ABSTRACT

Rice Husk Ash (RHA), a waste from firing process of clay products, has no proper usage,
although they have appreciable chemical properties. For this study, roof tile specimens with
addition of different RHA percentages (0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%) were manufactured in
industrial scale plant, so. As to determine the effect of waste RHA collected from a brick kiln
on structural properties of clay roof tiles. For 10% RHA replacement of clay, transverse
breaking load was increased by 31.5%. Bulk density is reduced with the percentage of RHA
added, which is favourable for roof tiles as a roofing material. RHA increases water absorption
property. However, addition of RHA up to 15% is acceptable according to standards. It was
found that by having RHA added roof tiles as for roofing, inside temperature can be reduced
further, feeling more comfortable. 10% RHA addition can be considered as the optimum level
of adding RHA to clay roof tiles to get optimized results for roof tile properties.

i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to devote this page in writing a few words in appreciation of all the individuals
who assisted us in compiling this research thesis. First and foremost we would like to offer my
sincere gratitude to the director Mr. N.L.B.Illagolla, Head of the department Mrs.
B.K.D.Balasooriya, Assistant Lecturer Mr.Ashraff.

It is with great appreciation that we extend my sincere gratitude towards Mr.W.P.Nimal, owner
of the industrial roof tile factory, Walasmulla, for giving his contribution us to manufacture
relevant roof tiles.

We must also convey our earnest appreciation to our friends Chathura Lumbini & Hasitha
Kithmal for the help they gave us in this process.

Least, but not last we would also like to thank everyone else who provided their valuable time
to assist in countless ways to make this thesis a success.

S.J.Makawita (COL/CE/2015/F/0015)
W.P.Dilini Dayarathna (COL/CE/2015/F/0032)
Advanced Technological Institute,
Colombo 15.

ii
PREFACE

The final year project is a compulsory module for the civil engineering students at the Advanced
Technological Institute, in Colombo 15. This provides the experience of conducting
independent timely and insightful researches based on our field of preference. This is the final
thesis for undertaking a research study to evaluate the “Comparative study on properties of
normal clay roof tiles and Rice Husk Ash mixed clay roof tiles”.

The report consists of five chapters incorporating the background of research, literature review,
methodology followed, results & discussion & finally the conclusion & future directions for
the research thesis.

In the first chapter, a brief introduction to the research background is given. This highlights the
current problem which is aimed to be achieved by the research. The background is further
concentrated in to a local context where the research work was carried out. In addition, the
significance of the research in a Sri Lankan perspective is described. Finally in the chapter the
objectives of the research are defined accordingly.

A descriptive review of the research related literature is presented in chapter 2. Limitations of

tests conducted are reviewed while comparing and contrasting different measures taken by
different research groups to overcome each obstrucle faced.

The proposed methodology to conduct the tests and evaluate results in descriptively explained
in chapter 3. The reasoning behind selection of test methods and selection of specific values are
presented in detail in this chapter.

The results of experiments conducted throughout the research are discussed in chapter 4. The
conclusion and the future directions are given in the final chapter.

S.J.Makawita (COL/CE/2015/F/0015)

W.P.Dilini Dayarathna (COL/CE/2015/F/0032)

Advanced Technological Institute

Colombo 15

iii
CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..........................................................................................................ii
PREFACE ..................................................................................................................................iii
CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................. iv
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................vii
ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................viii
CHAPTER 1 ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
1.1.1 Background ................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH .......................................................................... 2
1.3 OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 2 ............................................................................................................................... 5
LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 5
2.1 GLOBAL PICTURE ........................................................................................................ 5
2.1.1 Addition of RHA to Concrete .................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Addition of RHA to clay Bricks ................................................................................ 6
2.1.3 Addition of RHA to Masonry blocks ........................................................................ 7
2.2 PROPERTIES OF RHA ................................................................................................... 7
2.2.1 Physical Properties .................................................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Chemical Properties ................................................................................................... 8
2.3 PROPERTIES OF CLAY ROOF TILES ......................................................................... 9
2.4 RESEARCH GAP .......................................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER 3 ............................................................................................................................. 11
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 11
3.1 PROPOSED METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 11
3.2 PREPARATION OF SAMPLES.................................................................................... 12
3.2.1 Soil and RHA sampling ........................................................................................... 12
3.2.2 Preparation of Roof Tile Specimens ........................................................................ 13
3.3 TESTS FOR RAW MATERIALS ................................................................................. 15
3.3.1 Sieve analysis for RHA ........................................................................................... 15
3.3.2 Atterberg limits tests ................................................................................................ 15
3.4 TESTS FOR ROOF TILE PROPERTIES ...................................................................... 17

iv
 3.4.1 Transverse Breaking Load ....................................................................................... 17
3.4.2 Bulk Density ............................................................................................................ 17
CHAPTER 4 ............................................................................................................................. 20
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 20
4.1 PROPERTIES OF RAW MATERIALS ........................................................................ 20
4.1.1 Particle size distribution of RHA............................................................................. 20
4.1.2 Atterberg’s Limit ..................................................................................................... 21
4.2 PROPERTIES OF RHA ADDED ROOF TILES .......................................................... 22
4.2.1 Transverse Breaking Load ....................................................................................... 22
4.2.2 Bulk density ............................................................................................................. 23
4.2.3 Water absorption...................................................................................................... 24
4.2.4 Water penetration .................................................................................................... 25
4.3 Summary of test results .................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER 5 ............................................................................................................................. 26
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS ..................................................................... 26
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 27
APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................... 31
APPENDIX A: Tests for Material Properties.......................................................................... 31
APPENDIX B: Tests for Structural Properties of Tiles .......................................................... 36
REMARKS ............................................................................................................................... 40

v
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 (a) Rice husk, (b) Burnt RHA, (c) RHA after grinding………………………… 1
Figure 3.1: Activity flow chart……………………………………………………………...11
Figure 3.2: Clay used for roof tile manufacturing…………………………………………..12
Figure 3.3: RHA taken from brick kiln…………………………………………………….. 12
Figure 3.4: Mixing clay & RHA by hand………………………………………………….. 13
Figure 3.5: Clay plates……………………………………………………………………... 13
Figure 3.6: Tiles placed on shelves……………………………………………………………….. 14

Figure 3.7: Burned roof tiles……………………………………………………………………...14

Figure 3.8: Industrial roof tile factory…………………………………………………………….. 15
Figure 3.9: Liquid limit apparatus…………………………………………………………. 16
Figure3.10: Experimental set-up for transverse breaking load test………………………………… 17
Figure 3.11: Measuring Dry weight………………………………………………………... 17
Figure 3.12: Samples soaking in water…………………………………………………….. 18
Figure 3.13: Sample testing for water penetration…………………………………………. 19
Figure 3.11: Tiles kept inside an oven of 200°C………………………………………………….. 19

Figure 4.1: particle size distribution of RHA……………………………………………….20

Figure 4.2: liquid limit variation…………………………………………………………… 21
Figure 4.3: plastic limit variation………………………………………………………….. 21
Figure 4.4: plasticity index variation………………………………………………………. 22
Figure 4.5: failure mode under transverse load…………………………………………………….23
Figure 4.6: variation in Transverse breaking load with RHA%............................................ 23
Figure 4.7: variation of bulk density with RHA%................................................................. 24
Figure 4.8: water absorption……………………………………………………….............. 25
FigureA.1: Liquid limit of clay with 0% RHA…………………………………………………..... 34

Figure A.2: Liquid limit of clay with 5% RHA…………………………………………………... 34

Figure A.3: Liquid limit of clay with 10% RHA…………………………………………………. 35
Figure A.4: Liquid limit of clay with 15% RHA…………………………………………………. 35

Figure A.5: Liquid limit of clay with 20% RHA………………………………………….. 35

vi
LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 : Physical and Chemical Properties of Rice-Husk Ash (Bouzoubaa and Fournier
2001)……………………………………………………………………………………….. 7
Table 2.2 : Chemical composition of RHA (Wt. %)………………………………………..9
Table 4.1: summary of test results…………………………………………………………. 26
Table A.1: Data of Sieve Analysis Test Results of RHA…………………………………….. 33
Table A.2: Liquid limit test data…………………………………………………………… 34
Table A.3: Plastic limit test data…………………………………………………………… 37
Table A.4: Atterburg limits of clay samples………………………………………………..38
Table B.1: Transverse Breaking Load test data…………………………………………… 33
Table B.2: Bulk Density test data…………………………………………………………. 34
Table B.3: Water absorption test data……………………………………………………... 35
Table B.4: Fire resistivity test data………………………………………………………....36

vii
ABBREVIATIONS

APS – Average Particle Size

ASTM – American Standard Test Methods
CBRHA – Controlled Burning Rice Husk Ash
GRH – Ground Rice Husk
HPR – Husk-to-Paddy Ratio
HSC – High Strength Concrete
LOS – Loss on Ignition
OPC – Ordinary Portland Cement
PM – Particulate Matter
PSD – Particle Size Distribution
RHA – Rice Husk Ash
UCBRHA – Uncontrolled Burning Rice Husk Ash

viii
CHAPTER 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 Background

Disposal of industrial and agricultural waste in a proper way is a major problem faced by the
world at present. Most of them are having adverse effects on the environment. Therefore,
investigating methods to make them use as construction materials is becoming a necessity
today. Rice husks are the outer protective shell of the edible rice kernel. When it is burnt, RHA
is produced. It is a by-product in rice production. Figure 1.1shows different stages in RHA
production. As rice is the staple food in many countries, a large amount of rice husk is produced
as a by-product.

Figure 1.1 (a) Rice husk, (b) Burnt RHA, (c) RHA after grinding

It was found that the paddy production has been rapidly grown over the last last few years in
Sri Lanka. (Department of Census and Statistics). The amount of rice husk generated as a by-
product of rice processing depends on the husk-to-paddy ratio (HPR). Different HPR values are
reported in different studies in the range of 0.14 to 0.27(Beagle 1981).

According to Agus (2002), HPR is 0.1 by weight and about 20% of rice husk becomes RHA.
Paddy production varies significantly with the geographical factors; specially due to the
prevailing weather condition, land availability, irrigation availability, fertilizer usage, etc.
Burning process of rice husk can be carried out in different methods: burning under controlled
conditions, burning under uncontrolled conditions and open burning. Not all combustion
processes, however, are equal.

1
Rice husk contains about 20 percent silica, but in controlled combustion conditions, the
resulting ash offers upwards of 90 percent silica content with negligible carbon content. In the
study of Nilantha et al. (2010) for RHA collected from a brick kiln, the total percentage
composition of iron oxide (Fe2O3=1.56%), Silicon dioxide (SiO2=91.75%) and Aluminium
Oxide (Al2O3=2.07%) was found to be 95.38%.

In uncontrolled burning (open burning), the process currently used around the world, the
resulting RHA contains much higher carbon content, but comparatively a lesser silica content
(Craven 2010). Open field burning of rice husk not only produces poor quality of ash, but is
banned in many countries due to pollution problems. RHA collected from brick kilns has shown
similar properties as burnt under controlled combustion condition. (Uduweriya and De Silva
2010).

There have been recorded that nearly 10,000 brick manufacturing units are in Sri Lanka with
ranging capacities of 15,000 to 24,000 bricks per kiln. It is estimated that, annually, over 800
million bricks are produced in Sri Lanka. Rice husk is the fuel used in 20% of them (Asian
Institute of Technology 2003). Therefore, large amounts of RHA, which are rich in SiO2 are
compiled from these kilns.

Due to free availability, and their significant properties, RHA collected from brick kilns are
being targeted in this study.

1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH

Rice husk ash, a waste of brick kiln, is unusually high in ash, which is around 90% silica, highly
porous and light weight, with a large external surface area (Kumar et al. 2012). Its absorbent
and insulating properties are being used in many industrial applications, including acting as a
strengthening agent in building materials.

There are a number of studies that have been carried out to investigate the enhancement of
properties of construction materials like concrete, bricks and blocks with the addition of RHA.
As they have given positive results, it is beneficial to investigate whether RHA would enhance
the characteristics of clay roof tiles and an optimum usage of RHA. And properties of a tile with
RHA would be compared with those of a conventional tile.

2
Nowadays, asbestos sheet roof covering is becoming more popular among people mostly
because of easiness in handling, fast assembling, cost effectiveness and high strength compared
with wood and clay tiles. However, the World Health Organization has found that use of
asbestos as roofing material, cause lung cancer, cancer of the larynx and ovary, mesothelioma
and asbestosis (fibrosis of the lungs). In addition, several thousands of deaths can be attributed
to other diseases related to asbestos, as well as to non-occupational exposures to asbestos
(World Health Organization 2014).

Due to these reasons, many countries have already banned the use of asbestoses. Sri Lanka is
also going to ban importing or manufacturing of asbestos roofing. (Kamburugamuwa 2015).
Clay roof tiles can be a best alternative to asbestos considering several advantages of them over
asbestos: health favourability, better appearance, thermal absorption.

If strength and durability properties can be enhanced in clay roof tiles, they also can be made
popular among people. A way to enhance these properties is aimed in this study. Manufacturing
cost of clay tiles can also be minimized by using RHA as a component. Use of RHA for roof
tile manufacturing prevents environmental pollution that caused by open dumping of rice husk
ash as well.

The runoff coming along these roofs, which is common in urban environment, can be carried
several miles away with the storm water. Rainwater harvesting is suitable practice and popular
way of saving water in many countries. Therefore, harvested roof runoff is primarily used for
some of non-potable purposes. Roof surfaces in urban areas are efficient catchment surfaces for
the deposition of fine particles which can travel over long distances along with storm water.
And also utilizing harvested storm water in dry regions in Sri Lanka is becoming a new trend
in order to find solutions for water scarcity. Therefore, investigating the effect of using RHA
added roof tiles on runoff coming along them is important. As in urban areas, roofs act as
primary storm water pollutants (Agus et al. 2007), apart from thermal and structural properties
of tiles, the effect on runoff coming along RHA added clay roof tiles was also investigated.

3
1.3 OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this study are,

 To investigate the effect of rice husk ash (RHA) collected from a brick kiln on properties
(transverse breaking load, bulk density, water absorption, water penetration, fire
resistivity) of clay roof tiles.
 To compare properties of normal clay roof tiles and rice husk ash (RHA) mixed clay
roof tiles.

 To determine the optimum level of addition of RHA in manufacturing of clay roof tiles.

4
CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 GLOBAL PICTURE

Utilization of waste matter in building construction is becoming more popular in the world
nowadays. It’s mostly because it not only gives alternative for construction material; however
it also gives solution for environmental pollution. Among many waste materials, Rice Husk Ash
(RHA) is significant due to its specific properties. These properties are dependent on the
components, temperature and time of burning.

Researchers have investigated the properties of RHA in several studies and a number of
researches based on RHA have been conducted in the recent past. Among them, addition of
RHA to construction materials such as concrete, clay bricks, Masonry blocks, cement, lime
cement mixers, Sand Crete blocks etc. are more popular. It has been found that RHA can
enhance the strength and durability properties of them.

2.1.1 Addition of RHA to Concrete

From the 500 million tonnes of rice that are produced annually worldwide, 100 million tonnes
is rice husk. High Strength Concrete (HSC) can be produced with the use of highly reactive ash
that is produced under controlled burning process. High strength grade 80 concrete is relatively
easy to produce by adding RHA. RHA concrete has resulted similar strength and durability
properties as in concrete with silica fume. (Ghassan and Mahmud 2010)

By grinding RHA to finer APS (Average Particle Size), specific surface area can be increased.
However, RHA’s APS is not the main factor controlling its surface area. The dosage of super
plasticizer had to be increased along with RHA fineness and content to maintain the desired
workability. The compressive strength of the blended concrete with 10% RHA has been
increased significantly, and for up to 20% replacement could be valuably replaced by cement
without adversely affecting the strength. Increasing the fineness of RHA enhances the strength
of blended concrete. (Ghassan and Mahmud 2010)

With the addition of RHA by 20 to 30 % replacement, the permeability of OPC concrete can be
reduced by 3 to 7 times. (Swaminathen and Ravi 2016)

5
When the RHA percentage in concrete increases, the chloride ion penetration decreases
basically because of pore refining capacity of RHA. The optimal replacement percentage of
RHA in concrete found to be varied from 10% to 20%. (Gupta and Wayal 2015)

The RHA concrete has a higher compressive strength in 90 days when compared with normal
concrete. However, the strength is different at 14 and 28 days. The maximum compressive
strength increase of 15.6% is for 10% replacement of cement by RHA. However the result for
20% RHA was not significant. (Hossain et al. 2011)

Nevertheless, according to Akeke et al. (2012), the optimum RHA replacement to increase the
compressive strength and workability properties of concrete is 25% and marginal improvement
for flexural strength studies is 10 to 25% replacement.

Uduweriya and De Silva (2010) have showed that 20% replacement of cement by RHA gives
18% of compressive strength increment and water absorption property of concrete is reduced
when adding RHA.

2.1.2 Addition of RHA to clay Bricks

Perera et al. (2015) has used RHA wasted from an industrial brick kiln in clay brick
manufacturing and has obtained results as following. These type of RHA contains high amount
of silica and can be used as a good SiO2 provider. With 4% RHA addition compressive strength
of clay bricks shows an improvement of 32.7% while for the same RHA ratio water absorption
shows the lowest value of 19.51%. Hence according to Perera et al. (2015), the optimum
replacement ratio of RHA for clay in clay bricks is 4%.

RHA can be used to produce lighter clay bricks. Bricks with 5% RHA replacement show an
increased compressive strength of 6.62 MPa that satisfies the requirement of compressive
strength as specified by the Pakistan Building Code for masonry construction and a minimum
modulus of rupture criteria of 0.65 Mpa as specified by ASTM C67. RHA leads to increment
of water absorption in clay bricks due to high porosity. However with 5% RHA replacement,
water absorption is still less than 18%. Hence 5% is the best proportion for RHA replacement
in clay bricks. (Kazmi et al. 2016).

6
2.1.3 Addition of RHA to Masonry blocks

Pushpakumara and Silva (2012) have studied characteristics of masonry blocks manufactured
with RHA collected from a brick kiln in Sri Lanka. RHA coming from kilns was found to be
having pozzolanic properties. Addition of Ca2+ has resulted in increasing the utilization of RHA
and increasing the compressive strength. Thermal conductivity of RHA blocks has been found
to be lower than the in blocks without RHA. The compressive strength of RHA based cement
sand blocks has increased with the addition of lime and 5% of RHA addition has provided the
optimum value. (Pushpakumara and Silva 2012)

2.2 PROPERTIES OF RHA

2.2.1 Physical Properties

The physical properties of RHA have been studied by researchers at different situations. Table
2.1 shows a typical analysis of both physical and chemical properties of RHA that has been
produced under controlled combustion in an industrial furnace as studied by Bouzoubaa and
Fournier (2001). Depending on rice variety, soil composition, climatic conditions, and even the
geographical location, these values can be changed. When rice husk is burnt under temperatures
of 550 0C – 800 0C, amorphous silica is produced, however at higher temperatures, crystalline
silica is formed.

Table2.1 : Physical and Chemical Properties of Rice-Husk Ash (Bouzoubaa and Fournier
2001)

Physical Property Value

Fineness – median 8.3
particle size, m
Specific gravity 2.05
Nitrogen absorption, 20.6
m2/g
Pozzolanic activity 99
index, %
Water requirement, % 104

7
In fact, the reactivity of RHA is greater with a larger surface area which, in general, is higher
for smaller particle sizes. Nevertheless, other authors (Payá et al. 2000) have concluded that
ashes with smaller particle sizes did not maximize the pozzolanic reactivity. In fact, according
to findings, the surface area of rice husk depends not only on particle size distribution but also
on its roughness (Metha 1983).
Sultana et al. (2014) have investigated the effect of rice husk ash and fly ash on properties of
red clay collected from Naogaon district of Bangladesh.
Different percentages of rice husk ash (RHA) (5%, 10% and 15%) were thoroughly mixed with
clay to analyze various physical and chemical properties of clay followed by heat treatment of
8000C to 11000C. The resulted shrinkage values were very low. Low shrinkage indicates that it
reduces the risk of defects such as warping and cracking of clay. The percentage of water
absorption was within 6 to 10% for different mixture which may be suitable for ceramic and
tiling purposes. It was concluded that RHA of 15% could be used to improve the properties of
clay. The optimum firing temperature for all the samples was 10500C. (Sultana et al. 2014).
Various factors which influence properties of RHA are temperature and duration of burning,
rate of heating, burning technique, crop variety and fertilizer used as well. (Mansaray and Ghaly
1999).

2.2.2 Chemical Properties

Chemical composition of RHA burnt under different conditions and that are available in
different countries has been investigated in previous studies. Nilantha et al. (2010) have
investigated the properties of the Sri Lankan RHA, which was collected from a brick kiln. Agus
(2002) and Ghassan and Mahmud (2010) have investigated the properties of RHA obtained
from controlled burning processes. Izwan et al. (2011) has produced RHA under controlled
combustion by burning rice husk at 700oC for 6 hours in a muffle furnace. Chemical
composition of RHA reported in above mentioned studies are compared in Table 2.2. It shows
that RHA collected from brick kiln has the highest SiO2 percentage so that it can be used as
SiO2.

8
 Table 2.2 : Chemical composition of RHA (Wt. %)
SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO Na2O K2O Loss in
ignition
Nilantha et al. 91.75 2.07 1.56 1.3 1.00 0 2.32 -
2010
Ghassan and 88.32 0.46 0.67 0.67 0.44 - 2.91 5.81
Mahmud 2010
Agus 2002 89.08 1.75 0.78 1.29 0.64 0.85 1.38 2.05

Izwan et al. 2011 88.00 0.13 0.10 0.72 1.80 - 1.10 -

Provide for clay materials to increase SiO2/Al2O3 ratio. (Perera et al. 2015)

The oxide percentage present in prepared samples with RHA added to clay has not been varied
significantly. This indicates that the combination or mixture of the raw materials have little
effect in chemical characteristics. Aluminum oxide content in the mixture slightly has decreased
for 10% and 15% RHA. At alumina contents below 20% the mixtures were considered as
refractory materials, at contents above 20%, as plastic clays. So, the prepared samples (with
RHA added to clay) mostly can be considered as plastic. It also depends on other physical and
mineralogical properties. (Sultana et al. 2014).

2.3 PROPERTIES OF CLAY ROOF TILES

Use of clay roof tiles as a building material has a long history both locally and internationally.
However, only a few numbers of researches or experiments have been conducted on this
subject.
Clay tiles have comparatively a longer life expectancy when considered with other roofing
materials. It is about 100 years, and often several hundred (Landeata and Larson 1987).

Physical properties of roof tiles vary according to the clay material used. High quality tiles are
produced with the addition of the silica sand, as a stabilizer. The degree of surface finish of the
tiles is dependent on the particle size of the clay material and the percentage of silica sand
added. Progressive decrease in percentage of water absorption for all produced tiles lie from
19.13% to 7.56% as the percentage of silica content increases or the percentage of clay content
decreases. (Ohijeagbon and Adeyemi 2003)

9
The properties of Sri Lankan flat clay roof tiles have been studied by Costa and Mahroof (2005)
by selecting samples from various manufacturers randomly from Dankotuwa and Wennappuwa
area. They show that the flat clay roof tiles in Sri Lanka are almost up to the Sri Lankan
Standards except for mass, effective width and effective length.
In tropical countries like ours, heat insulation and thermal comfort is a major issue. The reason
that the clay is a bad conductor of heat makes it a good roofing material. When using clay
roofing tiles, the internal temperature of a house is reduced, thus contributing favourably to the
thermal comfort of the occupants in the building. (Costa and Mauroof 2005)

2.4 RESEARCH GAP

A number of research studies have been conducted incorporated with rice husk ash. Although,
many researchers have investigated the effect of using RHA for building materials such as
concrete, masonry blocks, bricks, concrete roof tiles etc., no study have been conducted yet on
using RHA for clay roof tiles.
According to the literature reviewed, only a limited number of researches have been conducted
in evaluation of rice husk ash that burnt in a brick kiln which is a by-product of kiln fuel. This
research study therefore aims to specifically investigate the utilization of the RHA produced as
by-product of kiln fuel, in roof tile production.
Therefore this research study will be helpful to bridge this existing gap in the research culture
and findings can then build a new sustainable way of making clay roof tiles with enhanced
properties.

10
CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 PROPOSED METHODOLOGY

• Start

Soil and RHA

sampling

Clay roof tile manufacturing by replacing clay with RHA in

proportions (0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%)

Material Testing (Seive analysis, Atterburg limits test)

Tests for structural properties of roof tile (Transverse

breaking load, Bulk density, Water absorbtion, Water
penetration, Fire ressistivity)

Evaluation of test results

End
Figure 3.1: Activity flow chart

11
RHA that remains as a by-product from a brick kiln at Walasmulla area was collected.
Specimens with different RHA contents were cast. After manufacturing of roof tiles, raw
materials used in the study were tested for several physical properties. Sieve analysis test to
determine the grain size analysis of RHA, specific gravity test for both RHA and clay and also
the Atterburg limit tests for clay with different RHA compositions were carried out. XRF (X-
Ray Fluorescence) test to determine the chemical compositions of RHA and clay was also
carried out. Selected tests for roof tiles were determination of transverse breaking load, bulk
density, water absorption, water penetration. Proposed activity flow plan is shown in Figure 3.1.

3.2 PREPARATION OF SAMPLES

3.2.1 Soil and RHA sampling

Clay and Rice husk ash are the main materials that was used in this study.

Clay: The clay for the study was collected from Konkarahena area in Hambantota District,
North Western Province, where roof clay tile production have been well established.(Figure
3.2)

Figure 3.2: Clay used for roof tile manufacturing

Rice Husk Ash: The Rice husk ash was collected an industrial brick kiln located at Walasmulla
in southern Province. (Figure 3.3).

Figure 3.3: RHA taken from brick kiln.

12
3.2.2 Preparation of Roof Tile Specimens

Mainly “Kirimati” is used for roof tiles. Separate clay samples were prepared by mixing
different RHA contents (0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%) according to weight. Initially clay and
RHA were mixed by hand mixing. (Figure 3.4)

Figure 3.4: Mixing clay & RHA by hand

Further mixing was achieved with the help of a machine. Clay with RHA was put into the
machine through the cone at the top where it got ground, well mixed and became almost a
homogeneous material. The output was obtained as clay plates which had slightly larger
dimensions than the tile. (Figure 3.5)

Figure 3.5: Clay plates

These plates were kept on the lower part of the mould of the electrically driven pressing
machine and pressed with upper part of the mould. The moulded tile was then shaped with small
knives by removing excessive material hanging around.

Tiles were stacked on shelves for 7 days as in Figure 3.6 inside sheds until they got dried enough
to burn.

13
 Figure 3.6: Tiles placed on shelves

Tiles were then stacked outside the shed ready for loading on kiln. Burning was done with
wood. The kiln was set by forming floor made of bricks laid flat and somewhat open over the
tops of the flues. On this flooring, the tiles were packed as closely as they lied on edge, course
upon course. When the kiln was full, the doorways were bricked up and plastered with mud
minimizing the heat loss.

Firstly in the kiln, only smoke was allowed to pass through the flues with a gentle heat
transferred inside until the disappearance of the white steam which indicated tiles were fully
dried. This took 24 hours. Fire was then gradually increased within 72 hours but not allowed to
go inside until the interior of the flues had been brought to red heat. Fire was then allowed to
go inside from bottom to top and maintained the high temperature condition for 24 hours. The
temperature inside the kiln was maintained at 14000C. Burning process required nearly a week.

After burning was completed, doorways were broken down after 24 hours and the temperature
of the furnace was gradually reduced to room temperature before removal of the fired roof tiles.

The roof tile specimens needed for the study were cast in a roof tile factory (Figure 3.7) at
Konkarahena in Hambantota District.

Figure 3.7: Burned roof tiles

14
 Figure 3.8: Industrial roof tile factory

3.3 TESTS FOR RAW MATERIALS

3.3.1 Sieve analysis for RHA

RHA was dried and cleaned. The weights of the sample and each sieve were weighed. The set
of sieves were arranged as the largest mesh opening was at the top and the smallest was at the
bottom. The pan was attached at the bottom of the stake of sieves. The sample of RHA was
poured on the top sieve and the cover was added to avoid dust and loss of particles while
shaking. The stacks of sieves were placed on the mechanical shaker and horizontal shaking was
applied for a time of 10 minutes. Then the weights of the sieves with remaining RHA were
measured and the percentage of soil passing was determined. The test was conducted as
specified in ASTM C 136 (2001).

3.3.2 Atterberg limits tests

Atterberg limits tests were performed to determine the plastic limits, liquid limits and linear
shrinkage of the soil that used to make clay roof tiles. These were carried out as specified in
ASTM D4318 (2005). The tests were performed for clay soil with 5 different mix proportions
of RHA (0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%) that used to prepare roof tiles.

Liquid limit

The clay was mixed with rice husk ash into different percentage (0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%)
and tested for the liquid limit. There the clay was thoroughly mixed with small amount of
distilled water until it appeared as a smooth uniform paste. Then the mixed clay was placed into
the cup of the liquid limit apparatus as shown in Figure 3.9 and a groove was prepared using
the grooving tool.

15
The number of the drops requires making the two halves of the soil pat come into contact at the
bottom of the groove along a distance of 13 mm was counted. The clay sample was placed into
a can to determine the moisture content. The wet weight and oven dried weight of the same
sample were measured. The entire clay specimen was remixed in the porcelain dish by adding
small amount of distilled water to increase the water content so that the number of drops
required closing the groove was decreased. The test was conducted for five trials and the
moisture content in each trial was measured. The number of drops versus the moisture content
was plotted to estimate the water content at the 25 drops which means the ‘Liquid limit”

Figure 3.9: Liquid limit apparatus

Plastic Limit

The soil sample was prepared by adding distilled water until the soil is at a consistency where
it could be rolled without sticking to the hands. The mass was rolled between the palm or the
fingers and the glass plate by using sufficient pressure to roll the mass into a thread of uniform
diameter by using about 90 strokes per minute until it reached 3.2 mm, taking no more than two
minutes. The rolled mass was broken into pieces when the diameter of the thread reached the
correct diameter. The kneaded and reformed pieces were re-rolled. The rolling was continuing
until the thread crumbled that no longer be able to roll into a 3.2 mm diameter thread. The
crumbled soil portions were gathered together and the clay was placed into a moisture can and
immediately the weight of the clay was measured for moisture content. The oven dried weight
of this sample was measured. The test was repeated for three trials. The average moisture
content was calculated and considered as the plastic limit. Plasticity index was calculated from
the difference between Liquid Limit and Plastic limit.

16
3.4 TESTS FOR ROOF TILE PROPERTIES

3.4.1 Transverse Breaking Load

Two parallel self-aligning cylindrical steel bearers, with the bearing surface rounded to 40 mm
diameter were placed on the roof tile testing machine. The tile specimen was supported evenly
flatwise on the bearers set with a span of 25 cm and resting on the bottom surface. The load
was applied through a third steel bearer of the similar shape placed midway between and parallel
to the supports which were kept on the tile as shown in Figure 3.11. The length of all the bearers
were to be exceeded the maximum width of the tile under test. The load was applied downwards
perpendicular to the span.

Figure3.10: Experimental set-up for transverse breaking load test

3.4.2 Bulk Density

Dry weight of a specimen was measured after keeping them in an oven of 1100C (Figure 3.12).
Volume of a specimen was obtained by calculating the overflowed water content when one roof
tile (which was kept under water for 24 hours) was immersed in a totally filled water bucket.
Bulk density was calculated by dividing the dry mass by its volume. Three specimens from
each RHA proportion were tested.

Figure 3.11: Measuring Dry weight

17
Water Absorption

The samples were kept in an oven at a temperature of 110°C for 24 hours. The mass of each
tile specimen was weighed (Dry mass (Wd)). They were then completely immersed (Figure
3.12) in a bowl of water for 24 hours (until no bubble was observed.). This procedure was
repeated for the remaining tiles. Excess water was removed from the samples using tissue paper
and the wet mass (Ww) was also weighed. The amount of water absorbed (Wa) by the roof tile
was subsequently calculated as in Equation 2 according to ASTM - C1492 (2003). Three
specimens were tested for each RHA %.

Equation 02

𝐖𝐰 − 𝐖𝐝
𝐖𝐚 = 𝐱𝟏𝟎𝟎%
𝐖𝐝

Figure 3.12: Samples soaking in water

Water penetration

Roof tiles were placed in a glass frame as shown in the Figure 3.13. The tile was fitted at the
bottom of the trough and the clearance between the tile and the frame was filled with Silicone
sealant to prevent water leakage. Water was poured on to the surface until a 50mm water head
was formed. The bottom of the tile was carefully examined to see whether the water has seeped
through the tile after a period of 6 hours as recommended in Bureau of Indian standards (2002).
Figure 3.16 shows a testing for water penetration. Six samples was tested for each RHA %.

18
 Figure 3.13: Sample testing for water penetration

Fire resistivity

Roof tiles from different RHA percentages were kept in oven at 100°C for 24 hours and weights
were measured. Then they were kept in an oven at 200°C for 18 hours (Figure 3.14) and again
the weights were measured. The percentage of weight loss, which describes the fire resistivity
was calculated in accordance with ASTM E119 2014.

Figure 3.14: Tiles kept inside an oven of 200°C

19
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 PROPERTIES OF RAW MATERIALS

4.1.1 Particle size distribution of RHA

RHA

100

90

80
Percentage Passing (%)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Partical size (mm)

Figure 4.1: particle size distribution of RHA

Particle size distribution of RHA obtained by sieve analysis is shown in Figure 4.1. It can be
seen that the percentage of passing of RHA through 250µm sieve is 62.34%. Fineness modulus
is 2.61. This implies that major portion of RHA sample is fine and hence they can move easily
through clay particles when mixing.

20
4.1.2 Atterberg’s Limit

100

80

60

LL (%) 40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20
RHA %

Figure 4.2: liquid limit variation

Liquid limit of this clay soil (without adding RHA) is 88% and it decreases with the addition
of RHA to clay (Figure 4.2). According to Ling and Weng (2001), when liquid limit decreases,
shrinkage also decreases. Shrinkage reduction is favourable for roof tiles. Kazmi et al. (2016)
also has observed the reduction of liquid limit when RHA content increases in the soil.

50.0

40.0

30.0
PL (%)

20.0

10.0

0.0
0 5 10 15 20
RHA %

Figure 4.3: plastic limit variation

21
 60.0

50.0

40.0

PI (%)
30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0
0 5 10 15 20
RHA %

Figure 4.4: plasticity index variation

Variations of plastic limit and plasticity index are shown in Figures 4.3 and 4.4 respectively.
Clay with 5% RHA shows the minimum plastic limit which is 30%. Similarly as observed by
Agus et al. (2002) and Kazmi et al. (2016), plastic index decreases when RHA percentage
increases within a range of 50.1% to 4.7% as shown in Figure 4.4.

4.2 PROPERTIES OF RHA ADDED ROOF TILES

4.2.1 Transverse Breaking Load

When loading was applied as described in section 3.4.1, the failure mode observed in the tile is
as shown in Figure 4.6. Transverse breaking load of tiles is increasing with RHA content up to
10% RHA replacement (Figure 4.7). Maximum load was recorded as 1136.55 N for 10% RHA
replacement which is an increment of load of 31.5% compared to the conventional roof tile. It
increases with RHA % up to 10% replacement. High amount of SiO2 presented in RHA might
contribute to this strength gain. Nevertheless, large amount of RHA addition is not desired
because as found by De Silva and Crenstil (2008), when the SiO2/Al2O3 percentage is not
optimum, the strength of the clay is reduced. Therefore, reduction of breaking strength can be
observed after 10% RHA replacement. (Figure 4.5). The requirement for breaking load of Class
A type roof tile is 900N (Bureau of Indian standards 2002), which is satisfied by 5%, 10% and
15% RHA added tiles.

22
 Figure 4.5: failure mode under transverse load

1300.00
Transverse Breaking load (N)

1200.00
1100.00
1000.00
900.00
800.00
700.00
600.00
500.00
0 5 10 15 20
RHA %

Figure 4.6: variation in Transverse breaking load with RHA%

4.2.2 Bulk density

When increasing the RHA percentage, bulk density of the roof tile decreases slightly (Figure
4.7). The replacements of clay with RHA of 10%, 15% and 20% show 3.04%, 6.16% and 7.77%
density reductions respectively, when compared with a conventional tile. This is due to the
lesser specific gravity of RHA when compared to clay as discussed in section 4.1.2. Hence,
higher the RHA percentage in the tile, the weight of the tile will be lesser. Lesser weight of the
roof tiles will ultimately result to cost reduction in building construction ranging from the size
of the foundation size to roof structure.

23
 2100

2050

Bulk Density (kg/m3)

2000

1950

1900

1850

1800

1750

1700
0 5 10 15 20

RHA %

Figure 4.7: variation of bulk density with RHA%

4.2.3 Water absorption

Figure 4.8 shows water absorption of tiles for each replacement percentage of RHA. Water
absorption increases when RHA content increases. Water absorption of conventional roof tile
(0% RHA) remains as 12.98% whereas that in 15 % and 20% RHA tile has reached to a value
of 15.68% and 18.55%, respectively. RHA particles are larger than clay particles; hence, when
they are mixed, voids are made in between. Therefore, the porosity developed in this way is the
reason for increasing water absorption with RHA percentage. However, when water absorption
is higher, more water remains in the tile causing the growth of small plants and moss on the
roof which reduces the durability and aesthetic appearance. Sultana et al. (2014) and
Tonnayopas et al. (2008) also found the increment of water absorption of clay when RHA
replacement with clay is increased. Addition of RHA up to 15%, is acceptable, satisfying the
limit of water absorption of clay roof tiles (i.e., 18 %) Bureau of Indian Standards (2002).

24
 19
18

Water Absorption (%)

17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
0 5 10 15 20
RHA %

Figure 4.8: water absorption

4.2.4 Water penetration

No water dripping was found at the bottom of all the tiles after the test, implying that all tested
tiles, with varying RHA percentage are satisfying the water penetration test. Although RHA
addition can increase voids amount in the tile as mentioned in the preceding section, it is not
enough to create any water seepage within RHA range of 0% to 20%. Hence, RHA addition up
to 20% is allowed regarding water penetration property of roof tiles.

4.3 Summary of test results

Table 4.1: summary of test results
property 0% RHA 5% RHA 10% RHA 15% RHA 20% RHA

Transverse - 16.70% 46.4% 31.65% Reduced

breaking increment increment increment
load
Bulk density - 1.62% 3.04% 6.16% 7.77%
reduction reduction reduction
Water Ok Ok Ok Ok Not Ok
absorbion
Water Ok Ok Ok Ok Ok
penetration

Table 4.1 presents the summary of results of tests carried out to investigate the properties of
RHA added roof tiles. By considering all the above results, it can be concluded that 10% is the
optimum level of addition of RHA to roof tiles.

25
CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Use of waste matter in building construction is becoming more popular in the world today,
mostly because it not only gives alternative for construction material but also gives a solution
for waste management while reducing environmental pollution. Among many waste materials,
Rice Husk Ash (RHA), a waste from clay products manufacturing process has no effective
usage in many countries including in Sri Lanka.

For this study, roof tile specimens with different RHA percentages (0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and
20%) were manufactured in industrial scale. RHA was collected from an industrial brick kiln,
as it has been found that the brick kiln RHA contains high percentage of SiO 2. The effect of
waste RHA collected from a brick kiln was investigated on properties of clay roof tiles during
this study.

Furthermore, the physical properties of RHA and clay were also determined in order to find the
reasons for characteristic behaviour of RHA added clay roof tiles.

For 10% RHA replacement, transverse breaking load can be increased by 31.5%, which is the
optimum. High SiO2 content of 84.14% in RHA may be the most probable reason for this
strength gain property. However, beyond 10%, RHA addition is not acceptable. Bulk density is
reduced with the percentage of RHA added, which is a favourable property for roof tiles as a
roofing material. RHA increases water absorption property. However, addition of RHA up to
15% is acceptable according to standards.

It was found that by having RHA added roof tiles as roofing material, inside temperature can
be reduced further so that it is felt more comfortable.

10% RHA addition can be considered as the optimum level of adding RHA to clay roof tiles to
get optimized results for roof tile properties.

This study was conducted to investigate the effect of RHA on the structural properties of fired
clay roof tiles. These research findings can be utilized for the improvement of clay tile
production industry in Sri Lanka and also to minimize the huge waste production due to Rice
husk.

26
REFERENCES
Agus, S. M., 2002, 'Utilization of Uncontrolled Burnt Rice Husk Ash in Soil Improvement',
Dimensi Teknik Sipil, 4(2), 100-05.
ced.petra.ac.id/index.php/civ/article/viewFile/15559/15551
Akeke, G. A., Ephraim, M. E., Akobo, I. Z. S. and Ukpata, J. O, 2012, ‘Structural Properties of
Rice Husk Ash Concrete’, International Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, May
2013, Vol. 3, No. 3, ISSN2305-8269.
http://www.eaas-journal.org/survey/userfiles/files/v3i307%20civil%20engineering.pdf

A. N. and Ravi, S. R., 2016, ‘Use of Rice Husk Ash and Metakaolin as Pozzolonas for Concrete:
A Review’, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562, Volume
11, Number 1 (2016), pp 656-664
www.irdindia.in/journal_ijraet/pdf/vol4_iss3/17.pdf
Asian Institute of Technology, 2003, Brick and Ceramic Sectors, Regional Energy Resources
Information Center (RERIC), Thailand.
https://books.google.lk/books?isbn=1439862257
ASTM C136, 2001, Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates, West Conshohocken,
U.S.A.
https://www.astm.org › Standards & Publications

ASTM C325, 2007, Standard Guide for Wet Sieve Analysis of Ceramic Whiteware Clays, West
Conshohocken, U.S.A.
https://www.astm.org/Standard/alpha-lists/C.html

ASTM C1167, 2003, Standard Specification for Clay Roof Tiles, West Conshohocken, U.S.A.
https://www.astm.org › Standards & Publications

ASTM C1492, 2003, Standard Specification for Concrete Roof Tile, West Conshohocken,
U.S.A.
https://standards.globalspec.com/std/10065169/astm-c1492

ASTM D859, 2000, Standard Test Method for Silica in Water, West Conshohocken, U.S.A.
https://www.astm.org › Standards & Publications

ASTM D4318, 2005, Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity
Index of Soils, West Conshohocken, U.S.A.
https://www.astm.org › Standards & Publications

ASTM E119, 2014, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and
Materials, West Conshohocken, U.S.A.
https://www.technokontrol.com/pdf/walls_astm.e119.2000.pdf

27
Beagle, E. C., 1981, Rice Husk Conversion to Energy, Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations, Rome.
www.scirp.org/(S(lz5mqp453edsnp55rrgjct55))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?

Bureau of Indian Standards, 2002, Clay Roofing tiles, Mangalore Pattern Specification, Manak
Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi.
www.questin.org/sites/default/files/standards/is.654.1992.pdf

Costa, W. D. S. M. and Mauroof, A. L. M., 2005, ‘Properties of Flat Clay Roof Tiles in Sri
Lanka’, ENGINEER, Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka.
139.162.44.104/bitstream/123456789/1348/1/T0773.pdf

Craven, S. M., 2010, ‘RHA: Kernel of Wisdom’, in Natiponal Precast Concrete Association,
http://precast.org/2010/07/rha-kernel-of-wisdom/

De Silva P. and Crenstil K.S., 2008. 'The Effect of Al2O3 and SiO2 On Setting and Hardening
of Na2O-Al2O3-SiO2- H2O Geopolymer Systems', J. Aust. Ceram. Soc. 44 [1], 39-46
jglobal.jst.go.jp/en/public/20090422/200902294234344086

Department of Census and Statistics, 2008, ‘Paddy Statistics’

http://www.statistics.gov.lk/agriculture/Paddy%20Statistics/PaddyStats.htm

Environmental and Industrial Measurements Division, RTI International, 2009, Standard

Operating Procedure for the X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Particulate Matter Deposits on
Teflon Filters, Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park,North Carolina,Revision 5.
https://epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/ambient/pm25/spec/pmxrfsop.pdf

Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, 2016, ‘Water Quality for
Agriculture’
http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/T0234e/T0234E01.htm
Ghassan, A. and Mahmud, H., 2010, 'Study on Properties of Rice Husk Ash and Its Use as
Cement Replacement Material', Materials Research 13(2), 185-90.
https://www.researchgate.net/.../250029951_Study_on_Properties_of_Rice_Husk_Ash.

Gupta, M. I. and Wayal, A. S., 2015, ‘Use of Rice Husk Ash in Concrete: A Review’, IOSR
Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2278-1684, p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume
12, Issue 4 Version. I (Jul. - Aug. 2015), PP 29-31.
www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jmce/papers/vol12-issue4/Version-1/D012412931.pdf

Hossain, M. A., Rashid, M. H., Laz, O. U. and Rahman M. M., 2011, ‘Effect of Rice Husk Ash
on Concrete’, Proceedings of the WasteSafe 2011 – 2nd International Conference on Solid
Waste Management in the Developing Countries 13-15 February 2011, Khulna, Bangladesh.
https://www.researchgate.net/.../275336677_Effect_of_Rice_Husk_Ash_on_Concrete

28
Izwan, J., Said, S., Jaya, R. P., Bakar, B. H. A. and Ahmad, A. Z., 2011, 'Chemical and Physical
Properties of fired-Clay Brick at Different type of Rice Husk Ash', International Conference
on Environment Science and Engineering 8, IACSIT Press, Singapore.
scholar.google.com.my/citations?user=CA6tUDkAAAAJ&hl=en

Kamburugamuwa, A., 2015, ‘Sri Lanka to set standards for red clay roofing tiles upon asbestos
ban’, Lanka Business Online
www.lankabusinessonline.com/sri-lanka-to-set-standards-for-red-clay-roofing-tiles-up.

Kazmi, S. M. S., Abbas, S., Saleem, M. A., Munir, M. J. and Khitab, A., 2016, ‘Manufacturing
of sustainable clay bricks: Utilization of waste sugarcane bagasse and rice husk ashes’,
Construction and Building Materials, 120 (2016), 29–41.
https://www.researchgate.net/.../319010619_Clay_bricks_prepared_with_sugarcane_bag...

Kumar, A., Mohanta, K., Kumar, D. and Parkash, O., 2012, ‘Properties and Industrial
Applications of Rice husk: A review’, International Journal of Emerging Technology and
Advanced Engineering, ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/511b/caed12ce0bc484adb83d795f2345cdf66e55.pdf

Landeata, G. and Larson, S., 1987, Roofs in the warm humid tropics of South East Asia, Lund
Committee on Habitat and Development Studies.
www.hdm.lth.se/fileadmin/hdm/alumni/papers/sdd2006/sdd2006-08.pdf

Metha, P. K., 1983, Pozzolanic and cementitious byproducts as mineral admixtures for
concrete-a critical review, Pozzolanic and cementitious byproducts as mineral admixtures for
concrete-a critical review.
https://www.researchgate.net/.../283578812_An_overview_on_the_Influence_of_Pozzol.

Millone, A. D., n.d., CHEMICALLAND21

https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/kaolin

Nilantha, B. G., Jiffry, I., Kumara, Y. and Subashi, G.H.M.J., 2010, 'Structural and Thermal
Performances of Rice Husk Ash (RHA) Based Sand Cement Block', Proceeding of the
International Conference on Sustainable Built Environments, pp 138-44.
dl.lib.mrt.ac.lk/handle/123/9227
Ohijeagbon, I. O. and Adeyemi, M. B., 2003, ‘Properties of Clay/ Silica/ Cement Tiles’,
Nigerian Journal of Technological Development 3 (2003), pp 102-104.
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/njtd/issue/view/16681

Perera, B. V. A., Madhushanka, K. G. S., Silva, G. H. M. J. D. and G.S.Y.De Silva, G. S. Y.

D., 2015, ‘Effect of Rice Husk Ash (RHA) on structural properties of fired clay bricks’,
Proceeding of the 6th International Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
Management 2015, Kandy, 11th-13th December.
www.civil.mrt.ac.lk/conference/ICSECM_2015/volume_5/volume_5.pdf

29
Pushpakumara, B & Silva, G. H. M. J. S., 2012, 'Characteristics of Masonry Blocks
Manufactured with Rice Husk Ash (RHA) and Lime', ENGINEER 45(03), pp.1-10.
https://books.google.lk/books
Roper, L. D., 2016, ‘Crop Production in the World & the United States’
http://www.roperld.com/science/cropsworld_us.htm

Sultana, M. S., Hossain, M. I., Rahman, M. A. and Khan, M. H., 2014, ‘Influence of Rice Husk
Ash and Fly Ash on Properties of Red Clay’, Journal of Scientific Research, 6 (3), 421-430.
https://www.banglajol.info/index.php/JSR/article/view/15343

Uduweriya, R. B.Y. B. and De Silva, S., 2010, ‘Effect of mechanical properties of concrete
containing rice husk ash’, Proceedings of the 8th Academic Sessions, University of Ruhuna 2010,
Vol.8, pp. 87-94.
https://www.researchgate.net/...Properties...Concrete...Rice_Husk_Ash...Replacement...ce..

World Health Organization, 2014, ‘Chrysotile Asbestos’, WHO publications, Switzerland.

www.who.int/ipcs/assessment/public_health/chrysotile_asbestos_summary.pdf

30
APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Tests for Material Properties

Table A.1 : Data of Sieve Analysis Test Results of RHA

Weight Wt. of sieve RHA Cumulative RHA
Sieve
of +RHA Wt. of RHA retained RHA passing
Size(mm)
sieve(g) retained(g) retained(g) % retained% %

2.36 564.6 566.6 2 1.61 1.61 98.39

1.7 555.4 557.1 1.7 1.37 2.98 97.02
1.18 514.9 517 2.1 1.69 4.68 95.32
0.85 500 502.1 2.1 1.69 6.37 93.63
0.6 480.6 488 7.4 5.97 12.34 87.66
0.425 463.9 479.3 15.4 12.42 24.76 75.24
0.25 435 451 16 12.90 37.66 62.34
0.075 343.8 385.8 42 33.87 71.53 28.47
Pan 343 377.9 34.9 28.15 99.68 0.32

31
 Table A.2: Liquid limit test data
Wet Dry Dry
Weight Weight
Weight Weight Weigth Moisture
RHA Pan No of of of
of of of Content
% No Blows Empty Water
Pan+Clay Pan+Clay Clay (%)
Pan (g) (g)
(g) (g) (g)
1 75 18.0 18.4 18.3 0.3 0.1 33.33
2 52 45.7 46.4 46.1 0.4 0.3 75.00
0 3 26 26.7 29.1 27.9 1.2 1.2 100.00
4 12 27.1 29.9 28.4 1.3 1.5 115.38
5 6 44.2 47.1 45.4 1.2 1.7 141.67
1 69 16.0 17.7 17.2 1.2 0.5 41.67
2 40 15.7 17.2 16.6 0.9 0.6 66.67
5 3 19 15.7 18.4 17.2 1.5 1.2 80.00
4 11 17.6 20.8 19.3 1.7 1.5 88.24
5 6 17.4 23.1 20.1 2.7 3.0 111.11
1 62 44.0 46.5 45.8 1.8 0.7 38.89
2 37 18.4 20.3 19.6 1.2 0.7 58.33
10 3 18 18.5 21.9 20.4 1.9 1.5 78.95
4 10 15.6 19.0 17.3 1.7 1.7 100.00
5 3 18.2 21.4 19.7 1.5 1.7 113.33
1 40 15.4 17.3 16.6 1.2 0.7 58.33
2 21 16.1 18.5 17.6 1.5 0.9 60.00
15 3 17 15.2 18.6 17.3 2.1 1.3 61.90
4 14 17.3 20.5 19.1 1.8 1.4 77.78
5 7 6.7 10.9 8.9 2.2 2.0 90.91
1 87 15.0 16.5 16.2 1.2 0.3 25.00
2 25 17.2 18.7 18.2 1.0 0.5 50.00
20 3 15 17.7 20.6 19.5 1.8 1.1 61.11
4 12 15.6 18.2 17.2 1.6 1.0 62.50
5 9 18.7 21.2 20.2 1.5 1.0 66.67

32
 0% RHA - LL
160.00
140.00

Moisture content (%)

120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
1 10 100
No. of blows

Figure A.1 : Liquid limit of clay with 0% RHA

5% RHA - LL
120.00

100.00
Moisture content (%)

80.00

60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00
1 10 100
No of blows

Figure A.2 : Liquid limit of clay with 5% RHA

33
 10% RHA - LL
140.00
120.00

Moisture content (%)

100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
1 10 100
No of blows

Figure A.3 : Liquid limit of clay with 10% RHA

15% RHA - LL
100.00
Moisture content (%)

80.00

60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00
1 10 100
No of blows

Figure A.4 : Liquid limit of clay with 15% RHA

20% RHA - LL
80.00
70.00
Moisture content (%)

60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
1 10 100
No of blows

Figure A.5 : Liquid limit of clay with 20% RHA

34
 Table A.3: Plastic limit test data
Weight of Wet Weight Dry Weight
Moisture
RHA % Pan No Empty Pan of Pan+Clay of Pan+Clay
Content (%)
(g) (g) (g)
1 15.4 16.5 16.2 37.50
0 2 18.2 19.0 18.8 33.33
3 17.7 18.7 18.4 42.86
1 18.1 18.8 18.6 40.00
5 2 17.3 17.8 17.7 25.00
3 15.9 16.4 16.3 25.00
1 19.4 20.0 19.8 50.00
10 2 17.9 18.4 18.3 25.00
3 17.5 18.0 17.9 25.00
1 15.7 16.1 16.0 33.33
15 2 15.7 16.1 16.0 33.33
3 16.0 16.3 16.2 50.00
1 15.7 16.4 16.2 40.00
20 2 15.7 16.3 16.1 50.00
3 15.9 16.6 16.4 40.00

Table A.4 : Atterburg limits of clay samples

Liquid Plastic Plasticity

RHA %
limit (%) limit (%) Index (%)

0 88 38 50
5 70 30 40
10 66 33 33
15 60 39 21
20 48 43 5

35
 APPENDIX B: Tests for Structural Properties of Tiles

Table B.1 : Transverse Breaking Load test data

RHA % 0% RHA 5% RHA 10% RHA 15% RHA 20% RHA

Specimen 1 736.17 977.77 1117.30 992.16 765.09

Specimen 2 760.43 1103.01 1081.10 929.08 480.00

Specimen 3 845.60 641.36 1250.23 979.43 548.00

Specimen 4 700.67 864.90 1221.38 1082.78 643.98

Specimen 5 822.09 923.39 989.90 1104.87 698.26

Average 773.00 902.09 1131.98 1017.66 627.06

% Increment 0.00 16.70 46.44 31.65 -18.88

36
 Table B.2 : Bulk Density test data
RHA % 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Sample no. 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Dry weight (kg) 2.9375 2.9601 2.9782 2.7498 2.7665 2.7746 2.7501 2.7461 2.6994 2.6584 2.7987 2.6433 2.6523 2.695 2.669

Wet weight (kg) 3.3263 3.338 3.3634 3.1445 3.1573 3.1663 3.1703 3.1459 3.0936 3.0665 3.2344 3.0696 3.0844 3.3008 3.1196

Weight of water
45.1 44.9 45.8 44.8 45.05 45.8 44.95 45.15 45.75 44.9 45 45.85 45.05 45.1 45.65
full bucket (kg)

Weight of bucket
after immersing 46.9 46.8 47.6 46.65 46.65 47.5 46.7 46.8 47.45 46.65 46.65 47.4 46.7 46.75 47.4
tile(kg)

Volume of tile
0.0015 0.0014 0.0016 0.0013 0.0016 0.0015 0.0014 0.0015 0.0014 0.0013 0.0016 0.0015 0.0014 0.0017 0.0014
(m3)

Bulk Density
1924.6 2058.5 1905 2124.2 1776.5 1892.2 1936.3 1835.8 1937 2019.3 1766.4 1739.5 1849.1 1632.5 1948.7
(kg/m3)

Avg bulk density

1962.67 1930.98 1903.01 1841.72 1810.12
(kg/m3)

37
 Table B.3 ; Water absorption test data
RHA % 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Sample no. 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Dry Weihgt 2.9375 2.9601 2.9782 2.7498 2.7665 2.7746 2.7501 2.7461 2.6994 2.6584 2.7987 2.6433 2.6523 2.695 2.669

Wet weight 3.3263 3.338 3.3634 3.1445 3.1573 3.1663 3.1703 3.1459 3.0936 3.0665 3.2344 3.0696 3.0844 3.3008 3.1196

Water
13.24 12.77 12.93 14.35 14.13 14.12 15.28 14.56 14.60 15.35 15.57 16.13 16.29 22.48 16.88
absorption

Avg (%) 12.98 14.20 14.81 15.68 18.55

38
 Table B.4 : Fire resistivity test data
Weight at Weight at 200°C % weight
RHA% 100°C (kg) (kg) loss

0 2.9550 2.94890 0.21

5 2.7620 2.75180 0.37

10 2.6881 2.67670 0.42

15 2.6373 2.62500 0.47

20 2.6857 2.66950 0.60

39
REMARKS

40
41