4.5 Article

Sugarcane Bagasse as Aggregate in Composites for Building Blocks

Journal

ENERGIES
Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en16010398

Keywords

building blocks; sugarcane bagasse; lime; soil; agro-industrial waste

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Each year, a substantial amount of sugarcane waste is generated and usually used for combustion for energy generation. This research proposes an alternative use for sugarcane bagasse as the sole aggregate in composites for building materials. The composites with lime binder achieved better thermal insulation and mechanical strength.
Each year, hundreds of millions of tons of processed sugarcane generate, by weight, 25 to 30% of bagasse as waste, whose destination is combustion for energy cogeneration. This research proposes an alternative and more sustainable use for this waste. The use of sugarcane bagasse (SCB) as the single aggregate in composites for building blocks was studied. The raw bagasse was used without any treatment. As the binder, aerial lime and/or soil were used. Both provided enough mechanical strength for non-load-bearing walls. The composite of SCB with soil achieved the best performance in terms of mechanical resistance: 2.6 MPa in compressive strength and 2.1 MPa in bending strength, while the composite of SCB with lime achieved 1.76 MPa and 1.7 MPa, respectively. The higher number of fibers in the SCB/lime mixture provides better thermal insulation than clay brick or conventional concrete, such as hempcrete. The lime composites obtained greater water resistance and less loss of mechanical strength when saturated. However, the higher water absorption coefficient makes it necessary to apply a waterproof mortar on surfaces exposed to the weather. The replacement of supplied blocks by SCB blocks can offer a better and more economical solution that improves the quality of the built environment and is more ecofriendly.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available