Wrap Tyres Programme

Composite construction products from waste tyres

Turning waste tyres into new products for the construction industry.

Project code: TYR0003 Research date: Nov 2006Mar 2007

ISBN: 1-84405-351-2 Date: March 2007

Front cover photograph: Plasterboard sandwich panel with a rubber core derived from waste tyres.

IMPORTANT NOTE & DISCLAIMER WRAP and BRE believe the content of this report to be correct as at the date of writing. However, factors such as prices, levels of recycled content and regulatory requirements are subject to change and users of the report should check with their suppliers to confirm the current situation. In addition, care should be taken in using any of the cost information provided as it is based upon numerous project-specific assumptions (such as scale, location, tender context, etc.). The report does not claim to be exhaustive, nor does it claim to cover all relevant products and specifications available on the market. While steps have been taken to ensure accuracy, WRAP cannot accept responsibility or be held liable to any person for any loss or damage arising out of or in connection with this information being inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. It is the responsibility of the potential user of a material or product to consult with the supplier or manufacturer and ascertain whether a particular product will satisfy their specific requirements. The listing or featuring of a particular product or company does not constitute an endorsement by WRAP and WRAP cannot guarantee the performance of individual products or materials. For more detail, please refer to WRAPs Terms & Conditions on its web site: www.wrap.org.uk

Published by Waste & Resources Action Programme

The Old Academy 21 Horse Fair Banbury, Oxon OX16 0AH

Tel: 01295 819 900 Fax: 01295 819 911 E-mail: info@wrap.org.uk

Helpline freephone 0808 100 2040

Executive summary
The construction industry consumes approximately 420 million tonnes of products per year, and therefore utilises large quantities of raw materials. Alternatives to primary materials in construction products are already widely used; examples include the use of construction and demolition wastes as aggregates, timber wastes in composite board products and by-products from steel-making in the manufacture of mineral wool. Examples such as these contribute to continued improvement of the green credentials of the construction industry. By 2005, there were over 480,000 tonnes of used tyres arisings per year in the UK (Environment Waste Strategy, 2007). Since July 2006, both whole and shredded tyres have been banned from landfill, following implementation of the UK Landfill Regulations. There is therefore an urgent need to find new applications and markets for tyre arisings. In November 2005, BRE was commissioned by WRAP to identify applications for waste tyres in construction products. The principal objective of the project was to use tyre waste to develop and provide industry with a number of new sustainable, viable, low-cost composite construction products that are easy to manufacture. The aim of the project was to contribute to the remit of WRAP to reduce the volume of waste tyres going to landfill, and to research new market opportunities for waste tyre-derived materials. The project was completed in March 2007. The objectives of the project were: to understand and characterise waste-tyre raw materials; to establish the properties, reactivity and functionality of these raw materials for the development of construction composites; to develop a matrix-used tyre-performance-demand model for used tyre-based composites; to investigate the modification of a new generation of reprocessed used tyre constituents, if necessary; to develop new processes for manufacturing these composites. The main tasks undertaken under the project were as follows: property testing of the tyre-derived raw materials, including recommendations on raw material modification; laboratory manufacture of prototype products identified by BRE and an industry consultative group; assessment of the properties of the developed prototypes; development of a matrix of used tyre vs. property demand for the plasterboard/tyre buffings-derived panel; industrial assessment of the plasterboard/buffings product; assessment of economic and market factors. During the project, a series of prototypes based on a range of waste tyre-derived raw materials (shreds, dust and buffings) with plasterboard, oriented strand board (OSB) and laminate floor were produced. A plasterboard sandwich panel with a rubber layer in the middle was successfully developed and a variety of this subsequently tested by Lafarge Gypsum, who were interested in its acoustic insulation properties. Further work is still needed to bring this product to market, but results so far are promising. The results of the tests are given in Appendix A. A range of other potential products were prototyped in the laboratory, including underlay for use beneath laminate floors, and sandwich panel for door or wall partition with OSB. However (with industry agreement), these have not been taken further at this stage, some of them because they appear to be uneconomical given current cost models. Members of an industry consultative group contributed to the project through the provision of testing facilities, materials and advice. Key contributors were: Murfitts Industries, Charles Lawrence International Ltd, Credential Environmental Ltd, Tyre Recovery Association, Biffa Waste Services, CostDOWN Consultancy, Lafarge Plasterboard, Hyperlast, Apollo Adhesives and Kingpin.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 1

Contents
1.0 2.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3 Description of the project ........................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Assessing tyre-derived raw materials ......................................................................................6 2.2 Used tyre-performance-demand model ...................................................................................6 2.3 Manufacture and characterisation of prototype products ..........................................................6 3.0 Results and discussion ............................................................................................................. 8 3.1 Assessing tyre-derived materials.............................................................................................8 3.1.1 Products available from tyre recyclers ........................................................................8 3.1.2 Physical properties of the tyre shreds....................................................................... 10 3.2 Tyre granules bound with resin ............................................................................................ 10 3.2.1 Initial trial mixes ..................................................................................................... 10 3.2.2 Initial product development ..................................................................................... 11 3.2.3 Further prototypes: laminate floor underlay and plasterboard sandwich panels........... 14 3.2.4 Tests on the tyre/resin mixes................................................................................... 15 3.2.5 Used tyre-performance-demand model..................................................................... 18 3.2.6 Summary of the prototype development................................................................... 19 3.3 Market survey ..................................................................................................................... 19 3.3.1 Market drivers for the use of tyres in composites ...................................................... 20 3.3.2 Overview of the market for recycled tyre materials and resins ................................... 20 3.3.3 Market survey of acoustic plasterboard products....................................................... 21 3.3.4 Market survey of acoustic underlay for laminate flooring ........................................... 22 4.0 Environmental aspects ........................................................................................................... 22 5.0 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 23 6.0 Next steps .............................................................................................................................. 23 7.0 Commercialisation ................................................................................................................. 23 8.0 Sources of information consulted .......................................................................................... 25 8.1 References.......................................................................................................................... 25 8.2 Websites investigated during market survey.......................................................................... 25 8.2.1 Tyres ..................................................................................................................... 25 8.2.2 Products with tyre-derived rubber content ................................................................ 25 8.2.3 Acoustic underlays .................................................................................................. 25 8.2.4 Acoustic boards ...................................................................................................... 25 8.2.5 Dry lining/partition/ceilings/floors............................................................................. 25 8.2.6 Tyre-derived materials: ........................................................................................... 26 Appendix A: Used tyre application vs property requirements............................................................ 27 Appendix B: Lafarge Plasterboard test results................................................................................... 29 Appendix C: Resins considered in the project.................................................................................... 31

Composite construction products from waste tyres 2

1.0

Introduction

The construction industry consumes approximately 420 million tonnes of products per year, and therefore utilises large quantities of raw materials. Alternatives to primary materials in construction products are already widely used. Examples include the use of construction and demolition wastes as aggregates, timber wastes in composite board products and by-products from steel-making in the manufacture of mineral wool. Examples such as these contribute to the continued improvement of the green credentials of the construction industry. By 2005, there were over 480,000 tonnes of waste tyre arisings in the UK per year. Since July 2006, both whole and shredded tyres have been banned from landfill, following implementation of the UK Landfill Regulations. There is therefore an urgent need to find new applications and markets for waste tyre arisings. The current uses for waste tyres are listed in Figure 1. Figure 1 Current uses for waste tyres Uses and disposal routes Comment Export (used casings) The tyre casing comprises the entire main structural body of a tyre, often called the carcass. Retread (UK and export) The preferred method for re-using worn tyres as it effectively doubles the life of the tyre. Buffings are generated in the process. Energy recovery Used as a fuel (primarily in cement kilns). Landfill engineering Whole or shredded tyres can be used in landfill engineering, for example as part of leachate collections systems. Recycled material from end-of-life tyres processed into different grades of shred and crumb.

Tonnes 35,039 57,427a

85,750b 59,000c

Material recovery (shred/crumb)

162,500d

BRMA, RMA & industry figures. Returns from industry cement kilns c Based on DTI Landfill Operator survey 2005 d Returns from industry.
b

Used Tyres 2005 - End Uses (486 578 tonnes)

Landfill loss 12% Landfill engineering 12% Export of used casings 7% Re-used as part worn tyres 7% Other re-use 0% Retread UK & export 12%

Energy recovery 17%

Material recovery (shred/crumb) 33%

Figure 2 Waste tyre end uses in the UK (source: DTI tyre statistics: 2005)

Composite construction products from waste tyres 3

It can be seen from Figure 2 that approximately half of all waste tyres undergo material or energy recovery. A Publicly Available Specification, PAS107, has recently been prepared by the British Standards Institution (BSI) in collaboration with WRAP to provide a specification for producing grades of size-reduced rubber of consistent and verifiable quality. A summary sheet for the specification (PAS107: 2007, WRAP/BSI) has been produced by WRAP). The grades and characteristics of material specified, and their PAS codes, are given in Figure 3. Figure 3 Characteristics of size-reduced tyre materials (source: PAS107: 2007, WRAP/BSI)

Material Category Rough Cuts Clean Cuts Rough Cut Shred Clean Cut Shred Rough Cut Chips Clean Cut Chips Granulate Powder Fine Powder

Size range (maximum dimension) mm Minimum 300 300 50 50 10 10 1.0 0 0 Maximum None None 300 300 50 50 10 1.0 0.5

Other characteristics Exposed wire and textiles 1) Less than 5% exposed wire and textiles
2)

Exposed wire and textiles Less than 5% exposed wire and textiles
2)

Exposed wire and textiles No exposed wire. Less than 5% exposed textiles 2) Free from exposed wire and textiles Free from exposed wire and textiles Free from exposed wire and textiles

1) All exposed wire and textiles shall be firmly attached to the body of the rubber fragments 2) Upon Visual Inspection

This project researches the potential uses of tyre shred, crumb or buffed materials that are categorised under material recovery in Figure 2. The materials assessed fall within the categories RS, CC, G and P (Rough cut shred, Clean cut chips, Granulate and Powder respectively) according to PAS107. However, this project was undertaken before the issue of PAS107 and hence the terminology used will differ slightly from the PAS107 terminology. In November 2005, WRAP commissioned the BRE consultancy to identify applications for waste tyres in construction products. The principal objective of the project was to use tyre waste to develop and provide industry with a number of new sustainable, viable, low-cost composite construction products, which are readily attainable. The aim of the project was to contribute to WRAPs remit of reducing the volume of waste tyres going to landfill and to research new market opportunities for waste tyre-derived materials The project was completed in March 2007. This report describes the methodology used to identify potential products for the construction industry using waste tyres, from the classification of the various tyre shreds available to the technical development and testing of prototypes, and assessment of the market potential for the prototypes developed. During the project, a series of prototypes based on a range of used tyre-derived raw materials (shreds, dust and buffings) with plasterboard, oriented strand board (OSB) and laminate floor were produced. A plasterboard sandwich panel with a rubber layer in the middle was successfully developed and a variety of this subsequently tested by Lafarge Gypsum, who were interested in its acoustic insulation properties. Further work is still needed

Composite construction products from waste tyres 4

to bring this product to market, but results so far are promising. The results of the tests are given in Appendix A. A range of other potential products were prototyped in the laboratory, including underlay for use beneath laminate floors, and sandwich panel for door or wall partition with OSB. However (with industry agreement), these have not been taken further at this stage, in some cases because they appear to be uneconomic given current cost models.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 5

2.0

Description of the project

The aim of the project was to utilise tyre waste to develop and provide industry with a number of sustainable, viable, low-cost composite construction products. The overall objectives of the project were achieved through a number of secondary objectives: understanding and assessing the primary reprocessed raw materials arising from waste tyres when existing recycling and recovery processes are adopted; establishing the property profile of the waste tyre raw materials relevant to the development of composites; examining the reactivity and functionality of the reprocessed waste tyre raw materials; developing new processes (on a pilot or laboratory scale) for the manufacture of composites based on recycled tyres; assessing the market potential for the product(s) developed.

2.1

Assessing tyre-derived raw materials

The main tyre-derived raw materials (shreds, granules, buffings) were assessed for specific gravity and particle size, shape/appearance/composition. It was not considered necessary, as originally set out in the project proposal, to formally assess the wettability or detailed microstructure of the rubber since observations of the workability of the wet mixes was adequate to optimise the blend of rubber and resin.

2.2

Used tyre-performance-demand model

A range of tyre-derived raw materials and potential products were initially considered under the project and evaluated on the basis of the cost of competitor products. Following an evaluation on that basis, the most successful prototype (technically and commercially) proved to be a panel based on resin-bound rubber buffings bonded to plasterboard. A matrix was subsequently developed for plasterboard/buffings composite sandwich panel products to identify the functional requirements required of the product in the envisaged end-use. In developing this model, the following questions/issues were considered: What does the envisaged application demand in terms of product function? Mechanical performance (stiffness, strength, etc) Other physical performance (fire resistance, noise attenuation, durability, appearance, etc) Cost (effectively dictated by the costs of competitive products) What are the key aspects of the composition of the envisaged product that will enable it to be fit-for-purpose? How much (indicative) energy will be required to break down the source tyres? What are the current competitive products? Price. In some cases identification of direct competitors is not straightforward. Indicative prices give target range. Strengths and weaknesses.

The results of the assessment are given in Section 3.2.5 and Appendix A. Here, the performance and cost of the successful composite is compared in relation to service classes for plasterboard and competitor acoustic boards.

2.3

Manufacture and characterisation of prototype products

A series of prototypes (comprising a rubber layer and one or more stiffer layers) were developed in BREs laboratories. These comprised: a wall sandwich panel, plasterboard/rubber stud wall panels, and laminate floor underlay. The materials utilised in the composites with a tyre-derived rubber layer were plasterboard, laminate flooring or oriented strand board. Mixes (rubber buffings or shreds) bound with resin were also produced and cast into sheets for assessment.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 6

The tyre shreds/resin were assessed (in terms of curing time, workability and quality of binding) in relation to temperature, resin type and percentage resin content. The rubber buffings/resin were assessed for water vapour permeability, water absorption and moisture swelling. The prototypes were assessed for the following properties: Stiffness (all-visual assessment) Bonding of rubber layer to substrate (all-visual assessment) Fire resistance (OSB/rubber sandwich panel only) Stiffness (plasterboard/buffings only) Impact resistance (plasterboard/buffings only).

Assessment of the thermal conductivity was not considered worthwhile as it was not relevant to the expected end uses of the composites.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 7

3.0 3.1

3.1.1 Products available from tyre recyclers

The raw material composition of car tyres is different from lorry tyres. Lorry tyres have a higher proportion of natural rubber, a lower proportion of fibre and a greater wall thickness. By contrast, car tyres are made of synthetic rubber, have a higher proportion of steel and fabric and are therefore less profitable to re-process. This means that markets for processed truck tyres are better developed than those for car tyres. This project initially examined products derived from truck tyres with a low degree of processing. However, a decision was made to concentrate mainly on finding new applications for materials derived from processing car tyres, for which there is an excess of supply over demand. The recycling process for tyres consists of various stages. Depending on which level of processing is used, different materials outputs are available. Rubber shreds can be produced in different sizes depending on the requirements for the end-use applications. Product prices for shredded tyres generally increase dramatically with the degree of processing (and reduction in particle size). The most common way to recycle tyres is to use a mechanical shredder. However, other techniques are now available, such as water jetting and cryogenic processing (liquid nitrogen) (Waste Management News, 3/10/06; Slater 2006). These may produce feedstocks at an equivalent or lower cost to other recycling methods. The main processed tyre raw materials currently available can be summarised as follows:

Results and discussion Assessing tyre-derived materials

Shreds/crumb
Tyre shreds and crumb are processed materials that are available in various particle sizes. In general, the finer the material, the higher the end value (as there are more valuable end uses). However, finer materials do require greater processing, which also incurs additional cost.

Dust
An unavoidable waste (not deliberately produced) from the production of shreds. The amount of dust produced depends on the nature of the end product (finer shred leads to more dust). It has relatively low value and no current uses. Following the ban on tyre material to landfill, dust is currently stockpiled.

Buffings
Buffings are an unavoidable fibrous residue derived from the tyre retreading process, in which the existing tread is removed and replaced with new tread. Buffings have a relatively low value but are of particular interest to composite manufacturing companies, due to their fibrous shape, potential interlock properties and small particle size. Available amounts are expected to increase as a result of initiatives to promote the advantages of retreaded tyres. Figure 4 details the shreds and powders derived from tyre recycling that were collected and assessed for the project.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 8

Figure 4 Description of the tyre shreds collected for the project Step of recycling Description of product {includes category code as defined in PAS107} process 1. Initial Coarse shred: 3050mm, contains steel and fibre shredding (picture shows example of truck tyre). 30 pieces of coarse shreds were examined (60% contained only steel, 20% steel and fabric, 20% fabric only) {Rough cut shred, RS} Size (in mm) Length Width Thickness Min. 30 11 6 Max. 144 74 17 Mean 76.6 41 11.2 2. Removal of steel According to one industry source, car tyres contain approximately 30% steel. The tyres are shredded to 1525mm size and the steel is removed magnetically from the shreds. Approximately 8% of the rubber remains adhered to the steel. Shreds: 2550 mm, contain rubber and fibres (picture shows example of car tyre) {Clean cut chips, CC}

1 cm

3.

Shredding of rubber

4.

Removal of fibres

Granules: 25mm, rubber only (picture shows example of car tyre) {granulate, G}

1 cm

1 cm 5. Shredding by-product Powder: <0.8mm, rubber only. Graph shows the grading of rubber powder {Powder, P}:
70.0 60.0 50.0 % mass 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 Sieve size (microns)

1 cm

Rubber powder particle grading

6. Tyre retreading

Buffings: Fibrous material, rubber only. The larger particles, from 1mm to 20mm, are generally elongated whilst the smaller particles, <1mm, are generally irregular in shape. {not categorised in PAS107}

1 cm

Composite construction products from waste tyres 9

3.1.2 Physical properties of the tyre shreds

The density of various types of tyre shreds described above was characterised. Results are shown in Figure 5. Figure 5 Density measurement of various tyre shreds from truck tyres Coarse shreds Shreds Granules Buffings Density (kg/m3) 1,460* 1,150* 1,060* 1,150* * data checked and agreed by industry partners. Bulk densities are typically 400500kg/m3 depending on particle size

3.2

3.2.1 Initial trial mixes

Tyre granules bound with resin

A series of experiments was carried out at BRE in order to find out the reactivity of car tyre granules with binders and to optimise the binding systems both for manufacture and performance of the composites produced. The following mix parameters were used to establish the quality of the mix: curing time effect of temperature on setting time and binding quality effect of resin content on binding quality of tyre granules comparison of resin types in terms of their effect on binding quality of tyre granules.

The resins used were all isocyanates, specially designed pre-polymers that can also be used for the manufacture of reactive hot melts. The isocyanate resins solidify to form a bond and cure under the action of atmospheric and substrate moisture to form a product which will not re-melt. Three different types were used (all supplied by the project partners): Resin A: Different supplier, but with similar properties to B and C Resin B: Same supplier as Resin C (viscosity of 775mPa.s at 25 C) * Resin C: Same supplier as Resin B (viscosity of 1,800mPa.s at 25 C).

The resins are all manufactured from petroleum sources. The environmental impact of these resins (in terms of manufacture and product life cycle) has not been assessed. However, health and safety precautions do have to be followed. Appendix A gives further details. The aim was to produce a well-bonded product with the minimum quantity of resin and at a moderate temperature (60 C or less). As moisture is an essential ingredient in the curing process, a small amount of water was added either during mixing or after compaction. The resin was mixed with the rubber in a bowl mixer. The mixed material was tamped by hand into wooden moulds which were sealed in aluminium foil. Pressure was applied through a top board and G-cramps. Heat was applied to the sealed packages in an oven to accelerate the rate of curing. With one mix (mix 8), an attempt was made to line the mould surfaces with strand (the wood material used in OSB). The results of the trial mixes (using the car tyre granulates) are summarised in Figure 6. The following observations were made of mixes 114: It appeared that temperature did not have any effect on the quality of the curing: curing at 60 C binds the rubber granules as well as at 160 C (mixes 35). Temperature only affected the curing time, not the quality of the product. The curing time can be as short as 5 minutes with heat applied. The minimum amount of Resin C needed was at least 5% for rubber granules to bind effectively (mixes 11 to 14). However, 4.5% of Resin A was sufficient to bind the granules (mix 9). It was possible to bond the resin/granule mix with strand as the resin did not penetrate the strand sufficiently (mix 8).

This is the SI unit for dynamic viscosity. One Pa.s is equivalent to one newton-second per square metre (Ns m2). The unit is the viscosity of a fluid in which a tangential force of 1 Newton per square metre maintains a difference in velocity of 1 centimetre per second between two parallel planes 1 centimetre apart.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 10

It is important to note that the amount of resin required varies with the surface area of the rubber, i.e. the coarser the rubber shred, the less resin is required. Also, fabric fibres present in the rubber shred increase the resin absorption of the product, therefore requiring greater volumes. Figure 6 Initial trial mixes (car tyre-derived rubber granulates/resin) Mix Curing Temperature Resin type Resin (% no. timea wt) 1 Overnight 60 C Resin C 1.6% 2 7 hrs 60 C Resin C 1.6%

Water (% wt) None 2cm3 sprayed onto surface 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 2% 1%

Result/ comments Not cured Cureda

Effect of temperature
3 4 5 6 7 30 min 30 min 30 min 5 min 5 min 160 C 100 C 60 C 160 C 160 C Resin C Resin C Resin C Resin C Resin C 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 2% 1% Cured Cured Cured Cured but not boundb Cured but not bound Partial adhesion to strand Cured Not cured Cured, not well bound Cured, well bound Cured, well bound Cured, well bound

Reduced resin content

Trial using wood strand and tyre granules (with pressing)

8 5 min 140 C Resin C 4.5% 4.5%

Effect of resin (samples were pressed)

9 10 11 12 13 14
a b

10 min 10 min 5 min 5 min 10 min 5 min

160 C 160 C 160 C 160 C 130 C 140 C

Resin A Resin B Resin C Resin C Resin C Resin C

4.5% 4.5% 3% 8% 6% 5%

4.5% 4.5% 3% 8% 6% 5%

Cured means that the resin had set Bound means the tyre granulates were bound to each other to form a solid

3.2.2 Initial product development

Resin C had been found to be effective with relatively low proportions of resin. It was therefore used to make the further mixes to develop composite products. The scope of the project was to consider two application/product areas: Laminate floor underlay Sandwich construction panels, using oriented strand board (OSB) and plasterboard. Several samples were made using Resin C, and various rubber materials; see Figure 7 for details.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 11

Figure 7 Description of the initial prototypes developed Prototype Application

Rubber used Truck tyre shred (50mm thick)

Prototype 1:

Sandwich panel for door or partition

Other material used OSB

Comment

High density, difficult to cut panel due to presence of steel. Coarse shreds did not bond together well, therefore the panel edges had to be closed with wooden edge pieces.

Prototype 2:

Sandwich panel for wall partition

Truck tyre powder (12mm thick)

Plasterboard

Good bonding of tyre with plasterboard good potential

Prototype 3: (side, top and bottom view)

Laminate floor underlay

Truck tyre powder (6mm thick)

Laminate floor board

Good bonding of tyre with laminate floor good potential

Composite construction products from waste tyres 12

Prototype 4:

Sandwich panel for door or partition

Truck tyres. Shreds (12mm thick)

OSB

Good bonding of tyres with the OSB

Prototype 5: No picture available; the sample was used for fire testing see schematic below

Sandwich panel for door or partition

Truck tyre granules 25mm. (100mm thick)

OSB

Good bonding of tyres with OSB.

Figure 8 Schematic of Prototype 5 The prototypes developed were discussed with the project partners. It was decided that the subsequent activities should concentrate on the use of car tyre-derived material (for which there is a need to develop new markets), rather than truck tyre-derived material for which high-value markets, such as safety surfacings, are already well developed. The industrial partners also highlighted the point that, to be of interest, new construction products containing tyre-derived material would have to be able to compete on price with existing products. The product type that was chosen for further investigation was the plasterboard sandwich panel for wall partitions (prototype 6) as this was thought to be a higher-value application than sandwich panels. These were selected for the following reasons: There is an active market for acoustic partitions, floor underlay and acoustic board products based on plasterboard. Good acoustic damping properties can be anticipated from products made with recycled rubber due to its damping properties. The raw materials price for tyre-derived rubber makes it attractive for consideration as an ingredient in wall partitions. This was confirmed in the market survey (Section 3.3).

Composite construction products from waste tyres 13

3.2.3 Further prototypes: laminate floor underlay and plasterboard sandwich panels
Prototypes 2 and 3 were shown to industry partners to gauge the level of interest from a technical viewpoint. In parallel, an economic assessment of each of these applications was carried out (see Section 3.3). Further mixes were also developed using waste car tyre-derived rubber. One of the concerns with the prototype samples shown in Figure 7 was the stiffness of the rubber layer, as this is important in determining the acoustic insulation properties. In general terms, the stiffer the layer, the less sound attenuating and the more thermally insulating the layer is. For this particular project, sound attenuation was the main interest and the prototype samples were deemed too stiff for the best attenuation in both applications. The type of resin used in the mix is the main parameter affecting the stiffness of the prototype. Another resin (a polyurethane resin known as Resin D) was therefore used to develop further prototype samples (see Figure 9). The work also focused on small particle-sized materials (such as buffings) which were considered likely to be suitable for the fabrication of thin components. These materials also have the advantage of low market price (<40 per tonne). A rule of thumb is that the thickness of a bound layer should be >10 times the diameter of the largest particle. Hence, a layer thickness of 10mm was the starting position for the prototypes. The new prototype samples were made using a polyurethane resin (Resin D) which is activated by atmospheric moisture. It therefore requires no heat or water addition to the mix. It is also judged to be less stiff than the isocyanate resins. The manufacturers recommended that, for small particle sizes, 1520% (by weight) of resin should be used. This is a higher resin content than that used for the first phase and as a result, the cost of the resin makes up the bulk (approx. 8090%) of the raw materials cost of the resin/rubber layer. (See market survey, Section 3.3. and Appendix A.) The sample mixing and compaction procedure was the same as that used to manufacture the previous prototypes. However, the samples were cured at room temperature and without the addition of water. A longer curing period was also used compared with the previous laboratory prototype samples. The rubber used for these samples was buffings (derived from tyre retreading). Buffings are relatively low in cost (see Section 3.3), small in particle size and do not contain any fibre (which absorbs a large amount of resin). In addition, the small particle size allows fairly thin components to be made. Two types of prototype were produced (Figure 9). Both prototype samples that were developed from the buffings during the second phase of the project appeared less stiff when handled than the samples previously developed. They were therefore considered more promising for technical investigation as potential acoustic insulation products. The materials mixed easily and the products were easy to mix and compact. The finished products were well bonded together when cured and appeared to have a good level of stiffness. The fibrous structure of the buffings also provided a good particle interlock, which is expected to provide better tensile strength. However, an economic assessment of the floor underlay recipe showed that the use of buffings in this application was uneconomical compared with alternatives already on the market (see Section 3.3.4). No further tests were therefore carried out on the floor underlay. In summary, the sandwich wall panel (Prototype 6) was considered successful. A sandwich panel prototype with 17.5% resin content was successfully manufactured. An initial assessment of the cost of raw materials also indicated that it could be economically viable and compete on price with competitor partition products. However, the economic assessment of the materials indicated that the resin represents a major component (around 90%) of the materials cost. It is expected that, with the development of bioresins that are not based on petrochemicals, the price of the resin component will fall to perhaps half that of the current price of petrochemical resins.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 14

Figure 9 Description of the second phase of prototypes developed using buffings Picture Application Resin % Rubber used (by weight) Resin D: Buffings Sandwich Prototype 6: 17.5% (10mm panel for thick) wall partition

Other material used Plasterboard

Comment

Good bonding of tyre with plasterboard. Prototype appears less stiff than Prototype 2 good potential

Prototype 7: Bottom and top view

Laminate floor underlay

Resin D: 17.5%

Buffings

Laminate floor

Good bonding of tyre with laminate floor. Prototype appears less stiff than Prototype 3 good potential

Lafarge Plasterboard showed an interest in the plasterboard sandwich panel and the economic assessment of this product showed that it was potentially economically viable. The plasterboard samples were therefore tested further under this project. The results of testing conducted by Lafarge Gypsum, on prototypes similar to Prototype 6, are given in Appendix A.

3.2.4 Tests on the tyre/resin mixes

Fire tests
Small-scale fire tests were carried out on two prototype samples: Prototype 2 (tyre layer: 100mm thick) Prototype 5 (tyre layer: 100mm thick): granulates were high-value tyre products as they contained no fibre or steel. Tests on this prototype were carried out mainly to gain information about the behaviour of rubber under fire conditions.

The test regime was adopted from the ISO5660 Cone Calorimeter test (WCTE, 2004). A radiation level of 50kW/m2 was chosen. The test exposes one side of the sample to the irradiation (Figure 10) and monitors the temperature build-up through the depth of the test specimen with exposure time (for samples of 100mm thickness). In these tests the temperature build-up was monitored in two locations: 1 At the interface between unexposed board and core material 2 At the centre of the core material. This test regime is currently under development at BRE and is being used to assess product performance in preparation for full-scale fire resistance tests to EN1363. The regime does not replace full-scale fire testing but has been shown to provide a good indication of key performance characteristics of materials and their use in structural wall units. It also enables comparison of performance levels of different material types and

Composite construction products from waste tyres 15

combinations. The test set-up has several advantages, including the possibility to closely observe failure characteristics of the specimen, especially after the test has been completed.

Figure 10 Stages of small scale-fire test to the modified EN1363 The fire tests showed that whilst the outer layer (in the case of OSB) was burned (Figure 11) or degraded (in the case of plasterboard, Figure 12), the rubber core merely charred very slowly, rather than igniting or melting (as shown on the right hand sides of both Figures 11 and 12). The temperature probe placed just at the interface between unexposed board and core material showed that after 30 minutes of exposure to the heat source, the temperature remained at room temperature. Figure 11 Hole burned through OSB

4 cm

4 cm Figure 12 Hole burned through the plasterboard, sheathing, and charred rubber core Many applications or products have more specific test requirements than can be addressed by a simple test such as the calorimeter test. Nevertheless, the work done so far does give an early indication that combustibility may not be a major problem with these products containing tyre rubber. It is also recognised, however, that issues such as the amount and nature of smoke generated are important. Further testing of prototype products would be necessary to address these issues fully. Such tests would need to be specific to the intended application to determine the fire resistance period of, for example, a stud partition with rubber-backed sheathing boards. Polyurethanes such as Resin D are combustible and can regenerate isocyanate fumes. However, phosphate-type flame retardants can be added which can be very effective barriers to the propagation of flame.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 16

Further tests on the plasterboard wall partition samples (Prototype 6)

Further samples of Prototype 6 were prepared, using a different Resin D. The tyre layer as prepared for Prototype 6 samples was tested for: water vapour permeability permeability water absorption swelling of the tyre layer with water over time.

Prototype 6 was also tested for: stiffness (3 point bending). The test method utilises a constant span (100cm) between supports and gives the amount of maximum deflection from the horizontal (at mid span at the time of failure) and the load required to cause that failure. density impact resistance: The impact test allows materials to be categorised into duty categories of light, medium, heavy or severe. Appendix A gives further details.

Tensile and compressive strength were not assessed as resistance to bending/deflection of the prototype was considered more relevant to the performance of partition boards. The results of the tests are summarised in Figures 13 and 14. Rubber layers (10mm thickness) were manufactured at BRE with three different resins. These were sent to Lafarge Gypsum for the manufacture of prototype panels and assessment for potential acoustic benefits. The results from the tests conducted and the methods adopted are described in Appendix A. An overview of the results is given in Figure 15.

Figure 13 Results of tests performed on the tyre layer of Prototype 6 Test Result Comment Water Vapour Permeability (BS EN 650 g/m2/day The tyre layer is permeable, so cannot be used at a ISO12572:2001) vapour barrier. Water Absorption 21.43% Virtually no swelling, although the water absorption is high (probably due the presence of voids between tyre buffings).

Swelling (tested in water at 20 C measured after 7 days) (BS EN317:1993)

1.08% 1 cm

Figure 14 Results of tests performed on Prototype 6

Composite construction products from waste tyres 17

Test Stiffness (adapted from EN310:2003) Sample size: 600mm length x 50mm width x 32mm thickness

Results and comments Average results (for 3 samples) for Prototype 6: Mean deflection 12mm under a load of 258.62N

1 cm The average result (for 3 samples) for a single layer of plasterboard: Mean deflection 17mm under a load of 68N.

Impact (up to 10Nm) based on BS5234-2 1992 Part 2 and BS8200: 1985 [8, 9]

1.73mm indent on board for impact of 10Nm Suitable for Severe duty An indent caused by a 10Nm impact Average diameter of indents = 23.3mm; depth = 1.73mm

Figure 15 Results of tests performed on prototypes manufactured by Lafarge Gypsum Test Results and comments Manufacture Prototypes with three resin types, identical thickness were developed and tested using a method based on ISO16940* type A : 12.5mm standard + type A resin/rubber 10mm type B : 12.5mm standard + type B rubber/resin 10mm type C : 12.5mm standard + type C rubber/resin 10mm

plasterboard layer rubber/resin layer

Acoustic (damping of vibration of the board) Acoustic performance: dynamic stiffness and damping (tested by Lafarge Plasterboard)

All the results were encouraging and showed good results in terms of damping of the vibration of the board compared to conventional products. Damping results were 4% for all three prototypes.

* ISO16940 Glass in building Glazing and airborne sound insulation Measurement of the mechanical impedance of
laminated glass

3.2.5 Used tyre-performance-demand model

Composite construction products from waste tyres 18

The most successful prototype (technically and commercially) was a panel based on resin-bound rubber buffings bonded to plasterboard. A matrix was therefore developed for the plasterboard/buffings composite sandwich panel material. Function-demand inputs to the model (developed by the BRE team) were as shown in Figure 16. The results of the assessment of the prototype against the matrix are given in Appendix A. Here, the performance and cost of the composite is compared in relation to service classes for plasterboard and competitor acoustic boards. Figure 16 Function-demand inputs Resin binder o Resin type o Resin content (%) o Resin cost Tyre-derived rubber o Tyre-derived material (particle grading and shape) o Relative density

Tyre/resin layer o Stiffness o Durability (moisture resistance) o Shear resistance

Tyre/plasterboard composite performance o Impact resistance o Bending strength o Deflection o Interlayer bond strength o Stiffness of rubber/resin layer o Stiffness of plasterboard layer o thickness of rubber/resin layer o Thickness of plasterboard layer Possibilities for modification of key properties of the overall composite o Resin type o Resin content (%) o Tyre-derived material (particle grading and shape) as received o Possibility to modify the tyre-derived material o thickness of rubber/resin layer o Thickness of plasterboard layer o Number of layers (2 or 3) o Options for onsite mixing versus delivery to manufacturer as a roll

3.2.6 Summary of the prototype development

The plasterboard sandwich panel with a buffing/ resin layer in the centre (10mm thick), using Resin D was successfully developed and showed: Good acoustic properties (vibration damping) Improved stiffness properties compared to a single plasterboard layer Impact resistance equivalent to that of a panel suitable for severe duty The rubber layer had a similar density (kg/m2) to that of a sheet of plasterboard (12mm thickness). The technical properties of the panel were, therefore, so far very promising. A comparison of the prototype properties with those of other boards (where available), is given in Appendix A. With the prototypes manufactured at BRE and tested at Lafarge Gypsum, all the results were encouraging and showed good results in terms of damping of the vibration of the board compared to conventional products. Results obtained in the project are compared with data for other plasterboard and acoustic board products in Appendix A.

3.3

Market survey

One issue raised by the project partners was the need to ensure that the products developed during the project were economically competitive with comparable products. A detailed market review was therefore conducted on the two products identified (acoustic wall board and acoustic underlay).

Composite construction products from waste tyres 19

3.3.1 Market drivers for the use of tyres in composites

The main general market drivers for processed tyre materials are summarised below (Figure 17). (+) indicates drivers that are likely to increase the supply of materials and lead to lower raw materials prices; (-) indicates drivers that are likely to compete with construction applications for low-cost waste tyre material, reducing supply and increasing cost. Several manufacturers were contacted and an internet search was carried out to find out the value of materials derived from waste tyres. Results are given in Figure 18. Figure 17 Effects of the drivers influencing the market for recycled tyres Driver influencing market for processed tyre materials Whole and chopped tyres banned from Landfill (July 2006) Competition for restricted supplies of raw materials could act against new entrants to markets (Materials Recycling World, Issue 17) Competition for coarse shredded rubber with other high-value end uses (e.g. equestrian surfaces), and with cement kiln fuels (Materials Recycling World, issue 17) Economies of scale as processing capacity increases Current markets are seasonal (equestrian surfaces, lawn treatment). There may therefore be scope for less seasonal products such as construction products WRAP drive to stimulate remould tyre market is likely to increase the supply of buffings

Effect of driver

+ + + +

Figure 18 Value of size-reduced materials derived from waste tyres (approx. figures from manufacturers, 2006) Material Approx price per tonne a) Coarse shreds (3050 mm) b) Shreds (5 mm to 25 mm) c) Small shreds/granules with fibre (10 mm single size) d) Rubber granules (25 mm) e) Tyre fibre f) Buffings 5 ex works 60 100 Corresponds to PAS107 category code RS CC CC Description Application

Large tyre shreds with steel and fibre present Flat thin particles; textile fibre present Flat thin particles; textile fibre present

Civil engineering Equestrian surfaces/paths Equestrian surfaces/paths

Coarse (>5mm)

100 120 5 4050

Virtually single size shred material. Minimal textile fibres (Rayon/nylon with some rubber) Fibre-like rubber particles up to 3mm long, minimal textile fibre content, some finer material Fine ungraded material (approx. 2mm down)

Fine (<5mm)

Playground surfacings/turf reinforcement None currently None currently

f) Dust

None currently

For tyre-derived rubber suitable for use in most construction products, price is key. Although coarse shreds cost relatively little, they are unsuitable for fairly thin products such as acoustic wall-boards or underlay. The high cost of the fine materials derived from recycled tyres led the project to try alternative fine materials such as buffings and dust.. A target materials cost of approximately 15 per tonne is required to be attractive for the applications being investigated by BRE, whilst processors can secure up to 120 per tonne for rubber granules, for which there is a high demand in specialist applications such as safety surfacings.

3.3.2 Overview of the market for recycled tyre materials and resins
Approximately 162,500 tonnes of tyres were recovered in 2005 for materials processing into powders, crumbs and shreds (DTI tyre statistics: 2005).

Composite construction products from waste tyres 20

There are strong markets for rubber derived from truck and bus tyres because they contain less textile and are therefore more straightforward to recycle. As a result, very few truck tyres are used in applications that require only simple processing such as energy recovery. They are well utilised in high-value moulded products, sports surfaces or playground surfaces. This means that truck tyre material is not likely to be available for cheap construction material applications. Car tyres are utilised in applications such as equestrian surfaces and paths, with minor uses such as horticulture (total approx. 85,000 tonnes). Coarse shreds (with and without metal) are also used for energy recovery in the cement industry, and there is a strong demand for them. There is, however, scope to use this coarse material in construction products if it can compete with energy recovery. Another option is to look at finer wastes such as dust and buffings derived from car tyres, for which there are currently limited applications. The resins used in the project were petroleum based. As such, they are expensive and unlikely to reduce in price. However, the resins industry is currently examining plant-based starter materials for resins which are expected to replace oil-based materials and lead to lower-cost resins. The manufacturers recommend that, for small particle sizes, 1520% resin is used. There are resins available that are compatible with the rubber materials and we envisage that a substitution can effectively be made.

3.3.3 Market survey of acoustic plasterboard products

There are a variety of acoustic panel products that are suitable for a range of situations. Manufacturers quote sound attenuation figures for systems but not for individual boards, as the performance is affected by the way the boards are assembled and mounted. It is therefore difficult, without large-scale tests, to establish precisely which of the current acoustic board products the prototype developed in this project will be equivalent to (in terms of acoustic performance). However, it is likely that the prototype will need to compete with products selling at around 3.50 to 4.00 per square metre (see Figure 19). Figure 19 Acoustic board products Product Manufacturer Soundbloc British Gypsum Soundbloc Plasterboard Soundshield Soundshield Mineral laminate Mineral laminate Knauf Mineral laminate Apertura circ. 6/18 Sound Reduction Maxiboard Systems

Description Gypsum plasterboard with high-density core Standard Dense plasterboard Mineral fibre bonded to wallboard Perforated plasterboard with acoustic fleece Cement and gypsum with polymeric core

Thickness (mm) 12.5 15 9.5 12.5 15 32 42 52 12.5 17

Spot price per m2 3.65 4.10 1.94 3.67 4.16 11.14 14.16 17.52 22.85 29.95

The cost of materials used to manufacture the plasterboard sandwich panel with rubber buffings varies from 2.95 to 4.80 per square metre depending on the resin chosen (price range depending on manufacturer and resin type) and the amount of resin used in the mix (Figure 20). The manufacturing cost is close to some of the selling prices listed in Figure 19. However, the price of buffings may vary with economies of scale. The economic assessment is encouraging since the acoustic performance of the plasterboard panel is expected to be improved by having a rubber layer. The ability of the panel to decrease sound transmission is expected to increase with its mass (and hence with the thickness of the rubber layer). The elastic properties of the rubber layer may also lead to some improvement. The optimum thickness of the rubber layer would mainly be limited by considerations of the cost and weight of the panel per square metre. With current materials costs, the maximum thickness achievable economically is approx. 10 mm (4.80 per square metre). Based on weight, the optimum thickness is also approx 10 mm .

The weight of a 10 mm layer of rubber/resin is approx. 7.5 kg/m2. The weight of general purpose plasterboard (12.5 mm thickness) is approx. 8.5 kg/m2. The combined weight would therefore be approx 16 kg/m2. This is comparable to the weight of most commercial acoustic board products (eg Knauf Soundshield 13.8 kg/m2). Use of thinner plasterboard(6.2 kg/m2)and the same rubber layer thickness would give 13.7 kg/m2. http://www.knaufdrywall.co.uk/home/

Composite construction products from waste tyres 21

Data in Appendix A give an assessment of market-related aspects of the prototype. The effects on raw materials price of varying resin type, resin content and rubber layer thickness on the cost of the rubber layer are considered. Key aspects/conclusions are as follows: Replacement of petrochemical resins by new bioresins (under development) could potentially reduce the range of raw materials cost of the rubber layer (per square metre) from the approximate range of 1.50 0.84, to 0.950.50 depending on resin content (1020%) and thickness (510mm). The use of bioresin has the potential to reduce materials costs significantly. However, increasing the resin content from 10% to 20% almost doubles the raw materials cost, irrespective of the type of resin used. A reduction in the thickness of the rubber layer has the potential to decrease the raw materials cost of the rubber layer. However, thicknesses of less than 10mm were not attempted in this project. The selling price of plasterboard is approximately 1.94 per square metre. The materials cost alone of 10mm rubber layer (per m2), is approx. 1.50 (made with petrochemical resins) with a potential of approx. 0.85 (made with bioresins).

3.3.4 Market survey of acoustic underlay for laminate flooring

Some of the competitor underlay products have a comparable selling price to the materials cost of prototype 7 (Figure 21). Based on the current work being conducted on acoustic board materials and assuming a similar recipe for both products (see below) a 10mm-thick resin/rubber layer could be produced for around 1.00 to 1.50 per square metre (materials cost). Based on other products (for example Isorubber), 610mm is judged to be the optimum thickness. The underlay was therefore not considered economically viable. If the rubber layer was 6mm thick, the cost would be between 0.60 and 0.90. However, the recently identified plant-based resins are expected to reduce the materials cost to approx. 0.50 to 0.75 per square metre for a 10mm thickness. Figure 20 Raw materials being considered under the project for acoustic plasterboard panel Materials Material source Arisings per annum /t Cost per m2 of rubber/resin product for 10mm thickness Buffings Waste from tyres approx 3,750 tonnes remoulding data source* * Janet Boast, Kingpin, Personal communication 40 1.01 to 1.51 (10% resin) 1.91 to 2.86 (20% resin)

Cost of product per m2 for 1 layer of plasterboard 2.95 to 3.45 3.85 to 4.80

Figure 21 Prototype 7, acoustic floor underlay for laminate flooring Product Material cost /m2 Acoustic floor underlay for laminate flooring made from 1.01 (10% resin) rubber buffings (BRE project) 1.51 (20% resin) Floor underlay for laminate flooring (existing competitor Unknown product standard PE moistureproof underlay) Floor underlay for laminate flooring (existing competitor Unknown product Combilay product [no sound reduction claimed]) Floor underlay for laminate flooring (existing competitor Unknown product WOOD Fibre claims to reduce noise by 73%) Unknown Floor underlay for laminate flooring (existing competitor product FLOOR MASTER claims a 22dB sound reduction) Note: Material cost excludes cost of laminate itself.

Selling price per m2 Unknown 1.00 1.80 2.08 1.88

4.0

Environmental aspects

The resins used initially for the project were three types of isocyanates specially designed pre-polymers that can also be used for the manufacture of reactive hot melts. Later trials under the project used polyurethane resins. All these resins are derived from petroleum. The environmental impact of the resins has not been formally assessed. However, the main environmental issues during use are given in Appendix C. A successful product is

Composite construction products from waste tyres 22

likely to incorporate the rubber/resin as a discrete layer in a sandwich construction rather than forming a core within a product, to facilitate segregation and recycling. This is particularly important for gypsum plasterboard, which is readily recyclable.

5.0

Conclusions

The project looked at the potential to use waste rubber tyres in composite products for the construction industry. Several prototypes were developed, including: Sandwich panel for doors Structural sandwich panel for partitions Laminate floor underlay Sandwich plasterboard panel.

The laminate floor underlay and the sandwich plasterboard panel were taken forward for further development. The laminate floor underlay looked technically promising. However, a market review showed that the development of such a product was unlikely to be economically viable given current production costs. No further testing was therefore performed. However, if the product were thinner, or could utilise a cheaper resin, it could be economically viable. The project successfully developed an acoustic plasterboard sandwich panel with a rubber core using buffings and a polyurethane resin. The initial testing of the product showed that the product performed well in the following tests: Acoustic (damping of vibration) Stiffness Impact resistance.

The market review of the product also showed that it should be economically viable to bring the acoustic plasterboard sandwich panel with a rubber core product to market.

6.0

Next steps

In order to bring the sandwich panel product to market, more development work needs to be done, including: Optimisation of the resin/ rubber mix Optimisation of the manufacturing process Further review of the buffing market and discussion with tyre retreaders (and recyclers) Full-scale testing of panels, including fire and acoustic testing Assessment of performance with alternative resins (plant-derived or sulphur polymer) Commercialisation with an industrial partner who can take forward this developmental work in their process (see below).

7.0

Commercialisation

Lafarge Plasterboard have assessed the technical performance of composites made from plasterboard and the BRE materials. The potential applications are being actively considered by Lafarge Gypsum, although the prototype is one of a number of priorities. An initial assessment of the raw materials costs and technical performance indicates that the composite could be commercially viable relative to competitors as an acoustic partition. Many competitor materials use virgin and/or imported materials and there is a demand for materials with a high recycled content. The most likely production scenario would be for the manufacturer to apply a readyprepared rubber layer to finished plasterboard. This is the most feasible approach for the manufacturing process and would also allow separation of the components at end of life to allow recycling.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 23

The next stage for Lafarge is to conduct a preliminary assessment of commercial issues. This is expected to include firm materials costs and quantities available from the supplier. Subject to the outcome of a commercial meeting within Lafarge Plasterboard, the company and BRE intend to contact the raw materials supplier to assess what they can propose and whether it is viable in terms of cost and to discuss the logistics of manufacture on a commercial scale.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 24

8.0 8.1

Sources of information consulted References

BS EN ISO 12572: 2001 Water vapour permeability. http://www.standardsdirect.org/standards/standards2/StandardsCatalogue24_view_18584.html BS 5234-2 1992 impact. http://www.standardsdirect.org/standards/standards4/StandardsCatalogue24_view_3553.html BS 8200, 1985, impact. http://www.standardsdirect.org/standards/standards5/StandardsCatalogue24_view_7311.html DTI tyre statistics: 2005, http://www.wrap.org.uk/construction/tyres/dti_used_tyre_statistics/2005_dti_tyre.html BS EN 310: 2003 Wood based panels_ determination of modulus of elasticity in bending and of bending strength. Environment Waste Strategy 2007, Annex C12 (tyres), 4pp, 2007, DEFRA http://www.bsi-global.com/en/Shop/Publication-Detail/ PAS 107: 2007, WRAP/BSI. Specification for the manufacture and storage of size-reduced tyre materials. http://www.wrap.org.uk/construction/tyres Slater, S. Used tyre market flows and market analysis- market disruption planning, TYR0010, WRAP 2006. Waste Management News, 3/10/06. Plans announced for emission free tyre recycling facility. http://www.letsrecycle.com/info/waste_management/news.jsp?story=6105 WCTE, 2004 The fire resistance behaviour of structural sandwich walls.

8.2

Websites investigated during market survey

8.2.1 Tyres
DEFRA http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy/strategy07/pdf/waste07-annex-c12.pdf

8.2.2 Products with tyre-derived rubber content

National Green Specification http://www.greenspec.co.uk

8.2.3 Acoustic underlays

http://www.uzin-utz.com/uzin_com/Default.htm http://www.uzin-utz.com/uzin_com/Default.htm http://www.xetal.co.uk/products.asp

8.2.4 Acoustic boards

Some products are based on rubber-based, but involve quite sophisticated production methods, based on rubber and mineral wool www.xetal.co.uk (use mainly production waste) http://www.xetal.co.uk/products.asp http://www.e-cousti.co.uk/

8.2.5 Dry lining/partition/ceilings/floors

Acoustic isolation rubber matting to minimise impact noise transmission: - Regupol (79% 88% recycled Natural rubber tyres and car window seals and cork) http://www.constructionresources.com/products/pdfs/envelope/Regupol.pdf - Acousticel R10 Floor Insulation (50% + recycled Vehicle tyres) http://www.soundservice.co.uk/R10_index.htm http://www.soundservice.co.uk/AcousticelrR10.htm - Isorubber (60 to 85% recycled rubber and rubber manufacturing waste) http://www.thermal-economics.co.uk/

Composite construction products from waste tyres 25

Acoustic isolation rubber matting to minimise impact Noise transmission from above to below: - Wedi-Nonstep Plus, Wedi-Nonstep Plan, Wedi-Nonstep Pur (90% recycled Rubber) http://www.wedi.co.uk - Regupol (7988% recycled Natural rubber Tyres and car window seals and cork) http://www.constructionresources.com/products/pdfs/envelope/Regupol.pdf - Acousticel R10 (50%+ recycled Vehicle tyres) http://www.soundservice.co.uk/R10_index.htm - Isorubber (60 to 85% recycled rubber and rubber manufacturing waste) http://www.thermal-economics.co.uk

8.2.6 Tyre-derived materials:

Kingpin Tyres Ltd http://www.kingpin-tyres.com Sims Group http://www.simsmetal.com/tyrecycle/solutions/buffings-shred_sc.asp Retread Manufacturers Association http://www.retreaders.org.uk/default.htm Murfitts Industries http://www.murfittsind.com

Composite construction products from waste tyres 26

Appendix A: Used tyre application vs. property requirements

Figure 22 Matrix of used tyre application vs. property for the plasterboard/tyre buffings derived panel Application Function-demand Composition Competition Description

Composite wall boards to address noise and/or impact.

Some airborne sound attenuation due to additional mass Impact sound attenuation Enhance physical impact resistance of board/composite, particularly with bonded backing? Fire resistance essential Target cost see competition

Rubber crumbs <5mm in resin bound layer Some steel content is acceptable Minimise fibre content Low processing costs to minimise rubber material costs (40 or less) Bonded to internal face of board or as interstitial layer between boards (i.e. 2-layer or 3layer system) Resin/additives to achieve necessary fire resistance

Double wall construction used to achieve high performance. Glass wool may be used Multiple/denser board layers used to achieve higher mass

Key features/limitations of the rubber/composite prototype product (Prototype 6) Use of recycled material Stiffer than plasterboard Rubber layer moisture stable On a laboratory scale, rubber layer can be cast on to the plasterboard or provided separately Raw materials cost expected to be competitive, particularly with plant-based resins under development Resistant to impact Resin fire resistant Weight of rubber layer comparable to that of plasterboard Acoustic properties show potential to be as good as existing acoustic wall boards Resin has relatively high cost

Figure 22 summarises the functions and property requirements of a plasterboard/rubber panel. Figure 23 summarises the results of tests on the prototype (Prototype 6) and the rubber layer separately. A prototype of adequate stiffness, durability (moisture resistance) and density similar to that of plasterboard, with excellent impact resistance, was produced. A relatively inexpensive source of rubber (buffings from tyre retreading, approx. 40 per tonne) of sufficient fineness to produce a thin rubber layer had been identified. However, the resin demand of the layer was relatively high (approx 17%) due to the fineness of the rubber material so that the resin constituted the major cost of the layer. Further processing or treatment of the rubber (such as sieving) was not

Composite construction products from waste tyres 27

considered necessary as the fineness of the rubber is a key feature to allow the fabrication of a thin layer suitable for bonding to plasterboard. The following issues remain to be addressed in future industrial exploitation of the idea: a) b) Whether the thickness of the rubber layer can be further reduced from 10mm and retain acoustic performance Performance of the rubber with plant-based resins

Figure 23 Performance data for Prototype 6 and Product/prototype Impact Water (BS5234(2))* absorption (wt %) and

competitor materials Durability Deflection (moisture and load resistance) at failure

Dynamic stiffness

Prototype 6 Severe duty 12mm 24.1 under (3 layer) made 259N with plasterboard load and rubber layer Prototype 6 (2 [NA] 15.8 layer) made with plasterboard and rubber layer Appears 650 7.5 Prototype 6 21.43 1.08 durable (approx) (rubber layer only) Knauf Wallboard [NA] 17mm [NA] [NA] 8.3 Plasterboard under 68N load (12.5mm single layer) Knauf Wallboard [NA] [NA] [NA] [NA] 16.6 Plasterboard (2 x 12.5mm double layer) * BS 5234 classifies materials into light, medium, heavy and severe duty. Medium reflects non-domestic exposure situations such as office accommodation. Severe reflects major circulation areas or heavy industrial situations where little care or even vandalism might be expected. [NA] = not available. Manufacturers have advised that tests for these parameters are typically undertaken to reflect the behaviour of systems. Thus, data for individual plasterboards are not available. Note: Data for plasterboards are derived from manufacturers literature; prototype data from BRE test results.

swelling (vol %) -

Water vapour permeability (g/m2/day)

Density (kg/m2)

Composite construction products from waste tyres 28

Appendix B: Lafarge Plasterboard test results

Results of assessment of products by Lafarge Gypsum

1) Experimental procedure BRE manufactured rubber/resin sheets (10mm thickness) by compaction into wooden moulds in their laboratories using three different resins. These were sent to Lafarge Gypsum for incorporation into rubber/plasterboard composites. The composites were made by laminating the rubber sheet onto the back of a single sheet of standard plasterboard (12.5mm thickness) by gluing to form two layers as follows: Type A : 12.5mm standard + type A resin/rubber 10mm Type B : 12.5mm standard + type B rubber/resin 10mm Type C: 12.5mm standard + type C rubber/resin 10mm The resin content was 20% by weight. Three samples of 600 x 60mm of each type were produced at BRE and beams were sawn from the samples by Lafarge Gypsum, Lyon. Sound (vibration) attenuation in the low frequency range has been evaluated by a loss factor. The higher the loss factor, the higher the sound insulation performance. Loss factor was calculated by the mechanical impedance method (MIM) where continuous subtle vibration is applied on the centre of a test piece. With glazing, it can be related to Sound Transmission Loss. Lafarge Gypsum evaluated the loss factor The test used is a development test which was inspired by the ISO16940 Glass in building Glazing and airborne sound insulation Measurement of the mechanical impedance of laminated glass. The principle is to mechanically excite the beam at its central point and measure its response at a critical frequency using a sensor. The method uses a longer beam than that required for glass. From the results, the damping and equivalent Youngs Modulus (dynamic stiffness) of the product can be estimated. The prototype beams gave a loss factor of 4%. In comparison, a single layer of plasterboard would be expected to give around 1%. On the other hand, a visco-elastic bitumen membrane would give around 14%.

Plasterboard (12.5 mm)

Rubber/resin (10 mm)

Figure 24 Plasterboard/rubber composite

Composite construction products from waste tyres 29

2) Results
Figure 25 results of damping (loss factor) tests

Type Rubber thickness Resin type Results: damping (loss factor) A B C 10mm 10mm 10mm A B C 4% 4% 4%

The three prototypes showed good results in terms of damping of the vibration of the board. The results were similar (within the reproducibility of the test), irrespective of the type of resin used. The presence of the viscoelastic rubber layer improves the damping properties of the product. The dynamic stiffness is mainly dependent on the properties of the stiff layer (in this case, the plasterboard). Hence, the dynamic stiffness of the product is reduced by the presence of the rubber layer. 3) Potential The technical performance of the composites showed good potential in terms of airborne sound insulation. Two potential applications were identified for the rubber layer, including partitions and absorbing impact noise or vibration. The rubber is expected to improve sound insulation by a) adding weight and b) improving the damping of the board (and so damping vibration). Sandwich panels, such as the prototypes described here, are generally less effective than laminated products in terms of acoustic performance, but are generally able to compete better on cost and are therefore preferred by manufacturers. The potential applications are being actively considered by Lafarge Gypsum. An initial assessment of the raw materials costs and technical performance indicates that the composite could be commercially viable. It also contains recycled materials which could be attractive to product specifiers. The prototype will be presented at a forthcoming Lafarge Gypsum marketing meeting (in September 2007). The next stage would be a preliminary assessment of commercial issues such as likely costs and quantities available from the supplier, variability and form of the material, etc. Subject to the outcome of the meeting, Lafarge Plasterboard intends to contact the supplier of size-reduced rubber to assess the commercial opportunity. Tests for dynamic stiffness have not yet been conducted and these are not expected to be undertaken in the near future. If the outcome of commercial discussions is favourable, then further technical tests are expected to be conducted, but will be outside the scope and timescale of this project. Thus, there is an acoustic potential depending on the final cost of materials, production costs and the selling price of the composite board.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 30

Appendix C: Resins considered in the project

Figure 26 Cost assessment for resin/buffings combinations
1) 10 mm thickness Resin/rubber buffings layer thickness (mm) Resin cost rubber buffings (per sq cost (per sq total materials Resin cost (as % metre) metre) cost of layer cost) 10 1.33 0.17 1.50 89% 10 1.33 0.17 1.50 89% 10 0.67 0.17 0.84 80%

Resin type PU isocyanate bioresin 2) 5 mm thickness

Resin type PU isocyanate bioresin

Resin/rubber buffings layer thickness (mm)

Resin cost rubber buffings (per sq cost (per sq total materials Resin cost (as % metre) metre) cost of layer cost) 5 0.67 0.09 0.75 89% 5 0.67 0.09 0.75 89% 5 0.34 0.09 0.42 80%

PU isocyanate bioresin

Resin cost per tonne (estimated) 3,000.00 3,000.00 1,000.00

PC4010 petrochemical resin [3/K] resin percentage price [5mm] price [10mm] 10 0.76 1.51 12 0.89 1.78 14 1.03 2.05 16 1.16 2.32 18 1.30 2.59 20 1.43 2.86

Bioresin [1.00/K] resin percentage 10 12 14 16 18 20

price [5mm] price [10mm] 0.25 0.50 0.30 0.59 0.34 0.68 0.39 0.77 0.43 0.86 0.48 0.95

An overview of plant oil-derived resins in relation to the project The prototypes explored in this project have included two main types of petrochemical resins: polyurethanes and isocyanates. There are two main plant-derived polyols (organic molecules with several hydroxyl, or OH, groups) available commercially for resin production which could offer alternatives to polyurethanes; these are soy oilbased, rape seed oil-based or castor oil-based. A great deal of work has been undertaken in the USA on the soy-based polyols, particularly related to polyurethane foam. The problem in Europe is low availability of soy-based feedstock.

Composite construction products from waste tyres 31

The castor oil-derived polyols are slightly different in their chemical nature and are mainly found in the surface coating market. Castor is more expensive and tends to be targeted at such higher margin end uses. However, anecdotal evidence suggests that they can be sourced more cheaply than alternative petroleum-based binders. Currently there is no renewable (non-petrochemical) route to the isocyanate materials, and this the major stumbling block. It is likely that the initiation of new processes will ultimately produce these products. Considerable work is also being done on alternative cross-linking systems. It is likely that plant-based resins suitable for use with rubber will be developed. Such resins are likely to have significant environmental and safety benefits compared with petrochemical alternatives (low VOC, renewable sources, etc). However, the full environmental impact (in terms of the whole product life cycle) has yet to be assessed. Bioresins are likely to be about 1,0001,500 per tonne or less if production reaches higher volumes. Cost assessments of various formulations are given in Figure 26. One company is developing thermoset bioresins. All the reactive groups are consumed during polymerisation to leave an inert thermoset polymer. The product is reported to be less brittle than PU, and a good candidate for strongish composites with the right reinforcement (cellulosics, etc). If a properly graded filler is used that is basically non-absorbing, a very low level of binder is required. It also has good resistance to the spread of flame. Sulphur polymer takes a waste product from the oil industry currently. It is thermoplastic in character and is transformed to a binder by melting. Sulphur polymer is between 450 and 600 per tonne.

Polyurethane polymers PU comes from isocyanate-type resins that are made with a polyol backbone. They have a good track record and high durability. Once the resin is reacted with the filler then no isocyanate remains. Some very strong polymer composites can be made with PU, especially if good reinforcement is used. PU is combustible and can regenerate isocyanate fumes. However, phosphate-type flame retardants can be added which can be very effective barriers to propagation of flame, etc. PU is the most expensive binder: between 2 and 3 per kg is the typical cost for high-volume PU use (i.e. 2,0003,000 per tonne).

Composite construction products from waste tyres 32

Written by: Flavie Moulinier, Kevin Lardner, Andrew Dunster, BRE Steve Weston, CostDown Consultancy

Published by Waste & Resources Action Programme

The Old Academy 21 Horse Fair Banbury, Oxon OX16 0AH

Tel: 01295 819 900 Fax: 01295 819 911 E-mail: info@wrap.org.uk

Helpline freephone 0808 100 2040 www.wrap.org.uk