Property Characterization of Abaca Fiber Reinforced

i

PROPERTY CHARACTERIZATION OF ABACA FIBER REINFORCED

CEMENT-BONDED BOARD WITH PULVERIZED

GREEN MUSSEL SHELLS

A Project Study

Presented to the Faculty of

The Civil Engineering Department

Technological University of the Philippines

College of Engineering

In Partial Fulfillment of the Course Requirements

for the Degree of Bachelor of Science

in Civil Engineering

Thesis By:

Carbonel, Maikko Neil T.

Lucero, Shaira Joy M.

Nuestro, Kimberly Mae B.

Obregoso, George Jr. B.

Engr. Juanito H. Neric Jr.

Project Adviser

MANILA

March 2014

ii

APPROVAL SHEET

This thesis entitled PROPERTY CHARACTERIZATION OF ABACA FIBER

REINFORCED CEMENT-BONDED BOARD WITH PULVERIZED GREEN MUSSEL

SHELLS prepared by:

CARBONEL, Maikko Neil T.

LUCERO, Shaira Joy M.

NUESTRO, Kimberly Mae B.

OBREGOSO, George Jr. B.

In partial fulfillment of the course requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in

Civil Engineering is hereby approved and accepted.

___________________________

Engr. Juanito H. Neric Jr.

Project Adviser

___________________________ ___________________________

Dr. Melito A. Baccay Engr. Edmundo C. Dela Cruz

Panel Member Panel Member

___________________________ ___________________________

Engr. Jesus Ray M. Mansayon Engr. Ma. Analin C. Pajaro


___________________________ ___________________________

Engr. Mark G. Costelo Engr. Anthony T. de Castro


Accepted as partial fulfillment of the course requirements for the degree of Bachelor of

Science in Civil Engineering.

___________________________ ___________________________

Engr. Edgardo S. Legaspi Engr. Lyndon R. Bague

Head, CE Department Dean, College of Engineering

___________________________ ___________________________

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research would not been made possible without the help of several

individuals who in one way or another contributed to the successful completion of this

study. The authors would like to extend their gratitude to the following:

To their adviser, Engr. Juanito H. Neric, for his immense knowledge, supervision,

encouragement, and remarkable staying control during the course of this research.

To their thesis professor, Dr. Melito A. Baccay, and to the Civil Engineering

faculty as they helped collaborate upon this study and provided advices and guidance

including: Engr. Edmundo C. Dela Cruz, Engr. Jesus Ray M. Mansayon, Engr. Ma.

Analin C. Pajaro, Engr. Mark G. Costelo and Engr. Anthony T. de Castro.

To Sir Reynaldo Baarde and Engr. Jassine Garna, of Integrated Research and

Training Center, and Engr. Juancho Pablo S. Calvez, of Metallurgical Technology

Division Mines and Geosciences Bureau, as they allowed the authors to use the main

facilities for the completion of the tests required for the study.

To their families, especially their parents, for their unconditional love, undying

support and timeless considerations as they allowed them to take concentrations in prior

to this study and turned any uncertainties of failure into aspirations to succeed.

iv

Above all, the authors praise and thanks goes to Almighty God for the

overflowing blessings undeservingly bestowed upon them.

v

ABSTRACT

The use of environmental-friendly alternative building materials has remarkably gained

its importance in the construction industry. As development of eco-friendly and sustainable

construction materials continues, cement-bonded composites are no exemption. The study

concentrates on the characterization and development of Cement-Bonded Board comprising

Abaca Fiber as reinforcing material and Pulverized Green Mussel Shells as filler.

Aiming for new potential source of raw materials for Cement-Bonded Board, it is

hypothesized that abaca fiber as reinforcing material and pulverized mussel shells as filler will

have effects on the mechanical and physical properties of the board. In accordance to the ASTM

standards, Water Absorption and Thickness Swelling test, and Moisture Content and Specific

Gravity determined the physical properties while Static Bending Test and Direct Screw

Withdrawal Test characterized its mechanical properties. The tests were conducted at the

Integrated Research Technology Center Laboratory, Technological University of the Philippines,

Manila.

On the physical tests, the results have shown that the expectation of a varying specific

gravity with the water:cement ratio is not achieved , considering the cement:abaca fiber ratio is

constant in all of the specimens, because of the improper distribution of fibers. From the test

results, it is being verified that the cement bonded board of least water:cement ratio and least

PGMS:sand ratio have least water absorption. It also is been verified that the board which is of

most water:cement ratio and least PGMS:sand ratio have least thickness swelling. From these

vi

tests, PNS 230:1989 requirement for water absorption and thickness swelling of wood-wool

cement boards (type C) of less than 30% and of less than 10% respectively were met by all the

specimens.

Due to the improper distribution of fiber on the boards, the results did not show any good

trend between the MOR and the water:cement ratio. The trends the same was observed on the

results of MOE. It shows that the lesser the PGMS content, the higher the MOR value. On the

other hand, specimens with water:cement ratio of 0.6 has higher MOR value at higher PGMS

content. The results also showed that at lesser PGMS content, the lesser the water absorption and

thickness swelling, and increased MOR and MOE. Moreover, the amount of PGMS as filler

influences the resistance of screw withdrawal that each specimen encompasses resulting the

more PGMS content the lesser the direct screw withdrawal strength.

In general, it can be concluded that the strength of the specimens is dependent on the

arrangement and proper distribution of fibers. Thus, the poor arrangement and improper

distribution of fibers affect significantly the physical and mechanical properties of the specimens

particularly the MOR and MOE.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page i

Approval Sheet ii

Acknowledgement iii

Abstract v

Table of Contents vii

List of Figures xi

List of Tables xii

Chapter 1: THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Statement of Objectives 4

1.2.1 General Objective 4

1.2.2 Specific Objectives 4

1.3 Scope and Delimitations 4

1.4 Significance of the Study 5

Chapter 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

2.1 Related Literature and Studies 7

2.1.1 Cement-Bonded Composites 7

2.1.2 Compositions of Cement-Bonded Board 8

viii

2.1.2.1 Cement as Binder 9

2.1.2.2 Abaca Fiber as Reinforcing Material 9

2.1.2.3 Green Mussels as Filler 11

2.2 Conceptual Framework 14

2.3 Definition of Terms 17

Chapter 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.1. Preparation of Materials 20

3.1.1. Abaca Fiber 20

3.1.1. Pulverized Green Mussel Shells or PGMS 21

3.1.1. Binder and Admixtures 22

3.2 Mix Design Proportions 23

3.3 Specimen Fabrication 24

3.3.1 Mixing of Raw Materials 24

3.3.2 Moulding 25

3.3.3 Cold Pressing 25

3.3.4 Curing and Conditioning 26

3.3.5 Trimming of Samples 26

3.4 Test Methods 27

3.4.1 Physical Tests 27

3.4.1.1 Moisture Content and Specific Gravity Test 28

3.4.1.2 Thickness Swelling and Water Absorption Test 29

3.4.2 Mechanical Tests 30

ix

3.4.2.1 Static Bending Test 30

3.4.2.1 Direct Screw Withdrawal Test 31

Chapter 4: PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF

DATA

4.1 Physical Properties 32

4.1.1 Moisture Content and Specific Gravity

4.1.2 Water Absorption and Thickness Swelling

4.2 Mechanical Properties

32

35

38

4.2.1 Stiffness and Flexural Strength 38

4.2.2 Results of Modulus of Rupture and Modulus of Elasticity Test 39

4.2.3 Direct Screw Withdrawal Resistance 42

Chapter 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusions 44

5.2 Recommendations 45

REFERENCES 46

x

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A List of Abbreviations and Symbols

49

APPENDIX B List of Formulas 51

APPENDIX C Tables of Results from Physical and Mechanical Tests 52

APPENDIX D Documentation 60

APPENDIX E Detailed Computations

65

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Title Page

Figure 2.1 Perna Viridis 12

Figure 2.2 Conceptual Framework 16

Figure 3.1 Commercially available Abaca Fibers 21

Figure 3.2 Hammered Green Mussel Shells 21

Figure 3.3 Calcination of Green Mussel Shells 22

Figure 3.4 Cold Pressing of Specimen 26

Figure 3.5 Trimming of Specimens 27

Figure 4.1

Average Moisture Content of the

Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS boards

33

Figure 4.2

Specific Gravity of the


34

Figure 4.3

Average Water Absorption of the


36

Figure 4.4

Average Thickness Swelling of the


37

Figure 4.5 Load-Deflection curve for SBT of Specimens 39

Figure 4.6 28th Day Modulus of Rupture 40

Figure 4.7 28th Day Modulus of Elasticity 40

Figure 4.8

Average Load from DSWT of the


42

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page

Table 2.1 Chemical Compostion of Mussels and Commercial CaO3 13

Table 3.1 Properties of the Materials 52

Table 3.2 Mix Proportions 52

Table 4.1 Philippine National Standards for Medium Density Board 52

Table 4.2 Moisture Content of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board 53

Table 4.3 Specific Gravity of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board 54

Table 4.4 Water Absorption of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board 55

Table 4.5 Thickness Swelling of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board 56

Table 4.6 Modulus of Rupture of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board 57

Table 4.7 Modulus of Elasticity of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board 58

Table 4.8 Direct Screw Withdrawal Resistance of Cement-Abaca

Fiber-PGMS board

59

1

CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

1.1. Introduction

The environmental responsiveness has changed the customs of material designing

as designers become environmental-considerate on the specifications of their products.

Among the engineering sectors, the promising movement nowadays was by the

renewable resources utilization. The use of environment-friendly alternative building

materials has remarkably gained its importance in the construction industry. Such

materials that offer unique strength, stability and versatility in its applications have

significantly become a necessity in product selection.

As development of eco-friendly and sustainable construction materials continues,

cement-bonded composites are no exemption. Fibre cement was probably amongst the

latest materials on the market to have contained large quantities of asbestos (Hardie,

2003). In recent decades, governmental regulations have banned the use of asbestos due

to its harmful effects. Therefore, attempts have been made to find replacement for

asbestos (Morteza et al., 2010). The most commonly used fibers are steel, glass, carbon,

and graphite which contribute high strength and modulus for structural applications.

However these fibers have relatively high cost compared to natural fibers. Cellulose

fibers appeared to be the most promising material because they are inexpensive and are

abundantly available in most of the developing countries (Pablo, 2011).

2

In the Philippines, a natural fiber namely abaca fiber is very abundant. In fact, the

country is the world's leading abaca producer, where the plant is cultivated on 130,000

hectare by some 90,000 small farmers. This abundance opens opportunities for

explorations on its uses in more value added engineering properties (FAO, 2009).

Abaca fiber, valued for its strength, flexibility, buoyancy, and resistance to

damage in saltwater, is chiefly employed for potentials in boat/ship building industries,

aeronautics as well as in construction business especially for high-rise building. A good

ecological balance combined with its excellent technical properties cited by Chrysler-

Daimler paved way to the use of abaca as underbody protection of car. The development

of this new end-use for abaca fiber in composite applications for the automotive industry

contributed to increasing the demand for the fiber. Pablo (2011) studied the use of abaca

fiber along with sisal fiber as reinforcements in cement mortar matrices in the form of

meshes. Because of its improved overall performance of the plain mortar plates makes it

a good potential for use as reinforcements in cement-based materials.

Material selection boasts of being able to recover and utilize waste materials

reduce its emissions during manufacturing operations, conserve and preserve the

environment through the efficient utilization of water, energy and other resources. Here

in our country, one of the sectors that needs to further be maximized its efficiency is the

sector of the aquaculture. As countrywide target on food security, income generation, and

employment are being evidently contributed by the aquacultural sector, voluminous

wastes are being emitted. The green mussels are one of the species of molluscs farmed

3

considerably in the Philippines for food. Consequently, as demands boost because of its

affordability in the market, waste from mussels is accumulated in the form of shells.

These days, productions of green mussel are 13,500 tons a year (Oger, 2012). As invasive

species, research teams come across alternative recycling procedures for the green mussel

shells to diminish its volume as wastes and moreover to generate these as a substitute

construction materials securing the need of construction industry in the near future.

Past research documents the incorporation of waste shell into concrete products as

coarse aggregates, sand or cement mortar (Barnaby, 2004). Compressive strength tests

investigate the applicability of these shells as an alternative material for sand. Based on

the results obtained, Yoon et al. (2003) drawn conclusion that mussel shell is a good

supplement material when sand sources are insufficient.

In promoting further studies and developments on the engineering properties of

renewable resources in Agricultural and Aquacultural sectors, this research investigates

the potentials of abaca fiber as reinforcing material and pulverized green mussel shell as

filler respectively for fabrication of cement-bonded panel board.

4

1.2. Statement of the Objectives

1.2.1. General Objective:

To characterize the properties of abaca fiber reinforced cement bonded board with

pulverized green mussel shells.

1.2.2. Specific Objectives:

Specifically, the study aims to determine the following:

a. To determine the physical properties of the Cement-Bonded Board with

Abaca Fiber and Pulverized Green Mussel Shells such as moisture content,

specific gravity, water absorption and thickness swelling.

b. To determine the mechanical properties of the Cement-Bonded Board with

Abaca Fiber and Pulverized Green Mussel Shells such as stiffness, flexural

strength and direct screw withdrawal resistance.

1.3. Scope and Delimitations

The study concentrated on the development and characterization of Cement-

Bonded Board comprising Abaca Fiber as reinforcing material and Pulverized Green

Mussel Shells as filler.

5

Aiming for new potential source of raw materials for Cement-Bonded Board, the

study aims to carry out physical and mechanical properties of the board containing abaca

fiber and green mussel shells in accordance to the ASTM standards. Water Absorption

(WA) and Thickness Swelling (TS) test, and Moisture Content (MC) and Specific

Gravity (SG) determined the physical properties while Static Bending Test (SBT) and

Direct Screw Withdrawal Test (DSWT) characterized its mechanical properties. The

testing will be conducted at the Integrated Research Technology Center Laboratory,

Technological University of the Philippines, Manila.

Due to equipment and time constraint, investigation and analyses of chemical

composition and microstructure of abaca fiber and green mussel shells as raw material for

the panel board were not quantified in this research. Costing of the panel fabrication was

not also included in this study.

1.4 Significance of the Study

Specifically, this study is significant to the following:

To the Civil Engineers, this will provide data to those professionals who are

interested in the advancement of researches in discovering new sustainable materials for

construction applications which can offer unique strength, stability, versatility,

affordability, and safety to both users and environment.

6

To the Construction Industry, this will give them supplementary information on

meeting the market standards and on building establishments with complete advantages

while preserving the natural beauty of the environment.

To the Community, this will give them insights about prospective sources of

livelihood by collecting and selling agricultural and aquacultural products like abaca fiber

and pulverized green mussel shells to construction material producers as they

simultaneously maximize the natural resources.

To the Future Researchers, this will serve as their reference for the future

studies using other agricultural and aquacultural wastes as a potential source of raw

materials that could be used in concrete fabrications and applications.

7

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW TO THE RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents the different foreign and local studies related to this research.

Concepts, methodologies, subjects and instrumentations used that are significantly

connected to the present work are also examined. Furthermore, comparisons from

previous studies are discussed and the framework of concept to be conducted are

illustrated and explained.

2.1 Related Literature and Studies

2.1.1 Cement-Bonded Composites

Composites are combinations of two or more than two materials in which one of

the materials, is reinforcing phase (fibres, sheets or particles) and the other is matrix

phase (polymer, metal or ceramic) (Saxena et al., 2011). Fiber cement is a composite

material made of filler, cement and cellulose fibers. A material for reinforcing cement

sheet products containing fibers other than asbestos, clay and thickener have been

developed, in which fiber cement product consisting essentially by weight of a

Portland cement binder in the amount of between about 40% and 80%, natural and/or

synthetic fibers in an amount of between 1% and 15%, clay in an amount of between

about 2% and 15%, and thickener in an amount of between about 0.03% and 0.5%.

8

The product may also contain silica and/or filler in an amount of between about 10%

and 40% by weight (Morteza et al., 2010).

Application of natural fibers to replace asbestos because of their availability in

the tropical and subtropical parts of the world has been explored. Natural cellulose

fibers have been produced either as a full or partial substitute for asbestos because

they have similar characteristics such as high aspect ratio, high tensile strength,

toughness, flexibility and above all, the buoyancy of the fiber in the cement. The

reasons for putting these fibers into cement-based materials are generally agreed to be

as follows:

1. Improvement of flexure (bending strength)

2. Improvement of impact toughness

3. Control of cracking and change in failure behavior to give post-crack load-

bearing capacity, and

4. Change in the flow characteristics of the fresh material (Pablo, 2011).

2.1.2. Compositions of Cement-Bonded Board

The cement bonded board comprises primarily of fibers, fillers, cement and

admixtures (Morteza et al., 2010). Admixtures are used to alter the properties of

certain mixes to obtain desired characteristics. Chemical admixtures such as

accelerators counteract the adverse effect on cement hydration (Sudin et al.,

UNDATED).

9

2.1.2.1. Cement as Binder

Portland cement is the most common type of cement used in the world

due to the materials versatility (Bonilla, 2012). Type I Portland cement is

known as common or general purpose cement. It is generally assumed unless

another type is specified.

2.1.2.2. Abaca Fiber as Reinforcing Material

Addition of fibers to cement-bonded board imparts a number of

attributes that are important to the application and serviceability of the

composite. Utilization of natural fibers as reinforcement of composites is

economical for increasing their certain properties; for example, tensile

strength, shear strength, toughness and/or combinations of these (Ali, 2012).

Among all the natural fiber-reinforcing materials, abaca appears to be a

promising material because it is inexpensive and abundantly available

(Ramadevi et al., 2012).

Abaca fiber, known worldwide as Manila hemp, is obtained from the

leaf sheath of the abaca, Musa textilis Nee. Abaca is indigenous to the

Philippines grown in 56 provinces with Catanduanes as its leading abaca-

producer. Total production as of 2011 is 73,274 metric tonnes of abaca. It is

similar to banana in appearance except that the leaves are upright, pointed,

narrower and more tapering than the leaves of the banana. The length of the

10

fiber varies from three to nine feet or more, depending on the height of the

plant (FIDA, 2012). The color of the fiber ranges from ivory white to light and

dark brown (Pablo, 2011).

Abaca is considered the strongest of natural fibers being three times

stronger than cotton and two times stronger than sisal fibers. The official

standard grades of abaca fiber are divided into three (3) classes depending on

the manner of extraction, namely: hand-stripping, spindle-stripping and

decortication. Residual grades are standard grades for hand- and spindle-

stripped grades potentially used in fiber boards such as roofing tiles, floor

tiles, hollow blocks, boards, reinforcing fiber concrete and asphalt (FIDA,

2012).

Abaca fiber, valued for its strength, flexibility, buoyancy, and resistance

to damage in saltwater, is chiefly employed for potentials in boat/ship building

industries, aeronautics as well as in construction business especially for high-

rise building. Pablo (2011) studied the use of natural organic fiber meshes as

reinforcements in cement mortar matrices namely, abaca and sisal fibers. It

was found that the use of such fibers as reinforcements in cement mortar

matrices has considerably improved the overall performance of the plain

mortar plates. Hence, such fiber reinforcements possess very good potential

for use as reinforcements in cement-based materials.

11

2.1.2.3. Green Mussels as filler

The typical cement board may comprise of about silica and/or filler in an

amount between 10% and 40% by weight (Morteza et al., 2010). Aggregates

in these mixes are used as fillers and strength enhancers.

Perna viridis, commonly identified as Asian Green Mussel or Tahong,

is a mussel often growing at lengths from 80-100mm to 165mm. These

aquatic species as shown in the Figure 2.1 are among the number of bivalvia

and phylum mollusc.

Figure 2.1 Perna viridis (Benson et al., 2006)

The Asian Green mussels are bivalve mussel widely distributed to Asia-

Pacific region including Persian Gulf to the Philippines, East China Sea, and

North and South to Indonesia. Peak reproducing activities normally happen

perennially however the mussels living in the Philippines and Thailand are

known to spawn all year round. Approximately 13,500 tons a year are

harvested locally (Oger, 2012).

12

There is a high content of calcium carbonate in green mussels which is

given as 95% (Hamester, 2012). However, mussel shells contain not only

calcium carbonate (CaCO3) but minerals that drawn together and are seldom

getting laid down in the shell from the environment are also obtained.

Minerals such as lead, cadmium and zinc, or organophosphate pesticides and

petroleum by-products are easily detected. These impurities and accumulation

in the shell serve as a warning of contamination in the environment. By this,

health of an ecosystem is biologically monitored.

Table 2.1 presents the chemical composition of commercial CaCO3 and

mussel. The green mussel shell presents a slightly lower, although not

significant, amount of calcium oxide (CaO) than commercial calcium

carbonate. There are differences in chemical composition because the mussels

are water filterer.

Table 2.1 Chemical Compostion of Mussels and Commercial

CaO3 Source: Hamster, et al. (2012)

Oxides Mussels

(%) CaCO3

CaO 95.7 99.1

K2O 0.5 0.4

SiO2 0.9 -

SrO 0.4 -

Fe2O3 0.7 -

SO3 0.7 -

MgO 0.6 -

Al2O3 0.4 -

13

These past years, green mussel shells or tahong shells have been

studied as a raw material for construction. Hamester et al. (2012) conducted a

comparative study of oyster shells and green mussel shells by obtaining

calcium carbonate (CaCO3) from the said species as they are incorporated as

filler in the Polypropylene (PP). No significant difference on Youngs

modulus, yield strength and impact strength is observed from PP with

commercial CaCO3 and those obtained from oyster and green mussels. In

summary, it states that CaCO3 can be obtained from oyster and mussel shell

and is technically possible to replace the commercial CaCO3 despite the great

difference in particle size and its distribution.

As being same mollusc species, Yoon et al. (2003) conducted a study on

the mechanical characteristics of crushed oyster shell. It is analysed that a

decrease in compressive strength is obtained as the amounts of oyster shell

were increased except for the 40% dosage of shell that yielded an unexpected

increase in compressive strength. Based on these results, they concluded that

crushed oyster shells are a good alternative material for sand.

In the paint industry, Musico (UNDATED) conducted a study that

utilizes the calcium carbonate contained in green mussel shells as an extender

or additive in the production of paints. It is concluded that there is similarity

on the physical properties of the commercial calcium carbonate and the

calcium carbonate from the green mussel shells. He had seen that fineness and

14

white color of the calcium carbonate from green mussel shells were the same

from commercial calcium carbonate.

Shells, along with eggs, snails, and other marine organisms, contain a

chemical called calcium carbonate, a common substance found around the

world. Common minerals and rocks where calcium carbonate exists are in

chalk, limestone, marble, and travertine. It's also the active ingredient that

causes hard water conditions in many households (Sciencefairadventure,

2007).

2.2. Conceptual Framework

Figure 2.4 shows the input, process and output of the research. It illustrates how the

concept of the research flows. It started by identifying the problem and end up obtaining

the results from the tests undertaken on the process. These results were used to satisfy the

objectives of the research.

Researchers believed in the potential of using abaca fiber as reinforcement and

pulverized green mussel shells as filler to produce a cement-bonded board. These two

materials must perfectly bond as it is combined with the Portland cement. Physical and

mechanical tests will be required to characterize the properties of the samples. In this

study, these properties only refer to the moisture content, specific gravity, thickness

15

swelling, water absorption, stiffness, flexural strength and direct screw withdrawal of the

fabricated board.

Utilization of these agricultural and aquaculture waste for the reduction of

voluminous waste is one of the reasons why the technology behind abaca fiber and

pulverized green mussel shells are combined by the researchers. Promoting sustainable

green construction from disregarded solid waste will lead to production of new and

innovative building material.

16

Figure 2.2 Conceptual Framework

1. Environmental Issue

1.1 Reduction of

Aquaculture and

Agricultural Waste

2. Concept

2.1 Utilizing recyclable

waste to produce

sustainable cement-

bonded composite

board

3. Resources Requirements

3.1 Abaca fiber

3.2 Pulverized green

mussel shells

3.3 Portland Cement

3.4 Calcium Chloride

3.6 Sand

4. Instruments

4.1 Universal Testing

Machine (UTM)

4.2 Calcination Furnace

1. Material Preparation

1.1 Fabrication of

cement-bonded

composite sample

boards using abaca

fiber and pulverized

green mussel shells

2. Determination of the

Physical Properties

2.1 Moisture Content

2.2 Specific Gravity

2.3 Thickness Swelling

2.4 Water Absorption

3. Determination of the

Mechanical Properties

3.1 Stiffness

3.2 Flexural Strength

3.3 Direct Screw

Withdrawal

Resistance

1. Physical Properties

Tests Results

1.1 Moisture Content

1.2 Specific Gravity

1.3 Thickness

Swelling

1.4 Water Absorption

2. Mechanical Properties

Test Results

2.1 Stiffness

2.2 Flexural Strength

2.3 Direct screw

Withdrawal

Resistance

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

17

2.3 Definition of Terms

Abaca fiber is known worldwide as Manila hemp and the Philippines premier fiber

which is originally used for making ropes.

Accelerators are added to concrete either to increase the rate of early strength

development or shorten the time of setting, or both.

Aggregates make up the bulk of a concrete mixture.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) an organization engaged in the

standardization of specifications and testing methods and in the improvement of

materials.

ASTM D 1037 contains standard test methods prepared by ASTM in determination of

the physical and mechanical properties of wood-base fiber and particle panel materials

(ASTM).

Bivalvia is the class of freshwater and marine mollusc which green mussel shells are

included (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bivalvia).

Calcination is the process used to obtain calcium carbonates from a substance by

driving off the carbon dioxide (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/calcination).

Cement is a binder, a substance that sets and hardens independently and can bind other

materials together.

Dimensional Stability refers to the ability of the material to remain its original

dimensions while being subjected to its intended purpose

(http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/dimensional-stability.html).

Elasticity is the property of a material that enables it to return to its original size and

shape after a force is removed.

18

Fabrication refers to the construction or manufacture.

Filler particles added to a matrix material to improve its properties.

Fracture Toughness is the ability of the material to resist the propagation of cracks

which leads to fracture.

Modulus of Elasticity (MOE) a measure of stiffness of material; is the ratio of stress

to strain but only in the elastic region.

Modulus of Resilience is the product of stress and strain.

Modulus of Rupture defines the ability of the material to resist deformations under

load (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexural_strength).

Moisture Content is the amount of water contained in the material.

Morphology is the branch of bioscience studies the form and structures of plants and

animals.

Natural Cellulose Fiber is the fiber recognizable as being from a part of the original

plant due to they are only processed to clean the fiber to use.

Pulverize - refers to ground or crush.

Resilience is the ability of a material to recover to its original size and shape after

being deformed by an impact load.

Specific Gravity refers to the ratio of the mass of solid or liquid to the mass of an

equal volume of distilled water. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/specific+ gravity)

Sustainability refers to the meeting the needs of the present generation without

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

Type I Portland Cement General Purpose. For use when the special properties

specified for any other types are not required.

19

Thermal Resistance is the resistance to the flow of heat.

Universal Testing Machine (UTM) is the equipment that can be use to test the

flexural strength, stiffness and direct screw withdrawal resistance of a cement-bonded

composite board.

Water Absorption is the property of a material to absorb water at specified conditions.

Youngs Modulus also called Modulus of Elasticity.

20

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the methods and procedures used in the fabrication of the

actual specimens, and the testing of the specimens in accordance to ASTM D 1037-99.

3.1 Preparation of Materials

The raw materials used are the abaca fiber and pulverized green mussel shells

(PGMS).

3.1.1 Abaca Fiber

The abaca fiber utilized in this study was commercially available in the market

as shown in Figure 3.1. The purchased abaca fibers are washed with tap water to

remove unnecessary particles that affect the bonding with the other main materials.

These were air dried for about 24 hours. The cleaned abaca fibers were cut to desired

lengths of 30 mm and soaked with clean water for at least 24 hours before bringing

the SSD (Saturated Surface Dry) condition.

21

Figure 3.1 Commercially available abaca fibers

3.1.2 Pulverized Green Mussel Shells or PGMS

Green mussels were collected from a local producer of tahong chips, Ocean

Fresh Tahong Chips, which were contacted to obtain access to their waste records.

The shell condition is after-cooked. It was cleaned by brush, washed with tap water

and sun dried for at least a day. Manual hammering was done to reduce the size of

green mussel shells to approximately 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm as shown in Figure 3.2. to

avoid pieces from scattering, cloth are used.

Reduced mussel shells size were placed on crucibles and were calcinated inside

a furnace as in shown in Figure 3.3 at >900C for 2-3 hours. Calcinated shells were

given the time to let them cool down and then pulverized it using a mortar and pestle.

PGMS that passed through 200-mesh sieve were used for the fabrication of

specimens.

22

Figure 3.2. Hammered Green Mussel Sheels

Figure 3.3. Calcination of Green Mussel Shells

3.1.3 Binder and Admixtures

Ordinary Portland Cement (Type I) were used as the binder while 2-3% of

reagent grade calcium chloride (CaCI2) and superplasticizer were used as cement

23

setting accelerator and water-reducer respectively. Ordinary sand screened to pass 16-

mesh sieve were used in all boards.

3.2 Mix Design Proportions

The proportion of raw materials used in each mix design was based on the

cement-bonded composite board with a target medium density board of 1.2 g/cc.

(3.1)

All measurements were carried out on weight proportion basis. The methodology

utilized to calculate the materials for fabrication of the cement-bonded board is based on

cement: sand of 2:1, cement: abaca fiber ratio of 100:25 (Xiong et al.), 20% and 40% of

sand replaced by pulverized green mussel shell (Yoon et al., 2002) and three water-

cement ratios of 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6.

Three different mix design proportions were used to further investigate the effects

of the abaca fiber as reinforcing material and pulverized green mussel shell as filler. The

mix proportions of the materials used in this study are shown in Table 3.1.

24

Table 3.1. Mix Proportions

Specimen Cement, g Water, g Abaca Fiber,

g Sand, g PGMS, g

W/C = 0.4

A 412.7142 165.0857 103.1786 165.0857 41.2714

B 421.9714 168.7886 105.4929 126.5914 84.3942

W/C = 0.5

C 412.7142 206.3571 103.1786 165.0857 41.2714

D 421.9714 210.9857 105.4929 126.5914 84.3942

W/C = 0.6

E 412.7142 247.6285 103.1786 165.0857 41.2714

F 421.9714 253.1828 105.4929 126.5914 84.3942

3.3 Specimen Fabrication

Mixing of raw materials, moulding, cold-pressing, curing and conditioning, and

trimming are the processes used for the fabrication of the specimen.

3.3.1 Mixing of Raw Materials

Water-cement ratios used are from 0.4 to 0.6 based on the specimen to give a

workable paste that can support cement hydration. Levels of calcium chloride and

superplasticizer were maintained to a state that improves workability of the mix.

25

3.3.2 Moulding

The mixture was placed in a 250mm x 250mm mould to maintain the uniform

size and volume of the specimen.

3.3.3 Cold Pressing

The mats were pressed separately to 9 mm thickness using a Universal Testing

Machine (UTM) and left under pressure of 1.23MPa for 24hours as shown in Figure

3.4.

Figure 3.4. Cold Pressing of Specimen

26

3.3.4 Curing and Conditioning

The consolidated mats were removed from the press, taken out of the mould,

placed on a table and cured completely for 28 days in a controlled room maintained at

21C and 65% relative humidity.

3.3.5 Trimming of Samples

After curing, the boards were trimmed or cut to required test specimen sizes as

shown in Figure 3.5. The cement-bonded boards were trimmed to a final dimension

of 250mm x 250mm x 9mm. From the fabricated board, 3 samples were cut 50mm x

50mm for Moisture Content and Specific Gravity Test; 3 samples of 60mm x 60mm

for Thickness Swelling and Water Absorption Test; 3 samples of 50cm x 100mm for

Static Bending Test; and 3 samples of 50mm x 75m for Direct Screw Withdrawal

Test.

27

Figure 3.5. Trimming of Specimens

3.4. Test Methods

The test methods were based from ASTM D1037 standards characterizes the

physical and mechanical properties of each specimen of each mix proportion.

3.4.1 Physical Tests

The physical tests for this study comprise of Moisture Content and Specific

Gravity Test, and Thickness Swelling and Water Absorption Test.

28

3.4.1.1 Moisture Content and Specific Gravity Test

The specimen used have a required dimensions of 50mm x 50mm.

Moisture content and specific gravity were calculated using equation 3.2 and

3.3, respectively.

Where:

MC = moisture content, %

W = initial weight, g

F = final weight when oven-dry, g

w = width of specimen, in. (mm)

t = thickness of specimen, in. (mm)

L = length of specimen, in. (mm)

K = 1, when SI units of weight and measurement are used; or 0.061, when

SI units of weight and inch-pound units of measurement are used.

29

3.4.1.2 Water Absorption and Thickness Swelling Test

Diverse blends of cement-bonded material have several effects on the

dimensional stability of the fabricated material. Water absorption and thickness

swelling tests therefore is followed in accordance with the American Society

for Testing Materials D 1037 (ASTM 1999) with some modifications.

A sample of 60mm x 60mm was cut from fabricated board as based from

ASTM D1037. Thickness Swelling and Water Absorption Test were carried

out to bear out the amount of water the board absorbed when submerged to

moisture and the thickness that the board take after a specific period of

submersion. To know the gradual water absorption behavior of our specimens,

we chose Method A specifically 2 plus 22hr period of submersion. Values of

water absorption and thickness swelling were reported in percentage as

calculated by the equations 3.4 and 3.5, respectively.

(3.4)

(3.5)

where:

WA= water absorption percent after 24 hours

WAas = weight of sample after soaking for 24 hours (grams)

WAbs = weight of sample before soaking for 24 hours (grams)

30

Tf = final thickness

Ti = initial thickness

3.4.2 Mechanical Tests

The mechanical tests for this study comprise Static Bending Test and Direct

Screw Withdrawal Test.

3.4.2.1 Static Bending Test

Static Bending Test is the testing conducted to determine the strength

against bending using UTM. Force was applied uniformly and perpendicularly

to the sample by using a load specimen support. Load capacity was determined

based from the reading in the UTM.

From these test, Modulus of Rupture and Apparent Modulus of Elasticity

for each specimen are calculated using equations 3.6 and 3.7, respectively.

(3.6)

(3.7)

Where:

P = maximum Load

P1 =load at proportional limit, lbf (N)

31

b = width of specimen, in. (mm)

d = thickness (depth of specimen), in. (mm)

E = stiffness (apparent MOE), psi (kPa)

L = length of span, in. (mm)

y1 = center deflection at proportional limit load, in. (mm)

3.4.2.2 Direct Screw Withdrawal Test

Direct Screw Withdrawal Test (DSWT) is the testing used to determine

the resistance of the cement-bonded to withdrawal of screw in a plane normal

to the face. Samples were screwed a two inch No. 10 Type AB sheet metal

screws then being subjected to the Compression Machine, load capacity of the

board was determined based from the reading in the Compression Machine.

(3.8)

where:

L1= Load on trial 1

L2= Load on trial 2

L3= Load on trial 3

32

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of data gathered using the

Universal Testing Machine (UTM). The result are presented using the tabular

presentations (use of statistical table), graphical presentation (use of graphs), and textual

presentations (use of statements or sentences).

4.1 Physical Properties

4.1.1 Moisture Content and Specific Gravity

The moisture content (MC) and specific gravity (SG) are two properties which

significantly have influence on the physical and mechanical properties of a material.

Taking nothing else into relation, these variables ought to consider always when

material, specifically wood-based fiber material, is being tested to evaluate its

efficiency.

33

Specimens of W/C of 0.4 Specimens of W/C of 0.5 Specimens of W/C of 0.6

Figure 4.1. Average Moisture Content of the Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS boards

Figure 4.1 shows the average %MC of the specimens indicating their

water:cement ratio specifically 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6 respectively. Comparing specimens of

the same water:cement ratio, the specimen of higher PGMS:sand ratio possesses the

lower %MC. The partly replacement of amount of PGMS to sand have effects on the

moisture content of the specimen. The amount of PGMS affects the amount of

moisture that each specimen encompasses resulting the more PGMS content the

lesser moisture content.

9.00

Specimen A

6.80

Specimen C

8.23

Specimen E

5.47

Specimen B

4.56

Specimen D

7.24

Specimen F

34

The values of moisture content are not totally affected by the water:cement

value. This is due to the fiber dispersion on the specimens. Overall, Specimen D had

the lowest moisture content which means that it is the best mix proportion in terms of

moisture content.

Figure 4.2. Specific Gravity of the Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS boards

As shown in Fig.4.2, specimen D has the highest specific gravity of 1.47 among

all of the specimens and specimen E has the lowest specific gravity. The figure only

shows that the value of water-cement ratio and PGMS content could not take its effect

on the specific gravity due to the poor dispersion of fibers. Occurrence of pores

makes an effect on the specific gravity of the specimens.

The fibers are less dense than the other material in the specimens which also

means that improper distribution of the fibers makes the board result in inconsistency

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

A B C D E F

Sp

ecif

ic G

ravit

y

Specimen

Ave Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3

35

on its specific gravity. Poor dispersion of abaca fibers affects the definite occurrence

of pores in the specimen. Porosity has a significant effect on the specific gravity and

density of the specimen. The effect of the PGMS as filler could not determine on its

specific gravity because of the formation of clumps of the abaca fiber.

4.1.2 Water Absorption and Thickness Swelling

The dimensional stability of the board is associated to its physical

properties including the water absorption (WA) and the thickness swelling (TS)

performance. Conducting the test, Water Absorption and Thickness Swelling

(WATS) Test, for this can verify the performance of cement-bonded boards when

used under state of severe humidity.

Figure 4.3. Average Water Absorption of the Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS boards (After

2 plus 22hours submersion)

0

5

10

15

20

25

A B C

D E

F

Wat

er A

bso

rpti

on

(%

)

Specimen

Note: 30 % and lesser water absorption to pass PNS

36

Figure 4.3 shows that specimen F contains the highest percent of water

absorption of 24.66%. Generally, specimens does not correlate the effect of its

water:cement ratio to its water absorption due to lack of trends on the values . The

specimens with 40% of sand replaced by PGMS have higher water absorption than

the specimens with 20% of sand replaced by PGMS which proves that PGMS content

affects the amount of water absorption of the boards. The variation of the water

absorption of the boards could not create any increasing or decreasing relation with

the water:cement ratio due to the poor fiber dispersion. Poor dispersion of fibers tends

to form clumps and cling to one another. By this, not all abaca fibers are completely

coated by cement paste and thus tend the water to absorb more by part of the

uncoated fibers. Based on the figure, high water:cement ratio increases the water

absorption of boards having same PGMS replacement. Also, high PGMS content

increases the water absorption.

Overall, it was verified that specimen A with the least water:cement ratio and

least PGMS:sand ratio showed least water absorption. From this study, PNS

230:1989 requirement for WA of wood-wool cement boards (type C) of less than

30% was met by all the specimens.

37

Figure 4.4. Average Thickness Swelling of the Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS boards

(After 2 plus 22hours submersion)

The thickness swelling (TS) of the specimens adhere to the similar trend with

%WA. Aside from the fiber content that tends to spring back after submersion, the

enhancement of the water absorption of the specimens merely influenced the

performance in the %TS. The presence of voids in the specimens has allowed internal

swelling. Apart from geometry of the specimen, the %TS of the specimens were also

influenced by the sand replacement by PGMS in which the lesser amount of PGMS

the lesser the %TS of the specimens as shown in the Fig.4.4. Swelling were also been

experienced by the specimens because of the not fully encapsulated by the cement

thus low bonding and more absorption of water. Overall, it is being verified that the

specimen E which is of most water:cement ratio and least PGMS:sand ratio have least

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

A B C

D E

F

Th

ick

nes

s S

wel

lin

g (%

)

Specimen

Note: 10 % and lesser thickness swelling to pass PNS

38

thickness swelling. From this study, PNS 230:1989 requirement for TS of wood-

wool cement boards (type C) of less than 10% was met by all the specimens.

4.2 Mechanical Properties

4.2.1 Stiffness and Flexural Strength

Figures 4.5 shows the typical load deformation curves of a cement-bonded

board obtained by measuring the deflection of the bottom of the specimen at the

center by means of transducer-type gages and read and plotted simultaneously against

load.

By producing different samples consisting of different mix proportions, it was

observed that Specimen B which has a PGMS:sand replacement ratio of 40% yielded

the highest bending strength. Result analysis indicate that higher PGMS:sand

replacement ratio with lower moisture content had an effect on the performance of the

boards with respect to its strength. The interfacial bonding between the fiber and the

cement matrix is influenced by the moisture content. With lower moisture content,

higher value of flexural strength is observed.

39

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1

Specimen A

Specimen B

Specimen C

Specimen D

Specimen E

Specimen F

Deflection, mm

Load

, kgf

Figure 4.5. Load-Deflection curve for SBT of Specimens

4.2.2 Results of Modulus of Rupture and Modulus of Elasticity Test

Figure 4.6 shows samples A, B, C, D, E and F passing strength

requirements. Based from the figure, it can be seen that all specimens failed the

modulus of rupture test. See Appendix C for detailed results.

40

Note: 40 kgf/cm2 and greater MOR to passed PNS

Figure 4.6. 28th

day Modulus of Rupture

Figure 4.7. 28th

day Modulus of Elasticity

A B C D E F

Average 37.69 26.55 19.63 17.38 22.87 31.35

Specimen 1 47.34 21.78 21.48 23.64 20.47 42.61

Specimen 2 49.40 21.53 17.05 17.16 18.98 31.74

Specimen 3 16.32 36.33 20.35 11.32 29.15 19.71

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

50.00

MO

R, k

g/c

m2

A B C D E F

Average 431.19 292.91 239.59 279.60 225.53 344.61

Specimen 1 551.76 367.07 111.52 439.67 99.80 560.86

Specimen 2 501.74 220.72 201.94 225.71 68.21 382.14

Specimen 3 240.06 290.96 405.31 173.43 508.58 90.82

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

MO

E, M

Pa

41

Figure 4.6 shows that water:cement ratio does not affect the variation of the

modulus of rupture of the specimens. Due to the improper distribution of fiber on

the boards, results dont show any trend between the MOR and the water:cement

ratio. The reason why all of the specimens failed the modulus of rupture test is

due to the poor fiber arrangement that somehow gave consistent values of MOR.

Even on the results of MOE shown in Figure 4.7, there were no good trends

observed on the obtained data.

Based on Figure 4.6, specimens having a water:cement ratio of 0.4 and 0.5

are alike in terms of the effects of PGMS on MOR. It shows that the lesser the

PGMS content, the higher the MOR value. On the other hand, specimen with

water:cement ratio of 0.6 increased in MOR value when higher content of

PGMS. As shown from Figure 4.7, the variation in the values of MOR and MOE

are alike. For specimens having water:cement ratio of 0.5 and 0.6, higher content

of PGMS results to higher value of MOE. Conversely, specimen with

water:cement ratio of 0.4 have lesser MOE value when the amount of PGMS

decreases. Generally, specimens with water:cement ratio of 0.4 and 0.6 are

consistent in the relation of the results of MOE and MOR. Considering the

values of MOR and MOE from these specimens, specimen A exhibited the

highest value of MOE and MOR which means that it is the best mix proportion

in terms of static bending test. As for specimen A with lesser PGMS content, the

water absorption and thickness swelling were generally lower but resulted to

higher MOR and MOE.

42

4.2.3 Direct Screw Withdrawal Resistance

The resistance to withdrawal in a plane normal to the face of the board can

be measured by Direct Screw Withdrawal Test (DSWT). Significantly, this test

defines the board of its capacity to be used for exterior applications which most

of the time is required to be screwed.

Note: 40kgf and greater load from DSWT to pass PNS

Figure 4.8. Average Load from DSWT of the Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board

From Figure 4.8, like the results of MOE and MOR, no good trends

between the water:cement ratio and screw holding resistance were observed. Due

to the poor dispersion of fiber, specimens with water:cement ratio of 0.4 and 0.6

shows that the one with lower PGMS content possesses the higher load. Only the

water:cement ratio of 0.5 shows that the specimen with higher PGMS content

have lower load. Changes in water:cement ratio became insignificant as the

result shows low performance at 0.5 water:cement ratio. Specimens with

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

A B

C D

E F

Lo

ad, k

g

Specimen

117.75

63.59

18.59

83.8

61.44

36.65

43

water:cement ratio of 0.4 apparently obtained higher screw holding strength

value even without considering the effect of PGMS content to all of the

specimens. In terms of the varying water:cement ratio, the specimens with

water:cement ratio of 0.4 exhibited the best mix proportion among the three

ratios tested showed higher resistance to screw withdrawal.

The average screw withdrawal strength of specimens A, B, D and E ranged

from 61 kg to 117 kg. These values compared favourably with cement

composites standard for direct screw withdrawal strength. According to

Philippine National Standards, the direct screw withdrawal strength value

required for material to pass ranged from 40 kg load.

Specimen A was the best among all the specimens in terms of direct screw

withdrawal strength based on the results. Considering the effect of the PGMS

content, specimen A showed better result which makes the best mix proportion

in terms of screw holding strength. The amount of PGMS as filler influences the

resistance of screw withdrawal, the more PGMS content the lesser the direct

screw withdrawal strength.

44

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the result of the study, the following conclusions were derived:

1. The moisture content of boards, of the same water:cement ratio, containing

higher PGMS:sand replacement ratio of 40% exhibited lower moisture content

ranging from 4.56% to 7.24%. The boards with higher PGMS:sand

replacement ratio had increased its specific gravity but did not give any good

trend with respect to its water;cement ratio. Furthermore, these boards have

higher water absorption ranging from 20.87% to 24.66%. The thickness

swelling of the boards was observed to have the same trend with its water

absorption in terms of PGMS content. From this study, PNS 230:1989

requirement for water absorption and thickness swelling of wood-wool

cement boards (type C) of less than 30% and 10% respectively was met by

all the specimens.

2. The Modulus of Rupture and Modulus of Elasticity of the boards did not give

any good trend based on the test results observed. The average Modulus of

Rupture ranged from 17.38 kgf/cm2 to 37.69 kgf/cm2. These values fell short of

the MOR of cement-bonded board based on the Philippine National Standards

45

as attributed to the improper distribution of fiber on the boards. The direct

screw withdrawal test results compared favorably with cement composites in

accordance to the Philippine National Standards for material to pass the direct

screw withdrawal strength requirement of 40 kg load. Futhermore, the board

containing water:cement ratio of 0.4 and PGMS content of 20% showed the

highest strength.

5.2 Recommendations

To further improve this study, the proponents would like to propose the following

recommendations:

1. To use other pre-treatments of natural fibers for the enhancement of cement paste-

fiber bonding.

2. To develop better distribution, arrangement and length of natural fibers for the

good fabrication of cement bonded board.

3. To investigate the potential use of the pulverized green mussel shells in the

cement and concrete industry.

46

REFERENCES:

ASTM (2006). ASTM C150 / C150M 12 Standard Specification for Portland Cement.

Retrieved from http://www.astm.org/Standards/C150.htm

Barnaby, C. (2004). An Investigation to the Reuse of Organic Waste Produced by the

New Zealand Mussel Industry. Department of Applied Science. Master of Applied

Science thesis, Auckland University of Technology: 80-109.

BFAR-PHILMINAQ (2007). Managing Aquaculture and Its Impacts: A Guidebook for

Local Governments. Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR)-

PHILMINAQ Project, Diliman, Quezon City, 80p.

Bonilla, E. (2012). The Composition of Fiber Cement Board Siding. Retrieved from

http://sidingmagazine.com/siding-information/the-composition-of-fiber-cement-

board-siding/

FAO (2009). Natural fibres. Retrieved from http://www.naturalfibres2009.

org/en/fibres/abaca.html

Gianluca C., Giuseppe C., Giuseppe R. & Alberta L. (2010). Composites Based on

Natural Fibre Fabrics, Woven Fabric Engineering. Retrieved from

http://www.intechopen.com/books/woven-fabric-engineering/composites-based-on-

naturalfibre-fabrics

47

Hamester, M. R.R, Balzer, P. S., Becker, D., (2012). Characterization of Calcium

Carbonate Obtained from Oyster and Mussel Shells and Incorporation in

Polypropylene. Materials Research, 15(20), 204-208. doi:10.1590/S1516-

14392012005000014

Hardie, J. (2003,July 1). Tell me more about Fibre Cement. Retrieved from

http://www.infolink.com.au/c/James-Hardie/Tell-me-more-about-Fibre-Cement-

n755412

Meikhtila T. (February, 2009). CE 1022 Building Material and Construction. Ministry of

Science and Technology: 2-4.

Morteza, K., Eshmaiel G., & Abolhassan V. (2010, September 16). Method and Material

for Manufacturing Fiber Cement Board. Retrieved from

http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100234491#ixzz2er2f4QYG

Moslemi, A. (2008). Technology and Market Considerations for Fiber Cement

Composites. University of Idaho, Madrid, Spain. Presented to 11th International

Inorganic-Bonded Fiber Composites Conference.

Mussel Shell to be Used as Raw Material in Hollow Block Making. (2013). Retrieve

from http://leytesamardaily.net/2013/03/mussel-shell-to-be-used-as-raw-material-in-

hollow-block-making/

48

Natural Aquaculture Sector Overview. (2013). Rerieved from

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_philippines/en

Obillo, A. (2013, June). Green Mussel (Perna Viridis) Shells as an Additive Component

in Hollow Block Making. Studymode, p5. Retrieved from

http://www.studymode.com/essays/Green-Mussel-Perna-Viridis-Shells-As-

1741796.html

Overview of Philippine Aquaculture. (1999). Retrieved from

http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x6943e/x6943e06.html

Rules and Regulations Governing the Culture of Mussels (Tahong). ( 1982, January 15).

Retrieved from http://www.bfar.da.gov.ph/pages/legislation/FAO/fao138.html

Saxena M., Pappu A., Sharma A., Haque R., & Wankhede S. (2011). Composite

Materials from Natural Resources: Recent Trends and Future Potentials, Advances in

Composite Materials - Analysis of Natural and Man-Made Materials. Retrieved from

http://www.intechopen.com/books/advances-in-composite-materials-analysis-of-

natural-andman-made-materials/composite-materials-from-natural-resources-recent-

trends-and-future-potentials

Sciencefairadventure, (2007). Composition of a Shell. Retrieved from

http://www.sciencefairadventure.com/ProjectDetail.aspx?ProjectID=172

49

APPENDIX A

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

ASTM - American Standards and Testing Methods

b - width of specimen, in. (mm)

d - thickness (depth of specimen), in. (mm)

DSWT - Direct Screw Withdrawal Test

E - stiffness (apparent MOE), psi (kPa)

F - final weight when oven-dry, g

K - 1, when SI units of weight and measurement are used

or 0.061, when SI units of weight and inch-pound units of measurement are

used.

L - length of specimen, in. (mm)

L - length of span, in. (mm)

L1 - Screw hold capacity trial 1, kg



MC - Moisture Content

MCSGT - Moisture Content and Specific Gravity Test

MOE - Modulus of Elasticity

MOR - Modulus of Rupture

P - maximum Load

P1 - load at proportional limit, lbf (N)

50

PGMS - Pulverized Green Mussel Shells

PNS - Philippine National Standards

R - modulus of rupture, psi (kPa)

SBT - Static Bending Test

SG - Specific Gravity

SSD - Saturated Surface Dry

t - thickness of specimen, in. (mm)

Tf - final thickness

Ti - initial thickness

TS - Thickness Swelling

UTM - Universal Testing Machine

W - initial weight, g

w - width of specimen, in. (mm)

WA - Water Absorption

Was - weight of sample after soaking for 2 plus 22hours (grams)

WATST - Water Absorption and Thickness Swelling Test

Wbs - weight of sample before soaking for 2 plus 22hours (grams)

y1 - center deflection at proportional limit load, in. (mm)

51

APPENDIX B

LIST OF FORMULAS

Board Mass

(3.1)

Moisture Content

(3.2)

Specific Gravity

(3.3)

Water Absorption

(3.4)

Thickness Swelling

(3.5)

Modulus of Rupture

(3.6)

Modulus of Elasticity

(3.7)

Face-Screw Hold Strength

(3.8)

52

APPENDIX C

TABLES OF RESULTS FROM PHYSICAL AND MECHANICAL TESTS

Table 3.1. Properties of the Materials*

MATERIAL DENSITY, g/cc SOURCE

Ordinary Portland

Cement 1.82 ASTM Test

Abaca Fiber* 0.49 PTRI-DOST

Pulverized Green

Mussel Shell 2.8

Bironite: A New Source of Nuclei by

Snow

Ordinary Sand 1.48

Inflence of Abaca and Banana Fiber on

the Physical and Mechanical Property of

Ferrocement by Medrano et al.

*Note: Abaca Fiber is a commercially available thus no Grade of the material has been

provided

Table 3.2. Mix Proportions*

Specimen Cement, g Water, g Abaca

Fiber, g

Sand, g PGMS, g

W/C = 0.4

A 418.605 167.442 104.651 167.442 41.861

B 418.605 167.442 104.651 125.581 83.721

W/C = 0.5

C 400.000 200.000 100.000 160.000 40.000

D 400.000 200.000 100.000 120.000 80.000

W/C = 0.6

E 382.979 229.787 95.745 153.192 38.298

F 382.979 229.787 95.745 114.894 76.596

*Note: All the specimens are computed with based on cement: sand of 2:1, cement: abaca

fiber ratio of 100:25; varying PGMS: sand ratio of 20:100 and 40:100; and three

varying water-cement ratios of 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6.

Table 4.1. Philippine National Standards for Medium Density Board*

Physical Properties Mechanical Properties

Water Absorption Thickness Swelling Modulus of Rupture

Face Screw Hold g

30% and lesser 10% and lesser 40kgf/cm2 and

greater

40kgf and greater

53

Table 4.2. Moisture Content of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board*

*Note: All were tested in accordance to the ASTM D 1037-99 with

curing days of 28.

Specimen Trial

WEIGHT, g

MC, % Initial

after 24-h

oven-drying @

103 2C

A

1 29.90 27.40 9.12

2 26.20 24.40 7.38

3 28.10 25.40 10.63

AVE 9.04

B

1 29.30 27.50 6.55

2 34.40 32.50 5.85

3 38.70 37.20 4.03

AVE 5.47

C

1 31.40 29.60 6.08

2 30.70 29.40 4.42

3 35.50 32.30 9.91

AVE 6.80

D

1 34.00 32.40 4.94

2 34.30 32.60 5.21

3 32.30 31.20 3.53

AVE 4.56

E

1 34.10 31.90 6.90

2 32.30 29.60 9.12

3 36.30 33.40 8.68

AVE 8.23

F

1 24.60 22.60 8.85

2 25.80 24.00 7.50

3 23.60 22.40 5.36

AVE 7.24

54

Table 4.3. Specific Gravity of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board*

Specimen Trial

Weight DIMENSION, mm

SG after 24-h

Length Width Thickness oven-drying @ 103

2C

A

1 27.40 49.95 49.85 8.05 1.37

2 24.40 48.95 51.50 7.81 1.24

3 25.40 48.75 49.80 7.55 1.39

AVE 1.33

B

1 27.50 47.40 48.10 10.20 1.18

2 32.50 50.40 50.10 9.78 1.32

3 37.20 52.80 50.00 9.85 1.43

AVE 1.31

C

1 29.60 46.80 47.00 10.20 1.32

2 29.40 48.35 48.08 9.70 1.30

3 32.30 47.40 48.60 10.08 1.39

AVE 1.34

D

1 32.40 48.85 48.85 10.13 1.34

2 32.60 47.55 47.40 9.14 1.58

3 31.20 49.40 48.85 8.76 1.48

AVE 1.47

E

1 31.90 50.85 49.45 9.40 1.35

2 29.60 48.10 52.40 9.60 1.22

3 33.40 51.45 51.45 9.75 1.29

AVE 1.29

F

1 22.60 49.80 47.00 7.25 1.33

2 24.00 50.00 48.00 7.48 1.34

3 22.40 49.20 48.60 6.53 1.44

AVE 1.37

*Note: All were tested in accordance to the ASTM D 1037-99 with curing days of 28

55

Table 4.4. Water Absorption of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board*

Specimen Trial

Weight WA, % Evaluation

Initial

after

2hrs

soaking

after

2plus

22hrs

soaking

after

2-h

after 2

plus

22-h

Based from

PNS 230:1989

A

1 41.00 47.40 48.70 15.61 18.78

2 40.00 44.70 45.40 11.75 13.50

3 45.00 50.30 51.20 11.78 13.78

AVE 13.05 15.35

56

Table 4.5. Thickness Swelling of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board*

Specimen Trial

THICKNESS, mm TS, % Evaluation

Initial

after

2hrs

soaking

after

2plus

22hrs

soaking

after 2-h

after 2

plus 22-

h

Based from

PNS 230:1989

A

1 6.80 6.88 6.94 1.18 2.03

2 7.20 7.35 7.23 2.08 0.35

3 7.20 7.35 7.91 2.08 9.90

AVE 1.78 4.09

57

Table 4.6. Modulus of Rupture of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board*

Speci

men Trial

DIMENSION, mm LOAD, kgf MOR Evaluation

L W H

@propor

tional

limit, P1

maxim

um

load, P

R =

3PL/

2bd

Based from

PNS 230:1989

A

1 99.80 48.90 9.70 12.13 14.55 47.34

2 99.80 50.50 9.60 13.34 15.36 49.40

3 99.40 50.50 9.75 7.00 5.25 16.32

AVE 37.69 >40 FAILED

B

1 98.80 47.70 9.30 5.66 6.06 21.78

2 98.80 50.70 11.48 9.30 9.70 21.53

3 97.40 53.00 9.75 12.93 12.53 36.33


C

1 49.80 49.50 10.25 13.74 14.95 21.48

2 101.00 48.60 9.80 7.68 5.25 17.05

3 99.30 46.60 10.39 9.70 6.87 20.35


D

1 99.70 49.40 9.10 6.06 6.47 23.64

2 97.90 46.70 9.03 4.04 4.45 17.16

3 97.20 48.80 8.00 2.02 2.43 11.32


E

1 103.20 49.30 8.63 4.04 4.85 20.47

2 103.80 48.60 8.66 2.83 4.45 18.98

3 104.30 51.00 8.75 6.87 7.28 29.15


F

1 121.00 47.80 7.83 6.06 6.87 42.61

2 110.70 49.60 7.73 5.25 5.66 31.74

3 110.20 49.20 7.43 1.62 3.23 19.71


*Note: All were tested in accordance to the ASTM D 1037-99 specimens soaked before

test for 24-hour period.

58

Table 4.7. Modulus of Elasticity of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS board*

Specimen Trial

DIMENSION, mm LOAD, kgf y MOE

Length Width Height

@propor

tional

limit, P1

maxim

um

load, P

Deflecti

on, (in

mm) E =

PL/4bdy

A

1 99.80 48.90 9.70 12.13 14.55 1.20 551.76

2 99.80 50.50 9.60 13.34 15.36 1.45 501.74

3 99.40 50.50 9.75 7.00 5.25 1.50 240.06

B

1 98.80 47.70 9.30 5.66 6.06 0.95 367.07

2 98.80 50.70 11.48 9.30 9.70 1.30 220.72

3 97.40 53.00 9.75 12.93 12.53 2.05 290.96

C

1 49.80 49.50 10.25 13.74 14.95 0.70 111.52

2 101.00 48.60 9.80 7.68 5.25 2.10 201.94

3 99.30 46.60 10.39 9.70 6.87 1.10 405.31

D

1 99.70 49.40 9.10 6.06 6.47 0.90 439.67

2 97.90 46.70 9.03 4.04 4.45 1.20 225.71

3 97.20 48.80 8.00 2.02 2.43 1.05 173.43

E

1 103.20 49.30 8.63 4.04 4.85 3.45 99.80

2 103.80 48.60 8.66 2.83 4.45 3.60 68.21

3 104.30 51.00 8.75 6.87 7.28 1.10 508.58

F

1 121.00 47.80 7.83 6.06 6.87 2.05 560.86

2 110.70 49.60 7.73 5.25 5.66 2.00 382.14

3 110.20 49.20 7.43 1.62 3.23 2.90 90.82

*Note: All were tested in accordance to the ASTM D 1037-99 specimens soaked before

test for 24-hour period.

59

Table 4.8. Direct Screw Withdrawal Resistance of Cement-Abaca Fiber-PGMS

board*

Specimen Load 1, Load 2, Load 3, Average

Evaluation

Based from

kg kg kg kg PNS 230:1989

A 137.42 119.64 96.2 117.75 >40 PASSED

B 40.42 92.15 58.2 63.59 >40 PASSED

C 16.17 26.68 12.93 18.59 >40 FAILED

D 54.16 71.14 126.11 83.8 >40 PASSED

E 51.74 64.67 67.9 61.44 >40 PASSED

F 48.5 28.29 33.14 36.65 >40 FAILED

*Note: All were tested in accordance to the ASTM D 1037-99 specifically Method A: 2

plus 22h Submersion Period with curing days of 28

60

APPENDIX D

DOCUMENTATION

I. Gathering of the Materials

Purchasing Green Mussel Shells and Abaca Fiber

Cleaning the Green Mussel Shells

(Eliminating other elements on the shell using knife)

61

Washing the Green Mussel Shells with detergents

Calcination of the Green Mussel Shells

62

II. Fabrication of the Specimens

Construction of the molder

Fabrication of the specimens

63

Curing of the specimens

III. Testing of the Specimens

Trimming of the Specimens

64

Physical Tests including WATST and MCSG

Mechanical Tests including SBT and DSWT

65

APPENDIX E

DETAILED COMPUTATIONS

Computation of Mix Proportion of Specimen A

Target board mass, m = 675 g

for Cement material,

675 g (

) = 385.7143 g

for Abaca fiber,

675 g (

) = 96.4286 g

for Non-cement material (Sand and PGMS),

675 g (

) = 192.8571 g

for Sand,

192.8571 g (

) = 154.2857 g

for PGMS,

192.8571 g (

) = 38.5714 g

For total mass computed,

66

Increase each of the materials volume by 28.2 % to maintain the target volume.

CEMENT 211.9309 cc

x 1.07 x

1.82

=

412.7142 g

ABACA FIBER 196.7931 cc 0.49 103.1786 g

SAND 104.2471 cc 1.48 165.0857 g

PGMS 13.7755 cc 2.8 41.2714 g

for water-cement ratio of A which is 0.4:

WATER = 412.7142 g (0.4) = 165.0857 g

For Admixtures,

*2% Cement for Calcium Chloride and

5% of Superplasticizer

CALCIUM CHLORIDE = 412.7142 g (0.02) = 8.2543 g

SUPERPLASTICIZER = 412.7142 g (0.05) = 20.6357 g

562.5000 cc

526.7466 cc

35.7534 cc (7 % of 526.7466)

67

Computation of Mix Proportion of Specimen B



675 g (

) = 385.7143 g

for Abaca fiber,

675 g (

) = 96.4286 g


675 g (

) = 192.8571 g

for Sand,

192.8571 g (

) =115.7143 g

for PGMS,

192.8571 g (

) = 77.1428 g


562.5000 cc

514.4603 cc

48.0397 cc (9.4 % of 514.4603)

68


CEMENT 211.9309 cc

x 1.094 x

1.82

=

421.9714 g

ABACA FIBER 196.7931 cc 0.49 105.4929 g

SAND 78.1853 cc 1.48 126.5914 g

PGMS 27.5510 cc 2.8 84.3942 g

for water-cement ratio of B which is 0.4:

WATER = 421.9714 g (0.4) = 168.7886 g

For Admixtures,





69

Computation of Mix Proportion of Specimen C



675 g (

) = 385.7143 g

for Abaca fiber,

675 g (

) = 96.4286 g


675 g (

) = 192.8571 g

for Sand,

192.8571 g (

) = 154.2857 g

for PGMS,

192.8571 g (

) = 38.5714 g


562.5000 cc

526.7466 cc

35.7534 cc (7 % of 526.7466)

70


CEMENT 211.9309 cc

x 1.07 x

1.82

=

412.7142 g

ABACA FIBER 196.7931 cc 0.49 103.1786 g

SAND 104.2471 cc 1.48 165.0857 g

PGMS 13.7755 cc 2.8 41.2714 g

for water-cement ratio of C which is 0.5:

WATER = 412.7142 g (0.5) = 206.3571 g

For Admixtures,





71

Computation of Mix Proportion of Specimen D



675 g (

) = 385.7143 g

for Abaca fiber,

675 g (

) = 96.4286 g


675 g (

) = 192.8571 g

for Sand,

192.8571 g (

) =115.7143 g

for PGMS,

192.8571 g (

) = 77.1428 g


562.5000 cc

514.4603 cc

48.0397 cc (9.4 % of 514.4603)

72


CEMENT 211.9309 cc

x 1.094 x

1.82

=

421.9714 g

ABACA FIBER 196.7931 cc 0.49 105.4929 g

SAND 78.1853 cc 1.48 126.5914 g

PGMS 27.5510 cc 2.8 84.3942 g

for water-cement ratio of D which is 0.5:

WATER = 421.9714 g (0.5) = 210.9857 g

For Admixtures,





73

Computation of Mix Proportion of Specimen E



675 g (

) = 385.7143 g

for Abaca fiber,

675 g (

) = 96.4286 g


675 g (

) = 192.8571 g

for Sand,

192.8571 g (

) = 154.2857 g

for PGMS,

192.8571 g (

) = 38.5714 g


562.5000 cc

526.7466 cc

35.7534 cc (7 % of 526.7466)

74


CEMENT 211.9309 cc

x 1.07 x

1.82

=

412.7142 g

ABACA FIBER 196.7931 cc 0.49 103.1786 g

SAND 104.2471 cc 1.48 165.0857 g

PGMS 13.7755 cc 2.8 41.2714 g

for water-cement ratio of E which is 0.6:

WATER = 412.7142 g (0.6) = 247.6285 g

For Admixtures,





75

Computation of Mix Proportion of Specimen F



675 g (

) = 385.7143 g

for Abaca fiber,

675 g (

) = 96.4286 g


675 g (

) = 192.8571 g

for Sand,

192.8571 g (

) =115.7143 g

for PGMS,

192.8571 g (

) = 77.1428 g


562.5000 cc

514.4603 cc

48.0397 cc (9.4 % of 514.4603)

76


CEMENT 211.9309 cc

x 1.094 x

1.82

=

421.9714 g

ABACA FIBER 196.7931 cc 0.49 105.4929 g

SAND 78.1853 cc 1.48 126.5914 g

PGMS 27.5510 cc 2.8 84.3942 g

for water-cement ratio of F which is 0.6:

WATER = 421.9714 g (0.6) = 253.1828 g

For Admixtures,





Property Characterization of Abaca Fiber Reinforced

Documents

Transcript of Property Characterization of Abaca Fiber Reinforced