Professional Documents
Culture Documents
____________________________
____________________________
Major in Chemistry
____________________________
by
Allen A. Espinosa
November 2006
2
PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in
Chemistry, has been examined and recommended for acceptance and approval.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We wish to thank the following persons and institutions that, in one way or
Dr. Rebecca C. Nueva España, our Chemical Research mentor and chair of the
board of panelist, for sharing her expertise in Chemical Research and the research process
as well.
Prof. Vic Marie I. Camacho, our research adviser, for her guidance and assistance
Prof. Nelson Garcia, our panel, for his guidance and assistance while doing our
is, there are ideas that are possible and that there are also ideas which are not possible and
that we have to think critically before pursuing something and the ones we done wrong
Prof. Adolfo P. Roque, our panel, for sharing his ideas regarding our research.
Engineering of Adamson University for sharing his knowledge and for guiding us in our
methodology.
Science Division of the Department of Science and Technology for explaining to us what
Prof. Antonio G. Dacanay, our statistics mentor, for lending us statistics book.
4
Mr. Ronnel Pantig, SRC technician, for patiently providing materials and
Dr. Susan R. Arco and Dr. Florian R. del Mundo of the Institute of Chemistry of
the University of the Philippines and Prof. Gilbert U. Yu of the Department of Chemistry
of the Ateneo de Manila University for giving ideas and possible topics for research while
Ma. Jesusa O. Araneta, our classmate, for sharing her Bato-Balani journal which
Reinier Augustus S. Isidro and Sherryl R. Jamito, our kuya and ate, for providing
The family of April Mae V. Agbayani’s husband, Allan Ray Berganos, especially
Palma and Carla Mari A. Pareja, our dear classmates, for helping us transport our
Institute Library for providing us lots of information regarding ceramic tile making.
Our family, for the unconditional love, understanding and support they extended
to us.
Our Creator, for giving us life, for us to experience the sweetness and bitterness of
A. M. V. A
A. A. E
6
ABSTRACT
This research study entitled “Ceramic Tiles from Crassostrea iredalei (Oyster)
Shells” aimed to investigate the feasibility of the Crassostrea iredalei (oyster) shell as
base for ceramic tile making. The Crassostrea iredalei (oyster) shell were substituted to
silica sand in 40%, 50%, 60%, 100% and 0% substitution respectively. Slip casting was
the forming method used in producing the tile body. Three firing procedures were utilized
using the bisquit and glost firing. The produced tiles were subjected to impact strength
and porosity tests. In the one-way ANOVA used in the study for comparing the said
physical properties of the produced tiles with that of the commercial tiles, it shows that
tile C3 is the most feasible among all the experimental tiles. Meaning, it is the only tile
that is comparable with the commercial tiles in terms of impact strength and porosity.
This also shows the feasibility of producing tile with 60% concentration of calcium
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page i
Approval Sheet ii
Acknowledgement iii
Abstract
vi
List of Figures
ix
List of Tables
x
List of Appendices
xii
Chapter
1 Introduction
1
Objectives of the Study
2
Significance of the Study
2
Scope and Limitations of the Study
3
Definition of Terms
3
2 Crassostrea iredalei (Oyster) Shell: Chemical Components and Uses 4
Ceramic Tile Production
7
Physical Properties of Ceramic Products on the Fired State
13
8
Local Studies
Nata de Coco Reinforced Styrofoam as Tiles
18
Feasibility of Foam Polystyrene and Powdered
Talaba Shells as Tiles
19
3 Materials and Reagents
21
Research Design
22
Phase I: Preparation of Ceramic Tiles from Oyster Shells
Gathering of Samples
23
Mold Making
23
Preparation of Mixtures
24
Molding and Drying
24
Glaze Preparation
25
Glaze Application
25
Firing Technology
25
Phase II: Tests on Physical Properties
Test for Impact Strength
26
Test for Porosity
27
9
Bibliography
48
Appendices
A Raw Data and Computations for Impact Strength Test
50
B Raw Data and Computations for Porosity Test
58
C Research Pictorials
66
Curriculum Vitae
70
10
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
LIST OF TABLES
Table
4.12 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for control tiles
F and G
4.13 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture A
4.15 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture B
4.17 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture C
12
4.19 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture E
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
C Research Pictorials
14
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
One of the building materials is ceramic tile that is used as floorings in bathrooms, dining
area, function halls, etc. Because of this, there is a demand of ceramic tiles and its
industry is booming.
On the other hand, every year, various solid wastes in our country have been a
great problem to our government. One example is the shells of Crassostrea iredalei
commonly known as oyster found near the seashores. It makes the seashore looks grimy
and its foul odor when fresh is disgusting which is not inviting local and foreign tourists
to visit tourist spots like beaches. It also serves as silt for reproduction of flies and other
These shells are known fossil that contains ninety seven and a half percent
(97.5%) calcium carbonate (CaCO3)1, which is a good source of calcium oxide (CaO) that
made these shells rigid and firm. The presence of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) would
This information brought the idea to the researchers to use the Crassostrea
iredalei (oyster) shells as raw material for ceramic tile making. Due to its high
The main objective of the study is to investigate the feasibility of the Crassostrea
iredalei (oyster) shell as base for ceramic tile making. Specifically, it aims to:
i. Impact Strength;
commercially available ones such as the Mariwasa Ceramic Tiles® and Floor
Crassostrea iredalei (oyster) shells on the seashores by recycling it. Moreover, it can also
prevent the rapid growth of population of insects like mosquitoes living in the shells,
which are carriers of disease-causing bacteria and viruses. In addition, new product
means new opportunity for export and new hope for economic progress.
16
The focus of the study is on the utilization of Crassostrea iredalei (oyster) shells
as raw material for ceramic tiles. The process of ceramic tile making including tests on
properties such as impact strength and porosity are therefore incorporated in the study.
Definition of Terms
Ceramic tile is the tile made from Crassostrea iredalei (oyster) shell and some basic
Porosity is the penetration of liquids and vapors through the material that usually
Chapter 2
This section includes literature concerning the topic that the researchers deemed
shells and the process of ceramic tile making. Also, it includes local studies on tiles made
According to studies, ninety seven and a half percent (97.5%) of the chemical
conchiolin.2 Calcium carbonate (CaCO3) is a compound used in brick making for its high
compressive strength and boiling point.3 The presence of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) in
the shells indicates that it could be used as a source of calcium oxide (CaO), which was
of 92.1, moisture at 105°C of 0.084%, oil absorption of 18.9g oil per 100g of oil,
specific surface area of 0.423m2/g, weight/solid per gallon of 23.1lbs, specific gravity of
2.71, pH of 9.8, hexagonal particle shape, and density of 1.1 g/cm3. Its general uses
building products, polishing compound, grouting and thin set mortars, abrasive in
powdered cleansers, sealants, adhesives, putty, and glues, paints (water-based), animal
USA and Korea have developed and successfully tested a new process to convert waste
oyster shells into a compound that cleanses water of phosphorus, a common pollutant in
urban, agricultural and industrial runoff. Heating the shells at very high temperatures in a
nitrogen-rich atmosphere for about an hour efficiently converts their contents into a form
of calcium oxide (CaO). Crushed-up oyster shell forces the phosphorus to leave the
solution, become small particles and precipitate out, or fall to the bottom of the tank,
Moreover, oyster shells are processed and made into oral calcium supplement
tablets because of its high calcium content. Studies shown that thirty nine percent (39%)
Furthermore, oyster shells are crushed into fine particles to be used as an organic
fertilizer. Studies shown that finely crushed oyster shells raises pH in acidic soils. It also
has other nutrients and micronutrients, which keeps the natural balance of the soil.7
Tiles are similar to bricks. They differ in uses, in shapes, and in finishing. While a
brick is in the form of a block, a tile is in the form of a sheet. Both are made from the
same process and materials but the tile may go through glazing which can give it a
smooth finish. Tiles are used for walls and flooring.8 Figure 2.4 shows the schematic
Ceramics is defined as products made out of clay and other earth materials that
can be formed or molded into various shapes, then dried and fired into hardness at a
given temperature.9 Ceramic tile is made of clay. After the formation of the tile body, it
goes through a firing process.10 Basic ceramic raw materials include clay, feldspar and
silica. Clay is an earth material that forms a sticky mass when mixed with water. When
wet, this mass is readily moldable, but when dried, it becomes hard and brittle and retains
its shape. When heated to redness, it becomes still harder and is no longer susceptible to
the action of water. Such a material clearly lends itself to the making of articles of all
shapes. Clays can be classified into kaolin/white clay and ball clay. Kaolin/white clay is
the white-burning clay because of its low iron content. Because of its relative purity, it is
more refractory than other clays. It is the base to which other ingredients are added to
develop the desirable properties. Its strength varies almost directly with plasticity. 9 In a
chemical analysis, kaolin is found to contain 46.87% SiO2, 37.60% Al2O3, 0.27% Fe2O3,
0.85% TiO2, 0.56% CaO, 0.09% Na2O, 0.10% K2O and 13.7% LOI.11 Ball Clays are
extremely plastic clays that fire nearly white though is often black in the raw state. They
usually contain slightly more impurities than kaolin, but are used to increase the plasticity
and workability of the body. In a chemical analysis, ball clay is found to contain 56.74%
SiO2, 26.94% Al2O3, 1.53% Fe2O3, 1.26% TiO2, 0.25% CaO, 0.64% MgO, 3.42% K2O,
21
0.41% Na2O and 8.81% LOI.12 Feldspars are used as flux in ceramic bodies. When the
body is fired, the feldspar melts and forms a molten glass that causes the particles of clay
to cling together. When this glass solidifies, it provides strength and hardness to the body.
It is also a good source of soda and potash. Chemically, the feldspars are silicates of
these elements. Silica or silicon dioxide in the form of quartz, is used in nearly all
ceramic bodies for three reasons: to reduce the drying shrinkage and thus help prevent
cracking of the piece, to give firing qualities by reduction of the firing shrinkage and to
act as a sort of skeleton to hold the shape of the piece in the kiln. 8 Silica, along with
alumina (silica-alumina), forms a major part of the crystal lattice of clay minerals. These
decompose on firing and form part of the microstructure of clay based ceramics such as
earthenware, stoneware and porcelain.13 The proportion of clay (kaolin and ball clay),
Raw materials like clays, talc and other minerals of ceramic tile are quarries and
refined. Great care is taken in the proper mixture of these materials, as one is critical to
the success, quality and characteristics of the product produced. Once the raw materials
are quarries prepared, and properly mixed, the tiles may now be formed. There are few
common means of forming the tile. First is dust press, wherein an almost dry mixture of
clays, talc, and other ingredients are pressed into a mold at extremely high pressures.
Second is extrusion, wherein the ingredients are slightly wetter and are forced through a
nozzle to form the desired tile shape. Third is slush mold or wet pour, wherein a much
wetter mixture of ingredients is poured into a mold to form the desired shape. Fourth is
rampress, which is very similar to dust press method, except that the size of the tile
22
shapes are generally much larger.10 Pressing is a kind of hand forming method in which
the clay must be soft enough to flow into the cavity of the mold while under pressure.
Pressed ware is commonly handled immediately after pressing and must be strong
Slip casting method of forming the tile body includes the procedure in where
sodium silicate is added to the clay mixture as a defloculant which is added to obtain
good fluidity. Sodium silicate is added 0.3-0.6% of the total weight of the clay mixture on
the other hand 30-45% of the total weight is water. The specific gravity of the mixture
should fall within the range of 1.6-1.8. The mesh sieve number of particles should fall
In general, there are essentially three basic production cycles to which the entire
range of different types of ceramic floor and wall tile can be referred. The first of these
unglazed tile. The types of unglazed tile produced with this production technology are
cotto, red stoneware, porcelain stoneware and clinker (klinker). The second of these is
based on double-firing technology, which obtains its name from the fact that two distinct
firing treatments are employed, i.e. one to consolidate the tile body and the other to
stabilize the glazes and decorations applied onto the fired tile body.
majolica, cottoforte, and earthenware (white body). The third of these cycles is based on
single-firing technology. The glazes and decorations are applied onto the dried, but still
unfired, tile body. Then it is subjected to a single heat treatment single-firing. During this
firing, consolidation of the tile body and stabilization of the glazes takes place at the same
23
time. This production cycle is use for the manufacture of single-fired whiteware and
coating melted in place on a ceramic body which may render the body smooth, non-
porous and of desired color or texture. The primary function of glazes is to give strength
and durability of products. Likewise, glaze protects ceramic wares from contamination,
from the action of acids and alkaline and from scratching. They are also used for
decoration purposes. Lime or calcium oxide (CaO) is an example of a glaze material. Its
sources are pure calcium carbonate, whiting, limestone, dolomite and anorthite. Lime is a
principal flux in medium and high temperature glazes but it is not very effective at lower
In the preparation of glaze, the universal method is to mix the glaze ingredients with
water to form a suspension or slip. Weighing of glaze batches should be done in scales of
good construction. Sensitive and precise to the smallest quantities required. Small
quantity of glaze batch is prepared in mortar and pestle while in large quantity, pebble
milling is introduced. 9
There are several ways of applying glaze slip on ceramic wares. One is dipping which
involves having a small receptacle filled with glaze into which the ceramic piece is
immersed into the glaze shaken vigorously to remove surplus of glaze. Another is pouring
on which a quantity of glaze is poured into a ceramic piece until the surface of ware is
covered with it. Brushing in which the application is done with the use of soft brush, even
strokes are required to attain a good finish. Then, spraying in which the application is
Bisquet firing is a technique where the dried ware should be fired to strengthen
the body's resistance to strain and stress. Firing of wares depends on the product required.
Porcelain, stoneware, and other wares to be glazed are fired at temperature of 800-900
degrees Celsius; for bricks, roof tiles, and other earthenware that do not need to be
glazed, firing temperatures should reach at least its semi-vitreous state at about 900
degrees Celsius to 1200 degrees Celsius. Firing state should be normal and slow due to
water smoking, dehydration, and other chemical and physical reactions undergone by the
body from a dried state to its maturing state. Usually, firing is under an oxidizing flame. 9
Glost Firing is a technique where bisquet fired walls are glazed and then fired.
Temperature for glost firing depends on the glaze used. Temperature ranges from 800-
1050 degrees Celsius; for stoneware and porcelain, temperature ranges from 1150-1380
degree Celsius. Oxidizing and reducing atmospheres inside the kiln depend on the glaze
used, tone effect and product required. Usually, the glazed wares are first fired in an
oxidizing atmosphere up to 1100 degrees Celsius, the wares are fired in reducing flame;
lastly, the firing becomes slightly reducing or neutral. This step is called reducing firing.
There are bodies which could be glaze on its green or dried state, then fired. This is called
monofiring. 9
25
Weighing
+ water defloculant
Blunging
Retouching
Drying
Bisquit Firing
underglaze decoration application
Glaze Application
brushing, spraying, pouring
Glost Firing
Quality Control
Packaging
Compressive Strength9
to bear crushing loads. Since ceramics normally break under tension, its true
should be done. In particular, the specimen facing the bearing load must be
absolutely flat and parallel. If this criterion is not met, the load will be carried
unevenly by the specimen causing failure at low loads thus giving low
compressive strengths. Cushioning materials are often used to distribute the load
Sc = P/A
Hardness9
properties to measure. Several methods have been developed which give fairly
reliable results. Usually, a diamond stylus is forced into the surface of a ceramic
specimen under a standard load and depth of penetration is measured. The test is
The second method and one of the most common tests used for hardness is
the Moh’s scale. This scale uses ten standard minerals, each of which will scratch
all minerals below it on the scale. Ceramics are rated on this scale by scratch trials
bending load. It is one of the quality control tests for the measurement of strength.
circular cross section; supported near its ends, with a load applied to the central
portion of the supported span. Any standard testing machine of suitable capacity
correct results, the bar must fracture at the center. The MOR is represented by the
equation:
where:
MOR = 8PL / D3
Such a test assumes the pieces to be uniformly strong through all cross
sections, which is not strictly true. To average out the variations, ten specimens
are used for the test and individual values with more than 20% variation from the
average are discarded. The most important factors in the MOR determinations are
the rate of loading, the ratio of span to specimen thickness, and the specimen
Porosity9
should be carefully controlled. The greater the porosity of a sample, the more
likely the penetration of liquids and vapors through the materials and usually,
refractories with high porosity will suffer internal chemical attack as a result of
the penetration of slags into the interior. Also, table-ware that exhibits high
porosity would absorb various substances during use and becomes permanently
stained and unsanitary. There are few ceramic products produced today which do
not have carefully controlled pore structures. Only the open pore volume,
sometimes called the apparent pore volume, can be directly measured. When this
29
% Pa = Vop / Vb x 100
% Pa = Wm – Wd / Wm – Wmm x 100
Generally, the absorption test is the best single indicator of the quality of a
as, when the firing temperature of a body is increased, its absorption steadily
30
drops, and, as the absorption decreases, the mechanical strength of the body is
greatly improved.
by the equation:
Local Studies
This section includes literature on tile making using locally available materials
and the tests conducted to investigate the feasibility of the tiles produced.
The rise of the nata de coco industry and the many uses of the said food product
prompted a group of students to do research on the said fibrous material. An idea came up
to use the cellulose fibers of nata de coco to reinforce the common Styrofoam.
Nata de coco was placed in a large container then boiled in a 25% sodium hydrox-
ide solution to remove the noncellulosic material. The mixture was allowed to settle for
10-15 minutes until the material had separated. The cellulose was then collected and
placed in the drying oven for a few minutes to dry. The oven was occasionally observed
to prevent the sheets from burning. The dried cellulose was then cut into small pieces and
was placed in the Wiley mill for grinding. The powdered cellulose was then stored until
the Styrofoam was ready for mixing. The Styrofoam was placed in a container and tolu-
ene was added to dissolve the material. The powdered cellulose was mixed with the
Styrofoam and toluene. The mixture was stirred until all the Styrofoam had been dis-
during the production; the four mixtures were as follows: 10:90, 15:85, 20:80, and 25:75
percent of cellulose with Styrofoam, respectively. Pure Styrofoam and pure cellulose
32
were also held as basis for comparison. The mixtures were mixed very evenly and
carefully. When the cellulose and Styrofoam were mixed completely in each of the
different treatments, the resulting polymer blend was poured into aluminum containers.
Tests were made to examine the quality of the resulting material. Tests on
flexibility, flammability, and water absorption were done. The test on flexibility was done
by noting the expansion of the samples when exposed to the same tension. The
flammability test was based on whether the tiles are easily burned or not. The water
absorption test was done by submerging each sample into water and left there for a
certain time then weighed to note the change in mass. The texture was also observed to
Through the flexibility, flammability, and water absorption qualitative test and
with the aid of statistical tests such as Friedmann’s statistical test prove that the product
cannot substitute tiles since they do not possess the properties of commercially produced
tiles.
The study deals with the recycling of polystyrene foam or foam polystyrene more
making tiles. The tiles were made as follows: FPS was mixed with ground talaba shells
after being dissolved in premium gasoline. This mixture was then placed into molds
having 2.54 cm x 2.54 cm x 1.27 cm dimensions and was left to air dry. Three mixtures
of FPS and gasoline with ground talaba shells were prepared. The mixtures have the
33
ratios of 60:40, 50:50, and 40:40. It was then removed from the molds and sanded into
tiles having dimensions of one by 2.54 cm x 3.18 cm. The resulting tiles were tested
(Impact Test) against some commercial tiles involving a test for the breaking of the tiles
upon receiving the impact of a load. The results showed that the experimental tiles were
Impact Test
The strength of the tiles will be tested in the following manner. The tiles would be
placed on the floor underneath a piece of metal. A load would be dropped on the metal.
This would be done on each of the tiles with increasing weight. A commercial tile would
also be tested in this manner to compare its strength with that of the experimental tiles.
Height = 0.68 m
Load 1 = 0.587 kg
Load 2 = 1.1567 kg
Load 3 = 1.7577 kg
Rating Scale:
5 – no cracks, no damage
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
This section includes the details how the study was conducted, that is, the plans
used while for the straining of the pounded shells, a metal screen with fine holes (70
For the preparation of mixtures, basins are used in the mixing of the pounded
shells with the feldspar, kaolin, ball clay, sodium silicate and water. For further mixing, a
For the molding and drying, a mold made of plaster of paris is used.
For glaze preparation, calcium oxide, carboxymethyl cellulose and water is used.
For the impact test, a meter stick, loads of different weight and a flat metal are
used.
For the porosity and water absorption test, a triple beam balance and a basin are
used.
35
Research Design
Experimental
2:3 (A)
1:1 (B)
3:2 (C)
1:0 (D)
0:1 (E)
Glaze Preparation
Glaze Application
Glost Firing
Final Product
Gathering of Samples
The fifty kilograms (50kg) or one (1) sack of Crassostrea iredalei (oyster) shells
After the shells were collected, it was washed of impurities by boiling. It was
done for ten (10) minutes and then air-dried and sun-dried for twenty four (24) hours.
After drying, the shells were pounded using pounding steel. The pounded shells are
subjected to a screen with fine holes (70 mesh sieve) to allow only the passage of finer
shell particles. Shells that were left on the screen will be pounded again until such time
Mold Making
Each mixture of plaster of paris was carefully mixed for three (3) to four (4)
minutes until it is about to start setting. The mixture’s composition is three hundred
The mixture was poured in the master mold. The master mold has a plastic
walling to prevent sticking of the plaster of paris. The mater mold is made up of wood
Preparation of Mixtures
For the experimental group, five (5) different mixtures were made: mixtures A, B,
C, D and E. The composition of each are: 2:3, 1:1, 3:2, 1:0, 0:1 (pulverized shells : fixed
mixture of feldspar, kaolin and ball clay ratio of mass). The composition of the fixed
mixture was 3:2:1 (feldspar : kaolin : ball clay ratio of mass). The composition of mixture
D was 1:1 (pulverized shells : feldspar ratio of mass). The composition of mixture E was
0:1 (pulverized shells: fixed mixture of feldspar, kaolin and ball clay ratio of mass).
Slip Casting was used in the preparation of mixtures. Sodium silicate is added to
the mixtures. It was 0.5% of the total weight of the clay mixture on the other hand 36% of
0.5 in in dimensions. Fifteen (15) replicates were prepared for each mixture. The
0.5 in
4 in 4 in
Glaze Preparation
Thirty grams (30g) of lime or calcium oxide (CaO) was mixed with seventy
milliliter (70mL) of water to form a suspension or slip. Three tenths grams (0.3g) of
specific gravity is checked using a hydrometer. The specific gravity of the mixture was
1.5.
Glaze Application
Brushing glaze application is used. It was done with the use of a soft brush.
Firing Technology
Four (4) tiles from mixtures A, B, C, and E are subjected to bisquit firing without
glaze at a temperature of 900°C. They were referred to as A1, B1, C1, and E1.
Another four (4) tiles from mixtures A, B, C, and E are subjected to glost firing
with glaze at a temperature of 900°C. They were referred to as A2, B2, C2, and E2.
The last four (4) tiles from mixtures A, B, C, and E are subjected to bisquit firing
without glaze at a temperature of 900°C. The glaze was added to the tile after firing. The
39
glazed tiles were subjected to glost firing at a temperature of 1100°C afterwards. They
Tests
Two (2) tiles from A1, A2, A3, B1, B3, C1, C2, C3, E1, E2 and E3 and two
commercially available tiles namely Mariwasa Ceramic Tiles® and Floor Center
The tiles would be placed on the floor underneath a piece of metal. A load
would be dropped on the metal. This would be done on each of the tiles with
increasing weight. The weight, height and rating scale is shown below.
Height = 0.68 m
Load 1 = 100 g
Load 2 = 200 g
Load 3 = 500 g
Rating Scale:
50 – no cracks, no damage
Porosity Test
Two (2) tiles from A1, A2, A3, B1, B3, C1, C2, C3, E1, E2 and E3 and two
commercially available tiles namely Mariwasa Ceramic Tiles® and Floor Center
Porosity Test.
Each tile was weighed using a triple beam balance to get its dry fired mass
(Wm). After weighing, each tile was dipped in water instantaneously to fill the
open pores then it was weighed again to get its unsaturated mass (Wd). After
weighing, the tiles were submerged in water for five (5) hours and were weighed
again to get its saturated mass (Wmm). To get the percent apparent porosity (%Pa),
the values gathered from weighing was then be substituted to the equation:
% Pa = Wm – Wd / Wm – Wmm x 100
41
Chapter 4
This section includes facts and figures gathered in the experimentation process of
utilizing oyster shells as substitute to silica sand in ceramic tile making. The results of the
The oyster shells were mixed with five (5) treatments, referred to as mixtures A,
B, C, D and E. The proportions of each mixture were 2:3, 1:1, 3:2, 1:0 and 0:1
(pulverized oyster shells : fixed mixture of ball clay feldspar and kaolin ratio of mass)
As shown in Table 4.1, mixtures A, B, C and E dries, hardens and forms a tile
body. No cracking occurs when removing it in the plaster of paris mold. The said
mixtures dry because the plaster of paris mold absorbs its water content. On the other
hand, said mixtures harden & become moldable due to the presence of clays (ball clay
and kaolin). Mixture B, however, did not form a tile body because it did not harden and it
did not become moldable, though it dries. Drying of the mixture is due to the plaster of
paris mold, but because it does not contain clays, it did not harden and it did not become
moldable. It cracks when removing it to the plaster of paris mold. Mixture D contains
feldspar only whose function is to provide strength and hardness to the tile body which is
Firing Technology
Three firing procedures were done. Different subscripts were used to indicate the
firing procedure done on the tile. The subscript 1 indicates that the tile undergone bisquit
firingproduct procedure. In contrast, the subscript 2 indicates that the tile underwent
No. No. of
No. of
of tiles that
Mixture Groups* tiles Description
tiles broke into
produced
fired fragments
no cracks,
A1 4 4 0
no damage
few cracks,
A2 4 4 0 little
A
damage
few cracks,
A3 4 4 0 little
damage
no cracks,
B1
4 4 0 no damage
broke into
fragments,
B2 4 0 4
B extensive
damage
few cracks,
B3 4 4 0 little
damage
few cracks,
C1 4 4 0
brittle
few cracks,
C C2 4 4 0
brittle
no cracks,
C3 4 4 0
no damage
no cracks,
E1 4 0
4 no damage
no cracks,
E E2 4 0
4 no damage
no cracks,
E3 4 4 0
no damage
*Firing Procedure: 1 - bisquit firingproduct
2 - glazingglost firingproduct
As shown in Table 4.2, all the groups except for B2 yields 100% though referring to
the description of each groups, it is noticeable that almost all have little damage. Group
B2 broke into fragments and exhibits extensive damage. This means that it is not feasible
to make tiles with 50% concentration of calcium carbonate and with a glazingglost
firing product procedure. On the other hand, the presence of feldspar provides strength
44
and hardness to the groups of tiles on the fired state because when the feldspar melts, it
forms a molten glass that causes the particles to cling together. But due to a lesser
concentration of it, qualitatively speaking, the produced tiles do not exhibit much
hardness and strength. The absence of silica sand, however, is substituted by calcium
carbonate which according to studies has the same function as the silica sand. Both silica
sand and calcium carbonate acts as sort of skeleton, reduce firing shrinkage, drying
shrinkage and cracking. But due to its higher concentration in mixtures, A, B and C the
result is the other way around. This means that, higher concentration of calcium
The physical properties such as impact strength and porosity of the produced tiles
from oyster shells were tested and compared with commercial ceramic tiles. The
Impact strength is an important property of a ceramic tile on the fired state. It refers to
the ability of ceramic material to bear crushing loads. Impact strength test is done to
measure the capacity of the ceramic tiles produced to bear crushing loads of different
masses. This test is done by dropping three loads of different masses (100g, 200g and
Table 4.3 shows the result of the impact strength test done on the two
commercial/control tiles F and G which will be used to compare with the experimental
tiles.
Table 4.3 Result of Impact Strength Test for Control Tiles F and G
Trial 1 Trial 2
Tile
Loads Loads Mean
Rank
1(100g) 2(200g) 3(500g) M 1(100g) 2(200g) 3(500g) M Total
ean ean
F 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 43.3 1.5
G 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 43.3 1.5
Table 4.3 shows the impact strength test conducted on the control tiles F and G.
The rating 50.0 indicates that the tile has the greatest impact strength while the rating
10.0 indicates that the tile has the lowest impact strength.
Referring to Table 4.3, it shows that the total mean indicates that control tiles F
and G have the same impact strength. The impact strength result for each control tile will
be used in comparing with the best tile for each mixture using one-way ANOVA but since
control tile F and G have the same impact strength rating, either of the two can be used.
Table 4.4 shows the result of the impact strength test done on mixture A.
Table 4.4 shows the impact strength test conducted on experimental tile A. The
rating 50.0 indicates that the tile has the greatest impact strength while the rating 10.0
Referring to Table 4.4, it shows that the total mean indicates that tile A2 have the
greatest impact strength while tile A1 have the lowest impact strength. For this reason, tile
Table 4.5 shows the summary of the one-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile
As shown in Table 4.5, the F-ratio is more than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength,
will be rejected. Meaning, tile A2 differ significantly with that of the control tile F or G in
terms of impact strength. Since the mean value of the result of impact strength test done
on experimental tile A2 is less than the mean value of the result of impact test done on
control tile F or G, tile A2 is more fragile compared with the control tiles. This indicates
that it not feasible to make tiles with 40% concentration of calcium carbonate and with a
bisquit firingproduct procedure if the impact strength is the only physical property to
be considered.
47
Table 4.6 shows the result of the impact strength test done on mixture B.
Table 4.6 shows the impact strength test conducted on experimental tile B. The
rating 50.0 indicates that the tile has the greatest impact strength while the rating 10.0
Referring to Table 4.6, it shows that the total mean indicates that tile B3 have the
greatest impact strength while tile B1 have the lowest impact strength. For this reason, tile
Table 4.7 shows the summary of theone-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile B3
As shown in Table 4.7, the F-ratio is less than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength,
will be accepted. Meaning, tile B3 do not differ with that of the control tile F or G in
terms of impact strength. This indicates that it is feasible to make tiles with 50%
48
product procedure if the impact strength is the only physical property to be considered.
Table 4.8 shows the result of the impact strength test conducted on experimental
tile C.
Table 4.8 shows the impact strength test conducted on experimental tile C. The
rating 50.0 indicates that the tile has the greatest impact strength while the rating 10.0
Referring to Table 4.8, it shows that the total mean indicates that tile C3 have the
greatest impact strength while tile C1 have the lowest impact strength. For this reason, tile
Table 4.9 shows the summary of the one-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile
As shown in Table 4.9 the F-ratio is less than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength,
strength. This indicates that it is feasible to make tiles with 60% concentration of calcium
Table 4.10 shows the result of the impact strength test conducted on experimental
tile E.
Table 4.10 shows the impact strength test conducted on experimental tile E. The
rating 50.0 indicates that the tile has the greatest impact strength while the rating 10.0
Referring to Table 4.10, it shows that the total mean indicates that tile E1 have the
greatest impact strength while tile E2 have the lowest impact strength. For this reason, tile
Table 4.11 shows the summary of the one-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile
Between
223.5 1 223.5
Groups
Within 111.8 Significant
3.800 2 1.900
Group
Total 227.0 3
As shown in Table 4.11, the F-ratio is more than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength,
will be rejected. Meaning, tile E1 differ significantly with that of the control tile F or G in
terms of impact strength. Since the mean value of the result of impact test done on
experimental tile E1 is less than the mean value of the result of impact strength test done
on control tile F or G, tile E1 is more fragile compared with the control tiles. This
indicates that it not feasible to make tiles with 0% concentration of calcium carbonate or
silica sand and with a bisquit firingproduct procedure if the impact strength is the only
In general, groups B3 and C3 are the tiles comparable with control tiles F or G in
B. Porosity Test
refers to the penetration of liquids and vapors through the material that usually causes
structural damage. The porosity test is conducted to determine how much liquid the
produced ceramic tile will absorb in standard period of time. It is done by measuring the
unsaturated mass of the tile, the liquid-dipped mass of the tile and the saturated mass of
51
the tile. The resulting masses were then substituted to the equation for percent apparent
porosity.
Table 4.12 shows the result of the porosity test done on the control tiles F and G.
Table 4.12 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for control tiles F
and G
Table 4.12 shows the porosity test done on control tiles F and G. It illustrates that
the lesser the percent apparent porosity, the lesser is its susceptibility to be penetrated by
As shown in Table 4.12 control tile F has the least percent apparent porosity,
meaning it is less susceptible to be penetrated by liquids while control tile G has larger
vapors. For this reason, control tile F is selected to be compared with the experimental
tiles.
Table 4.13 shows the results of the porosity test for mixture A.
Table 4.13 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture A
Table 4.13 shows the porosity test for mixture A. It illustrates that the lesser the
percent apparent porosity, the lesser is its susceptibility to be penetrated by liquids, the
better.
Referring to Table 4.13, it shows that tile A2 has the least percent apparent
porosity, meaning it is less susceptible to be penetrated by liquids while tile A3 have the
liquids and vapors. For this reason, tile A2 is selected to be compared with control tile F.
Table 4.14 shows the one-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile A 2 versus
control tile F.
As shown in Table 4.14, the F-ratio is less than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of porosity, will be
accepted. Meaning, tile A2 is comparable with control tile F in terms of porosity. This
indicates that it is feasible to make tiles with 40% concentration of calcium carbonate and
considered.
Table 4.15 shows the results of the porosity test for mixture B.
53
Table 4.15 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture B
Table 4.13 shows the porosity test for mixture B. It illustrates that the lesser the
percent apparent porosity, the lesser is its susceptibility to be penetrated by liquids, the
better.
Referring to Table 4.13, tile B1 has the least percent apparent porosity, meaning it
is less susceptible to be penetrated by liquids while tile B3 have larger percent apparent
porosity, meaning it is more susceptible to be penetrated by liquids and vapors. For this
Table 4.16 shows the summary of the one-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile
As shown in Table 4.16, the F-ratio is less than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of porosity, will be
accepted. Meaning, tile A2 is comparable with control tile F in terms of porosity. This
indicates that it is feasible to make tiles with 50% concentration of calcium carbonate and
54
to be considered.
Table 4.17 shows the results of the porosity test for mixture C.
Table 4.17 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture C
Table 4.17 shows the porosity test for mixture C. It illustrates that the lesser the
percent apparent porosity, the lesser is its susceptibility to be penetrated by liquids, the
better.
Referring to Table 4.17, tile C3 has the least percent apparent porosity, meaning it
is less susceptible to be penetrated by liquids while tile C1 have larger percent apparent
porosity, meaning it is more susceptible to be penetrated by liquids and vapors. For this
Table 4.18 shows the summary of the one-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile
Between
234.5 1 234.5
Groups
Not
Within 13.21
35.50 2 17.75 Significant
Group
Total 270.0 3
As shown in Table 4.18, the F-ratio is less than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of porosity, will be
accepted. Meaning, tile C3 is comparable with control tile F in terms of porosity. This
indicates that it is somewhat feasible to make tiles with 60% concentration of calcium
Table 4.19 shows the results of the porosity test for mixture E.
Table 4.19 Result of porosity test (in percent apparent porosity, %Pa) for mixture E
Table 4.19 shows the porosity test for mixture E. It illustrates that the lesser the
percent apparent porosity, the lesser is its susceptibility to be penetrated by liquids, the
better.
Referring to Table 4.19, tile E1 has the least percent apparent porosity, meaning it
is less susceptible to be penetrated by liquids while tile E2 have the largest percent
Table 4.20 shows the summary of the one-way ANOVA applied in comparing tile
As shown in Table 4.20, the F-ratio is more than the critical value, 13.51, then the
null hypothesis, which is, the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of porosity, will be
rejected. Meaning, tile E1 differs significantly with control tile F in terms of porosity. But
for this sample, E1 has lesser percent apparent porosity than control tile F. Meaning, tile
E1 is less susceptible to the penetration of liquids than control tile F. This indicates that it
is feasible to make tiles with 0% concentration of calcium carbonate or silica sand and
considered. The hardened clays after firing that make this group resistant to action of
liquids and vapors. But because it does not contain calcium carbonate or silica sand, the
tile is fragile.
In general, tiles A2 B1 and C3 are the tiles comparable with control tile F in terms
of porosity.
Table 4.21 shows the summary of results for the best tiles produced according to
As shown in Table 4.21, it suggests that tile C3 is the most feasible experimental
tile because it is feasible in both impact strength and porosity test done. This means that it
is feasible to make tile with 60% concentration of calcium carbonate and with a bisquit
However, as shown in Table 4.21, tiles A2, B1 and B3 are feasible in one physical
property only that is why the decision for its acceptance is not feasible. It is very
important that the produced tile pass all the tests for physical properties to achieve
quality.
It was also observed in the study that the lesser the calcium carbonate added to the
tile, the smaller the porosity. The lesser the percent apparent porosity means that the
susceptibility of the tile to absorb liquid or vapor is less. It is because calcium oxide
(from fired calcium carbonate) easily absorbs liquids like water to form hydroxides.
On the other hand, the greater the amount of calcium carbonate added to the tile,
the greater is the impact strength. The greater the impact strength means that the ability of
the tile to bear crushing load is better. It is because calcium carbonate reduces the drying
58
shrinkage, prevents cracking of the piece and act as a sort of skeleton to hold the shape of
the piece.
Table 4.22 shows the rough estimate of the costs of chemicals and equipment
Referring at Table 4.22, it shows that the total cost of the study amounted to
roughly one thousand eleven and 17/100 pesos (P1,011.17). This amount was utilized in
the production of 60 pieces of tiles. Dividing the amount used in the study with the
number of tiles will give out 16.85. Meaning, if the tiles were to be sold, its unit price
would be P16.85/piece which is higher than the price of the commercial tiles which is
The unit price may seem expensive but it should also be considered that the
plaster of paris mold can be used over and over again and the firing machine could fire
Chapter 5
The main objective of the study is to investigate the feasibility of the Crassostrea
iredalei (oyster) shell as base for ceramic tile making. Specifically, it aimed to: (a) utilize
Crassostrea iredalei (oyster) shells as substitute to silicon dioxide (silica sand) in ceramic
tile making; (b) test the physical properties like impact strength and porosity of the
produced ceramic tiles; and (c) compare the ceramic tile made of Crassostrea iredalei
(oyster) shells to commercially available ones such as the Mariwasa Ceramic Tiles® and
Floor Center Ceramic Tiles® in terms of impact strength and porosity via One-Way
ANOVA.
60
Based on the statistical analysis, it was found out that utilizing Crassostrea
iredalei (oyster) shells as substitute to silicon dioxide (silica sand) in ceramic tile making
procedure is feasible. The produced tile is comparable with the commercial tiles like
Mariwasa Ceramic Tiles® and Floor Center Ceramic Tiles® in terms of impact strength
and porosity. The other percent substitution of calcium carbonate including the firing
To further enhance or modify this research study, the researchers throw the
following recommendations:
1) Utilize other test for the physical properties of the best tile produced.
2) The use of other tile body forming method like the dust press method or
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1
JEFE (2000). Downloaded on August 10, 2006 from
http://www.jefo.ca/fiches_anglais/oyster_shells.html
2
Britannica, 1978
3
Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 4, 1988
4
Jamaica Export Trading Company. Downloaded on October 24, 2006 from
http://www.exportjamaica.org/jetco/click.htm
5
University of Florida News (2004). Downloaded on August 10, 2006 from
http://www.napa.ufl.edu/2004news/oystertip.htm
6
Rx List (2005). Downloaded on August 10, 2006 from http://www.rxlist.com/drugs/drug-
20939Calcium+Oyster+Shell+Oral.aspx?drugid=20939&drugname=Calcium+Oyster+Shell+Oral
7
Planet Natural (2004). Downloaded on August 10, 2006 from
http://www.planetnatural.com/site/oyster-shell-lime.html
8
The World Book Encyclopedia, Vol. 16, 1958
62
9
Training Manual on Ceramic Artware Production published by the Rural Technology &
Information Division, Industrial Technology Development Institute, Department of
Science and Technology.
10
The Tile Doctor (2003). Downloaded on August 10, 2006 from
http://www.thetiledoctor.com/tile_manufac.cfm
11
Alibaba.com (1999). Downloaded on October 5, 2006 from
http://www.alibaba.com/catalog/11336587/Water_Washed_Lavigated_China_Clay_Kaoli
n.html
12
(October 2001). China Raw Ball Clay QY-03 Chemical Analysis. Quezon City: Central
Ceramic Center.
13
Wikipedia (2006). Downloaded on October 24, 2006 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silica
14
Production of Ceramic Artwares published by the Rural Technology & Information
Division, Industrial Technology Development Institute, Department of Science and
Technology.
15
Ceramic-tile.com (2003). Downloaded on August 10, 2006 from http://www.ceramic-
tile.com/class.cfm
16
Isidro, Reinier Augustus and Sheryll R. Jamito. 2006. Janitor Fish’s Skin Reinforced
Concrete Blocks. Manila: Philippine Normal University Research Paper.
17
Camara, Paolo, Janssen Canicula, Rex Capuno, Don dela Cruz and Christopher
Sanguyo. 2001. Feasibility of Foam Polystyrene and Powdered Talaba Shells as Tiles.
Quezon City, Philippines: Philippine Science High School Research Paper.
63
APPENDIX A
Trial 1 Trial 2
Loads Loads Mean
Tile
1(100g) 2(200g) 3(500g) M 1(100g) 2(200g) 3(500g) M Total
ean ean
A1 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
A2 40.0 30.0 20.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 20.0 26.7 28.4
A3 40.0 20.0 20.0 26.7 40.0 20.0 20.0 26.7 26.7
B1 40.0 30.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 26.7 56.7
B3 50.0 40.0 20.0 36.7 50.0 40.0 20.0 36.7 36.7
C1 40.0 20.0 20.0 26.7 40.0 20.0 20.0 26.7 26.7
C2 40.0 40.0 20.0 33.3 40.0 40.0 20.0 33.3 33.3
C3 50.0 50.0 20.0 40.0 50.0 40.0 20.0 36.7 38.4
E1 40.0 30.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 26.7 28.4
E2 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 16.6 18.3
E3 40.0 20.0 10.0 23.3 40.0 20.0 10.0 23.3 23.3
F 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 43.3
G 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 50.0 50.0 30.0 43.3 43.3
Group A
Trial A2 F/G
1 30.0 43.3
2 26.7 43.3
∑ 56.7 86.6
∑X = 143.3
Step 1: Ho = M1 = M2= the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength
H1 = M1 ≠ M2 = the 2 groups of tiles do differ in terms of impact strength
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 223.5
1.9
= 111.8
Summary Table
Source of Sum of df Mean F ratio 66
Interpretation
variation Squares Squares
Between
223.5 1 223.5
Groups
Within 111.8 Significant
3.800 2 1.9
Group
Total 227.3 3
Group B
Trial B3 F/G
1 36.7 43.3
2 36.7 43.3
∑ 73.4 86.6
∑X=160.0
Step 1: Ho = M1 = M2= the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength
H1 = M1 ≠ M2 = the 2 groups of tiles do differ in terms of impact strength
Trial B3 F/G
1 1347 1874
2 1347 1874
∑ 2694 3748
∑x2 = 6442
= 223.5
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 43.56
-0.8
= - 54.45
Summary Table
Source of Sum of df Mean F ratio Interpretation
variation Squares Squares
Between
43.56 1 43.56
Groups
Not
Within -54.45
-1.600 2 -0.8 Significant
Group
Total 42.00 3
Group C
68
Trial C3 F/G
1 40.0 43.3
2 36.7 43.3
∑ 76.7 86.6
∑X=163.3
Trial C3 F/G
1 1600 1874
2 1347 1874
∑ 2947 3748
∑x2 = 6695
= 223.5
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 24.5
1.9
= 12.89
Summary Table
Source of Sum of df Mean F ratio Interpretation
variation Squares Squares
Between
24.50 1 24.50
Groups
Not
Within 12.89
3.800 2 1.900 Significant
Group
Total 28.30 3
Group E
Trial E1 F/G
1 40.0 43.3
2 36.7 43.3
∑ 76.7 86.6
∑X=143.3
Step 1: Ho = M1 = M2= the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength
H1 = M1 ≠ M2 = the 2 groups of tiles do differ in terms of impact strength
Trial E1 F/G
1 900 1874
2 713 1874
∑ 1613 3748
∑x2 = 5361
= 223.5
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 223.5
1.9
71
= 111.8
Summary Table
APPENDIX B
Porosity Test
* % Pa = Wm – Wd / Wm – Wmm x 100
Group A
Trial A1 F
1 39.90 48.57
2 40.46 40
∑ 80.36 88.57
∑X = 168.9
Step 1:
Ho = M1 = M2= the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of impact strength
Trial A12
F2
1 1592 2359
2 1637 1600
∑ 3229 3959
∑x2 = 7188
= 7188 – (168.9) 2
4
= 56.20
= 19.38
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 19.38
18.41
= 1.053
Summary Table
Group B
Trial B1 F
1 47.54 48.57
2 48.96 40
∑ 96.50 88.57
∑X=185.1
Step 1: Ho = M1 = M2= the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of apparent porosity
Trial B1 F
1 2260 2359
2 2397 1600
∑ 4657 3959
∑x2 = 8616
= 12.94
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 12.94
18.78
= 0.6890
Summary Table
Source of Sum of df Mean F ratio Interpretation
variation Squares Squares
Between
19.38 1 19.38
Groups
Not
Within 1.053
36.82 2 18.41 Significant
Group
Total 56.20 3
Group C
Trial C3 F
1 59.92 48.57
76
2 59.47 40
∑ 119.4 88.57
∑X = 208.0
Trial C3 F
1 3550 2359
2 3537 1600
∑ 119.4 3559
= 234.5
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 234.5
17.75
= 13.21
Summary Table
Group E
Trial E1 F
1 29.32 48.57
2 23.26 40
∑ 56.28 88.57
∑X=141.2
Step 1: Ho = M1 = M2= the 2 groups of tiles do not differ in terms of apparent porosity
Trial E1 F
1 859.7 2359
2 541.0 1600
∑ 1401 3959
∑x2 = 5360
= 320.3
(5.5) F ratio
F = MSb
MSw
= 320.3
0.5865
79
= 546.1
Summary Table
Source of Sum of df Mean F ratio Interpretation
variation Squares Squares
Between
19.38 1 19.38
Groups
Not
Within 1.053
36.82 2 18.41 Significant
Group
Total 56.20 3
APPENDIX C
Research Pictorials
Mold Making
Preparation of Mixtures
Firing
Glaze Preparation
Glazing
82
Porosity Test
83
CURRICULUM VITAE
Imus,Cavite
Personal Data
Educational Background
Major in Chemistry
Affiliations
CURRICULUM VITAE
Personal Data
Educational Background
Major in Chemistry
Baler, Aurora
85
Baler, Aurora
Affiliations