Manufacture of Soil-Cement Bricks With the Addition of Sugarcane Bagasse Ash

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of sugarcane bagasse ash on the compressive strength and water absorption index of soil-cement bricks. The ash was sieved without chemical and/or physical treatment to reflect the use of this material in real manufacturing processes. The addition of natural ash decreased the quality of the bricks, reducing the compressive strength and increasing the water absorption index.

Lignocellulosic Materials as Soil-cement Bricks Reinforcement

“…(IS 1982). Jordan et al (2019), when studying the use of sugarcane bagasse ashes in soil-cement bricks with 1:7:3 and 1:6:4 cement: soil: ash ratios also noted compression values reduction when using vegetal waste as reinforcement, not meeting the trading standards. However, Khedari et al (2005), evaluated the use of coconut fiber on soil-cement bricks production obtained an average 3.88 MPa compressive strength using a 5.75:1.25:2 soil:cement: sand ratio and 0.8 kg coconut fiber.…”

“…The soil used presented 65% sand, within the 60 to 80% ideal range (Ker et al 2015;Acchar and Marques 2016;Jordan et al 2019;Barbosa et al 2019) for soil-cement bricks production, classified as sandy-clay soil according to Feret's diagram (Moran 1984). For grain size test, most grains found in the soil presented grain sizes ranging from 0,42mm to 2mm with the grain sizes ranging from 2mm to 4,8mm was found in smaller amounts.…”

“…This is related to the higher porosity of bricks produced with lignocellulosic waste and their lower density since such factors directly influence the composites` mechanical properties (Kizinievič et al 2018;Giroudon et al 2019). The compressive strength values may be linked to the granular aspect presented by the bricks added with waste particles compared to the control brick (Figure 7) caused by reinforcement-matrix interaction, which fosters voids that assist on cracks propagation when submitting bricks to the compressive strength testing (Jordan et al 2019;Danso and Manu 2020). (IS 1982).…”

Lignocellulosic materials as soil–cement brick reinforcement

“…For loss of mass by immersion, when evaluating the 1.5% and 3% percentages for each waste (rice husk, coffee husk and bamboo), it was noted that all treatments were statistically differentiated. For rice husk and coffee husk, the highest loss of mass values by immersion was noted when using 1.5% waste, due to greater soil stabilization by using more particles, as with the increase in the percentage of the particles, there was an improvement in the soil structure, causing a lower loss of mass (Jordan et al 2019;Danso and Manu 2020). However, for bamboo, the highest average value was observed when 3% was used.…”

“…The soil used presented 65% sand, within the 60 to 80% ideal range (Ker et al 2015;Acchar and Marques 2016;Jordan et al 2019;Barbosa et al 2019) for soil-cement bricks production, classified as sandy-clay soil according to Feret's diagram (Moran 1984). For grain size test, most grains found in the soil presented grain sizes ranging from 0,42mm to 2mm with the grain sizes ranging from 2mm to 4,8mm was found in smaller amounts.…”