Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Review

Agricultural wastes as aggregate in concrete mixtures A review

Payam Shagh a,, Hilmi Bin Mahmud a, Mohd Zamin Jumaat a, Majid Zargar b
a
b

Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Center for Transportation Research, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

h i g h l i g h t s
 Potential uses of agricultural solid wastes in the construction industry.
 Some agricultural solid wastes can be used as aggregate for making concrete.
 Oil palm shell can be used to make a high strength lightweight concrete.

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 2 October 2013
Accepted 20 November 2013
Available online 18 December 2013
Keywords:
Agricultural wastes
Aggregate
Concrete
Sustainable material

a b s t r a c t
Concrete is the most widely used construction material. With the ever-increasing industrialization and
urbanization, huge amounts of natural resources are required to make concrete. This, in turn, means that
large volumes of natural resources and raw materials are being used for concrete production around the
world. To eliminate or minimize the negative environmental impact of the concrete industry and
promote environmental sustainability of the industry, the use of wastes from industry as materials for
concrete making is considered as an alternative solution for preventing the excessive usage of raw
materials. The wide availability of agricultural wastes make them a suitable and dependable alternative
for aggregate in concrete, wherever available. This paper reviews the possible use of agricultural wastes
as aggregate in the concrete industry. It aims to promote the idea of using these wastes by elaborating
upon their engineering properties. This summary of existing knowledge about the successful use of
agricultural wastes in the concrete industry helps to identify other existing waste products for use in
concrete making. From this identication by agricultural and civil engineers, signicant achievements
can be attained.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents
1.
2.
3.

4.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Environmental sustainability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Agricultural solid waste in concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Oil palm shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.1.
Properties of oil palm shell (OPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.2.
Oil palm shell lightweight concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
Coconut shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.
Corn cob. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.
Rice husk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5.
Tobacco waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Corresponding author. Tel.: +60 172437383; fax: +60 379675318.

E-mail addresses: pshagh@gmail.com, pshagh@um.edu.my (P. Shagh).
0950-0618/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.11.074

111
111
111
111
112
112
114
115
115
116
116
116
116

P. Shagh et al. / Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

111

1. Introduction

2. Environmental sustainability

Cement and concrete buildings date back several centuries and

the patent for Portland cement itself dates back over a century
[1]. The great advantage of concrete is that it is possible to
choose its constituents, and then it is up to the user to exploit
and optimize the unique properties of each of the components
to develop a high quality, durable construction material of high
impermeability [2]. With more than 10 billion tons of concrete
produced annually, it is considered to be the most important
building material [3]. It has been predicted that the worlds
population will increase from the present-day 69 billion by the
year 2050 and to 11 billion by the end of the century, which will
result in a considerable increase in the demand for water, energy,
food, river sources, common goods and services [4]. Also, the
demand for concrete is expected to grow to approximately 18 billion tons a year by 2050 [5]. Consequently, the concrete industry
is going to use a considerable amount of natural resources to produce cement and concrete.
The green rating for infrastructure and buildings has become
increasingly widespread in the last decade. Generally, the current
Green Building Rating (GBR) systems evaluate the sustainability
of buildings according to various categories, of which the construction material is one such category in most of the systems. Issues
like CO2 emissions during the production of Portland cement, along
with a signicant amount of energy, water, aggregate and llers
used for production of concrete as well as construction waste from
the demolition of concrete structures, makes this important construction material look less compatible with the environmental
requirements of a modern sustainable construction industry.
Ramezanianpour et al. [6] demonstrated that the current state
of the concrete industry is not sustainable. However, the utilization
of industrial and agricultural waste components can be a breakthrough to make the industry more environmentally friendly and
sustainable. Waste materials, such as y ash, silica fume, ground
granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS), recycled concrete, post-consumer glass, recycled tyres, and recycled plastics, have been successfully used in concrete for decades [3,7]. Also, recent studies
have shown the successful use of agricultural solid waste as aggregate in structural and non-structural concrete. Oil palm shell (or
palm kernel shell), coconut shell, rice husk, corn cob, pistachio
shell, spent mushroom substrate and tobacco wastes are among
the wastes used for this purpose. Since aggregate (sand as ne
and gravel as coarse) makes up about 6080% of the volume of concrete [8], the successful use of such agricultural solid wastes, as
whole or partial replacement of conventional aggregates, contributes to energy saving, conservation of natural resources, and a
reduction in the cost of construction materials. It also solves the
disposal problem of the wastes, and, hence, helps environmental
protection [6,9].
Research on the use of agricultural waste as aggregate in concrete production, is relatively new. More research on long term
durability of this kind of concrete would give more condence to
the construction industry in using them for their more sensitive
projects. The aim of this paper is to introduce some of the agricultural solid wastes that have been successfully used as aggregate for
making concrete in experimental and practical environments. The
relationships among concrete made using this type of aggregate,
environmentally friendly concrete, and green building rating systems are also discussed. Mutual recognition of these materials,
and their usage in concrete by both civil engineers and agricultural
engineers, would pave the way for other potential uses of agricultural wastes in the construction industry, as well as certain other
industries. It will also lead to a more environmentally sustainable
concrete industry.

Sustainable infrastructure and green building rating systems, by

establishing a grading system, independently assess several different aspects of an infrastructure or building design, construction
and/or maintenance. All considered aspects are directly or indirectly relevant to the efciency and environmental performance
of buildings. Environmental consciousness in selecting the materials used in every step of the construction process can have an effect
on the sustainability level of the outcome. These effects can be direct (like using an asbestos-free material) or indirect (like using
recycled material and diverting them from landll).
Assuming agricultural wastes are going to end up being destroyed or disposed of in the environment, salvaging them in the
form of aggregate for concrete production, can be considered one
of the environmental benets of this technique that will be recognized by most of the sustainability rating systems. For instance, the
United States Green Building Councils (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) [10], which is one of the
most globally recognized rating systems, gives points to this concrete for using pre-consumer recycled material. Other categories
and advantages in using these agricultural waste aggregates in
concrete can result in points for the construction work, which include: rapidly renewable material, recycled content, regional
materials (locally available material).
Concrete made using agricultural wastes has shown better thermal properties in research, which can result in sustainability points
in the energy and atmosphere category of the LEED rating system,
among them: Optimize Energy Performance credit. Hence, agricultural waste used as aggregate in concrete production can contribute in making the material, and, consequently, the structure
more environmentally friendly.

3. Agricultural solid waste in concrete

3.1. Oil palm shell
The oil palm industry is one of the most important agro-industries in certain countries, such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and
Nigeria. Malaysia and Indonesia are, respectively, the worlds largest and next largest palm oil producing countries. Malaysia alone
produces more than 7 million tons of crude palm oil, each year

Fig. 1. World palm oil production 19962000 [12].

112

P. Shagh et al. / Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

Table 1
Properties of oil palm shell as agricultural waste aggregate and crushed granite as conventional aggregate [16,17,19,2123,40].
Properties

Oil Palm Shell

Coconut shell

Crushed granite

Specic gravity
Bulk density (uncompacted) (kg/m3)
Bulk density (compacted) (kg/m3)
Void ratio (uncompacted) (%)
Void ratio (compacted) (%)
24 h water absorption (%)
Aggregate impact value (%)
Aggregate crushing value (%)
Los Angeles abrasion value (%)
Flakiness index (%)
Shell thickness (mm)
Thermal conductivity (W/mc)
Loss on ignition (%)

1.171.37
510550
590600
63
57
2133
48
510
35
65
28
0.19
98100

1.051.2

650

24
8.15
2.58
1.63

0.158 mm

2.602.70
1300
14201470
52
47
<1
1317
20
24
25

Fig. 2. Microscopic images of the surface of an OPS grain in two scales.

approximately 60% lighter than conventional coarse aggregates.

The density of OPS is within the range of most typical lightweight
aggregates [16,17]. One of the attractive characteristics of oil palm
shells is its signicant low Los Angeles abrasion value, which is
approximately 80% lower than conventional coarse aggregates
[18]. This characteristic shows that OPS aggregates have good
resistance to wear. In addition, because of the much lower impact
and crushing values of OPS aggregates, these aggregates have good
absorbance to shock [19]. The surfaces of the shells for both concave and convex faces are fairly smooth, while the broken edge is
rough and spiky. Fig. 2 shows scanning electron microscopy
(SEM) images of an OPS grain conducted by the SEM instrument
(Fig. 3). Fig. 2a clearly shows the smooth surface of the shell while
from the larger scale of this picture (Fig. 2b), it is clear that the edge
of the shell is rough.
Fig. 3. Scanning electron microscopy instrument.

[11]. Fig. 1 shows the global scale of world palm oil production between 1996 and 2000 [12]. One of the signicant problems in the
palm fruit processing plants is that the process produces a large
amount of solid waste. For instance, in Malaysia, Indonesia and
Thailand, the annual production of solid waste from the palm oil
industry is 47, 40 and 3.5 million tons, respectively. The solid
wastes include oil palm bunches, palm bre and fruit shells. In
addition, over 8 million tons of oil palm shell is produced by these
countries, annually [13].

3.1.1. Properties of oil palm shell (OPS)

The colour of oil palm shell (OPS) ranges from dark grey to
black. Depending on the breaking pattern of the nut, the shape of
the shells differs in a range from angular to polygonal [14]. Table 1
shows the characteristics of OPS. As can be seen in this table, OPS is

3.1.2. Oil palm shell lightweight concrete

The use of OPS as a lightweight aggregate for producing lightweight concrete was explored as early as 1984 by Abdullah [20]
in Malaysia and by Okafor [16] in Nigeria. In most cases, it has been
shown that the compressive strength of OPS lightweight concrete,
with and without cementitious materials, is within the typical
compressive strength for structural lightweight concrete (20
35 MPa) with a density of about 2025% lower than normal weight
concrete (NWC) [17,18,2124]. However, recent studies have
shown the possibility of producing high strength OPS lightweight
concrete of up to about 53 and 56 MPa for 28 and 56 days compressive strength [25,26]. Promoting the compressive strength of concrete and the ability to produce high strength concrete with
aggregate, such as OPS, is very important because the compressive
strength of concrete plays a fundamental role in the design and
construction of concrete structures [27], and, also, such potential
application of a waste material will encourage the construction

113

P. Shagh et al. / Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

Fig. 4. Oil palm shell grains in different conditions. (a): old, (b): fresh, and (c): crushed from large size old OPS.

industry to use this type of environmentally friendly concrete in

actual projects. The techniques for producing high strength OPS
concrete have been explained in various published papers
[25,26,28]. In summary, these techniques include the use of old
OPS, crushed OPS and OPS with smaller maximum coarse aggregate. Old OPS does not have any bre on their surface, which results in a better bond between the cement matrix and the OPS,
and, consequently, higher compressive strength. Another technique is based on crushing large old OPS and reducing the maximum size of coarse OPS aggregate. Crushed OPS is hard and has
a strong physical bond with hydrated cement paste. This stronger
bond is due to a reduction in the total smooth surface of OPS and
the increased total surface of the broken edges because of the
crushing of large sizes of OPS aggregate. In addition, the use of a
smaller size of OPS aggregate causes an increase in the bond between the aggregate and the paste, which results in a higher compressive strength. Fig. 4 shows OPS aggregate in several different
states. Table 2 shows some selected mix proportions of OPS concrete with normal and high strength concrete. For all the OPS lightweight concrete mixtures with normal strength, the maximum size
of OPS (as coarse aggregate) is 9.5 mm or more while for making
high strength OPS concrete this maximum size reduces to 8 mm.
From the test results of previous studies it was concluded [14]
that the mechanical properties of OPS concrete, such as splitting
tensile strength, exural strength and modulus of elasticity at the
same compressive strength, are lower than other types of
lightweight aggregate concretes made from articial or natural
lightweight aggregates. However, a recently published study [28]
has shown that incorporating steel bre into OPS concrete improves the compressive strength, and, furthermore, the splitting
tensile and exural strength improve signicantly. The splitting

tensile/compressive strength ratio of steel bre OPS concrete is

in the range of normal weight concrete and the exural strength
of such concrete is comparable to articial lightweight aggregate
concrete. In respect of the modulus of elasticity of OPS concrete,
although it has been reported that this property of OPS concrete
is signicantly lower than normal weight concrete, similar to many
other types of lightweight aggregate concrete, recent studies
[28,29] have shown that by following certain methods the modulus of elasticity of OPS concrete signicantly improves to the range
of normal weight concrete. These methods, which signicantly
promote the compressive strength of OPS concrete, are based on

Fig. 5. OPS grains (darker) in a lightweight concrete.

Table 2
Selected mix proportion and properties of oil palm shell lightweight concrete.

a
b
c

Mix
no.

Mix proportion (kg/m3)

Cement

Silica
fume

Fly
ash

Super
plasticizer
(%)

Water
to
cement
ratio

Oil
palm
shell and

Conventional
coarse
aggregate (granite)

Fine
aggregate

1
2
3
4
5
6

480
510
360
480
480
550

0
0
0
48
0
0

0
0
0
24
0
0

1
1.4
1.8
1
1.5
1.1

0.41
0.38
0.45
0.35
0.38
0.31

370
310
380
380
300
330

0
0
210
0
0
180

820
850
830
580
1050
710

Demolded density.
Air dry density.
Oven dry density.

Fresh
property
(slump, mm)

Density
(kg/m3)

28-Day cube
compressive
strength
(MPa)

Reference

7
60
33
105
50
205

1900a
1960b
1910a
1890
1990c
1980a

29
28
34
37
47
53

Mannan and Ganapathy [15]

Teo et al. [38]
Shagh et al. [14]
Alengaram et al. [23]
Shagh et al. [26]
Shagh et al. [25]

114

P. Shagh et al. / Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

Fig. 6. Structures made of oil palm shell concrete: (a) footbridge and (b) low-cost house [38].

the use of old OPS and old crushed OPS. Fig. 5 shows a cross section
of a lightweight concrete specimen containing OPS grains.
The durability properties of OPS structural lightweight concrete
under different curing conditions were investigated by Teo et al.
[30]. They reported that the durability properties of this concrete
were comparable to that of other conventional lightweight concretes. The research concluded that proper curing is required for
OPS concrete to achieve better durability. They recommended that
the minimum duration of moist curing should be carried out continuously for at least 7 days.
A comparative study [31] of the bond properties of OPS concrete
with normal weight concrete revealed that although the bond
stress of the OPS concrete was about 86% of the corresponding normal weight concrete, the ultimate bond stress of OPS concrete was
2.5 times higher than the theoretical values calculated based on BS
8110 [32]. In addition, the exural and shear behaviour of reinforced and un-reinforced concrete beams made with oil palm shell
structural lightweight concrete was experimentally investigated.
Teo et al. [33] reported that reinforced concrete beams made of
oil palm shell lightweight concrete with low reinforcement ratio
gave satisfactory performance in all the serviceability requirements of the BS 8110 [32] code. They reported that OPS reinforced
concrete beams with reinforcement ratios up to 3.14% showed 4
35% ultimate moments compared to the predicted moments. However, for a beam with higher reinforcement ratio (i.e. 3.90%), BS
8110 underestimates the ultimate moment capacity by about 6%.
Therefore, they recommended larger depths for OPS concrete
beams when the reinforcement ratio is greater than 3.14%.
Ahmed and Sobuz [34] reported that the exural behaviour of
beams made of oil palm shell shows very close agreement with
the theoretical results. Furthermore, the satisfactory shear behaviour of oil palm shell concrete beams has also been reported
[35,36]. Alengaram et al. [37] reported that the overall exural
behaviour of reinforced OPS concrete beams closely resembled that
of equivalent beams made with normal weight concrete.
For showing the potential use of oil palm shell (OPS) as aggregate for producing lightweight concrete in practice, two small
structures were built at University Malaysia Sabah (UMS) [38].
These structures comprised a small footbridge with a span of about
2 m (Fig. 6a) and a low-cost house with a oor area of about 59 m3
(Fig. 6b). These structures are located near the coastal area, which
has an annual rainfall of about 2500 mm, air temperature in the
range of 2332 C and relative humidity of 7291%.
3.2. Coconut shell
Coconut cultivation is predominant in the tropical regimes of
Asia and East Africa [39]. Table 3 shows the main countries in
the global market together with their production and land area
in 2005 [40]. As can be seen in this table, the main producers are
Indonesia, the Philippines and India with 75% of the world production. Coconuts vary considerably in size, shape, weight and colour

[41]. Annually, 4050 million tones of coconuts are grown worldwide. A mature coconut comprises 28 wt% of the white meat,
which is surrounded by 12 wt% hard protective shell, which, in
turn, is covered by a thick husk of 35 wt%. Annually, 1520 million
tones of husk are produced, which constitute about 30 wt% bre
and 70 wt% pith [42]. Coconut shells, like oil palm shells are available in large quantities in the tropical regions of the world [43]. It
has been reported [44] that coconut shells are one of the most
promising agro wastes with possible uses as coarse aggregate in
the production of concrete. A comparative study of concrete properties using coconut shell and oil palm shell shows that concrete
containing coconut shells exhibit a higher compressive strength
than oil palm shell [43]. Gunasekaran et al. [40] investigated various mechanical properties compressive strength, exural and
splitting tensile strengths, and impact resistance of concrete with
coconut shell as the coarse aggregate. They concluded that coconut
shell can be used as a lightweight aggregate for producing lightweight concrete. This lightweight concrete can be classied under
structural lightweight concrete. The mechanical properties of coconut shell, as well as conventional coarse aggregate (crushed granite) are provided in Table 1. Fig. 7 shows microscopic images of
coconut shell grains. A comparison between this gure and
Fig. 2a reveals that the surface of a coconut shell is rougher than
OPS. This may be one of the reasons for the better compressive
of coconut shell concrete compared to oil palm shell concrete [43].
A long-term study on the compressive strength of coconut shell
aggregate concrete [45] shows that this concrete, even at later ages
(365 days), has good quality. In addition, Gunasekaran et al. [45]
reported that the ultimate bond strength of this concrete was
much higher compared to the theoretical bond strength as per BS
8110 [32]. Table 4 shows some selected mix proportions of coconut
shell lightweight concrete and their fresh and hardened properties.
Fig. 8 shows coconut shell grains in concrete.
A recent study conducted by Gunasekaran et al. [46] shows the
satisfactory performance of coconut shell reinforced concrete
beam in exure. According to this publication, the exural

Table 3
The main coconut players in the global market for 2005 and their coconut production
statistics [40].
Country

Indonesia
Philippines
India
Brazil
Thailand
Vietnam
Mexico
Sri Lanka
Papua New Guinea
Malaysia

Production (nuts)

Area

(kt)

(%)

(ha)

(%)

16,300
14,797
9500
3034
1500
972
950
890
650
642

30.1
27.3
17.5
5.6
2.8
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.2
1.2

2670
3243
1860
281
343
110
150
395
180
179

25.0
30.4
17.4
2.6
3.2
1.0
1.4
3.7
1.7
1.7

115

P. Shagh et al. / Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

Fig. 7. Microscopic images of the surface of coconut shell grains.

behaviour of a coconut shell lightweight concrete beam is comparable to other types of lightweight concrete. However, similar to
OPS concrete, the authors recommended that because the deections under the design service load for reinforcement ratios is
greater than 3.14%, which exceeds the allowable limit of BS 8110,
larger beam depths should be used. Such a problem for both types
of lightweight concrete beam in reinforcement ratios greater than
3.14% is probably due to the low modulus of elasticity of these concretes, which is about 5.15.3 GPa for a compressive strength of
about 2627 MPa. Although it is expected that in higher strength
levels, and, consequently, greater modulus of elasticity, this limitation for these organic materials will be solved, further research is
needed. It is worth noting that the chemical composition, consistency and structure of OPS have been reported as being very close
to that of coconut shells [47].
3.3. Corn cob
Corn cob is an agricultural solid waste from maize and corn. The
United States (the largest maize producer) and Africa produce 43%
and 7% respectively of the worlds maize [48]. Previous studies
[4850] show that the ash of corn cob has SiO2 of more than 65%
and a combination of Al2O3 and SiO2 of more than 70%. This means
that corn cob ash can be used as a cementitious material in
blended cement concrete. Although the use of the ash of this waste
in concrete technology started more than a decade ago, the use of
corn cob grains as aggregate is only recently developing. Faustino
et al. [51] investigated the use of corn cob for sound insulation purposes in buildings. They tested a corn cob particleboard with a size
of 3 cm (thickness)  100 cm (width)  50 cm (height) for impact
sound insulation purposes. The sample was made of binding corn
cob particles by wood glue with a ratio of 1(glue):4(corn cob particles). This corn cob particleboard had a density of about 334 kg/
m3. This density is similar to a natural sound insulation material,
namely, cork. They concluded that this product has an interesting
acoustic behaviour for building purposes. In addition, as reported
by Pinto et al. [52], the elementary chemical composition and the
microstructure of the corn cob shows that this agricultural waste
is similar to extruded polystyrene or corn. They reported that corn
cob can be a suitable building material in terms of thermal
insulation.
Corn cob as a lightweight aggregate for producing lightweight
concrete for non-structural applications for the rst time was
researched by Pinto et al. [53]. In the study, they measured the
density, compressive strength and thermal insulation properties

Fig. 8. Cross section of a concrete made of coconut shells as coarse aggregate [46].

of a corn cob lightweight concrete. The results were compared with

a non-structural lightweight concrete made with an articial
lightweight aggregate, namely, expanded clay. The lightweight
aggregate mix ratio (by mass) for both corn cob and expanded clay
were 6(aggregate):1(Portland cement):1(water) and 3:1:1, respectively. The rst mix ratio was reported to be a usual mix ratio for
the regularization layer of expanded clay concrete in the Portuguese context. The average results of this study are shown in
Table 5. As can be seen in the table, with a ratio of 6:1:1 the density
of the corn cob concrete is about 34% lower than the expanded clay
concrete, and, consequently, its thermal transmission coefcient is
about 27% lower. In this respect, it can be seen that corn cob lightweight concrete has better performance than expanded clay lightweight concrete. As concluded by Pinto et al. [53], using corn cob as
an alternative to articial and natural materials, has economic and
sustainable benets.
3.4. Rice husk
Rice husk (RH), which is poor in nutrition, forms the outer covering of rice grain and is always removed during the milling process [54]. Rice husks constitute about 20% of the volume of rice
produced annually in the world [55], which is approximately
80 million tones [56]. Although some rice husks are used for animal feed, re making, litter material, marking concrete, board production, and as silicon carbide whiskers to reinforce ceramic
cutting tools [54,57], most of this agricultural by-product is disposed of, and its accumulation is a serious environmental problem.
After aluminium and steel, Portland cement is the most

Table 4
Selected mix proportion and properties of coconut shell lightweight concrete [45].
Cement
(kg/m3)

Water to cement
ratio

Coconut shell
(kg/m3)

Fine aggregate
(kg/m3)

Slump (mm)

28-Day cube compressive

strength (MPa)

Air dry density

(kg/m3)

510

0.42

330

750

27

1970

116

P. Shagh et al. / Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

Table 5
Some properties of corn cob and expanded clay lightweight concrete as a regularization layer [53].
Mix
ratio

Corn cob

Expanded clay

Density
(kg/m3)

Compressive strength at
28 days (MPa)

Thermal transmission
coefcient (W/m2 C)

Density
(kg/m3)

Compressive strength at
28 days (MPa)

Thermal transmission
coefcient (W/m2 C)

6:1:1
3:1:1

382
778

0.120
0.392

1.99

576

1.360

2.72

energy-intensive material [55]. Therefore, nding a solution to

substitute a practical recycled product for cement replacement is
desirable for sustainability goals in the construction industry [6].
The use of rice husk ash is a possible solution, and the successful
use of this material for making concrete has been researched for
many years [5861]. However, there is little information regarding
the use of rice husks as aggregate for making concrete. Salas et al.
[62] investigated the substitution of sand and gravel with rice husk
in concrete. The used rice husk was in the natural state or treated
with a 5% lime solution. They concluded that concrete containing
rice husks could be used as a material with hybrid characteristics
between structural lightweight concrete and insulating concrete.
In addition, in another project [63], for the purpose of constructing
very low cost housing, they introduced a lightweight block that
was made of rice husks, as an agricultural waste, and y ash, as
an industrial by-product. The blocks had a density of about
1100 kg/m3 and a thermal conductivity of 0.20 W/mk. It should
be noted that the oven density of lightweight concrete ranges between 300 and 2000 kg/m3 with corresponding cube compressive
strengths from approximately 1 to over 60 MPa and thermal conductivities of 0.21.0 W/mk. These values in normal weight concretes are 21002500 kg/m3, 15 to greater than 100 MPa and
1.61.9 W/mk, respectively [64]. From the research it can be seen
that rice husks have been used as aggregate for making concrete
in which the concrete was used for insulating purposes [65].
3.5. Tobacco waste
Tobacco waste is toxic due to the presence of alkaloid nicotine.
Large quantities of this waste are produced annually during processing and cigarette making [66]. Ozturk and Bayrakl [67] investigated the possibility of using tobacco waste in producing
lightweight concrete. They used different percentages of tobacco
waste in lightweight concrete containing pumice. Based on the
characteristics, such as consistency, unit weight, porosity, compactness, compressive strength and thermal conductivity, they
concluded that pumice lightweight concrete with tobacco waste
additive can be used as a coating and dividing material in construction. They reported that lightweight concretes containing tobacco
waste have low thermal conductivity in the range of 0.194
0.220 W/mk. These values are lower than most other masonry
materials, such as brick (0.450.6 W/mk), briquette (0.71.0 W/
mk), pumice concrete (0.29 W/mk) and Ytong (0.23 W/mk).
4. Conclusions
With the increase in the worlds population, sustainable development should be of particular importance and the concrete industry should contribute to this purpose. One approach can be through
the use of by-products and agricultural wastes in concrete. Studies
show the possibility of use and acceptable performance of certain
agricultural solid wastes, e.g. oil palm shell, coconut shell, rice
husks, and tobacco waste, as aggregate in making concrete. Since
aggregate makes up about 6080% of the volume of the concrete,
the substitution of solid waste as full or partial replacement for
conventional aggregate contributes signicantly in cost effectiveness, energy saving and mitigation of the environmental impact

of the construction industry. Considering the current criteria for

a sustainable infrastructure, green building rating systems and related environmental benets, making concrete using agricultural
wastes as aggregate can help in making the concrete industry environmentally-friendly. Therefore, the development of existing
knowledge and identication of other useful solid wastes to be
used in making concrete will also provide a valuable contribution
in the environmental sustainability of the industry.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Mr. Hafez Ghafari (Sustainable
Deliverable, 140 N Wilson Ave, Pasadena, CA 91106, USA) for making a valuable contribution and for his supportive comments. The
nancial support from University of Malaya under the University
of Malaya Research Grant (UMRG), Grant No. RP018/2012A, is
gratefully appreciated.
References
[1] Tim TC. Evolving concrete for the millennium. In: Proceeding of the CONCET
2006. 9th international conference on concrete engineering and technology.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. p. 4957.
[2] Swamy RN. Design for sustainable development of concrete construction. In:
Proceeding 4th international structural engineering and construction
conference. ISEC-4-Innovations in structural engineering and construction,
September 2628 September 2007. Taylor and Francis/Balkema; 2008. p.
12416.
[3] Meyer C. The greening of the concrete industry. Cement Concrete Composite
2009;31:6015.
[4] Roskovic R, Bjegovic D. Role of mineral additions in reducing CO2 emmission.
Cem Concr Res 2005;35:9748.
[5] Mehta PK, Monteiro PJM. Concrete: microstructure, properties, and materials.
3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2006.
[6] Ramezanianpour AA, Khani MM, Ahmadibeni GH. The effect of rice husk ash on
mechanical properties and durability of sustainable concretes. Int J Civil Eng
2009;7(2):8391.
[7] Federico LM, Chidiac SE. Waste glass as a supplementary cementitious
material in concrete critical review of treatment methods. Cement Concr
Compos 2009;31:60610.
[8] Badur S, Chaudhary R. Utilization of hazardous wastes and by-products as a
green concrete material through s/s process: a review. Rev Adv Mater Sci
2008;17:4261.
[9] Harimi M, Harimi DJ, Kurian VJ. Bolong, N. Evaluation of the thermal
performance of metal roong under tropical climatic conditions, SBO: 2005
World Sustainable Building Conference, Tokyo, Japan. September, p. 70916.
[10] US Green Building Council. LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design
and Construction 2010, Edition: LEED 2009, ISBN 9781932444346,
Washington DC, p. 678.
[11] Miura K. Efcient use of oil palm wastes as renewable resource for energy and
chemicals. Japan: Kyoto University; 2010.
[12] Chavalparit O. Clean technology for the crude palm oil industry in Thailand.
PhD Thesis, Wageningen University, 2006.
[13] ESCAP Report: Biomass increasingly important in Indonesia and Thailand. E
news environment and sustainable development 2007; 7(2):5.
[14] Shagh P, Jumaat MZ, Mahmud H. Mix design and mechanical properties of oil
palm shell lightweight aggregate concrete a review. Int J Phys Sci
2010;5(14):212734.
[15] Mannan MA, Ganapathy C. Mix design for oil palm shell concrete. Cem Con Res
2001;31:13235.
[16] Okafor FO. Palm kernel shell as a lightweight aggregate for concrete. Cem Con
Res 1988;18:90110.
[17] Okpala DC. Palm kernel shell as a lightweight aggregate in concrete. Build
Environ 1990;25:2916.
[18] Basri HB, Mannan MA, Zain MFM. Concrete using waste oil palm shells as
aggregate. Cem Con Res 1999;29:61922.
[19] Teo DCL, Mannan MA, Kurian VJ, Ganapathy C. Lightweight concrete made
from oil palm shell (OPS): structural bond and durability properties. Build
Environ 2007;42:261421.

P. Shagh et al. / Construction and Building Materials 53 (2014) 110117

[20] Abdullah AA. Basic strength properties of lightweight concrete using
agricultural wastes as aggregates. In: Proceedings of international
conference on low-cost housing for developing countries, Roorkee, India, 1984.
[21] Mannan MA, Ganapathy C. Engineering properties of concrete with oil palm
shell as coarse aggregate. Constr Build Mater 2002;16:2934.
[22] Mannan MA, Ganapathy C. Concrete from an agricultural waste-oil palm shell
(OPS). Build Environ 2004;39:4418.
[23] Alengaram UJ, Jumaat MZ, Mahmud H. Ductility behaviour of reinforced palm
kernel shell concrete beams. Eur J Sci Res 2008;23(3):40620.
[24] Alengaram UJ, Mahmud H, Jumaat MZ, Shirazi SM. Effect of aggregate size and
proportion on strength properties of palm kernel shell concrete. Int J Phys Sci
2010;5(12):184856.
[25] Shagh P, Jumaat MZ, Mahmud H, Alengaram UJ. A new method of producing
high strength oil palm shell lightweight concrete. Mater Des
2011;32(10):483943.
[26] Shagh P, Jumaat MZ, Mahmud H. Oil palm shell as a lightweight aggregate for
production high strength lightweight concrete. Constr Build Mater
2011;25:184853.
[27] Shariq M, Prasad J, Masood A. Effect of GGBFS on time dependent compressive
strength of concrete. Constr Build Mater 2010;24:146978.
[28] Shagh P, Mahmud H, Jumaat MZ. Effect of steel ber on the mechanical
properties of oil palm shell lightweight concrete. Mater Des
2011;32(7):392632.
[29] Shagh P, Mahmud H, Jumaat MZ. Oil palm shell lightweight concrete as a
ductile material. Mater Des 2012;36:6504.
[30] Teo DCL, Mannan MA, Kurian VJ. Durability of lightweight OPS concrete under
different curing conditions. Mater Struct 2010;43:113.
[31] Alengaram UJ, Mahmud H, Jumaat MZ. Comparison of mechanical and bond
properties of oil palm kernel shell concrete with normal weight concrete. Int J
Phys Sci 2010;5(8):12319.
[32] BS 8110. Structural use of concrete-Part 1. Code of practice for design and
construction. London: British Standard Institution, 1985.
[33] Teo DCL, Mannan MA, Kurian VJ. Flexural behaviour of reinforced lightweight
concrete beams made with oil palm shell (OPS). J Adv Concr Tech
2006;4(3):45968.
[34] Ahmed E, Sobuz HR. Flexural and time-dependent performance of palm shell
aggregate concrete beam. KSCE J Civil Eng 2011;15(5):85965.
[35] Jumaat MZ, Alengaram UJ, Mahmud H. Shear strength of oil palm shell foamed
concrete beams. Mater Des 2009;30(6):222736.
[36] Alengaram UJ, Jumaat MZ, Mahmud H, Fayyadh MM. Shear behaviour of
reinforced palm kernel shell concrete beams. Constr Build Mater
2011;25(6):291827.
[37] Alengaram UJ, Jumaat MZ, Mahmud H. Inuence of cementitious materials and
aggregates content on compressive strength of palm kernel shell concrete. J
Appl Sci 2008;8(18):320713.
[38] Teo DCL, Mannan MA, Kurian VJ. Structural concrete using oil palm shell (OPS)
as lightweight aggregate. Turkish J Eng Environ Sci 2006;30:2517.
[39] Ali M. Coconut bre: a versatile material and its applications in engineering. J
Civ Eng Constr Technol 2011;2(9):18997.
[40] Gunasekaran K, Kumar PS, Lakshmipathy M. Mechanical and bond properties
of coconut shell concrete. Constr Build Mater 2011;25:928.
[41] Ohler JG. Modern coconut management, palm cultivation and products,
FAO. London: Intermediate Technology Publ. Ltd; 1999.
[42] Rodrguez NG, Yanez-Limon M, Gutierrez-Miceli FA, Gomez-Guzman O,
Matadamas-Ortiz TP, Lagunez-Rivera L, et al. Assessment of coconut bre
insulation characteristics and its use to modulate temperatures in concrete
slabs with the aid of a nite element methodology. Energy Build
2011;43:126472.
[43] Olanipekun EA, Olusola KO, Ata O. A comparative study of concrete properties
using coconut shell and palm kernel shell as coarse aggregates. Build Environ
2006;41:297301.

117

[44] Gunasekaran K. Lightweight concrete using coconut shells as aggregate. In:

Proceedings of international conference on advances in concrete and
construction, ICACC-2008, Hyderabad, India p. 45059.
[45] Gunasekaran K, Annadurai R, Kumar PS. Long term study on compressive and
bond strength of coconut shell aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater
2012;28:20815.
[46] Gunasekaran K, Annadurai R, Kumar PS. Study on reinforced lightweight
coconut shell concrete beam behavior under exure. Mater Des
2013;46:15767.
[47] Asia Development Bank (ADB). Pilot and demonstration activity (PDA):
producing water ller from coconut and oil palm shells. Technical assistance
report: PDA completion report, project number TA6325-REG, 2008.
[48] Adesanya DA, Raheem AA. A study of the workability and compressive
strength characteristics of corn cob ash blended cement concrete. Constr Build
Mater 2009;23:3117.
[49] Adesanya DA. Evaluation of blended cement mortar, concrete and stabilized
earth made from ordinary Portland cement and corn cob ash. Constr Build
Mater 1996;10(6):4516.
[50] Adesanya DA, Raheemb AA. A study of the permeability and acid attack of corn
cob ash blended cements. Constr Build Mater 2010;24:4039.
[51] Faustino J, Pereira L, Soares S, Cruz D, Paiva A, Varum H, et al. Impact sound
insulation technique using corn cob particleboard. Constr Build Mater
2012;37:1539.
[52] Pinto J, Paiva A, Varum H, Costa A, Cruz D, Pereira S, et al. Corns cob as a
potential
ecological
thermal
insulation
material.
Energy
Build
2011;43:198590.
[53] Pinto J, Vieira B, Pereira H, Jacinto C, Vilela P, Paiva A, et al. Corn cob
lightweight concrete for non-structural applications. Constr Build Mater
2012;34:34651.
[54] Zaid AA, Ganiyat O. Comparative utilization of biodegraded and undegraded
rice husk in Clarias gariepinus diet. Afr J Biotechnol 2009;8(7):135862.
[55] Zhang MH, Malhotra VM. High-performance concrete incorporating rice husk
ash as a supplementary cementing material. ACI Mater J 1996;93(6):62936.
[56] Safa Y, Bhatti HN. Adsorptive removal of direct dyes by low cost rice husk:
effect of treatments and modications. Afr J Biotechnol 2011;10(16):312842.
[57] Johnson AC, Yunus NB. Particleboards from rice husk: a brief introduction to
renewable materials of construction. Jurutera 2009.
[58] Mehta PK. Properties of blended cements made from rice husk ash. ACI J Proc
1977;74(9):4402.
[59] Mahmud HB, Majuar E, Zain MFM, Hamid NBAA. Mechanical properties and
durability of high strength concrete containing rice husk ash. ACI Special Publ
2004;221:75166.
[60] Ganesan K, Rajagopal K, Thangavel K. Rice husk ash blended cement:
assessment of optimal level of replacement for strength and durability
properties of concrete. Constr Build Mater 2008;22(8):167583.
[61] Madandoust R, Ranjbar MM, Moghaddam HA, Mousavi SY. Mechanical
properties and durability assessment of rice husk ash concrete. Biosyst Eng
2011;110(2):14452.
[62] Salas J, Alvarez M, Veras J. Lightweight insulating concretes with rice husk. Int J
Cem Compos Lightweight Concr 1986;8(3):17180.
[63] Salas J, Alvarez M, Veras J. Rice husk and y ash concrete blocks. Int. J. Cem
Compos Lightweight Concr 1987;9(3):17782.
[64] Newman J, Owens P. Properties of lightweight concrete. Adv Concr Technol Set
2003:329.
[65] Salas J, Veras J. Insulating panels with rice husk. Int J Housing Sci Appl
1986;10(1):112.
[66] Meher KK, Panchwagh AM, Rangrass S, Gollakota KG. Biomethanation of
tobacco waste. Environ Pollut 1995;90(2):199202.
[67] Ozturk T, Bayrakl M. The possibilities of using tobacco wastes in producing
lightweight concrete. Agricultural Engineering International 2005; the CIGR
Ejournal. vol. VII. Manuscript BC 05 006.