Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM68369
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1-6
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of Civil Engineering
SVERI's College of Engineering, Pandharpur
Department of Civil Engineering
SVERI's College of Engineering, Pandharpur
Department of Civil Engineering
SVERI's College of Engineering, Pandharpur
Department of Civil Engineering
SVERI's College of Engineering, Pandharpur
Department of Civil Engineering
SVERI's College of Engineering, Pandharpur
Department of Civil Engineering
SVERI's College of Engineering, Pandharpur
Plastic waste is a persistent environmental problem because most plastic products degrade very slowly and accumulate in landfills, waterways and open land. This study investigates the manufacture of plastic–sand bricks in which waste plastic bottles act as the binder and sieved crushed sand acts as the aggregate. The production route comprised collection, cleaning, drying, size reduction, batching, heating, mixing, molding, compaction, cooling for at least 24 hours and conditioning of the specimens. Three plastic-to-sand mixes by weight (1:3, 1:4 and 1:5) were prepared and compared with conventional bricks in terms of compressive strength and water absorption. The average compressive strengths were 9.72, 12.28 and 3.39 N/mm² for the 1:3, 1:4 and 1:5 mixes, against 5.10 N/mm² for the conventional brick, while the average water absorption values were 0.37%, 0.30% and 0.35%, against 3.00% for the conventional brick. The 1:4 mix (20% plastic by weight) gave both the highest strength (about 2.4 times that of the conventional brick) and the lowest water absorption (about 90% lower), whereas the 1:5 mix was weaker than the conventional brick. Fitted trend curves suggest that the optimum plastic content lies close to 20–22% by weight. The results indicate that plastic–sand bricks are promising for paving and non-load-bearing applications; however, standardized testing with replicate statistics, fire and thermal evaluation, durability assessment and environmental-safety review are required before any structural use is recommended.
KEYWORDS
This study manufactured plastic–sand bricks from waste plastic bottles and crushed sand at plastic-to-sand ratios of 1:3, 1:4 and 1:5 and compared their compressive strength and water absorption with conventional bricks. The main findings are summarized below. The 1:4 mix (20% plastic) performed best, with an average compressive strength of 12.28 N/mm² and a water absorption of 0.30%. The 1:3 mix reached 9.72 N/mm² and 0.37%, and it also exceeded the conventional brick (5.10 N/mm²) in strength. The 1:5 mix, at 3.39 N/mm², was weaker than the conventional brick, showing that an insufficient binder content reduces strength. All plastic–sand mixes absorbed about 88–90% less water than the conventional brick (3.00%), and the fitted trend curves point to an optimum plastic content of about 20–22% by weight, which remains to be confirmed experimentally. Waste plastic can therefore be a viable binder for plastic–sand bricks, offering a route to reuse plastic waste in paving and non-load-bearing products. The findings are limited to the measured properties and test conditions, and further evaluation against applicable standards is required before specific building applications are recommended.
[1] S. L. Mak, T. M. Y. Wu, F. W. F. Tang, J. C. H. Li, and C. W. Lai, “A Review on Utilization of Plastic Wastes in Making Construction Bricks,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 706, no. 1, Art. no. 012001, 2021. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/706/1/012001. [2] P. Lamba, D. P. Kaur, S. Raj, and J. Sorout, “Recycling/reuse of plastic waste as construction material for sustainable development: A review,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., vol. 29, pp. 86156–86179, 2022. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-16980-y. [3] A. A. Rauniyar, R. K. Nakrani, S. R. Narpala, et al., “An Evaluation of the Use of Plastic Waste in the Manufacture of Plastic Bricks,” Discover Civil Eng., vol. 1, Art. no. 43, 2024. doi: 10.1007/s44290-024-00045-3. [4] K. Yadav, A. Singh, O. N. Bhat, et al., “Transforming Waste into Innovation: A Review of Plastic Bricks as Sustainable Construction Materials,” Discover Civil Eng., vol. 1, Art. no. 38, 2024. doi: 10.1007/s44290-024-00040-8. [5] S. Swinnerton, K. Kurtz, S. Neba Nforsoh, V. Craver, and C. Tsai, “The Manufacturing Process and Consequent Occupational Health and Environmental Risks Associated with the Use of Plastic Waste in Construction Bricks in Small-Scale Recycling Plants,” J. Cleaner Prod., vol. 477, Art. no. 143818, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.143818. [6] G. Santos, E. Esmizadeh, and M. Riahinezhad, “Recycling Construction, Renovation, and Demolition Plastic Waste: Review of the Status Quo, Challenges and Opportunities,” J. Polym. Environ., vol. 32, pp. 479–509, 2024. doi: 10.1007/s10924-023-02982-z. [7] E. Cirino, S. Curtis, J. Wallis, T. T. Thys, J. Brown, R. Rolsky, and M. Erdle, “Assessing Benefits and Risks of Incorporating Plastic Waste in Construction Materials,” Front. Built Environ., vol. 9, 2023. doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2023.1206474. [8] V. Gupta and A. Sinha, “Application of Plastic Wastes as Construction Material for Sustainable Development: A Review,” World J. Adv. Eng. Technol. Sci., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 302–307, 2023. doi: 10.30574/wjaets.2023.8.1.0059. [9] “Recent Trends in Utilization of Plastics Waste Composites as Construction Materials,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 271, Art. no. 121520, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121520. [10] “Recycling Waste Thermoplastic for Energy Efficient Construction Materials: An Experimental Investigation,” J. Environ. Manage., vol. 240, pp. 119–125, 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.016.
Publication Date
10/27/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
1
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
5
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...