sustainability

Article
Recycled-Textile-Waste-Based Sustainable Bricks: A Mechanical,
Thermal, and Qualitative Life Cycle Overview
Hafsa Jamshaid 1, * , Ambar Shah 1 , Muhammad Shoaib 1 and Rajesh Kumar Mishra 2, *

1 School of Engineering and Technology, National Textile University, Faislabad 37610, Pakistan;
ambarshah1999@gmail.com (A.S.); ranashoaib.shoaib@gmail.com (M.S.)
2 Department of Material Science and Manufacturing Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Czech University of
Life Sciences Prague, Kamycka 129, Suchdol, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic
* Correspondence: hafsa@ntu.edu.pk (H.J.); mishrar@tf.czu.cz (R.K.M.)

Abstract: The textile industry, renowned for its comfort-providing role, is undergoing a significant
transformation to address its environmental impact. The escalating environmental impact of the
textile industry, characterised by substantial contributions to global carbon emissions, wastewater,
and the burgeoning issue of textile waste, demands urgent attention. This study aims at identifying
the feasibility of the future use of textile scraps in the construction and architecture industry by
analysing the effect of different binders. In this study, synthetic knitted post-consumer-waste fabrics
were taken from a waste market for use as a reinforcement, and different binders were used as the
matrix. In the experiment phase, the waste fabrics were mixed with synthetic binders and hydraulic
binders to form brick samples. The mechanical and thermal properties of these samples were tested
and compared with those of clay bricks. In terms of mechanical properties, unsaturated polyester
resin (UPR) samples showed the highest mechanical strength, while acrylic glue (GL) samples had the
lowest mechanical strength. White cement (WC) samples showed moderate mechanical properties.
Through several tests, it was observed that UPR samples showed the highest values of tensile,
bending, and compressive strengths, i.e., 0.111 MPa, 0.134 MPa, and 3.114 MPa, respectively. For
WC, the tensile, bending, and compressive strengths were 0.064 MPa, 0.106 MPa, and 2.670 MPa,
respectively. For GL, the least favourable mechanical behaviour was observed, i.e., 0.0162 MPa,
0.0492 MPa, and 1.542 MPa, respectively. In terms of thermal conductivity, WC samples showed
Citation: Jamshaid, H.; Shah, exceptional resistance to heat transfer. They showed a minimum temperature rise of 54.3 ◦ C after
A.; Shoaib, M.; Mishra, R.K. 15 min, as compared to 57.3 ◦ C for GL-based samples and 58.1 ◦ C for UPR. When it comes to
Recycled-Textile-Waste-Based
polymeric binders, UPR showed better thermal insulation properties, whereas GL allowed for faster
Sustainable Bricks: A Mechanical,
heat transfer for up to 10 min of heating. This study explores a circular textile system by assessing the
Thermal, and Qualitative Life Cycle
potential of using textile waste as a building material, contributing to greener interior design. This
Overview. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036.
study demonstrated the usefulness of adding short, recycled PET fibres as a reinforcement in UPR
https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104036
composites. The use of the PET fibre avoids the need to use a surface treatment to improve interfacial
Academic Editor: Humberto Varum adhesion to the UPR matrix because of the chemical affinity between the two polyesters, i.e., the PET
Received: 30 March 2024 fibre and the unsaturated polyester resin. This can find application in the construction field, such as
Revised: 30 April 2024 in the reinforcement of wooden structural elements, infill walls, and partition walls, or in furniture or
Accepted: 9 May 2024 for decorative purposes.
Published: 11 May 2024
Keywords: recycling; sustainable textile bricks; decorative bricks; waste management; resource
conservation; responsible consumption; cradle-to-grave; qualitative life cycle overview

Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
1. Introduction
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
The growing human population and advancements in technology are highly respon-
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// sible for high energy consumption, pollution, waste, greenhouse gas generation, and
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ resource depletion. As mentioned by Global Footprint Network in 2018, “if we keep on
4.0/). using resource at current rate, we will need 3 times more of the resources available currently

Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104036 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 2 of 15

on planet Earth to meet our yearly demands” [1]. The increase in population and living
standards has increased the amount of textile waste produced every year. There are several
large brick-manufacturing companies that are the primary sources of air pollution in the
world. They use trash, tires, textiles, and plastics as fuel. The global textile sector is also
the highest-waste-producing sector, amounting to 55% of total global waste. Nowadays,
reusing textile waste is an important step that can contribute to environmental sustain-
ability in several countries. Construction is a field that can reuse this waste in the form
of bricks. Using this waste in the manufacturing of construction materials can also lead
to the minimisation of landfill use and reduce the consumption of natural resources and
energy [2].
The textile industry is the world’s second-largest industrial polluter after the oil and
petrochemical industry, amounting to 14% of landfill material [3]. The clothing and textile
industry is notorious for contributing to environmental degradation, including greenhouse
gas emissions and the generation of wastewater and solid waste at various stages of
production and along the supply chain. The harmful impact of this growing volume of
waste is increasing our environmental footprint [3]. It has been observed that textile waste
generation has increased due to fast-changing fashion, rises in population, and an increased
consumption of clothes per person in wealthier families. The escalating environmental
impact of the textile industry demands urgent attention. It has also been noted that 90% of
post-consumer textile waste is reusable [4]. Circular business concepts for textile creation,
sharing, recycling, and reuse have recently emerged. Textile waste might be regenerated
in a circular economy, and different methodologies can be used to maximise its life cycle
duration. In order to reduce the environmental and climate challenges caused by the textile
industry while retaining its economic and social advantages, a systematic shift towards
circularity is required. A lot of research is being conducted to decrease textile waste by
reusing it in furnishings and interior applications. Reusing textiles is a better practice in
terms of environmental protection and is 20–100 times more beneficial than incineration
(lower emissions) and chemical recycling [4].
This predicament prompts a critical examination of the current disposal practices and
accentuates the pressing need for transformative solutions. This triggers a compelling
call to action for stakeholders, emphasising the gravity of the situation and the crucial
role of sustainable practices in mitigating the environmental footprint of the textile sector.
As the industry grapples with the inadequacies of traditional methods like incineration
and landfilling, a change in basic assumptions towards sustainable waste management
becomes imperative. At present, systemic solutions and a shift towards a circular economy
centred around the reuse or minimisation of waste have been an important point for
the textile industry. The profound implications of this challenge underscore the need for
innovative strategies, particularly in the integration of textile waste into emerging industrial
processes [5].
The global construction market is expected to grow in the next few years, and it is
driven by the growing population and increasing urbanisation. The size of the global
construction industry was USD 6.4 trillion in 2020, and it is expected to reach 14.4 trillion by
2030, which is almost twice as high as it was in 2020. The rising population has heightened
the demand for innovative building materials. To minimise the depletion of resources,
research is being conducted on construction/furniture materials that can be sustainably
produced [6]. To address this need, certain types of industrial waste are being repurposed
in the production of construction materials. The accumulation of unmanaged waste poses
significant environmental challenges. Utilising this waste in construction not only is cost-
effective but also promotes environmental sustainability. The textile and construction
industries are significant contributors to excessive carbon dioxide emissions (about 12%),
necessitating sustainable solutions for the future [7].
Researchers have used different types of waste in concrete mixes to develop bricks,
e.g., cuttings of textile waste [8], sludge from textile effluent treatment plants [9], cotton
micro-dust waste [10], polyester/cotton fabric waste [11], glass wool waste [12], and
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 3 of 15

cotton stalk fibre waste [13]. It was observed that using textile wastes in different ratios
in construction materials results in several types of benefits, including higher thermal
insulation (increased by 3–4%), enhanced noise protection, and lower costs [14]. Kamble
and Behera developed sustainable composites reinforced with recycled cotton shoddy,
waste glass fibre preforms, and needle-punched nonwoven sheets from jute in furniture
manufacturing as an alternative to timber [15]. Up to 5% improvement in mechanical
properties was observed by adding 3% of cellulosic fillers by volume.
Marlet and her studio FabBRICK used fabric scraps mixed with eco-friendly starch-
based glue and moulded into bricks through a mechanical compression technique [16–19].
Improvements of up to 4% and 7% were observed in tensile and bending performances,
respectively. Andreu used acrylic fabric selvedge wastes to make decorative bricks. The
fabric waste was mixed with water-based solvent-free acrylic resin, and an improvement of
2–3% in thermal insulation was observed [20]. Ackermans designed carbon-neutral fabric
bricks by utilising wastes of fabrics, buttons, zippers, and other trimmings. An overall
reduction in CO2 emission was reported [21]. Combining these bricks with insulation
materials results in building homes that would not require heating and cooling, thus
leading to carbon neutrality [22]. E. Kagitci conducted research on the upcycling of textile
waste as a sustainable building material for architectural design. To produce bricks of this
material, 100% cotton, silk, and viscose fabric wastes were combined with starch-based
glue. Up to 30% cost saving was predicted [19]. D Trajkovic et al. used polyester apparel
cuttings waste in insulation applications. All such bricks manufactured exhibited 10%
enhanced fire resistance, a 22% increase in moisture resistance, a 25% increase in acoustic
insulation, increased life span, easier recyclability, and higher durability. These bricks were
proposed to be used for making partition walls in a room, decorative walls, lamps, stools,
shelves, tables, and other types of home furnishings [23].
Despite the potential of utilising textile wastes in the production of bricks, several
areas of research remain unexplored. The reported studies provide encouraging results, but
the understanding of the effect of different binders on the quality of bricks was not reported;
therefore, it is the subject of the present study. The available literature lacks understanding
and comparisons of how different binders would affect the qualities and performance of
textile-waste-based bricks. The best available binders for integrating textile waste, the
physical properties of the bricks, their resilience in different environmental conditions, the
impact of environmental changes, economic viability, and the practicality of large-scale
brick manufacturing remain unanswered [24,25].
Both the textile and construction industries generate huge amounts of carbon diox-
ide, create large-scale environmental pollution, and consume huge amounts of natural
resources. This study explores a methodology for upcycling post-consumer textile wastes
for producing sustainable bricks. The purpose of this work is to highlight the importance
of integrating textile wastes into civil engineering and construction materials and, thus,
to reduce the carbon footprint left by textile and civil/architectural industries. It aims at
developing a sustainable building design and construction practice. In this work, several
upcycled interior architectural samples were developed in combination with different types
of binders. Besides tests of thermal insulation, tests of mechanical properties, e.g., tensile,
flexural, and compression tests for the prepared samples, were performed. In addition,
traditional clay bricks were used for the assessment and comparison of a qualitative life
cycle. A technology roadmap is demonstrated in Figure 1.
 Sustainability
Sustainability 2024,
2024, 16, 16, x FOR
x FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 44 of
of 16
16
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 4 of 15

Figure 1. A technology roadmap for recycled-textile-waste-based sustainable bricks.

Figure 1. A technology roadmap for recycled-textile-waste-based sustainable bricks.
Figure 1. A technology roadmap for recycled-textile-waste-based sustainable bricks.
2.2.Materials
Materialsand
andMethods
Methods
2.2.1.
Materials
2.1. and Methods
Materials
Materials
For
Forthis
thisstudy,
2.1. Materials study,wastes
wastesofofsynthetic
syntheticknitted
knittedfabric were
fabric wereprocured
procured from a local
from market.
a local market.
For binding
ForFor
binding purposes, synthetic
purposes, binders,
synthetic e.g.,
binders, unsaturated
e.g., polyester
unsaturated resin
polyester(UPR)
resin
this study, wastes of synthetic knitted fabric were procured from a local market.and acrylic
(UPR) and
glue (GL),
acrylic and
glue hydraulic
(GL), and binders, binders,
hydraulic white cement
white (WC),
cement plaster
(WC), ofplaster
Paris, of
and limeand
Paris, (L),lime
were(L),
For binding purposes, synthetic binders, e.g., unsaturated polyester resin (UPR) and
used
wereas demonstrated
used in Figure
as demonstrated 2. These
in binders,
Figure binders
2.white
These werewere
binders mixed to achieve an anaccurate
acrylic glue (GL), and hydraulic cement (WC), mixed
plastertoofachieve
Paris, and accurate
lime (L),
proportion
proportion for maintaining
for maintainingthe
thematerial consistency.
material consistency.
were used as demonstrated in Figure 2. These binders were mixed to achieve an accurate
proportion for maintaining the material consistency.

Figure2.2.Brick
Figure Bricksamples
samplesusing
usingwhite
white cement (WC),
cement unsaturated
(WC), polyester
unsaturated resin
polyester (UPR),
resin acrylic
(UPR), glue
acrylic glue
(GL),plaster
(GL), plasterofofParis,
Paris,and
andlime
lime(L).
(L).
Figure 2. Brick samples using white cement (WC), unsaturated polyester resin (UPR), acrylic glue
(GL), plaster of Paris, and lime (L).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 5 of 15

Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 16

However, among all these binders, only three led to the successful manufacturing of
brick samples, namely white cement (WC), unsaturated polyester resin (UPR), and acrylic
glue (GL). Mixing of successful blends (fabric scraps with binders) was carried out as per
standardHowever,
recipesamong
givenall
in these
Tablebinders, onlyaccelerator
1. A cobalt three led toand
the Methyl
successful manufacturing
Ethyl of
Ketone Peroxide
brick samples, namely white cement (WC), unsaturated polyester resin (UPR), and acrylic
(MEKP) were used for curing UPR as per supplier specifications. The mixtures were then
glue (GL). Mixing of successful blends (fabric scraps with binders) was carried out as per
filled into the moulds, and pressure was applied to form the bricks/tiles as shown in
standard recipes given in Table 1. A cobalt accelerator and Methyl Ethyl Ketone Peroxide
Figure 3, with specific dimensions (25 cm × 10 cm × 2.5 cm) according to different test
(MEKP) were used for curing UPR as per supplier specifications. The mixtures were then
standards These samples were then dried and cured for 24 h for final stabilisation. All the
filled into the moulds, and pressure was applied to form the bricks/tiles as shown in Fig-
samples were dried and cured in an open atmosphere. The weathering conditions might
ure 3, with specific dimensions (25 cm × 10 cm × 2.5 cm) according to different test stand-
affect the curing process.
ards These samples were then dried and cured for 24 h for final stabilisation. All the sam-
ples were dried and cured in an open atmosphere. The weathering conditions might affect
Table 1. Recipes for GL, WC, and UPR brick samples.
the curing process.
Binder Recipe
Table 1. Recipes for GL, WC, and UPR brick samples.
Fabric Glue Water
Acrylic Glue (GL)
Binder Recipe
100 g 500 g 500 mL
Fabric Glue Water
Acrylic Glue (GL) Fabric Cement Water
White Cement (WC) 100 g 500 g 500 mL
100 g Fabric 500 gCement 300 mL
Water
White Cement (WC)
Unsaturated Polyester Fabric 100 gResin 500 g
Cobalt 300 mL
MEKP
Resin (UPR) 100 g Fabric450 g Resin 8 drops
Cobalt MEKP
14 drops
Unsaturated Polyester Resin (UPR)
100 g 450 g 8 drops 14 drops

Figure 3. Schematic for the fabrication of textile-waste-based bricks.

Figure 3. Schematic for the fabrication of textile-waste-based bricks.
 Sustainability2024,
Sustainability 2024,16,
16,4036
x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 16
6 of 15

2.2.Testing
2.2. Testing
2.2.1.
2.2.1.Mechanical
MechanicalTest
Test
To
Toevaluate
evaluatethe themechanical
mechanicalproperties
propertiesofofthetheprepared
preparedbrick
bricksamples,
samples,tensile,
tensile,flexural,
flexural,
and compression tests were performed using a Digital-Display Hydraulic
and compression tests were performed using a Digital-Display Hydraulic Universal Universal Testing
Test-
Machine
ing Machine (UTS International Co., Ltd, Zhangzhou, China) as shown in Figure 4.size
(UTS International Co., Ltd., Zhangzhou, China) as shown in Figure 4. The The
ofsize
theoftest
thespecimens was determined
test specimens was determined according to ASTM
according C 67-03a
to ASTM [26]. [26].
C 67-03a To evaluate the
To evaluate
resistance to axial
the resistance to stresses, tensile tensile
axial stresses, tests were
testsperformed for the brick
were performed samples.
for the The samples
brick samples. The
were subjected
samples were to a 3-pointtoflexural
subjected testflexural
a 3-point to determine
test totheir bendingtheir
determine behaviour
bendingand flexural
behaviour
strength.
and flexuralThe strength.
viability ofThethe brick samples
viability for construction
of the brick samples for applications
construction was determined
applications was
by performing the compression tests. The loading speed was
determined by performing the compression tests. The loading speed was maintained maintained at 0.1 kN/sat
(maximum load 100 kN).
0.1 kN/s (maximum loadFive specimens
100 kN). were tested
Five specimens to determine
were the average
tested to determine thevalue of
average
each parameter. The CV% was found to be lower than 5% in
value of each parameter. The CV% was found to be lower than 5% in each case.each case.

Figure4.4.Mechanical
Figure Mechanicaland
andthermal
thermaltesting
testingofofthe
thesample
samplebricks.
bricks.

2.2.2.
2.2.2.Thermal
ThermalConductivity
ConductivityTestTest
Thermal
Thermal conductivity testswere
conductivity tests werealso
alsoperformed
performedfor forthe
theprepared
preparedbrick
bricksamples.
samples.TheThe
specimens
specimenswere wereheated
heatedby byaaheat
heatgungunasasshown
shownininFigure
Figure4.4.The
Thethermal
thermalproperties
propertieswerewere
determined
determinedbybyusing usingstandard
standard ČSN
ČSN ENEN
ISOISO10211 (730551)
10211 [27].[27].
(730551) For this
For test,
this atest,
heating gun
a heating
was held 5 cm away from the sample, and a temperature
gun was held 5 cm away from the sample, and a temperature sensor was sensor was held on the other side
held on the other
atside
a distance of 7.5 cm.
at◦ a distance Thecm.
of 7.5 heating temperature
The heating of the heat
temperature gunheat
of the 450 ◦was
was gun C (in450
the°C
range of
(in the
40–450 C). The temperature on the other side of the brick was checked after
range of 40–450 °C). The temperature on the other side of the brick was checked after 5 5 min, 7.5 min,
10 min,
min, 7.5and
min,1510min.
min,This
and measurement determined the
15 min. This measurement transmission
determined of thermal energy
the transmission of ther-
from one surface of the material to the opposite surface.
mal energy from one surface of the material to the opposite surface.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 7 of 15
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16

3. Results and Discussion

3. Results
3.1. and Properties
Mechanical Discussion
3.1. Mechanical
The averageProperties
results obtained from the above-mentioned tests are given in Table 2.
The average results obtained from the above-mentioned tests are given in Table 2.
Table 2. Mechanical testing results of the developed brick samples.
Table 2. Mechanical testing results of the developed brick samples.
Tensile Strength Bending Strength Compressive Strength
Tensile Strength Bending Strength Compressive Strength
Tests
Tests LoadLoad Strength
StrengthStrength
Strength LoadLoadStrength
2)
StrengthStrength
Strength LoadLoad Strength
2)
StrengthStrength
Strength
2)
(kN) (MPa) (kg/cm (kN) (MPa) (kg/cm (kN) (MPa) (kg/cm
(kN) (MPa) (kg/cm )
2 (kN) (MPa) 2 (kg/cm ) (kN) (MPa)
2 (kg/cm )
GL
GL 0.4050.405 0.01620.0162 0.1650.165 1.2301.230 0.04920.0492 0.5010.501 38.564
38.564 1.542 1.542 15.720
15.720
WC
WC 1.5931.593 0.064 0.064 0.6490.649 2.6502.650 0.106 0.106 1.0801.080 66.756
66.756 2.670 2.670 27.220
27.220
UPR
UPR 2.7662.766 0.111 0.111 1.1201.120 3.3513.351 0.134 0.134 1.3661.366 77.858
77.858 3.114 3.114 31.753
31.753

With reference to the results of tensile strength given in Table 2, all the brick samples
Withhuge
showed reference
gaps to
in the
theirresults of tensile Through
performances. strength repeated
given in Table
tests, 2, all the
it was brick samples
observed that
showed huge gaps in their performances. Through repeated tests,
UPR-based samples showed the highest values for tensile, bending, and compressive it was observed that
UPR-based samples showed the highest values for tensile, bending,
strengths, i.e., 0.111 MPa, 0.134 MPa, and 3.114 MPa respectively. For WC-based brick and compressive
strengths, i.e.,tensile,
samples, the 0.111 bending,
MPa, 0.134 andMPa, and 3.114
compressive MPa respectively.
strengths were observed FortoWC-based
be 0.064 MPa,brick
samples,
0.106 MPa, and 2.670 MPa, respectively. For GL-based textile bricks, minimum values MPa,
the tensile, bending, and compressive strengths were observed to be 0.064 of
0.106 MPa, and
mechanical 2.670 MPa,
properties, i.e., respectively. For GL-based
0.0162 MPa, 0.0492 MPa, and textile
1.542bricks, minimum values
MPa, respectively, were of
mechanical
observed. Theproperties,
samples i.e., 0.0162with
prepared MPa,
GL0.0492
binderMPa,
showedand minimum
1.542 MPa,values
respectively, were
for tensile,
observed. The samples prepared with GL binder showed minimum
bending, and compression strength as compared to WC and UPR. Comparative results values for tensile,
bending, and
are further compression
shown in Figurestrength
5a–c. as compared to WC and UPR. Comparative results are
further shown in Figure 5a–c.

(a) (b)

(c)
Figure 5. Mechanical properties of samples: (a) tensile strength, (b) bending strength, (c) compres-
Figure 5. Mechanical properties of samples: (a) tensile strength, (b) bending strength, (c) compres-
sive strength.
sive strength.
Sustainability 2024,
Sustainability 2024, 16,
16, x4036
FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 16
8 of 15

The
TheUPR-based
UPR-based brick
brick samples
samples showed exceptional mechanical performances performances in in tensile,
ten-
sile, bending,
bending, and and compression
compression modes.
modes. ThisThis
typetype of durable
of durable andand long-lasting
long-lasting composite
composite brick
brick material
material was awas a result
result of a stronger
of a stronger cross-linking
cross-linking betweenbetween the molecules
the molecules of theof the fibres
fibres and the
binder/resin
and duringduring
the binder/resin the curing process.
the curing This cross-linking
process. led to an
This cross-linking ledincrease in bonding
to an increase in
bonding
strength,strength, thus making
thus making it difficult
it difficult to separate
to separate the materials
the fabric fabric materials
from thefrom the [28–30].
resin resin
Hence, the
[28–30]. superior
Hence, mechanical
the superior behaviour
mechanical of UPR-based
behaviour bricks, which
of UPR-based required
bricks, which the highest
required
the highest
amount amount
of force of force
to break theto break
bond the bond
formed formed
between thebetween
fabric and theresin,
fabric and
was resin, was
observed. The
SEM images
observed. TheofSEM
the images
tensile-tested brick samplesbrick
of the tensile-tested are shown
samples in are
Figure
shown6. in Figure 6.

(a) GL (b) WC (c) UPR

Figure 6. SEM images of the tensile-tested brick samples using (a) GL, (b) WC, (c) UPR.
Figure 6. SEM images of the tensile-tested brick samples using (a) GL, (b) WC, (c) UPR.

This
Thisstudy
studydemonstrated
demonstratedthe theusefulness
usefulnessofof adding
adding short,
short,recycled
recycled PET PETfibres as as
fibres rein-
rein-
forcement in UPR resin-based composite bricks. The use of PET fibres
forcement in UPR resin-based composite bricks. The use of PET fibres avoided the need for avoided the need
for surface
surface treatment
treatment to improve
to improve the interfacial
the interfacial adhesion
adhesion to theto UPR
the UPRmatrix.matrix.
This This is be- of
is because
cause of the chemical
the chemical affinity between
affinity between similar materials,
similar materials, e.g., PETe.g., PETand
fibres fibres and unsaturated
unsaturated polyester
polyester resin, as depicted
resin, as depicted in previous in previous studies [30].
studies [30].
Despite
Despiteaavisually
visuallyappealing
appealinglook,
look,GL-based
GL-basedbrick
brick samples
samples showed
showed thethe
lowest
lowest me- me-
chanical strengths. Acrylic glues are thermoplastic in nature. Thermoplastic
chanical strengths. Acrylic glues are thermoplastic in nature. Thermoplastic polymers polymers dodo
not
not show
showanyanychemical
chemicalbonding
bondingduring
duringthe thecuring
curingprocess.
process.The Thethermoplastic
thermoplastic nature
nature of of
the binder led to a weaker adhesion between fabric and binder during
the binder led to a weaker adhesion between fabric and binder during the curing process. the curing process.
The
The absence
absenceof ofaastrong
strongchemical
chemicalbondbondresulted
resultedininthe
theformation
formationofofa arelatively
relatively weaker
weaker
composite
compositebrickbrickthatthatcancandeform
deformororbreak
breakeasily
easilywhen
when stresses
stresses areareapplied.
applied. The WC
The WC resin-
resin-
based
based brick
brick samples showed moderate
samples showed moderate mechanical
mechanical properties.
properties. The Thepresence
presenceofofporesporesininthe
the structure
structure of WC-based
of WC-based bricksbricks
during during the curing
the curing process process
impacts impacts their mechanical
their mechanical strength
strength due to the formation of voids and weak zones. These voids
due to the formation of voids and weak zones. These voids act as stress-concentrating act as stress-concen-
trating zones leading
zones leading to the of
to the failure failure of thewhen
the matrix matrix when mechanical
mechanical stresses are stresses
applied.are The
applied.
higher
The
strength of WC-based composite bricks as compared to GL-based samples was due was
higher strength of WC-based composite bricks as compared to GL-based samples to the
due to the formation
formation of silicate thatof silicate
is knownthattoisenhance
known mechanical
to enhance strength.
mechanical strength.
Although theAlthough
WC-based
the WC-based
brick samples did bricknotsamples did not
demonstrate thedemonstrate themechanical
same level of same levelstrength
of mechanical strength
as the UPR-based
as the samples,
brick UPR-based brick
they didsamples, they dida not
not experience experience
mechanical a mechanical
failure failure like
like the GL-based the GL-
samples.
basedThese
samples.scientific observations can provide valuable guidance in the process of select-
These scientific
ing suitable materials observations
for buildingcan applications.
provide valuableThis guidance in the process
also involves careful of select-
evaluation
ing suitable materials for building applications. This also involves
of aesthetic factors vis-à-vis mechanical properties, considering the bonding and curing careful evaluation of
aesthetic factors
methods employed. vis-à-vis mechanical properties, considering the bonding and curing
methods employed.
3.2. Thermal Properties
It is possible to acquire a better understanding of the heat resistance of brick materials
by investigating the thermal transmission behaviour. Textile-based bricks can withstand
high amounts of heat due to their inherent porosity. The heat resistance may change
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 16

3.2. Thermal Properties

Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 9 of 15
It is possible to acquire a better understanding of the heat resistance of brick materials
by investigating the thermal transmission behaviour. Textile-based bricks can withstand
high amounts of heat due to their inherent porosity. The heat resistance may change de-
depending on the type and nature of the binder that was used in the manufacturing of the
pending on the type and nature of the binder that was used in the manufacturing of the
bricks. The thermal resistance behaviour of WC-, UPR-, and GL-based samples is given in
bricks.3,The
Table andthermal resistance
the behaviour behaviour
is also of Figure
shown in WC-, UPR-,
7. and GL-based samples is given in
Table 3, and the behaviour is also shown in Figure 7.
Table 3. Heat resistance behaviour of brick samples.
Table 3. Heat resistance behaviour of brick samples.
Temperature
Temperature (◦ C)
(°C) Temperature
Temperature (◦ C)
(°C) Temperature
◦
Temperature ( (°C)
C) ◦
Temperature ( (°C)
Temperature C)
Samples
Samples after 5 min after 7.5 min after 10 min after 15 min
after 5 min after 7.5 min after 10 min after 15 min
GL 43.0 46.0 48.5 57.3
GL 43.0 46.0 48.5 57.3
WC
WC 35.0
35.0 42.0
42.0 46.8
46.8 54.3
54.3
UPR
UPR 34.4
34.4 40.7
40.7 48.1
48.1 58.1
58.1

Figure 7.
Figure 7. Results
Results of
of thermal
thermal resistance.
resistance.

The remarkable
The remarkable thermal
thermal insulation
insulation observed
observed in in the
the case of WC-based composite brick
samples was due to the presence of micro-pores
was due to the presence of micro-pores in their in their structure.
structure.These
Thesepores allow
pores the
allow
development
the development of airofpockets whichwhich
air pockets serve serve
as heatasinsulators. When WC-based
heat insulators. When WC-based brick samples
brick
were heated,
samples were the air pockets
heated, slowed slowed
the air pockets down the downtransfer of heat of
the transfer through the bulk
heat through theofbulk
the
material.
of As a result,
the material. WC-based
As a result, bricksbricks
WC-based could could
withstand high temperatures
withstand high temperatures without expe-
without
riencing an increase
experiencing an increasein the
in temperature.
the temperature. ThisThis
ability of WC-based
ability of WC-based bricks to impede
bricks to impede the
the
flowflow of heat
of heat makes
makes themthem effective
effective thermal
thermal insulators
insulators for for interior
interior homehome applications.
applications. In
In contrast,
contrast, thethe
UPR UPR andandGL GL binders
binders exhibited
exhibited relatively
relatively moremore compact
compact structures
structures with with
rela-
relatively
tively lowerlower porosity.
porosity. These
These materials
materials showedhigher
showed higherthermal
thermalconductance
conductance as as compared
to WC-based
WC-based samples due to increased density and reduced porosity. porosity. The UPR and GL
binders belong
belong totothethehigh-density
high-densitypolymeric
polymeric class
class of of materials.
materials. GL GLis a is a thermoplastic
thermoplastic pol-
polymer,
ymer, whilewhile
UPRUPR is a thermoset
is a thermoset polymer.
polymer. GL, being
GL, being thermoplastic
thermoplastic in nature,
in nature, can be
can be melted
melted and re-moulded
and re-moulded multiple multiple times.isThere
times. There is relatively
relatively higher higher
mobilitymobility of the polymer
of the polymer chains
chains
in the case of GL-based materials which facilitates the transfer of heat. As a As
in the case of GL-based materials which facilitates the transfer of heat. a result,
result, GL-
GL-based
based bricks bricks exhibited
exhibited a faster
a faster rate ofrate
heatofconduction
heat conduction
throughthrough the material.
the material. On the other On
the other hand, UPR, being a thermoset polymer resin, underwent irreversible chemical
bonding during the curing process. Once cured, it exhibited much higher rigidity due to the
formation of cross-links. The molecular chains cannot move freely within the cross-linked
 hand, UPR, being a thermoset polymer resin, underwent irreversible chemical bonding
during the curing process. Once cured, it exhibited much higher rigidity due to the for-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 mation of cross-links. The molecular chains cannot move freely within the cross-linked
10 of 15
structure. The limited mobility of these chains results in a much lower thermal conductiv-
ity in the case of UPR-based composite bricks as compared to GL-based samples.
structure. The limited mobility of these chains results in a much lower thermal conductivity
3.3. in the case ofLife
Qualitative UPR-based composite
Cycle Overview for bricks as compared
Traditional to GL-based
Bricks and samples.
Textile Bricks
To Qualitative
3.3. understand Lifethe sustainability
Cycle of the developed
Overview for Traditional composite
Bricks and bricks, a qualitative life
Textile Bricks
cycle overview/analysis
To understand the was carried out.
sustainability ofThis overview composite
the developed included four main
bricks, stages of the
a qualitative
life cycle, as shown
life cycle in Figure 8.was
overview/analysis These stages
carried out.are
Thisdefined as the
overview selection
included fourof rawstages
main material,
manufacturing process,
of the life cycle, application
as shown in Figurephase, andstages
8. These end are
of life of the
defined as composite
the selectionbricks.
of rawThis
material,
overview manufacturing
does not includeprocess, application
the generation phase, and endinofeach
of by-products life of the composite
stage, preparationbricks.
of the
This overview does not include the generation of by-products in each stage,
raw material, material transportation, effects on the environment after the end of life, etc. preparation
The of the raw
target unitsmaterial,
used tomaterial
quantify transportation, effects on the and
some of the performance environment
impact of after
thethe end
developed
of life, etc. The target units used to quantify some of the performance and impact of
products included energy consumption in megajoules (MJ) and strengths in megapascals
the developed products included energy consumption in megajoules (MJ) and strengths
(MPa). Aesthetic properties
in megapascals and end-of-life
(MPa). Aesthetic propertiesadaptability were
and end-of-life analysedwere
adaptability through qualita-
analysed
tive through
assessment.
qualitative assessment.

(a) (b)
Figure 8. Life
Figure cycle
8. Life overview
cycle diagram
overview diagramof
of(a)
(a) traditional bricksand
traditional bricks and(b)(b) recycled
recycled textile
textile bricks.
bricks.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 11 of 15

3.3.1. Raw Material Selection

Traditional Clay Bricks
There are mainly two popular types of bricks used around the world, i.e., cement-
based and clay-based bricks. Clay-based bricks are comparatively less expensive and
manufactured in several developing countries. Soil is preferred as a raw material for
making these bricks. The clay used for brick manufacturing is a finite natural resource. The
widespread use of clay in brick manufacturing and the ever-increasing demand for more
construction materials are leading to the depletion of this natural resource. Several studies
have been conducted to use alternative raw materials for partial replacement of clay-based
bricks and to prevent depletion and landfilling at the end of life [31,32].

Sustainable Composite Bricks from Recycled Textile Waste

The robust mechanical properties, finite raw material source, and negative environ-
mental effects of the traditional bricks make them unsuitable for interior design applications
such as furniture, partition walls, and decorative items. Since the need for construction
materials is ever-increasing, studies are being conducted for the development of alternative
materials that can be used in such construction activities in place of traditional bricks. Large
amounts of wastes are produced at every stage of the textile production process, i.e., during
yarn spinning, knitting, weaving, garment manufacturing, chemical processing, and use
as a clothing material [33]. The burning of these textile wastes results in the emission of
large amounts of greenhouse gases, causing severe threats to the environment. The reuse
of these wastes will reduce this negative impact [34]. The incorporation of textile fabric
wastes as reinforcement materials will lead to the development of sustainable bricks and
the prevention of large-scale landfilling traditionally caused by textile wastes.

3.3.2. Manufacturing Process

Traditional Clay-Based Bricks
The process involves the preparation of clay, shaping, drying, firing, and cooling
operations. The firing of bricks requires a large amount of traditional fuels, and it emits
a lot of CO2 . Firing also requires a high temperature between 900 ◦ C and 1200 ◦ C. This
consumes on average about 24 million tons of coal every year. Each brick consumes around
2.0 MJ to 3.5 MJ of energy. Such a huge amount of energy required severely affects the
environment as it emits a large amount of greenhouse gases [35,36]. Brick kilns emit harmful
greenhouse gases that not only affect human life but are harmful to plants and animals
as well. Mostly low-quality coal is used in the chimneys of kilns in several developing
countries, resulting in severe air pollution. These emissions from traditional brick kilns
are the major causes of ozone depletion and acid rain. The large-scale use of coal is also
causing widespread deforestation in several countries [37,38]. Brick-making processes are
the major sources of air pollution and soil degradation in these areas.

Sustainable Textile-Waste Based Bricks

The focus of this study was to manufacture sustainable textile-waste-based composite
bricks that are well-suited for interior applications. For the manufacturing of such bricks,
different types of binders were used for different types of fabric wastes depending upon
the essential performance in the interior applications. These bricks do not require the
traditional firing process leading to environmental conservation. The energy consumption
during this process was negligible, as compared to traditionally fired bricks. The sustainable
textile-waste-based composite bricks were moulded manually using clamps and were dried
and cured under the sun in an open environment.

3.3.3. Application Phase

Traditional Clay-Based Bricks
The traditional clay-based bricks manufactured in kilns are used for the construction
of buildings especially due to their robust mechanical performance. According to studies
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 12 of 15

reported by different researchers, the average compressive strength of these bricks ranges
from 2.5 to 4.5 MPa (average ≈ 3.28 MPa) [39–41]. With an average compressive strength of
3.28 MPa, these bricks are widely used for construction applications, leading to a prolonged
lifetime of the structures.

Sustainable Textile-Waste-Based Bricks

Since the need for construction materials is always increasing, studies are being
conducted for the development of alternative materials that can be used in different con-
struction activities as replacements for traditional clay-based bricks. They exhibit acceptable
strength, sustainable usage of raw materials, and positive environmental effects as com-
pared to traditional bricks. Therefore, these textile bricks are more suitable for interior
design applications such as furniture, partitions of walls, and interior decorations. Despite
the slightly lower compressive strength of these sustainable bricks (3.11 MPa for UPR resin),
there is a harmonious balance between mechanical performance and aesthetic attributes,
making them highly suitable for interior design applications.

3.3.4. End-of-Life Assessment

Traditional Clay-Based Bricks
After the demolition of the conventional buildings, the traditionally fired clay-based
bricks are incinerated or buried as they cannot be reused. This practice further damages
the environment by releasing pollutants [42]. The cradle-to-grave diagram for traditionally
fired clay-based bricks is shown in Figure 8a.

Sustainable Textile-Waste-Based Bricks

One of the most noteworthy advantages of these sustainable bricks is their end-of-life
adaptability. Depending upon the type of binders and the fabric wastes used, these bricks
can either be used as a landfill or can be recycled again using suitable methods. This
recyclability aspect of such bricks aligns with the principles of circular economy practices,
sustainable production, and responsible consumption. The idea of incorporating waste
textile materials into the creation of bricks not only helps protect the environment, but also
opens the possibilities for sustainable manufacturing of aesthetically pleasing construction
materials. The cradle-to-grave diagram for textile-waste-reinforced polymeric composite
bricks is shown in Figure 8b.
Table 4 shows the comparison of the sustainable bricks with clay-based traditional bricks.

Table 4. Comparison of potential data for sustainable bricks and clay bricks.

Life Cycle Sustainable Bricks Clay-Based Bricks

Stage Energy Strength Aesthetic Energy Strength Aesthetic
Different Based on
Raw Material Moderate for Based on High for clay Plain solid
textures and ingredient
Selection sourcing binders sourcing colour
colours percentage
Minimal; dried
Manufacturing Customisable High due to Traditional
and cured in - -
Process shapes firing brick shape
sun
Suitable for
Application Suitable for Various creative Traditional
Minimal Moderate building
Phase interiors possibilities appearance
applications
Lower than Retain Retains
End-of-Life - - Durable
traditional aesthetics appearance

Since sufficient quantitative data were not available, the life-cycle analysis was not
quantified. However, it was conducted qualitatively using the data in Table 4. The qualita-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 13 of 15

tive overview shows that the attributes and characteristics of the sustainable textile-waste-
based composite bricks are as follows:
• Raw Material Selection: They consume a moderate to low amount of energy for raw
material sourcing, can have adequate mechanical strength based on the type of binder
used, and can be produced with various textures and colours. However, there are
limitations with respect to 100% recyclability of these bricks in contrast to traditional
clay-based bricks.
• Manufacturing Process: These bricks involve minimal energy consumption during
manufacturing processes since they show very high flexibility in design and do not
require kiln firing. The absence of kiln firing reduces the environmental impact as
compared to conventional clay-based brick manufacturing.
• Application Phase: Minimal effort is required for the installation of sustainable textile-
waste-based composite bricks, making them suitable for various household and inte-
rior applications.
• End-of-Life: After their lifetime, the composite bricks do not consume any energy and
still retain their aesthetic appeal. But the recycling options may be limited as compared
to the kiln-fired traditional bricks which can be reused due to traditional appearances.

4. Conclusions
The primary objective of this study was to identify the effect of different types of
binders used in composite brick manufacturing along with fabric scraps/textile leftovers
as reinforcements. In this study, synthetic knitted fabric wastes were mixed with white
cement (WC), acrylic glue (GL), and unsaturated polyester resin (UPR) to form sustainable
composite brick samples.
To compare the mechanical properties of the prepared brick samples, tensile, flexural,
and compression tests were performed. The differences in the mechanical properties of
these samples were mainly attributed to the variations in binding and curing processes. It
was observed that the UPR-based sample showed the highest values for tensile, bending,
and compressive strengths, i.e., 0.111 MPa, 0.134 MPa, and 3.114 MPa, respectively. For WC-
based composite bricks, the tensile, bending, and compressive strengths were 0.064 MPa,
0.106 MPa, and 2.670 MPa, respectively. For GL-based samples, minimum mechanical
performance was observed, i.e., 0.0162 MPa, 0.0492 MPa, and 1.542 MPa, respectively. The
maximum mechanical performance of UPR-based samples is attributed to their ability to
form cross-linking with the fabric substrates. The visual appearance of the GL-based brick
samples was dominated by their lower mechanical strength. WC-based samples showed
moderate mechanical properties due to the presence of pores contributing to relatively
lower strength as compared to UPR-based bricks. The presence of silicate led to greater
strength in these samples as compared to GL-based composite bricks.
The thermal behaviour of the composite bricks was also investigated and compared.
The thermal conductivity of the samples can be attributed to the micro-porosity of the
structures. Due to the presence of micro-pores, WC-based samples showed exceptional
resistance to heat transfer. This resulted in a minimum rise of temperature (54.3 ◦ C) after
15 min of heating as compared to 57.3 ◦ C for GL-based samples and 58.1 ◦ C for UPR-based
samples. When it comes to polymeric binders, UPR showed better thermal insulation,
whereas GL allowed faster transfer of heat up to 10 min of heating. UPR shows better
thermal insulation properties due to its thermoset nature, whereas the thermoplastic nature
of GL facilitated greater mobility of polymer chains and faster heat transfer. Recycling of
fabric wastes as building materials appears to be a sustainable and viable solution that will
not only reduce environmental difficulties but also be sufficiently cost-effective.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 14 of 15

Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, H.J., A.S., M.S. and R.K.M.; methodology, H.J., A.S., M.S.
and R.K.M.; software, H.J., A.S., M.S. and R.K.M.; validation, H.J., A.S., M.S. and R.K.M.; formal
analysis, H.J., A.S., M.S. and R.K.M.; investigation, H.J., A.S., M.S. and R.K.M.; resources, H.J. and
R.K.M.; data curation, H.J., A.S., M.S. and R.K.M.; writing—original draft preparation, H.J., A.S.,
M.S. and R.K.M.; visualisation, H.J., A.S., M.S. and R.K.M.; supervision, H.J. and R.K.M.; project
administration, H.J. and R.K.M.; funding acquisition, H.J. and R.K.M. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was funded by the Internal Grant Agency of the Faculty of Engineering, Czech
University of Life Sciences Prague, “Development and testing of polymer composite materials with
natural reinforcement: 2023:31140/1312/3104”.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data will be available on request.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge Muhammad Furqan and Nadeem Safdar.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Valencia-Barba, Y.E.; Gómez-Soberón, J.M.; Gómez-Soberón, M.C.; Rojas-Valencia, M.N. Life cycle assessment of interior partition
walls: Comparison between functionality requirements and best environmental performance. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 44, 102978.
[CrossRef]
2. Armstrong, C.M.; Niinimäki, K.; Kujala, S.; Karell, E.; Lang, C. Sustainable product-service systems for clothing: Exploring
consumer perceptions of consumption alternatives in Finland. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 97, 30–39. [CrossRef]
3. Stanescu, M.D. State of the art of post-consumer textile waste upcycling to reach the zero waste milestone. Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Res. Int. 2021, 28, 14253–14270. [CrossRef]
4. Uddin, F.; Umer, K.; Anjum, S.T. Textile solid waste in product development studies. Chem. Rep. 2021, 3, 203–209. [CrossRef]
5. Joglekar, S.N.; Kharkar, R.A.; Mandavgane, S.A.; Kulkarni, B.D. Sustainability assessment of brick work for low-cost housing: A
comparison between waste based bricks and burnt clay bricks. Sustain. Cities. Soc. 2018, 37, 396–406. [CrossRef]
6. Muñoz, I.; Cifrian, E.; Andrés, A.; Miguel, G.S.; Ruiz, D.; Viguri, J.R. Analysis of environmental benefits associated with the
incorporation of Waelz slag into fired bricks using LCA. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 168, 178–186. [CrossRef]
7. Zhang, L. Production of bricks from waste materials—A review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 47, 643–655. [CrossRef]
8. Aspiras, F.F.; Manalo, J.R.I. Utilization of textile waste cuttings as building material. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1995, 48, 379–384.
9. Rahman, M.M.; Khan, M.M.R.; Uddin, M.T.; Islam, M.A. Textile Effluent Treatment Plant Sludge: Characterization and Utilization
in Building Materials. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2017, 42, 1435–1442.
10. Teklehaimanot, M.; Hailay, H.; Tesfaye, T. Manufacturing of Ecofriendly Bricks Using Microdust Cotton Waste. J. Eng. 2021, 2021,
8815965. [CrossRef]
11. Lanante, F.D.; Tambis, C.L.E.; Bacunawa, G.C.; Mendoza, M.A.T.; Espinazo, J.A.; Suliva, L.B. Performance and properties of
eco-friendly cement bricks added with polyester fabric wastes. J. BIMP-EAGA Region. Dev. 2022, 1, 1–9. [CrossRef]
12. Pamu, Y.; Svsndl, P. An experimental analysis for clay bricks manufacturing with partial replacement of glass wool. Aust. J. Struct.
Eng. 2023, 24, 294–309. [CrossRef]
13. Li, G.; Yu, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Li, J.; Li, C. Properties study of cotton stalk fiber/gypsum composite. Cem. Concr. Res. 2003, 33, 43–46.
14. Islam, S.; Bhat, G. Environmentally-friendly thermal and acoustic insulation materials from recycled textiles. J. Environ. Manag.
2019, 251, 109536. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Kamble, Z.; Behera, B.K. Sustainable hybrid composites reinforced with textile waste for construction and building applications.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 284, 122800. [CrossRef]
16. FabBRICK: Meet French Architect Clarisse Merlet Who Converts Your Old Clothes into Bricks. Available online: https://www.
greenqueen.com.hk/fabbrick-meet-french-architect-clarisse-merlet-who-converts-your-old-clothes-into-bricks/ (accessed on 20
October 2023).
17. Singhal, S.; Agarwal, S.; Singhal, N. Chemical recycling of waste clothes: A smarter approach to sustainable development. Environ.
Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 54448–54469. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Scaraboto, D. Sustainable Consumption: More Using, Less Shopping. NIM Mark. Intell. Rev. 2022, 14, 11–17. [CrossRef]
19. Kagitci, E. Upcycling Textile Waste from the Fashion Industry as a Sustainable Building Material for Architectural Design. 2023.
Available online: https://www.politesi.polimi.it/handle/10589/184174 (accessed on 16 November 2023).
20. Treggiden, K. Wendy Andreu Turns Selvedges into Innovative New Material. Available online: https://design-milk.com/circular-
by-design-wendy-andreu-turns-sunbrellas-fabric-trimmings-into-innovative-new-material/ (accessed on 9 November 2023).
21. A South African Initiative is Upcycling Used Clothing to Bricks! Available online: https://www.goodthingsguy.com/business/a-
south-african-initiative-is-upcycling-used-clothing-to-bricks/ (accessed on 30 October 2023).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 4036 15 of 15

22. How Ackermans Turns Its Fashion Waste into Building Blocks—twyg. Available online: https://twyg.co.za/how-ackermans-
turns-its-fashion-waste-into-building-blocks/ (accessed on 30 October 2023).
23. Trajković, D.; Jordeva, S.; Tomovska, S.; Zafirova, K. Polyester apparel cutting waste as insulation material. J. Text. I. 2017, 108,
1238–1245. [CrossRef]
24. Xiong, X.; Yang, T.; Mishra, R.; Militky, J. Transport properties of aerogel-based nanofibrous nonwoven fabrics. Fibers Polym. 2016,
17, 1709–1714. [CrossRef]
25. Munir, M.J.; Abbas, S.; Nehdi, M.L.; Kazmi, S.M.S.; Khitab, A. Development of Eco-Friendly Fired Clay Bricks Incorporating
Recycled Marble Powder. J. Mater. Civil Eng. 2018, 30, 1–11. [CrossRef]
26. ASTM C 67-03a; Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Brick and Structural Clay Tile. ASTM International: West
Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2023.
27. ČSN EN ISO 10211 (730551); Thermal Bridges in Building Structures—Heat Flows and Surface Temperatures—Detailed Calcula-
tions. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023.
28. Ali, M.; Room, S.; Khan, M.I.; Masood, F.; Memon, R.A.; Khan, R.; Memon, A.M. Assessment of local earthen bricks in perspective
of physical and; mechanical properties using Geographical Information System in Peshawar, Pakistan. Structures 2020, 28,
2549–2561. [CrossRef]
29. Xiong, X.; Yang, T.; Mishra, R.; Kanai, H.; Militky, J. Thermal and compression characteristics of aerogel-encapsulated textiles.
J. Ind. Text. 2018, 47, 1998–2013. [CrossRef]
30. Dehas, W.; Guessoum, M.; Douibi, A.; Antonio Jofre-Reche, J.; Miguel Martin-Martinez, J. Thermal, Mechanical, and Viscoelastic
Properties of Recycled Poly(ethylene terephthalate) Fiber-Reinforced Unsaturated Polyester Composites. Polym. Compos. 2019, 39,
1682–1693. [CrossRef]
31. Uddin, F. Introductory Chapter: Textile Manufacturing Processes. In Textile Manufacturing Processes; IntechOpen: London, UK,
2019; pp. 1–14. [CrossRef]
32. Toprak, T.; Anis, P. Textile Industry’s Environmental Effects and Approaching Cleaner Production and Sustainability: An
Overview. J. Text. Eng. Fash. Technol. 2017, 2, 429–442. [CrossRef]
33. Han, C.; Mirasa, A.; Saad, I.; Bolong, N.; Asman, N.; Asrah, H.; Abdullah, E. Use of Compressed Earth Bricks/Blocks in
Load-Bearing Masonry Structural Systems: A Review. Mater. Sci. Forum 2020, 997, 9–19. [CrossRef]
34. Venkataraman, M.; Mishra, R.; Militky, J.; Xiong, X.; Marek, J.; Yao, J.; Zhu, G. Electrospun nanofibrous membranes embedded
with aerogel for advanced thermal and transport properties. Polym. Adv. Technol. 2018, 29, 2583–2592. [CrossRef]
35. Padmalosan, P.; Vanitha, S.; Sampath Kumar, V.; Anish, M.; Tiwari, R.; Dhapekar, N.K.; Yadav, A.S. An investigation on the use of
waste materials from industrial processes in clay brick production. Mater. Today Proc. 2023, in press. [CrossRef]
36. Khan, M.W.; Ali, Y.; De Felice, F.; Salman, A.; Petrillo, A. Impact of brick kilns industry on environment and human health in
Pakistan. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 678, 383–389. [CrossRef]
37. Shaikh, A.; Jain, U.; Narayangarhwala, H.; Pawar, S.; Panwar, K.; Choudhary, N.; Khandelwal, A.; Hussain, M.S. A Comparative
Study of AAC Block & Clay Brick under Gravity Loading For Buildings. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2017, 3, V3I3-1315.
38. Gadling, P.P.; Varma, M.B. Comparative Study on Fly Ash Bricks and Normal Clay Bricks. IJSRD-Int. J. Sci. Res. Dev. 2016, 4,
673–676. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321528151 (accessed on 29 February 2024).
39. Arumugam, V.; Mishra, R.; Militky, J.; Tunak, M. In-plane shear behavior of 3D spacer knitted fabrics. J. Ind. Text. 2016, 46,
868–886. [CrossRef]
40. Hiwot, M.G.; Quezon, E.T.; Kebede, G.; Quezon, E.T. Comparative Study on Compressive Strength of Locally Produced Fired Clay
Bricks and Stabilized Clay Bricks with Cement and Lime. Glob. Sci. J. 2017, 5, 147–157. Available online: https://www.scipedia.
com/public/Hiwot_et_al_2017a (accessed on 29 February 2024).
41. Parashar, A.K.; Parashar, R. Comparative Study of Compressive Strength of Bricks Made with Various Materials to Clay Bricks.
Int. J. Sci. Res. Pub. 2012, 2, 1–4. Available online: www.ijsrp.org (accessed on 28 February 2024).
42. Dabaieh, M.; Heinonen, J.; El-Mahdy, D.; Hassan, D.M. A comparative study of life cycle carbon emissions and embodied energy
between sun-dried bricks and fired clay bricks. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 122998. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.