4.7 Article

Sustainable application of rice husk and rice straw in cellular concrete composites

期刊

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
卷 283, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122770

关键词

Cellular concrete; Rice husk; Rice straw; Thermo-acoustic performance; Plant biomass

资金

  1. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher-Level Education Personnel in Brazil (CAPES) [001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to improve the thermoacoustic performance of cellular concrete by adding rice straw to rice husk, reducing compressive strength but increasing three-point bending strength, and improving sound absorption. Wetting-and-drying cycles could enhance the compressive strength of specimens, while longer curing times also contributed to increased durability.
This study seeks to evaluate the effect of incorporating rice husk and rice straw as a sealing material, and to evaluate the mechanical, acoustic, thermal, and durability properties of the cellular concrete that will be used. A sustainable use option for rice culture waste is provided and detailed in this paper. This study seeks to improve the thermoacoustic performance of cellular concrete using only rice husk by adding rice straw. The introduction of straw reduced the compressive strength by about 15% and increased the threepoint bending strength. Sound absorption increased when adding rice straw, and the sound insulation values were statistically similar. With respect to the thermal analysis, the thermal conductivity was directly proportional to the straw length. In general, the best formulation was S-15%-3, which contained 15% rice straw at 3 cm. Specimens were submitted to wetting-and-drying cycles to evaluate durability, leading to increased compressive strength, which also increased with longer curing times. Furthermore, the cycles led to a reduction in the three-point bending strength while the thermal conductivity remained similar. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据