IntechOpen

Home > Books > Fiber-Reinforced Composites - Recent Advances, New Perspectives and Applications [Working Title]

Open access peer-reviewed chapter - ONLINE FIRST

Evaluation of Waste Tag Pins as Fibers in Gypsum Plasters

Written By

Ahmet Hayrullah Sevinç, Muhammed Yasin Durgun and Hayriye Hale Aygün

Submitted: 10 January 2024 Reviewed: 11 January 2024 Published: 19 June 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1004216

Fiber-Reinforced Composites - Recent Advances, New Perspectives and Applications IntechOpen
Fiber-Reinforced Composites - Recent Advances, New Perspectives a... Edited by Longbiao Li

From the Edited Volume

Fiber-Reinforced Composites - Recent Advances, New Perspectives and Applications [Working Title]

Dr. Longbiao Li

Chapter metrics overview

8 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics
Advertisement

Abstract

This study deals with the usability of tag pins on gypsum-based products, which are used to attach tags on goods such as textile products. The primary motivation of the study is that the tag pins become waste after the sale of the product and this waste is generally produced from polypropylene (PP), which is also used in fiber production. The study used waste tag pins in three different lengths (0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mm) and at three different fiber volumes such as 5, 10, and 15%. Thus, 40 × 40 × 160 mm sized prismatic gypsum samples were produced and unit weight, ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV), thermal conductivity, apparent porosity, water absorption, capillary water absorption, compressive and flexural strength of samples were tested. Samples with fiber content exhibited higher flexural strength than the reference sample. The use of longer fibers increased the flexural strength. As a result, the use of tag pins in gypsum matrix generally improved the pore structure and slightly increased the unit weight while enhancing properties such as porosity and water absorption. The same improvement was valid for the mechanical properties. However, the thermal insulation properties of gypsum-based products were adversely affected.

Keywords

  • tag pin
  • fiber
  • gypsum plaster
  • physical properties
  • mechanical properties

1. Introduction

Gypsum is a lightweight, easily processable, fast-setting, and environmentally friendly building material. Despite these advantages, it merges into the background with respect to cement mortar due to its poor mechanical characteristics, high shrinkage during heating, and low water resistance [1, 2, 3]. To overcome these shortcomings, gypsum is reinforced with various fibrous materials, such as polyester fiber [4], carbon fiber [5], glass fiber [6], sisal fiber [7], and plant-based fibers [8, 9], and has been widely used as gypsum-based composites in interior linings, such as wall panels, false ceiling, and partitions. In fiber-reinforced gypsum composites (FRGCs), the addition of fiber leads to improvement in the brittle characteristic of gypsum by increasing fracture toughness and crack propagation resistance [10]. However, the degree of improvement depends on fiber adhesion into the gypsum matrix and fiber type used for reinforcing gypsum to manufacture gypsum-based composites [11]. Many researchers have examined the effect of fiber type and fiber concentration on gypsum composite’s mechanical resistance, water absorption, and thermal properties [12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17].

Tag pins, one of the mostly used auxiliary materials, have been commercially used in the textile industry for hooking price tags and labeling garments. They are generally manufactured from synthetic fibers, such as polyamide (PA), polypropylene (PP), thermoplastic urethane (TPU), and polyetheretherketone (PEEK). Still, PP tag pins are the mostly used type due to their low cost, easy processability, and producibility of various lengths with different colors. The use of PP tag pins is not only observable in the textile industry. They have also been used in many products to which price tags are attached, such as toys, accessories, household articles, footwear, etc. Considering that the increase in global textile waste is approximately 60% in each year, 57 million tons of waste is added onto deposited wastes in a year [18, 19]. It is reported that 2% wastage is available during the application of accessories to garments [20]. When its wide use is considered in many sectors, the total wastage during the fixing of pins onto garments and the consumption of tag pins is two pieces even for only a woven shirt, a considerable amount of tag pins are wasted since manufacturing and after a product is purchased by a consumer. There are a few research works on the evaluation and recycling of tag pin wastes for investigating the effect of these wastes on shallow slope failure [21, 22, 23].

Some researchers aimed to reinforce gypsum with PP fiber to produce a more versatile gypsum-based composite. Gencel et al. manufactured vermiculite/diatomite and PP (0.5–1%) fiber-reinforced gypsum composites. They reported that increasing PP fiber content caused an increase in sound velocity and a decrease in thermal diffusivity but did not affect the water absorption characteristic of the composite [24]. In another study, researchers pointed out that PP fibers improved the durability of gypsum composite better than that of glass or mineral fibers due to the good adhesion of PP fibers with gypsum matrix and large pores occurred by increasing PP content in gypsum composite [17]. Mohendesi et al. proposed analytical modeling for PP and poly-paraphenylene terephthalamide (PPTA) short-fiber reinforced gypsum composites. They concluded that PP and PPTA reinforcement resulted in a notable improvement in the tensile strength of the gypsum composite. Still, the impregnation of PPTA fiber into the gypsum matrix was more versatile than that of PP with a smooth surface [25]. Some researchers focused on determining the mechanical properties of PP-reinforced gypsum composites, resulting in an increase in flexural [26] and impact [17] strength, and gypsum water resistance was also improved [27]. Wang et al. examined the thermal properties of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) and PP-reinforced gypsum-based foam insulation composite. They concluded that the degree of thermal conductivity was mainly related to the foam matrix, and fiber loading had no significant effect on thermal insulation [28].

This study differentiates from its counterparts by reinforcing the gypsum matrix with a waste PP tag pin. As mentioned above, there are only a few attempts to recycle PP tag pin waste. In this study, PP tag pins with a 0.5 mm fiber diameter were cut into various lengths and mixed with gypsum plaster by altering fiber loading. All samples were manufactured by following the same procedure and exposed to testing in the same conditions for a meaningful conclusion.

Advertisement

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Materials

In this study, plasterboard plaster, a commercial product produced in accordance with the TS EN 13279 standard, was used. The technical properties of the gypsum plaster used, which are stated by the company, are given in Table 1.

PropertyValue
Setting time—initial (min)>8
Setting time—final (min)≈30
Min. compressive strength (40 × 40 mm) (MPa)10
Min. flexural strength (40 × 40 × 160 mm) (MPa)4.5
% retained by 200-μm sieve99.5
% retained by 100-μm sieve95.0
Loose unit weight (g/cm3)0.75–0.80
Dry unit weight (g/cm3)1.05–1.10
Absolute volumetric mass (g/cm3)1.254

Table 1.

Technical properties of the gypsum plaster.

The images of various sizes of tag pins used in the study and the SEM image of a tag pin are shown in Figure 1. The tag pins were cut with scissors and brought to the desired dimensions. The technical properties of the tag pin fiber are given in Table 2. In the study, tap water was used as mixing water.

Figure 1.

(a) Various sizes of tag pin fibers and (b) scanning electron microcopy (SEM) image of a tag pin fiber.

PropertyValue
Fiber count (tex)
136
Fiber thickness (mm)0.5
Tensile strength (MPa)135.93 ± 5.7
Elongation (%)18.1 ± 0.6
Density0.99
Composition100% raw polypropylene

Table 2.

Technical properties of the tag pin fiber.

2.2 Materials

The mixture design (in g) and sample codes of the produced gypsum plaster samples are given in Table 3.

CodeGypsumWaterFiber
R1320858—
P5-0.51309.4851.14.5
P5-11298.8844.29
P5-1.51288.3837.413.5
P10-0.51309.4851.14.5
P10-11298.8844.29
P10-1.51288.3837.413.5
P15-0.51309.4851.14.5
P15-11298.8844.29
P15-1.51288.3837.413.5

Table 3.

Mixture design (in g) and sample codes of the produced gyssum plaster samples.

The control mixture without tag pin fiber was named R, while the mixture with 10 mm length and 0.5% fiber was named P10-0.5. The mixture with a length of 5 mm and containing 1.5% fiber was expressed as P5-1.5. Tag pin fiber was used at the ratios of 0.5, 1, and 1.5% by volume, respectively. During the production, first of all, gypsum powder and fibers were dry-mixed for 60 s. When a completely homogeneous dry mixture was obtained, water was added. The mixtures were mixed in the laboratory-type cement mixer for 90 s until they became homogeneous. Then some of the produced mixture was placed in 40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm prismatic molds and the rest in 120 mm × 120 mm × 20 mm plaque molds. Vibration was applied to the mixtures placed in the mold by lightly tapping the molds on the ground. Afterward, the finished samples were kept at 65% humidity and 21 ± 2° C temperature for 24 h to be set. After the samples removed from the mold were kept in the laboratory for 7 days, all samples were dried in the oven at 60° C for 48 h, and then the experiments whose test list and standards are given in Table 4 were applied. Also SEM analysis was performed to examine the microstructure of the samples. Figure 2 includes various images from the experimental study.

TestStandard
Unit weightASTM C 138
Ultrasonic pulse velocityASTM C 597
Water absorptionASTM C 20
Apparent porosityASTM C 20
Capillary water absorptionTS EN 480-5
Bending strengthTS EN 196-1
Compressive strengthTS EN 196-1
Thermal conductivityASTM C 1113

Table 4.

Tests performed and the standards.

Figure 2.

Images of experimental procedure. (a) Samples in molds, (b) all samples, (c) apparent porosity test, (d) ultrasonic pulse velocity test, (e) compressive strength test, (f) bending strength test, (g) capillary water absorbed samples.

Advertisement

3. Results and discussion

The results of unit weight of samples are given in Figure 3. Unit volume weights of the samples changed between 1138 and 1206 kg/m3. While the P15-1.5 sample gave the highest unit weight value, the R sample gave the lowest. As the fiber amount and fiber length increase, there is a slight increase in the unit weights of the samples. This increase was at a level of 6% compared to the reference sample. Therefore, no significant change in unit weight values was observed using fiber. Although it is generally stated in the literature that studies on the use of PP fibers in concrete [29] and gypsum plaster [30] show a slight decrease in unit weight due to the density of the fibers being lower than the matrix, it is thought that the fibers used in this study have a reducing effect on the voids formed in the gypsum matrix. Thus, a slight decrease in unit weights was observed. The apparent porosity results also support these results.

Figure 3.

Unit weight of samples.

Figure 4 shows water absorption and apparent porosity values. Water absorption values of the samples changed between 32.09 and 34.44%. Porosity results were found to be in the range between 35.53 and 39.06%. The lowest porosity was obtained from the reference sample. Porosity was decreased with increase in fiber ratio. Same as porosity, water absorption values were also reduced with fiber ratio. These two results support each other. As stated before, the increase in fiber amount and size causes an increase in the unit weight of the samples. Since the density of tag pin fibers is lower than that of the gypsum matrix, this is attributed to a decrease in pore structure. Porosity results confirm this situation. There are other studies stating that there is a decrease in the pore structure with the use of PP fiber. For example, Ahmed et al. [31] reported in his study that the porosity of the sample produced only with cement was 21.2% after 48 h of hydration, while the porosity of the sample containing PP fiber was 19.2% after the same period. It is thought that this is because PP fibers have a high specific surface and thus accelerate the hydration kinetics. This way, the pores between the cement grains are quickly filled, and a denser matrix is obtained. In another study [32], PP fibers filled the pores in the mixture and reduced porosity, thanks to their flexibility and fineness. Although the fibers used in these studies are PP fibers with smaller sizes compared to the tag pin fibers used in this study, according to the study of Abousnina et al. [33], a study in which macro PP fibers were used, macro PP fibers also fill the gaps and cracks in the internal structure and thus finer pore structure has been reported. Since water absorption values are also related to the pore structure, it shows a similar trend.

Figure 4.

Water absorption and apparent porosity values.

Figure 5 shows the ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) values of samples results. UPV values were between 2444 and 2601 m/s. UPV results are known to be strongly related to the material’s pore structure. With the increase of pores or cracks in the matrix, the UPV decreases [34]. Herein, the lowest result was obtained from the reference sample. It is seen that UPV values increase as the fiber ratio and fiber length increase. This indicates that as the fiber ratio increases, the sizes of pores decrease. As discussed before, using tag pin fibers increased the unit weights of the samples and reduced their porosity values. As seen here, tag pin fiber has formed a relatively denser microstructure. According to these results, what is expected from the UPV test is that it shows an opposite trend with porosity results. As expected, the highest UPV value was obtained from the sample using 1.5% and 15 mm long tag pin fiber. This sample gave a 6.4% higher UPV value than the reference sample. In the study where Romero Gómez et al. [30] turned waste cloths into PP fiber, it was pointed out that UPV values decreased as the fiber ratio increased. The values ranged approximately between 1850 and 2250 m/s. In another study, the same author [35] evaluated waste fishing nets as fiber in gypsum-based composites and, this time, observed that UPV values increased as the amount of fiber increased. In a study on lightweight concretes containing PP fibers, Balgourinejad et al. [36] reported that using PP fibers did not significantly affect UPV results. A similar conclusion can be drawn considering the maximum increase in value observed in this study.

Figure 5.

Ultrasonic pulse velocity values of samples results.

Figure 6 shows the water absorption by capillary suction after 10, 20, 30, 60, and 1440 min. The reference sample absorbed 102.6 g at 24 h. At the end of 24 h, the highest capillary water absorption value was obtained from the reference sample. In samples containing tag pin fiber, the highest value was obtained from the P5-0.5 sample (102.1 g), while the lowest value was obtained from the P15-1.5 sample (92.1 g). The increase in tag pin fiber usage rate and the use of longer fibers reduced capillary water absorption. While an approximately 10.2% reduction was achieved at the end of the 24-htest compared to the sample in which no fiber was used, switching from 5 mm fiber to 15 mm fiber at the same rate resulted in an average reduction of 7.1%. On the other hand, switching from 0.5% fiber to 1.5% fiber for the same length caused an average decrease of 2.58%. It is observed that the increase in fiber ratio is a more effective parameter than the increase in fiber length for improving capillary water absorption values. The capillary water absorption test results also support the previous porosity and UPV results. Although it is stated in the literature that the amount of open pores in mixtures containing PP fiber may be high [37], short-cut fibers will increase the capillarity effect in the gypsum plaster matrix [38]. However, it is also known that the fibers limit crack development and therefore may reduce water absorption capacity [37].

Figure 6.

Results of water absorption by capillary suction after 10, 20, 30, 60, and 1440 min.

Figure 7 shows the thermal conductivity coefficients of samples. Thermal conductivity coefficients varied between 0.388 and 0.413 W/mK. The lowest value was obtained from the reference sample. The highest value was obtained from the P15-1.5 sample. Thermal conductivity coefficients decreased as the tag pin fiber amount and fiber length increased. The reason for this decrease can be related to the pore structure of the samples. The general expectation for thermal conductivity coefficients is to show an opposite trend with the porosity results. The fact that using fibers reduces the number of pores also increases the thermal conductivity coefficient. Here, the P15-1.5 sample has a 6.4% higher thermal conductivity coefficient than the reference sample. In the literature, since PP fiber generally causes a slight increase in porosity in gypsum-based products, a decrease in thermal conductivity coefficients has also been observed. For example, the study of Gencel [39] achieved a 9.1% decrease in the thermal conductivity coefficient by using 0.5% PP fiber, while using 1% PP fiber increased this rate to 10%. In another study [40], the use of 0.5% PP fiber provided an 8.8% reduction, while the use of 1% PP fiber provided a 16.7% reduction. According to these results, the use of tag pin fibers was found to be less effective compared to studies using PP fibers in the literature.

Figure 7.

Thermal conductivity coefficients of samples.

Figure 8 shows the results of bending and compressive strength tests. The bending strengths of the samples altered between 5.59 and 6.28 MPa. The reference sample is the sample that gives the lowest bending strength. The use of tag pin fibers has increased the bending strength. In all three length groups, the lowest bending strength was obtained from the group containing 0.5% tag pin fiber, while the highest bending strength was obtained from the group containing 1.0% fiber. It can be stated that the optimum tag pin fiber usage rate among the mixtures applied within the scope of this study is 1%. When the sizes used were evaluated among themselves, the highest values were obtained when 15 mm length fiber was used. In this context, the highest bending strengths were obtained from the P15-1 sample. The value obtained here is 12.3% higher than the reference value. When 5 mm long tag pin fibers were used at 1%, an increase of only 2.3% was observed, but when 10 mm long fibers were used at 1%, an increase of 7.7% was observed. On the other hand, while using 5 mm fibers provides an average increase of 2.4%, these values are 5.7 and 10.7% for using 10 mm and 15 mm fibers, respectively. In a study in the literature involving the use of 0.5 and 1% PP fibers in gypsum-based composites [24], the bending strength increased by 6.25% with the use of 0.5% fiber and by 12.5% with the use of 1% fiber. In another study using the same ratios [40], using 0.5% PP fiber increased the bending strength by 1.7%, while using 1% fiber increased it by 21.4%. The fibers used in these examples are PP fibers specially produced for use in building materials such as concrete and mortar. Considering that the fibers used in this study are waste and are not PP fibers manufactured specifically to increase tensile strength, it can be said that the flexural strength increases obtained are at a satisfactory level.

Figure 8.

Results of bending and compressive strength tests.

Compressive strength values vary between 15.62 and 18.84 MPa. TS EN 13279-1 standard, which includes the properties of different gypsum plasters, states that the minimum compressive strength values of different gypsum products should be 2–6 MPa [41]. All samples produced within the scope of the study exceed these values. While the reference sample has a compressive strength of 15.94 MPa, the lowest strength value was obtained from the P5-0.5 sample. Except for this sample, all fiber-containing samples gave higher compressive strength than the reference sample. When samples containing fibers are evaluated among themselves, the trend is similar to that obtained from bending strength. Among the size groups, the highest compressive strength value was obtained from samples containing 1% tag pin fiber, while the lowest strength value was obtained from samples containing 0.5% fiber. At the same time, an increase in compressive strength was observed as the fiber length increased. The highest strength was obtained from the P15-1 sample. This value is 18.2% higher than that of the reference sample. The P5-0.5 sample, the only sample lower than that of the reference sample, gave a value only 2% lower. In their study, Gencel et al. [39] reported that the compressive strength of gypsum-based composites increased by 22% by using 0.5% PP fiber, and this rate increased to 55% with a 1% increase in PP fiber usage. In another study [24], it was reported that using 0.5% PP fiber provided a 3% increase in compressive strength, while using 1% PP fiber provided an increase of 6.7%. In a study where ladle slag and plaster were used together [42], it was observed that 2% PP fiber increased the compressive strength by approximately 36%. It is known that fiber increases compressive strength when the bond between fiber and matrix is good [42]. However, there are studies in the literature stating that compressive strength decreases with the use of PP fiber. For example, Durgun [40] observed that when 0.5% PP fiber was used in gypsum-based composites, there was a loss of compressive strength of 4.8%, and when 1% PP fiber was used, a loss of compressive strength of 9.7% occurred. This situation is attributed to increased porosity of the fibers [40] or poor interlocking between the fiber and the matrix [42]. This study observed that the use of fiber made the matrix structure denser and reduced porosity. It can be thought that the increases in compressive strength are related to this situation. As a result of both strength tests, it was seen that longer fiber length provided higher strengths. It is known that the length of the fiber affects the pull-out resistance [43]. This is attributed to the fact that as the embedded fiber length in the matrix increases, a more continuous surface is formed, and this increased surface provides more adhesion and friction, increasing the pull-out resistance and, therefore, the separation resistance of the matrix [44]. Figure 9 shows various images from the fractured surfaces of various samples.

Figure 9.

Various images from the fractured surfaces of various samples.

Figure 10 shows the SEM image of a tag pin fiber on the fracture surface. When the fiber is examined in close view, it is seen that the surface of the fiber consists of two different textures. A section whose surface appears to be completely smooth and clean, as well as a deformed surface with matrix residues on it, can be seen. The presence of such matrix residues on the fiber surface is a sign of enough bonding [40, 42]. On the other hand, some deformations can occur on the fiber surface during pulling-out.

Figure 10.

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image of a tag pin fiber on the fracture surface.

Figure 11 shows an image of a fiber mark in the matrix as a hole left from a pulled-out fiber after the fracture. Here, at the edge of the pull-out mark, pieces that are thought to have been peeled off from the surface of the plastic fiber can be seen. An image like this suggests a good bonding between the tag pin fibers and the gypsum plaster matrix. The increases in compressive and bending strengths support this idea.

Figure 11.

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image of a fiber mark in matrix.

Advertisement

4. Conclusions

In this study, the use of waste tag pin fiber in gypsum plasters was investigated. According to the experimental studies, the following conclusions can be drawn:

The use of tag pin fibers increased the unit weight of the samples. It also reduced the apparent porosity values. This situation is also reflected in the UPV and water absorption results. It has been observed that increasing the amount and length of tag pin fibers has a slightly decreasing effect on porosity.

  • Decreasing porosity increased the thermal conductivity coefficients. It was observed that the use of tag pin fibers slightly reduced the insulation properties of gypsum plaster samples.

  • The use of tag pin fiber improved the mechanical properties of the samples. By increasing the amount and fiber length, an increase of up to 12.3% in bending strength and up to 18.2% in compressive strength was achieved. According to these results, it was observed that the optimum tag pin fiber usage rate was 1%, and the best results were obtained when 15 mm length fibers were used. The SEM images suggest that a sufficient bond between the tag pin fibers and the gypsum plaster matrix can be established.

References

  1. 1. Dawood E, Mezal AM. The properties of fiber reinforced gypsum plaster. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports. 2014;3:1339-1347. DOI: 10.9734/jsrr/2014/7356
  2. 2. Deng YH, Furuno T. Properties of gypsum particleboard reinforced with polypropylene fibers. Journal of Wood Science. 2001;47:445-450. DOI: 10.1007/BF00767896
  3. 3. Arikan M, Sobolev K. The optimization of a gypsum-based composite material. Cement and Concrete Research. 2002;32:1725-1728. DOI: 10.1016/S0008-8846(02)00858-X
  4. 4. Rostami R, Zarrebini M, Mandegari M, Mostofinejad D, Abtahi SM. A review on performance of polyester fibers in alkaline and cementitious composites environments. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;241:117998. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.117998
  5. 5. Chung DDL, Zheng QJ. Electronic properties of carbon fiber reinforced gypsum plaster. Composites Science and Technology. 1989;36:1-6. DOI: 10.1016/0266-3538(89)90012-2
  6. 6. Doshi S, Rathod J, Lad K, Parmar P, Patel P. Glass fiber reinforced gypsum panel use in building construction. Global Research and Development Journal for Engineering. 2018;3:47-51
  7. 7. Hernandez Olivares F, Oteiza I, Villanueva LD. Experimental analysis of toughness and modulus of rupture increase of sisal short fiber reinforced hemihydrated gypsum. Composite Structures. 1992;22:123-137
  8. 8. Li M, Pu Y, Thomas VM, Yoo CG, Ozcan S, Deng Y, et al. Recent advancements of plant-based natural fiber–reinforced composites and their applications. Composites. Part B, Engineering. 2020;200:1-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108254
  9. 9. Pacheco Torgal F, Jalali S. Cementitious building materials reinforced with vegetable fibres: A review. Construction and Building Materials. 2011;25:575-581. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.07.024
  10. 10. Fantilli AP, Jóźwiak Niedźwiedzka D, Denis P. Bio-fibres as a reinforcement of gypsum composites. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(17):4830. DOI: 10.3390/ma14174830
  11. 11. Jia R, Wang Q , Feng P. A comprehensive overview of fibre-reinforced gypsum-based composites (FRGCs) in the construction field. Composites. Part B, Engineering. 2021;205:108540. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108540
  12. 12. Sair S, Mandili B, Taqi M, El Bouari A. Development of a new eco-friendly composite material based on gypsum reinforced with a mixture of cork fibre and cardboard waste for building thermal insulation. Composites Communications. 2019;16:20-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.coco.2019.08.010
  13. 13. Iucolano F, Liguori B, Aprea P, Caputo D. Evaluation of bio-degummed hemp fibers as reinforcement in gypsum plaster. Composites. Part B, Engineering. 2018;138:149-156. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.11.037
  14. 14. Iucolano F, Boccarusso L, Langella A. Hemp as eco-friendly substitute of glass fibres for gypsum reinforcement: Impact and flexural behaviour. Composites. Part B, Engineering. 2019;175:107073. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107073
  15. 15. Zargarnezhad H, Aghazadeh Mohandesi J. Experimental and multiscale numerical simulation of tensile strength of a randomly oriented short fiber composite in a brittle matrix. Computational Materials Science. 2013;69:533-541. DOI: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.08.033
  16. 16. Suárez F, Felipe Sesé L, Díaz FA, Gálvez JC, Alberti MG. On the fracture behaviour of fibre-reinforced gypsum using micro and macro polymer fibres. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;244:118347. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118347
  17. 17. Hua S, Wang K, Yao X, Xu W, He Y. Effects of fibers on mechanical properties and freeze-thaw resistance of phosphogypsum-slag based cementitious materials. Construction and Building Materials. 2016;121:290-299. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.06.003
  18. 18. Niinimäki K, Peters G, Dahlbo H, Perry P, Rissanen T, Gwilt A. The environmental price of fast fashion. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. 2020;1:189-200. DOI: 10.1038/s43017-020-0039-9
  19. 19. Shirvanimoghaddam K, Motamed B, Ramakrishna S, Naebe M. Death by waste: Fashion and textile circular economy case. Science of the Total Environment. 2020;718:137317. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137317
  20. 20. Islam Rajib MM, Parvez MMH, Islam MS, Ahmed T, Islam MR. Complete garment costing with major cost breakdown. Journal of Textile Science & Fashion Technology. 2023;9(2):115-126. DOI: 10.4236/jtst.2023.92008
  21. 21. Islam MA, Hossain MS, Badhon FF, Bhandari P. Performance evaluation of recycled-plastic-pin-supported embankment over soft soil. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2021;147:1-10. DOI: 10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0002528
  22. 22. Khan MS, Kibria G, Hossain MS, Hossain J, Lozano N. Performance evaluation of a slope reinforced with recycled plastic pin. In: Proceedings of Geo-Congress; 3-7 March 2013; San Diego. California: Geo Congress; 2013. pp. 1733-1742. DOI: 10.1061/9780784412787.174
  23. 23. Loehr JE, Bowders JJ, Owen JW, Sommers L, Liew W. Slope stabilization with recycled plastic pins. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2000;1714:1-8. DOI: 10.3141/1714-01
  24. 24. Gencel O, Del Coz Diaz JJ, Sutcu M, Koksal F, Alvarez Rabanal FP, Martinez Barrera G, et al. Properties of gypsum composites containing vermiculite and polypropylene fibers: Numerical and experimental results. Energy and Buildings. 2014;70:135-144. DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.11.047
  25. 25. Mohandesi JA, Sangghaleh A, Nazari A, Pourjavad N. Analytical modeling of strength in randomly oriented PP and PPTA short fiber reinforced gypsum composites. Computational Materials Science. 2011;50:1619-1624. DOI: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2010.12.020
  26. 26. Jorillo PA, Shimizu G, Suzuki T. New technology approach to age-old waste material (natural fibers) for composites. In: Woolley GR, JJJM G, Wainwright PJ, editors. Waste Management Series. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2000. pp. 45-56. DOI: 10.1016/S0713-2743(00)80017-3
  27. 27. Zhu C, Zhang J, Peng J, Cao W, Liu J. Physical and mechanical properties of gypsum-based composites reinforced with PVA and PP fibers. Construction and Building Materials. 2018;163:695-705. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.168
  28. 28. Wang Q , Cui Y, Xue J. Study on the improvement of the waterproof and mechanical properties of hemihydrate phosphogypsum-based foam insulation materials. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;230:117014. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117014
  29. 29. Karahan O, Atiş CD. The durability properties of polypropylene fiber reinforced fly ash concrete. Materials and Design. 2011;32:1044-1049. DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2010.07.011
  30. 30. Romero Gómez MI, Pedreño Rojas MA, Pérez Gálvez F, Rubio de Hita P. Characterization of gypsum composites with polypropylene fibers from non-degradable wet wipes. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021;34:101874. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101874
  31. 31. Ahmed A, Mahmoud AA, Elkatatny S. The effect of polypropylene fiber on the curing time of class G oil well cement and its mechanical, petrophysical, and elastic properties. Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technologies. 2023;13:1181-1196. DOI: 10.1007/s13202-022-01601-2
  32. 32. Liu Z, Yuan X, Zhao Y, Chew JW, Wang H. Concrete waste-derived aggregate for concrete manufacture. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022;338:130637. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130637
  33. 33. Abousnina R, Premasiri S, Anise V, Lokuge W, Vimonsatit V, Ferdous W, et al. Mechanical properties of macro polypropylene fibre-reinforced concrete. Polymers (Basel). 2021;13:1-25. DOI: 10.3390/polym13234112
  34. 34. Benaicha M, Jalbaud O, Hafidi Alaoui A, Burtschell Y. Correlation between the mechanical behavior and the ultrasonic velocity of fiber-reinforced concrete. Construction and Building Materials. 2015;101:702-709. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.10.047
  35. 35. Romero Gómez MI, Silva RV, Flores Colen I, Rubio de Hita P. Mechanical performance of waste fishing net fibre-reinforced gypsum composites. Construction and Building Materials. 2023;387:131675. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131675
  36. 36. Balgourinejad N, Haghighifar M, Madandoust R, Charkhtab S. Experimental study on mechanical properties, microstructural of lightweight concrete incorporating polypropylene fibers and metakaolin at high temperatures. Journal of Materials Research and Technology. 2022;18:5238-5256. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.04.005
  37. 37. İsafça Kaya T, Karakuzu K, Özen S, Doğangün A, Aghabaglou AM. Effect of polypropylene fiber and shrinkage reducing admixture utilization on water absorption of Khorasan mortar. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2022;57:730-733. DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.02.204
  38. 38. Li Z, Wang X, Yan W, Ding L, Liu J, Wu Z, et al. Physical and mechanical properties of gypsum-based composites reinforced with basalt, glass, and PVA fibers. Journal of Building Engineering. 2023;64:105640. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105640
  39. 39. Gencel O, Del Coz Diaz JJ, Sutcu M, Koksal F, Álvarez Rabanal FP, Martínez-Barrera G. A novel lightweight gypsum composite with diatomite and polypropylene fibers. Construction and Building Materials. 2016;113:732-740. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.125
  40. 40. Durgun MY. Effect of wetting-drying cycles on gypsum plasters containing ground basaltic pumice and polypropylene fibers. Journal of Building Engineering. 2020;32:101801. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101801
  41. 41. Turkish Standardization Institute: TS EN 13279-1: Gypsum Binders and Gypsum Plasters - Part 1: Definition and requirements. 2009
  42. 42. Nguyen H, Kinnunen P, Carvelli V, Mastali M, Illikainen M. Strain hardening polypropylene fiber reinforced composite from hydrated ladle slag and gypsum. Composites. Part B, Engineering. 2019;158:328-338. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.09.056
  43. 43. Yoo DY, Park JJ, Kim SW. Fiber pullout behavior of HPFRCC: Effects of matrix strength and fiber type. Composite Structures. 2017;174:263-276. DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.04.064
  44. 44. Huang H, Gao X, Khayat KH, Su A. Influence of fiber alignment and length on flexural properties of UHPC. Construction and Building Materials. 2021;290:122863. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122863

Written By

Ahmet Hayrullah Sevinç, Muhammed Yasin Durgun and Hayriye Hale Aygün

Submitted: 10 January 2024 Reviewed: 11 January 2024 Published: 19 June 2024

© The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.