is determined by ASTM test C372.

q) Thickness

The uniformity of thickness for a given lot of tile is determined by ASTM C499, with

values found, under “Thickness” in ANSI A137.

2.6 Use of plastics in the construction industry

According to Kiran Kumar and Prakash (2006) a material that contains one or more

organic polymers of large molecular weight, solid in its finished state and at some state

while manufacturing or processing into finished articles, can be shaped by its flow, is

termed as plastics. Prabir Das (2004) suggested that plastics could be used in

construction industry at various places. Proper selection of material / grade and suitable

design considerations can help to replace many more applications. Lighter weight,

design flexibility, part integration, low system cost, very high productivity and

improved product appearance are the main features for use of engineering plastics.

Lakshmi and Nagan (2011) suggested the use of E- Plastic particles along with fly ash

to improve the properties of concrete. Vasudevan (2004), in his report gave the most

25
useful ways of disposing waste plastics and laying roads in a research carried out by the

Chemistry Department of Thiyagarajar College of Engineering. They reported that the

waste plastics may be used in block making, modified light roofing, mastic flooring and

polymer reinforced concrete. The blocks could take 350 tonnes of load and prevent

water penetration.

There are three types of plastics namely; Thermosets, elastomers, thermoplastics.

Construction represents the second largest market for plastics, consuming some 25% of

all plastics consumed in the UK. The earliest commercially available plastics material

was first developed in the UK and exhibited in 1862. Plastics have been used in

construction applications since the 1930’s. Plastics are a family of some twenty

different materials each with a different range of properties. Examples of plastics used

in building are: acrylic, composites, expanded polystyrene, polycarbonate,

polyethylene, polypropylene, and polyvinyl chloride (Brouwer, 1992).

2.6.1 Generation and sources of plastic waste

a) Household: carry bags, bottles, containers and trash bags.

b) Health and Medicare: disposable syringes, glucose bottles, blood, intravenous

tubes, catheters and surgical gloves

c) Hotel and catering: packaging items, mineral water bottles, plastic plates, and

glass

26
2.6.2 Fundamental benefits of plastics in construction

Polymers have a number of vital properties, which when exploited alone or together,

make a significant and expanding contribution to constructional needs (Brouwer, 1992),

a) Hygiene and clean

b) Plastics are easy to install: Lightweight, Snap fit

c) Plastics promote energy efficiency in building: Plastics are low conductors of

heat, Tight seals achievable

d) Plastics are lightweight: Easy to transport, manoeuvre and handle, fewer

accidents

e) Plastics offer design freedom: A limitless array of shapes possible, products can

be colored, opaque or transparent, rigid or flexible

f) Plastics are strong: Durable, knock and scratch resistant with excellent weather

ability, do not rot or corrode.

g) Plastics are cost-effective: Favorable whole-life costs, offer a combination of

durability, quality, low maintenance and labour saving.

h) Plastics have a variety of waste management options available: Plastics building

products can be recycled with low energy inputs and when this is not feasible

can be used in energy from waste schemes.

i) Plastics score highly in environmental assessments: Plastics materials are an

efficient use of resources, rated highly in BRE’s ‘Green Guide to Specification’

27
 j) Plastics are low maintenance: Plastics building products can be repaired, they do

not need painting.

Using Plastics in construction has a number of advantages including but not limited to:

a) It easily binds to coarse aggregates at medium temperature

b) It does not require any change in road laying practice

c) The material is available locally in the form of shredded plastic, which is

presently treated as a waste

d) The process makes use of plastic bags in shredded form. The disposal of used

plastics, which is an environmental problem, is thereby eliminated

2.6.3 Polyethylene Grades

a) Low density polyethylene

Low density polyethylene is an extruded material that offers good corrosion resistance

and low moisture permeability. It can be used where corrosion resistance is important

and not stiffness, high temperatures, and structural strength. LDPE, a highly flexible

product, is used widely in orthopedics products or where mobility without stress fatigue

is desired as well as in consumer packaging, bags, bottles, and liners.

b) High density polyethylene

HDPE Represents the largest portion of the polyethylene applications and offers

excellent impact resistance, light weight, low moisture absorption, and high tensile

strength. It is also non-toxic and non-staining and meets FDA and USDA certification

for food processing.

28
 c) Ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene

This category has light weight (1/8 the weight of mild steel), high in tensile strength,

and is as simple to machine as wood. UHMW PE is the ideal material for many wear

parts in machinery and equipment as well as a superb lining in material handling

systems and storage containers. It is self-lubricating, shatter resistant, long-wearing,

abrasion and corrosion resistant.

UHMW PE meets FDA and USDA acceptance for food and pharmaceutical equipment

and is a good performer in applications up to 180 °F (82 °C). Melting Point 115oC to

135oC

2.7 Use of egg shell waste material in construction

Agricultural waste constitutes a significant proportion of the accumulated solid waste in

many parts of the world. Egg shells are part of agricultural wastes that litter the

environment. In the ever increasing endeavors to convert waste to wealth, the efficacy

of converting Egg shells to beneficial use becomes an idea worth investigating. The

composition of the Egg shells lends the effects of its ash on the cement to be articulated.

It is scientifically known that the Egg shell is mainly composed of compounds of

calcium. Winton (2003), presented egg shell as being composed off 93.7% calcium

carbonate, 4.20% organic matter, 1.30% magnesium carbonate, and 0.8% calcium

phosphate.

2.8 Use of white cement as a binder to make building tiles

Physical and chemical properties of white cement

29
 a) Appearance: A fine powder ranging in color from off-white to white

b) Odour: No distinctive odour

c) Boiling/melting Point: Melting point >1200ºC

d) Vapor pressure: Not applicable

e) Specific gravity: 3.0 – 3.2

f) Flash point: Not applicable

g) Flammability limits: Not applicable

h) Solubility in water: Slight, reacts on mixing with water forming an alkaline

(caustic) solution (pH >11)

i) Particle size: Up to 50% of the fresh dry material may be respirable (below 10

microns)

Contact with cement mixed with water or body fluids (for example sweat or eye fluid)

or with concrete or mortar should be avoided as it may cause irritation, dermatitis or

burns. If such contact occurs, the affected area should be washed without delay with

plenty of clean water. In case of eye contact rinse immediately with clean water and

seek medical advice.

2.9 Research gap

This research was carried out with the concern of reducing wastes in the environment by

using them to make construction building floor tiles. This study looked at floor building

tiles with these waste materials and the compressive strength, density, water absorption,

30
abrasion and impact resistance tests were conducted on the tiles to investigate their

suitability for use in the construction industry.

31
 CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Determination of the optimum proportions of the waste materials for

maximum strength of building tiles

This involved collecting the wastes, cleaning, drying, crushing and grinding them,

determining the density of the ingredients and determining the volumes of the

respective moulds that were used in the study.

3.1.1 Collection and processing of solid waste materials

a. Collection and processing of plastics

Plastics were collected especially from hospitals and other dumping sites, were washed

and shredded into pieces of 1 mm average diameter (see Plate 3.1).

Plastic is a strong material and it is resistant to both chemical and physical attacks

making it hard to disintegrate. It is also resistant to the penetration of water which is

why it is considered one of the major threats to the fertility of our soils. This has made it

a suitable component in this material since it increases on the water penetration

resistance of the material. Plastics also increase the bonding in the composite material.

Plastics were mainly used as fill materials to increase the bulk and reduce on the use of

other materials like cement and egg shells.

32
 Plate 3.1: Sorted and crushed plastics

b. Collection and processing of egg shells

The egg shells were obtained from poultry farmers, hotels, JKUAT cafeteria; they were

subjected to thorough cleaning involving soaking in water for 24 hours allowing easy

removal of dirt and membranes during cleaning. The major component of egg shells

being calcium carbonate makes them a very important material. The egg shells are

resistant to water penetration making its combination with plastics suitable for their use.

(a) Eggshells before being processed (b) Tiles and eggshells

33
 (c) Crushed eggshells (d) Pounded eggshells

Plate 3.2: Egg shells during drying and after being processed

Egg shells were first put in boiling water for 5-10 minutes to remove the membrane and

then sun dried for 3-4 days and then some were pounded using a motor and pestle( see

plate 3.3) and others crushed using a milling machine (Plate 3.4). The pounded egg

shells were sieved through a 1.2mm sieve (Plate 3.5). The egg shells were used to

increase the bulk and reduce on the use of other materials.

Tools and equipment used

Plate 3.3: Motor and pestle for pounding the egg shells

34
Plate 3.4: Milling machine in BEED used to crush the egg shell to powder

Plate 3.5: Researcher sieving the pounded egg shells

35
 c. White cement as a binder

This is a third component that binds the plastics and egg shells to make a material which

is resistant to water penetration. In this case, white cement was used to bring out the

colors of plastics and egg shell respectively. White hydraulic cement is good ingredient

because it is resistant to water infiltration and will increase the strength of the material.

White cement (Plate 3.6) was basically used for aesthetics properties. However, the

common ordinary Portland cement (OPC) can be used. Clean drinking water was used

for mixing the ingredients.

Plate 3.6: White cement

36
3.1.2 Mixing the materials after proportioning

i. Mixing plastics, Egg shells and cement and casting cubes

The densities of plastics, white cement and egg shells were 400 kg/m3, 1,440kg/m3, and

1,290kg/m3, respectively. For the production of building tiles, crushed plastics, crushed

and pounded egg shells and white cement were mixed in different quantities (Table

3.1). Commercial production of these tiles should aim at minimizing the cost of

production.

In order to manufacture the tiles, a ratio that gave the maximum compressive strength

was used. Nine (9) cubes were cast for each ratio; they were cured for 28 days under

water. Three cubes for each ratio were tested for compressive strength at 7, 14 and 28

days respectively.

Table 3.1: Quantities (kg) of different materials in each ratio

Cement: plastics: egg shells Cement (kg) Plastics (kg) Eggshells (kg)
(1:1:0) 0.94 0.26 0.00
(1:1:1) 0.62 0.17 0.56
(1:1:2) 0.47 0.13 0.84
(2:1:1) 0.94 0.13 0.42
(1:2:1) 0.47 0.26 0.42
(1:2:2) 0.37 0.21 0.67
(2:1:2) 0.75 0.10 0.67
(2:2:1) 0.75 0.19 0.30
(1:0:1) 0.84 0.00 0.84
(2:0:1) 1.25 0.00 0.56

37
The porker vibrator, trough, spades, a trowel, steel float were some of the tools that (see

Plate 3.7) were used in casting the cubes.

(a) Porker vibrator (b) Trowel

c) Trough d) Spades

Plate 3.7: Tools and equipment

The ingredients from table 3.1 (cement, plastics, crushed and pounded egg shells and

water) were weighed using the measuring scale and then mixed in a trough (Plate 3.8)

and then cast in already prepared moulds (Plate 3.9) and vibrated using a vibrator and

then left in the mould for 24 hours after which they are demoulded and cured (see Plate

3.10) for 28 days. The cubes were subjected to testing in a compressive strength testing

machine (Plate 3.11) and the results were obtained and recorded (Figure 4.4).

38
Plate 3.8: Ingredients in the trough before and after mixing

Plate 3.9: Cast cubes

Plate 3.10: Cubes curing

39
 Plate 3.11: Universal testing machine

ii. Making of the tiles

After obtaining the ratio (2:1:1) that gave the maximum strength, the making of the tiles

commenced. Moulds of different sizes (300x300x10mm, 200x200x10mm and

180x180x10mm), were used to make these tiles (Table 3.12). The mixture of white

cement, plastics and crushed Egg shells was hand compacted into the moulds and the

surface finished smooth using a steel float and then the tiles are left to set and dry in the

moulds for 24-48 hours before they were removed and let to dry at room temperature.

The mixture was made fairly plastic to enable proper compaction manually. Three

moulds of 200x200x10mm, one mould of 300x300x10mm and one mould of

180x180x10mm were used in the study.

40
 Plate 3.12: Moulds used to make tiles

Plate 3.13: Making the tiles with the moulds

41
 Plate 3.14: Appearance of tiles Plate

3.2 Testing tiles for physical and mechanical properties

3.2.1 Physical properties of tiles

a) Water absorption rate ASTM test method C37, EN99

The capacity of a ceramic material to absorb water is related to its porosity. Fully-

vitrified stoneware, a compact material with low porosity, has water absorption values

below 0.5%.

The strength of any building material will be drastically reduced if allowed to absorb

excessive moisture. This is the major reason for restricting the application of the

material without a protective measure such as DPC and DPM covering which are more

resistant materials to weather.

The water absorption value will have a direct bearing on other performance

characteristics such as mechanical resistance, the resistance to sudden temperature

changes and frost resistance. It also gives us an idea of the degree of internal cohesion

42
and compaction of the fired product. The open porosity of a wall or floor tile firstly

depends on the composition of the ceramic body. This may vary considerably from one

product to another (porcelain floor tiles have low porosity; wall tiles are very porous).

Other determining factors include the compaction of an unfired piece or piece-forming

(which in turn depends on such other factors as grain size, distribution of the spray-

dried powder, moisture etc.) and, finally, the firing process. Water absorption is also

used as a criterion for classifying ceramic wall and floor tiles in ISO 13006: 1998.

Obviously, the glazed layer has zero water absorption since it is fully vitrified.

The procedure involved the following:

a. Cubes from each mix ratio were randomly selected.

b. The cubes were dried in an oven for 24 hours at 60oCto ensure that all the water

was removed.

c. The dried cubes were weighed and recorded as M1.

d. Then the cubes were immersed in water for 24 hours.

e. Their weights were measured accurately and noted as M2.

Then the formula below was used to obtain the results

Where: = the mass of the dry tile, = the mass of the wet tile.

The average absorption of water of the sample was determined by the arithmetic

average of the individual results, and results must be rounded off to a single decimal

place.

43
 b) Density of the cubes

This is the mass of the material per unit of its volume. It is an important factor

influencing all strength properties of the material. Determination of density of a regular

shaped material such as a cube of mortar involved a simple procedure of weighing the

sample accurately and then measuring its dimensions well to compute its volume.

With the above formula, the density test of the material was calculated using the simple

procedure below.

a. A cube was selected at random and its mass weighed accurately.

b. Then its dimensions were accurately determined to find their volume.

where = length, = breadth and = thickness

c. The density was calculated using the above formula.

3.2.2 Mechanical properties of building tiles

a) Impact resistance test (Porcelanosa, 2005)

Impact can be defined as the application of a high degree of instantaneous force on a

minimal surface, and is generally negative for ceramic products. Heavy or pointed

objects falling on tiles may damage or shatter the surface, depending on the type of

object.

The determination of impact resistance is addressed in the American standard through

measuring what is known as the restitution coefficient (ASTM C648-84)

44
A spherical steel bearing weighing approximately 438g was dropped from a height of

one meter above the surface of the tile samples and the degree of shuttering or indention

was recorded.

A spherical steel ball weighing approximately 438g (see Plate 4.1) was dropped on to

the sample tiles at a height of one meter (see Plate 4.2) by using a steel reinforcement of

1 meter height and the degrees of damage to the sample tiles were recorded.

Plate 3.15: 438g spherical steel bearing

45
 Plate 3.16: Spherical steel bearing dropped through one meter

Surface abrasion resistance test ASTM C1027

Porcelanosa, (2005) believes that the degree of a ceramic tiles’ resistance to abrasion on

its glazed surface is the factor that is going to essentially determine its durability.

Therefore an in-house method has been developed to give a clearer idea of how tile

samples withstand wear and loss of appearance.

The test reproduces and even exaggerates the real abrasion conditions that any floor

tiles are subject to. Used as an abrasive agent is a quantity of sand with a high silica

content (with a hardness of 7 on Mohs’ scale), which is placed on the sample.

This abrasion of the tile surface is maintained during 10 minutes, after which the extent

of the wear is assessed.

46
For this study, a weight of 8.4kg was used alongside abrasive sand to test for the

abrasion of the tiles. The sample tiles were weighed before undergoing the abrasion test

and after the test. The two weights before and after abrasion were recorded. The

abrasion effect was assessed on the basis of effective percentage weight loss.

PRESENTATION OF RESULTS

Results were presented using photos and mostly Microsoft excel inform of graphs,

tables and graphs.

47
 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 The effect of cement, plastics and egg shells on compressive strength

of cubes

The compressive strength of cubes increased with increased quantities of cement. The

compressive strength increases with increasing amounts of cement upto approximately

60% beyond which the compressive strength starts decreasing because, cement reaches

the brittle state. At a minimum compressive strength of 10 N/mm2, about 44% of

cement is required. Compared to plastics and egg shells, cement contributes most

significantly to the compressive strength of cubes (Figure 4.1).

20
Compressive strength (MPa) of cubes

18
16
R² = 0.5803
14
12
at 28 days

10
8
6
4
2
-
- 20 40 60 80 100
Amount of cement (%)
Dots represent the cement % age in the different ratios keeping
othe materials constant

Figure 4.1: Effect of variation of cement content on the cube compressive strength

48
The compressive strength of the cubes was negatively affected by the addition of

plastics (Figure 4.2). This is consistent with the findings of Ghaly and Gill, (2004). The

decrease in strength may be attributed to the weak bond between plastics and cement or

the weak strength of the plastic. The effect of reducing the compressive strength of

concrete by the plastic aggregates is due to the fact that plastic particles aggregates do

not have the compression qualities of the conventional coarse aggregates. At a

minimum compressive strength of 10 N/mm2, about 13% of plastics is required.

20
Compressive strength (MPa) of

15
cubes at 28 days

10

5 R² = 0.4605

-
- 5 10 15 20 25
Amount of plastics (%)
Dots represent the plastics % age in the different ratios

Figure 4.2: Effect of variation of plastics content on cube compressive strength

The effect of egg shells on the compressive strength of the cubes was insignificant

(Figure 4.3). At a minimum compressive strength of 10 N/mm2, about 35% of cement is

required. Egg shells are a neutral filler material composed of CaCO 3 when pulverized

(King’ori, 2011). They are used to increase the bulk of the mixture and reduce on the

quantities of other mix ingredients.

49
 20
(MPa) of cubes at 28 days
Compressive strength
15 R² = 0.0288
10

-
- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Amount of egg shells (%)
Dots represent the eggshells % age in the different ratios keeping …

Figure 4.3: Effect of variation of egg shells content on the cube compressive strength

The highest strength (21 N/mm2) was realized for a cement: plastic: egg shell ratio of

2:0:1 (Figure 4.4). A compressive strength of 17.9 N/mm2 after 28 days' curing was

realized for ratios of 2:1:1 and 1:0:1. Ratio of 1:2:2 with the largest quantity of plastics

resulted in cubes with the lowest (about 1 N/mm2) compressive strength (Figure 4.4).

The compressive strength of the cubes made with a mixture of ratios 2:0:1 and 2:1:1

had the same strength as class 15 to class 20 concrete (Hirschi et al., 2005) (Figure 4.5).

Cubes with the highest compressive strength were those with high cement content or

without plastics.

50
 Table 4.1: Shows average cube compressive strength (MPa)

Average cube compressive strength

Mix ratio
(MPa)
(1:1:0) 9.20
(1:1:1) 8.20
(1:1:2) 7.92
(2:1:1) 17.90
(1:2:1) 5.78
(1:2:2) 0.99
(2:1:2) 10.94
(2:2:1) 10.11
(1:0:1) 17.91
(2:0:1) 21.22

25.00
cubes at 28 days (N/mm2)

21.22
Compressive strength of

20.00 17.90 17.91

15.00
10.94 10.11
9.20 8.20
10.00 7.92
5.78
5.00
0.99
-
1:1:0 1:1:1 1:1:2 2:1:1 1:2:1 1:2:2 2:1:2 2:2:1 1:0:1 2:0:1
Cement: plastics : eggshell ratio

Figure 4.4: Compressive strength of cubes

In conclusion, the highest compressive strength (21.22 N/mm2) was obtained without

plastics. Since the major objective was to get rid of waste materials by making use of

them in making construction floor tiles, the mix ratio containing cement, plastics and

egg shells that gave a compressive strength of 17.9 N/mm2 was considered the most

51
appropriate. Tiles with both compressive strengths were manufactured to obtain impact

and abrasion resistance results.

45 40
Compressive strength of concrete

40
At 7 days
35 30
30 at 28 days 27
25
25
(N/mm2)

20 20
20 17
15 13.5
15 10
10
5
0
1:4:8 1:3:6 1:2:4 1:1.5:3 1:1:1
Cement: fine aggregate: coarse aggregagate ratio

Figure 4.5: Compressive strength of various grades of concrete

4.2 Water absorption results of the cubes

Cubes with high quantities of cement had low water absorption rates while those with

more plastics and egg shells had high water absorption rates (Figure 4.6). Cubes made

from cement: plastics: egg shells ratio 1:2:2 had the highest water absorption rate

(33.4%). This might have been due to more quantities of plastics and egg shells. Cubes

made from cement: plastics: egg shell ratio of 2:1:1 had the lowest water absorption rate

(11.4%).

52
 Table 4.2: Shows the cube water absorption (%)

Mix ratio Water absorption (%)

1:1:0 16.9
1:1:1 15.5
1:1:2 16.4
2:1:1 11.4
1:2:1 21.4
1:2:2 33.4
2:1:2 19.9
2:2:1 21.6
1:0:1 14.0
2:0:1 32.7

40
33.4
Average water absorption %

35 32.7
30
25 21.4 21.6
19.9
20 16.9 16.4
15.5
14.0
15 11.4
10
5
0
1:1:0 1:1:1 1:1:2 2:1:1 1:2:1 1:2:2 2:1:2 2:2:1 1:0:1 2:0:1
Cement: plastics: egg shells ratio

Figure 4.6: Water absorption of the cubes

According to Kenya bureau of standards, floor tiles with water absorption rate in the

range of 6-10% have an allowable individual maximum of 11% water absorption.

Therefore, since these tiles have 11.4% water absorption rate, they can convincingly be

used as floor finish materials.

53
4.2.1 The effect of cement, plastics and egg shell contents on the water

absorption rates of cubes

Cubes water absorption decreased with increased cement content while increased water

absorption was obtained with reduced cement content. However, the relationship

between the cement content (%) and water absorption was not a strong one (Figure 6).

In comparison with the plastics and egg shells, it can be concluded that cement was the

main contributor to reducing water absorption of the cubes (Figure 4.7).

40.0
Water absorption of cubes (%)

35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
R² = 0.4005
15.0
10.0
5.0
-
- 20 40 60 80 100
Cement (%)

Figure 4.7: Effect of cement (%) on the water absorption of cubes

The contribution of plastics to water absorption is too minimal as shown by the weak

relationship between them and the water absorption. Therefore, Plastics have a very

insignificant effect on the water absorption of the cubes (Figure 4.8).

54
 40.0
Water absorption of cubes (%) 35.0
30.0
R² = 0.1955
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
-
- 5 10 15 20 25
Plastics (%)

Figure 4.8: Effect of plastics (%) on the water absorption of cubes

Eggshells had a very insignificant effect on the water absorption of the cubes (Figure

4.9). This is shown by the very weak relationship between percentage egg shells and the

percentage water absorption (5.7%) of the cubes.

40.0
Water absorption of cubes (%)

35.0
30.0
R² = 0.0575
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
-
- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Egg shells (%)

Figure 4.9: Effect of plastics (%) on the water absorption of cubes

55
In conclusion, water absorption was mainly influenced by the amount of cement. The

contribution of plastics and egg shells to water absorption was too insignificant.

4.3 Density results of cubes

Cubes with more cement content had high density values while those with high

quantities of plastics had low density values (Figure 4.10). Cubes made from cement:

plastics: egg shells ratio 1:2:2 had the density (1,305 kg/m3) while those made from

cement: plastics: egg shells ratio 1:0:1 had the highest density (2,086 kg/m3). The high

density could be as a result of proper compatibility of cement and egg shells mixture.

The density results show that the densities of the different mix ratios ranged from 1,305

kg/m3 to 2,086 kg/m3which compare well with the densities of the different classes of

concrete which range from 1,200 to 2,500 kg/m3.

Table 4.3: Shows density of cubes (Kg/m3)

Cement: plastics: eggshells ratio Density (kg/m3)

1:1:0 1,595
1:1:1 1,782
1:1:2 1,796
2:1:1 1,901
1:2:1 1,617
1:2:2 1,305
2:1:2 1,834
2:2:1 1,705
1:0:1 2,086
2:0:1 1,960

56
 2,500

2,086

1,960
1,901

1,834
1,796
1,782

1,705
1,617
2,000

1,595

1,305
Density (kg/m3)

1,500

1,000

500

-
1:1:0 1:1:1 1:1:2 2:1:1 1:2:1 1:2:2 2:1:2 2:2:1 1:0:1 2:0:1
Cement: plastics: egg shells ratio

Figure 4.10: Densities of cubes made with different mix ratios

4.3.1 Effect of the ingredients on the density of cubes

The density of tiles increased with increase in the quantity of cement up to

approximately 60% when density started to decrease (Figure 4.11). Cement has 58%

degree of significance of contribution to density of cubes.

57
 2500
R² = 0.5201
Density (kg/m3) 2000

1500

1000

500

0
- 20 40 60 80 100
Cement %

Figure 4.11: Effect of variation of cement content on the cube density

The density of cubes decreased with an increased plastic quantity. When the quantity of

plastics was zero, the density of the cubes was maximum at 2,086 kg/m3 (Figure 4.12).

2,500
R² = 0.6678
2,000
Density (Kg/m3)

1,500

1,000

500

0
- 5 10 15 20 25
Plastics %

Figure 4.12: Effect of variation of plastics content on the density of cubes

58
The effect of egg shells on the density of the cubes was very insignificant (Figure 4.13).

However, with increase in egg shell quantity, the density of the cubes slightly increased

up to approximately 45% beyond which, the density started deceasing.

2,500

R² = 0.0815
2,000
Density (Kg/m3)

1,500

1,000

500

0
- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Eggshells %

Figure 4.13: Effect of variation of egg shells on the density

4.4 Surface abrasion results

Experimental results showed that the presence of plastics in the tiles increased abrasion

resistance.

4.4.1 Effect of plastics on surface abrasion

Surface abrasion results show that tiles with cement, plastics and egg shells (2:1:1) wear

at a rate lower than those made with cement and egg shells only (2:0:1) (Figure 4.14).

The absence of plastics makes the tiles weak and easily eroded by any rubbing object

while presence of plastics makes the tiles more resistant to surface abrasion.

59
 2.5

Abrasion (% Weight
2
1.5

loss)
1
0.5
0
With Plastic Without plastics
Tile Material

Figure 4.14: Effect of plastics on abrasion

4.5 Impact resistance test results

The spherical steel ball when dropped on the tiles made during this study only caused

dents without shattering (see Plate 4.3). The inclusion of plastics in the mixes used to

produce the tiles reduced the brittleness of these tiles. When the spherical steel ball was

dropped onto tiles without plastics, the tiles shattered (see Plate 4.4), implying that they

were brittle. When the test was conducted on the commercial ceramic industrial tiles,

they shattered completely (see Plate 4.5). This implied that the industrial ceramic tiles

were brittle in nature.

60
 Plate 4.1: Indented tiles made with cement, plastics and egg shells

Plate 4.2: Shattered tile made with cement and egg shells without plastics

61
 Plate 4.3: Shattered commercial ceramic tile

In a nut shell, the presence of plastics in the tiles under study reduced their brittleness

making them suitable for use as floor tiles.

The bending strength could not be measured because of the brittleness of the tiles. The

weight of the apparatus caused failure of the tiles before any bending strength results

could be recorded by the universal testing machine.

In conclusion, an appropriate combination of cement, plastics and egg shells (2:1:1)

provided the highest impact and abrasion resistances, from which it was inferred that

plastics were important in increasing impact and abrasion resistances of the tiles.

4.6 Economic consideration of tiles

Table 4.1 shows the sizes of tiles made during this study and their relevant information.

Table 4.2 shows the cost of commercially available ceramic tiles of the same size as the

62
 tiles made during this study. The cost of production of the tiles used in this study is

carried out in Table 4.3

Table 4.4: Tile information

Dimensions (mm) Area (m2) Volume (m3) Number of tiles/m2

300x300x10 0.09 0.001 12

Table 4.5: Cost of commercial ceramic tiles

Tile type and size Coverage (m2) Cost (Kshs)

Floor tiles 300mm x300mm 1 900-1500

Wall tiles 300mm x300mm 1 800-1500

Table 4.6: Unit cost for plastics, egg shells, cement and tiles

INGREDIENT: PLASTICS

Activity Rate (Kshs/kg) Qty (kg) Amt (Kshs)

Collection washing and drying 5 1 5

Crushing cost 10 1 10

Total 15

Cost (Kshs) per kg 15

INGREDIENT: EGG SHELLS

Activity Rate (Kshs/kg) Qty (kg) Amt (Kshs)

Collection Washing and Drying fee 10 1 10

Crushing cost 10 1 10

63
 Total 20

Cost (Kshs) per kg 20

INGREDIENT: CEMENT

Activity Rate(Kshs/kg) Qty(kg) Amt (Kshs)

Buying 35 1 35

Total 35

Cost (Kshs) per kg 35

COST OF PRODUCTION (Kshs) OF CEMENT, PLASTICSAND EGG SHELLS MIX

TILES FOR RATIO 2:1:1
Cement Plastics Egg shells Total
Quantities (kg) 0.84 0.12 0.38
Cost (Kshs) 29.4 1.8 7.6 38.8
15% for transport, other costs and profit 5.82
margin
Total 44.62
cost/tile tiles/m2 Cost/m2
Cost/m2 (Kshs) 44.62 12 535

From the economic analysis, it can be concluded that the cost of the tiles made in this

study using cement, plastics and eggshell mixture (Kshs. 535) is lower than the cost of

ceramic tiles (Kshs. 900 t0 1500) available commercially and hence they are affordable

for medium and low cost housing.

64
 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusions

From this study the following conclusions can be made:

[1] Compressive strength of tiles increases with increasing cement content. Compared

to plastics and egg shells, cement contributes most significantly to the compressive

strength of tiles, which decreases with increasing quantity of plastics. Addition of

egg shells does not significantly affect the compressive strength of tiles. Plastics

have a tendency to reduce the compressive strength of tiles. Hence, they should be

used cautiously.

[2] The presence of plastics seemed to enhance abrasion resistance. The presence of

plastics in tiles under study enhanced impact resistance as they resisted impact due

to a falling steel ball weighing 438g. Water absorption decreased with increased

amounts of cement. However, plastics and egg shells had no significant effect on

water absorption of the tiles. The most appropriate mix in the study was that which

gave a compressive strength of 17.9 N/mm2, a water absorption rate of 11.4% as

well as tiles that are resistant to impact and abrasion. The density of tiles increased

with increase in the quantity of cement. Cement was the major contributing

material to density of cubes. The density of cubes decreased with increased plastic

quantity. The effect of egg shells and plastics on the density of the cubes was very

insignificant.

65
[3] Economically, the tiles made using cement, plastics and egg shells mixture are

affordable (Kshs 535 per m2) compared to (Kshs. 900 to 1500) for Ceramic tiles

available commercially and the production process is cheap since it does not

involve more expensive industrial equipment. Wastes (plastics and egg shells) are

the major materials that are needed to manufacture of these tiles.

66
5.2 Recommendations

This research can be very important in conserving the environment most especially in

those areas with poor waste disposal facilities by making good use of these wastes in

making floor tiles for use in the construction industry.

In this study, the following physical and mechanical properties were not performed on

to the tiles, that is: chemical resistance, freeze/thaw resistance, stain resistance, deep

abrasion resistance, crazing resistance, thermal shock resistance, Warpage, wedging,

bond strength, breaking strength, thermal expansion, and moisture expansion.

Therefore, further research should be carried out on the tiles concerning these properties

to ascertain their suitability for use in the different environments

67
REFERENCES

1. ADB., (2002). Report Prepared for Sustainable Development and Poverty

Reduction Unit: Solid Waste Management Options For Africa. Côte dÍvoire

2. Al-Manaseer, A. A., and T. R. Dalal, (1997). ‘‘Concrete containing plastic

aggregates.’’ Concrete Int., 19(8), 47–52.

3. Abdullah Hussein A., D. Rusel Salim and A. Abdulwahab Sultan, (2011).

Water absorption and mechanical properties of high – density

polyethylene/egg shell composite, Journal of Basrah Researches (Sciences),

Vol. 37, No. 3A, pp. 36-42.

4. American Society for Testing and Materials C270, Standard Specification

for Mortar for Unit Masonry, Philadelphia, PA

5. Aubert JE, B. Husson, N. Sarramone, (2006). Utilization of Municipal Solid

Waste Incineration (MSWI) Fly Ash in Blended Cement: Part 1: Processing

and Characterization of MSWI Fly Ash. J. Hazardous Mater, 136: 624-631.

6. Al-Jabri K.S., A. W. Hago, R. Taha, A. S. Alnuaimi and A. H. Al-Saidy

(2009), “Strength and Insulating Properties of Building Blocks Made from

Waste Materials”, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol.21, No. 5,

page no: 191–197.

7. Akinori Ito (2010). Chemical Transport Modeling Group, Frontier Research

Center for Global Change, 3173-25 Showa-machi, Kanazawa-ku,

Yokohama Kanagawa 236-0001, Japan.

68
 8. Batayneh M, I. Marie, I. Asi, 2007, ‘Use of selected waste materials in

concrete mixes’, Waste Management, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 1870–1876.

9. Brown, R.H. and G. Robinson, (1986). “Inadequacy of Property

Specification in ASTM C-270”, ASTM

10. Brouwer J., (1992). Plastics in Construction, a Guide for Architects and

specifiers. British Plastics Federation.

11. Cengiz Duran Atis, Okan Karahan, Kamuran Ari, Özlem Celik Sola, and

Cahit Bilim, (2009). Relation between Strength Properties (Flexural and

Compressive) and Abrasion Resistance of Fiber (Steel and Polypropylene)-

Reinforced Fly Ash Concrete, Journal of materials in Civil Engineering ©

ASCE

12. Cheng An and Wei-Ting Lin, (2014). Abrasion Resistance of Concrete

Containing Polyolefin Fibers and Silica Fumes, Polymers & Polymer

Composites, Vol. 22, No. 5, Smithers Information Ltd.

13. Choi YW, Moon DJ, Chumg JS & Cho SK, 2005, ‘Effects of waste PET

bottles aggregate on the properties of concrete. Cem Concr Res, vol. 35, pp:

76–81.

14. Fiori C. and A. Brusa, (1983), ‘Ceramic powders’, (ed. P. Vincenzini), 173–

183; New York, Elsevier Scientific

15. Freire M.N. and J.N.F. Holanda, (2006), Characterization of avian Egg shell

waste aiming its use in a ceramic wall tile paste, Brasil, Cerâmica 52 240-

244

69
16. Ghaly A. M. and M. S. Gill, (2004). Compression and Deformation

Performance of Concrete Containing Postconsumer Plastics, Journal of

materials in Civil engineering © ASCE

17. Ghosh S., M. Das, S. Chakraborti and S. Ghatak., (2002). Ceram. Int., 28,

393–400.

18. Harrison R. and B. Ralph the impact resistance of Ceramic tiles and flooring,

Ceram Research, Stoke-on-Trent, UK

19. Hirschi T., H. Knauber, M. Lanz, J. Schlumpf, J. Schrabback, C. Spirig, U.

Waeber. (2005). Concrete handbook, Zürich, Switzerland

20. ISO 10545-3: (1995). Ceramic tiles-determination of water absorption,

apparent porosity, apparent density and bulk density.

21. Khater G. A. (2002): Ceram. Int., 28, 59–67.

22. Kaseva, M.E., S.E. Mbuligwe, (2005). Appraisal of solid waste collection

following private sector involvement in Dar es Salaam. Habitat International

29, 353-366.

23. Kornmann, M. and CTTB, (2007),Clay bricks and roof tiles, Manufacturing

and Properties, Technical Centre for Roof Tiles and Bricks in Paris, Soc.

Industrie Minerale, Paris

24. King’ori A.M. (2011). A Review of the Uses of Poultry Eggshells and Shell

Membranes. International Journal of Poultry Science 10 (11): 908-912.

25. Michael F.B. (2008). Properties of ceramic tile.

70
26. Lakshmi R., S. Nagan, (2011). “Utilization of waste E plastic particles in

cementation mixtures” Journal of structural Engineering, vol.38, No.1

27. Liyala C.M., (2011). Modernizing Solid Waste Management at Municipal

Level: Institutional arrangements in urban centres of East Africa, PhD

Thesis. Environmental Policy Series. Wageningen University. The

Netherlands.

28. Nakano, T., N.I. Ikama and L. Ozimek, (2003).Chemical composition of Egg

shell and shell membranes. Poultry Science, 82: 510-514

29. Oberlin, A.S., (2011). The Role of Households in Solid Waste Management

in East Africa Capital Cities. PhD Thesis. Environmental Policy Series.

Wageningen University. The Netherlands.

30. Ohijeagbon I. O., H. D. Olusegun, A.S. Adekunle, O.S. Adewoye and A. O.

Oladiji, (2012). Impact of Suitable Replacement of Granite-Particles on

Interlocking Tiles, Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Review

5 (2) 51 – 56.

31. Okot-Okumu, J., R. Nyenje, (2011)."Municipal solid waste management

under decentralization in Uganda." Habitat International 35, pp. 537 543.

32. Pappu A, M. Saxena, SR. Asolekar, (2007). Solid Wastes Generation in

India and their Recycling Potential in Building Materials. Building and

Environment, 42: 2311-2320.

33. Phil, G. and M. Zhihong, (2009). High value products from hatchery waste.

RIRDC publication number 09/061. glatz.phil@saugov.sa.gov.au.

71
34. Prabir Das, 2004, “Engineering Plastics: New Generation Products for

Building and Construction,” CE & CR

35. Porcelanosa, (May 2005). Testing and performance, UK

36. Ramesh K., K. Arunachalam, S. Rooban Chakravarthy (2013). Experimental

Investigation on Impact Resistance of Fly ash Concrete and Fly ash Fiber

Reinforced Concrete, International Journal of Engineering Research and

Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com Vol. 3, Issue 2,

pp.990-999

37. Rebeiz KS, (2007). ‘Time-temperature properties of polymer concrete using

recycled PET. Cem Concr Compos, vol. 17, pp; 603–608.

38. Remadnia A., RM. Dheilly, B. Laidoudi & M. Queneudec, (2009). ‘Use of

animal proteins as foaming agent in cementitious concrete composites

manufactured with recycled PET aggregates. Constr Build Mater, vol. 23, no

10, pp. 3118–23.

39. Romanoff, A.L. and A.J. Romanoff, (1949). The avian egg. John Wiley and

sons, Inc. New York, NY.

40. Rotich H. K., Z. Yongsheng and D. Jun, (2006). Municipal solid waste

management challenges in developing countries: Kenyan case study. Waste

Management 26 (1), 92-100

41. Safiuddin Md., M. Z. Jumaat, M. A. Salam, M. S. Islam and R. Hashim, (18

October, 2010). Utilization of solid wastes in construction materials.

International Journal of the Physical Sciences Vol. 5(13), pp. 1952-1963.

72
42. Siddique R, Khatib J & Kaur I, (2008) ‘Use of recycled plastic in concrete: a

review’ Waste Manage, vol. 28, pp. 1835–1852.

43. Sikalidis CA, AA Zabaniotou & SP Famellos, (2002). ‘Utilization of

municipal solid wastes for mortar production, Resour, Conserv Recycl, vol.

36, no. 2, pp.155–167.

44. Sveda M. (2003). Effect of water absorption on frost resistance of clay

roofing tiles, British Ceramic Transactions Vol.102 No.1

45. Scheinberg A., (2011). Value Added: Modes of Sustainable Recycling in the

Modernization of waste Management Systems. PhD Thesis, Wageningen

University. The Netherlands.

46. Shuhadah S., M. Supri and H. Kamaruddin, (2008). Thermal analysis, water

absorption and morphology properties of Egg shell powder filled low density

polyethylene composites, in: proceeding of MUCET, UniMAP, Kangar,

Perlis, pp. 15-16

47. Simon A.M., (2008). Analysis of Activities of Community Based

Organizations Involved in Solid waste Management, Investigation

Modernized Mixtures Approach. The Case of Kinondoni Municipality, Dar

es Salaam. MSc Thesis. Wageningen University.

48. Winton, A.L. (2003). Poultry eggs, Agrobios Publishers, Behind Nasrani

Cinema, India

73
49. Yazoghli-marzouk O, RM. Dheilly & M. Queneudec, (2007). ‘Valorization

of postconsumer waste plastic in cementitious concrete composite’ Waste

Manage, vol. 27, no. 2, pp.1870–1876.

50. Republic of Uganda, value for money audit report on solid waste

management in Kampala, (2010). Office of the Auditor General

74