effects of portland cement and quicklime on physical and

Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 4, 2021

‐ 597 - © 2021 JUST. All Rights Reserved.

Received on 4/4/2021. Accepted for Publication on 26/8/2021.

Effects of Portland Cement and Quicklime on Physical and

Mechanical Characteristics of Earth Concrete

Khedidja Himouri 1)*, Abdelmadjid Hamouine 1) and Lamia Guettatfi 1)

1) ARCHIPEL Lab, University of Tahri Mohamed Bechar, Bechar, Algeria. * Corresponding Author. E-Mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Earth has been widely used as a construction material, especially in southern Algeria. Several of these ancient

structures are classified as protected earthen heritages, some of which were built with the mud bricks technique

and suffer significant damages due to Saharan climate conditions, the carelessness of individuals, besides the

lack of knowledge on the behavior of these structures. This study aims to contribute to a better understanding.

In this context, the physical and mechanical characteristics of earth concrete were examined, with different

combinations of Portland cement and quicklime as stabilizers. The experimental results show that stabilization

has positively affected the earth concrete's behavior, which allowed better improvement of both compressive

and bending strengths, as well as a better reduction in shrinkage by using Portland cement. In contrast, capillary

water absorption and water absorption by immersion were well enhanced by adding quicklime. Thus,

stabilization using both binders in combination for mixtures with 3%PC+6%QL and 6%PC+3%QL is more

effective for improving physical and mechanical properties than incorporating a single stabilizer.

KEYWORDS: Earth concrete, Portland cement, Quicklime, Shrinkage, Mechanical strength, Water absorption.

INTRODUCTION

For thousands of years on a worldwide scale,

humans have used raw earth in various forms for

construction and it’s still in use today (Aubert et al.,

2013; Van Damme and Houben, 2018). According to the

estimates, more than two billion people are currently

living in earthen habitations and about 10% of the world

heritage properties incorporate earthen structures (Van

Damme and Houben, 2018). In emerging countries

alone, this percentage can reach 50%, especially in rural

areas (Vega et al., 2011; Corrêa et al., 2015). In Algeria,

earth has been widely used as a construction material,

especially in the southern areas. The old Ksar of

Moughel in the state Bechar, which is located in the

southwest of Algeria, is classified as protected earthen

heritage. These structures, which were built with mud

bricks technique, suffer significant damages due to

Saharan climate conditions. Many rehabilitation

solutions have been implemented, but the problem

remains due to the lack of knowledge on the behavior of

these structures.

One of the most effective methods used to enhance

the characteristics of raw earth as a sustainable building

material is chemical stabilization that was mainly

introduced in compressed blocks and rammed earth

technologies using different stabilizers. Essentially, the

use of cement is to improve the mechanical properties

and the durability of earth concrete due to its hydration

reactions (Bahar et al., 2004; Basha et al., 2005; Kenai

et al., 2006; Millogo and Morel, 2012; Taallah et al.,

2014; Abbey et al., 2020). In fact, that effect depends

highly on cement content and the composition of the

soil, which makes cement more effective with coarse-

grained particles soils with low clay content, as has been

recommended by many researchers (Venkatarama

Reddy and Gupta, 2005; Kariyawasam and Jayasinghe,

2016). In contrast, the use of lime is more appropriate

with clayey earth (Venkatarama Reddy and Hubli, 2002;

Effects of Portland Cement and… Khedidja Himouri, Abdelmadjid Hamouine and Lamia Guettatfi

- 598 -

Miqueleiz et al., 2012); it enhances workability,

geotechnical properties, durability and mechanical

characteristics of the soil by several chemical reactions

that occur (cation-exchange, flocculation and

agglomeration, carbonation and pozzolanic reactions)

by forming the same hydrates that are formed during the

hydration of cement, as confirmed by previous research

(Millogo et al., 2008; Khattab et al., 2007; Al-Joulani,

2012). However, even though these two binders

significantly improve the earthen concrete performance,

some papers recommend avoiding the addition of

cement for the conservation and restoration of

monuments and earthen structures (UNESCO-ICOMOS

2012, Warren, 1999).

Mud bricks suffer from shrinkage, low mechanical

strengths and high water absorption due to the presence

of fine particles and the high water content needed for

workability. Degirmenci (2008) stated that the addition

of phosphogypsum reduced the shrinkage of adobes and

enhanced mechanical strength. Corrêa et al. (2015)

found that the use of synthetic termite saliva and

bamboo particles reduced the linear shrinkage, water

absorption and the loss of mass of adobes exposed to

water. Also, Türkmen et al. (2017) reported that adding

gypsum decreased linear drying shrinkage and water

absorption and improved compressive strength; besides,

the addition of Elazıg Ferrochrome Slag (EFS)

contributed to reducing the linear shrinkage values, but

had a negative effect on compressive strength and water

absorption.

The present study is an experimental investigation

examining the influence of stabilization with Portland

cement and quicklime on drying shrinkage (longitudinal

and volumetric), bulk density, capillary water

absorption, total water absorption (by immersion),

flexural strength and compressive strength of earth

concrete, which was manufactured using raw material

which originated from old mud blocks.

Figure (1): The old Ksar of Mougheul

MATERIALS

Soil The soil was obtained from the bricks of the ruined

parts at the old Ksar of Mougheul, Figure 1, The blocks

were first crushed, then passed through a 6.3 mm sieve.

Grain size distribution was determined according to NF

P 94-056 and NF P 94-057 standards. As illustrated in

Figure 2, our soil is well-graded and belongs to the limit

spindle of soils suitable for making adobes as given by

Houben et al. (2006). Soil characteristics are

summarized in Table 1.


- 599 -

Figure (2): Particle size distribution of soil

Table 1. Characteristics of the soil

Property value

Bulk density (g/cm3) 1.312

Specific gravity (g/cm3) 2.191

Water content (%) 0.80

Coefficient of uniformity Cu 58.48

Coefficient of curvature Cc 0.57

Activity coefficient Ca 0.47

Liquid limit (%) 19.18

Plastic limit (%) 14.37

Plasticity index (%) 4.81

PH 8.06

Adsorption of Methylene blue (%) 0.72

Carbonates (CO3-2) (%) 18.38

Sulphates (SO4-2) (%) 0.80

Chlorides (Cl-) (%) 0.52

Insoluble residue I.R. (%) 80.30

White Portland Cement The used white cement was chosen to preserve the

original color of the Ksar’s earthen bricks. It’s a Portland

cement (PC) type CEMI 52.5R acquired from MALAKI


- 600 -

manufacturing supplied by Lafarge. Its characteristics as

derived from the technical sheet are presented in

Table 2.

Table 2. Characteristics of Portland cement

Property Value

C3S (%) 55 ± 3

C3A (%) 9.0 ±1

Sulphate content (%) 2.8 ±0.8

Magnesium oxide content (%) 1.8 ±0.8

Chloride content (%) < 0.1

LOI (%) 3 ± 2.5

Normal consistency (%) 28 ± 3

Finesse (Blaine method) (cm2/g) 4000-5400

Shrinkage at 28 days (µm) < 1000

Initial setting time (min) 140 ±40

Final setting time (min) 210 ±40

Compressive strength at 2 days (MPa) ≥ 30

Compressive strength at 28 days (MPa) ≥ 55

Quicklime The chosen lime as a stabilizer is quicklime (QL)

obtained from SARL BMSD-Chaux in the state of

Saida, which is located in the Northwest of Algeria. The

chemical and physical characteristics according to the

technical sheet of the lime production unit are given in

Table 3.

Table 3. Properties of quicklime

Property Value

CaO 96.83%

Fe2O3 1.165%

Al2O3 0.27%

MgO 1.28%

Mn3O4 0.0019%

SiO2 1.259%

Fe 0.001%

Al 0.003%

Si 0.0031%

Mn 0.0011%

CO2 < 1%

Residual CO2 < 2%

Reactivity T60 < 2 min

Bulk density 0.78 g/cm3

Specific gravity 2.6 g/cm3

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

Manufacture of Test Samples Nine mixtures have been prepared by varying the

percentage of stabilizers. The samples were

manufactured by hand mixing as follows: initially, the

required quantities of soil and stabilizers were mixed in

a dry condition until a uniform mixture was obtained.

The mixes that contained quicklime were kept for an

hour in open air. Then, water was gradually added until

the paste was homogeneously mixed. After that, the

mixture was poured into 40×40×160 mm3 steel oiled

molds and compacted immediately using a vibrating

table for one minute. Excess material was removed by

trowel to produce a flat top surface on each mold. The

molds were preserved in the laboratory for five days to

allow partial hardening of the mixture by drying

naturally and dissipating moisture slowly. Finally, the

specimens were carefully demoulded and stored at room

temperature (20ᵒ); the length of the drying period is 42

days. In total, 270 samples were prepared for this study.

Details of mixture proportions of the various produced

earth bricks are given in Table 4. The manufacturing

procedure was the same as reported by Himouri et al.

(2021) and with the same soil.

The amount of water was adjusted to obtain the same

adequate workability for all the mixtures. Depending on


- 601 -

the type and the proportion of stabilizer, it is about

22.93-26.37%. This workability was assessed

preliminarily by the empirical test "Vicat test" for each

mix. The procedure of this empirical test was as follows

(Corrêa, 2013):

1. The mixture was placed in a cylindrical container.

2. An iron rod with a diameter of 10 mm, a length of 50

cm and marked at 2 cm at its end was supported on

the center of the cylindrical sample.

3. If the penetration of the bar in the paste reached 2 cm

of depth, the moisture corresponds to the optimum

moisture for adobe.

Table 4. Proportions of earth concrete mixes (% in relation to the soil mass)

Mixes Soil (%) PC (%) QL (%) Water (%)

CEC (a) 100 0 0 22.93

SEC1 (b) 100 3 0 23.16

SEC2 100 6 0 23.25

SEC3 100 10 0 24.41

SEC4 100 0 3 24.52

SEC5 100 0 6 25.10

SEC6 100 0 10 26.37

SEC7 100 3 6 24.80

SEC8 100 6 3 24.62

(a) CEC: Control Earth Concrete. (b) SEC: Stabilized Earth Concrete.

Tests Various tests were carried out in order to determine

the effect of stabilization on the physical and mechanical

properties of the studied earth bricks at two ages; 28 and

42 days. For comparative evaluation, the un-stabilized

samples "CEC" are considered as a reference mixture for

the study.

The first test was to investigate the development of

shrinkage and mass loss during the drying process. After

five days of making samples, the drying retractions were

measured and the variation of length, width and height

of each demolded specimen was monitored up to an age

of 42 days. The shrinkage ratios were calculated

according to the measured values by using the following

Eq. (1):

𝑆 %𝐷 𝐷

𝐷∗ 100 (1)

where, SA is the shrinkage ratio at age A; D0 is the

initial length, width, height or volume of the sample; DA

is the length, width, height or volume at age A.

After curing, the earth bricks bulk density was

obtained by oven-drying the samples at a temperature of

60°C until reaching a constant mass, then measured with

a caliper; after that, their volumes were calculated and

the densities were easily determined.

The capillary water absorption test was

accomplished as detailed in the standard NFXP 13-901.

First, the samples were oven-dried and then their (40x40

mm2) smooth surfaces were immersed at a 5 mm depth

in a plastic container for 24 hours. The capillary water

absorption coefficient Cb corresponds to the rate

absorption after a time equal to 10 min, which was

calculated by Eq. (2). The capillary absorption rate up to

24 hours was calculated by Eq. (3).

𝐶100 𝑀 𝑀

𝑆 √𝑡𝑔/𝑐𝑚 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (2)

𝐶𝑊𝐴 %𝑀 𝑀

𝑀∗ 100 (3)

where, Cb is the capillary coefficient, Mt is the

sample weight after immersion at time t in (g); M0 is the

dry initial sample weight in (g), S is the surface

submerged in (cm2), t is the immersion duration in

(min), CWAt% is the capillary water absorption rate

after immersion at time t.

Total water absorption was determined by

immersing the oven-dried specimens in a water


- 602 -

container for different durations: 24, 48, 72 and 96 hours

and measuring the increase in weight (Mh) compared to

the weight of the specimen in the dry state (Ms). The

total absorption was calculated by the following Eq. (4):

𝑇𝑊𝐴 %𝑀 𝑀

𝑀∗ 100 (4)

Both flexural and compressive strength tests were

executed according to NF EN 196-1, using a Matest

motorized hydraulic press with two capacity channels;

15kN and 250kN. The flexural tensile strength was

determined by a three-point bending test, with a loading

rate of 0.04kN/s until reaching the failure load, by which

the corresponding rupture stress value was calculated.

The compressive strength test was performed on the two

halves of each specimen resulting from the flexural test

at a loading speed of 0.40kN/s. The compressive failure

load recorded presents the maximum load used to

calculate the compressive strength by dividing it by the

contact area of the specimen.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Shrinkage Figure 3 shows the effect of different contents of

stabilizers on longitudinal and volumetric shrinkage

with time. The shrinkage ratio during the first five days

presents about 78 to 96% of its final value. The same

progress tendency of shrinkage was reported in previous

research on stabilized soil (Hossain and Mol, 2011;

Venkatarama Reddy and Gupta, 2005). As it can be

seen, the addition of PC and QL affected shrinkage

positively; a similar observation was stated in previous

studies (Gomes et al., 2018; Nakamatsu et al., 2017).

Moreover, the shrinkage ratio decreased with increasing

PC and QL content (Himouri et al., 2021). The SEC3

offered the highest reduction, while SEC4 offered the

lowest. Shrinkage reduction values are given in Table 5.

Table 5. Reduction rate values of shrinkage

Shrinkage reduction compared to CEC mix (%)

Mixes Longitudinal shrinkage Volumetric shrinkage

SEC1 43.10 43.27

SEC2 52.36 51.36

SEC3 68.43 62.47

SEC4 10.27 17.41

SEC5 18.03 22.78

SEC6 20.38 25.66

SEC7 34.28 37.23

SEC8 46.85 47.27

Figure (3): Effect of stabilizers content on shrinkage ratio

Final shrinkage regarding the stabilizer type was

higher for QL-adobes compared to the PC-adobes at

identical dosages. The observations that can be derived by

comparing the combinations SEC7 and SEC8 with the


- 603 -

mixes SEC5 and SEC4 in that order indicate that adding

PC to QL reduced retractions better than using quicklime

alone. This result can be explained by the fact that the

sufficient period that will allow an efficient stabilization

reaction to form cementitious products is much longer in

the case of lime. This period is about 15 days in the best

cases, as affirmed by Doat et al. (1979), but it is about one

day in the case of cement, versus the important shrinkage

ratio that takes place at a very early age.

The results also indicate that the shrinkage ratio is

more important in the height of each specimen than

retractions of the other two dimensions for all the

studied mixtures, as illustrated in Figure 4, which gives

the volumetric shrinkage much higher values. Gomes et

al. (2018) reported that the shrinkage of the samples was

significant, not only throughout its length, but also in the

other two dimensions for earth-based repair mortars and

stated that linear shrinkage does not appear to be

representative of total shrinkage. This was also

confirmed by Bouhicha et al. (2005) for composite soil

reinforced with chopped barley straw fibers.

Figure (4): Final shrinkage of each dimension of earth concrete sample at 42 days

From Figure 5, the evolution of losing mass by water

evaporation has the same trend of shrinkage. The mass

loss increases rapidly up to sixteen days and then it tends

to augment slowly until reaching a constant value after

28 days. The results also show that using and increasing

PC and QL dosages led to decreasing the mass loss,

except for SEC1. Furthermore, specimens with PC lose

more mass than those with QL at similar percentages.

Finally, though the cracks commonly occur in earthen

materials, the studied samples show none on their

surfaces. Lanzón et al. (2017) observed that no cracks

were found in prismatic and plaster specimens.

Figure (5): Development of mass loss by evaporation with time


- 604 -

Bulk Density Bulk densities for each mixture at 42 days are given

in Table 6. The incorporation of cement and quicklime

increases the density due to their specific gravities,

which are higher than the one of soil. The outcomes

show a negative correlation between shrinkage and

density, where the increase in the latter appears to lead

to a decrease in the former.

Table 6. Bulk densities of the earth concrete at 42 days

Mixes CEC SEC1 SEC2 SEC3 SEC4 SEC5 SEC6 SEC7 SEC8

Density (g/cm3) 1.667 1.690 1.712 1.735 1.682 1.704 1.718 1.720 1.725

Capillary Water Absorption The capillary water absorption results are depicted in

Figure 6 and Figure 7, except for the un-stabilized

blocks which disintegrated with the presence of water.

Observing the water upwelling curves, it is obvious that

the absorption rate is higher during the first hours.

Increasing the stabilizer percentage led to decreasing the

capillary water absorption, which decreased with time

also; this effect could be due to the quantity of the

formed cementitious products. The PC-stabilized

blocks, gave higher values of capillary coefficient Cb

than the QL-stabilized adobes. Moreover, using

quicklime in combination with cement made the PC-

stabilized blocks, absorb less water; the results indicate

that adding 3% QL to 6% PC in the mix SEC8 and 6%

QL to 3% PC in the mix SEC7 improved water

absorption rate respectively by about 5.83% and 37.91%

compared to the mixes SEC2 and SEC1 at the age of 42

days. The bricks stabilized with 3% of binders have lost

mass during the test with a percentage lower than 2.7%.

In this test, the binder with the best behavior was

quicklime. However, the Cb values for all mixtures were

below 20, which presents the threshold of the weak

capillary absorption stated by NF-XP 13-901 standard.

Figure (6): Water upwelling by capillary absorption of specimens at 28 and 42 days


- 605 -

Figure (7): The capillary coefficient of the samples at 28 and 42 days

Total Water Absorption Figure 8 presents the outcomes of water absorption

by immersion of mud bricks after 24, 48, 72 and 96

hours, excluding the three mixtures CEC, SEC1 and

SEC4, which collapsed after 24h of submersion. Bui et

al. (2014) explained this softening behavior under water

as follows: for the un-stabilized earthen material, the

cohesion of the particles is provided not only by the

capillary forces between particles, but also by attraction

forces of clay particles. However, because of the

sensibility to moisture, clayey particles push one to the

others in the presence of a significant amount of water,

so clay loses its cohesion. On the other hand, in the case

of stabilized earthen material (by lime or cement), the

main element of the pozzolanic cohesion is C–S–H

sheets, which are not sensitive to water; but, if the

binders are below the sufficient amount to coat all

particles (including sand, silt, clay), the soil remains

water-sensitive.

The effect of the stabilizer content is reflected on the

rate of water absorption. Increasing the former's dosage

leads to a decrease in the latter. By correlating results to

those of density for each binder, it's clear that as the

density of adobes increases, porosity reduces and less

water can penetrate. Villamizar et al. (2012) mentioned

this impact of density on water absorption. Similar to

capillary water absorption, the QL-specimens present a

lower total absorption rate compared to PC-samples and

using quicklime in combination with cement makes the

adobes more resistant to water absorption. Total water

absorption decreases with age for all the mixtures.

Walker and Standards Australia (2002) stated that water

absorption after 24h of immersion with values less than 20% is acceptable (Islam et al., 2020); the obtained

results are favorable, since all are within this maximum

admissible limit.

Figure (8): Total water absorption of the mud bricks at 28 and 42 days


- 606 -

Compressive Strength Figure 9 illustrates the outcomes of compressive

strengths. The stresses of concrete mixtures were

improved by augmenting the stabilizer amount. This

enhancement is a result of cementitious products

quantity derived from PC and/or QL hydration that

provides a large number of rigid bonds in the soil and

links its particles. On the contrary, the stresses of SEC1

and SEC4 with 3% of stabilizers, which are the same

stabilized concrete that disintegrated under water, are

lower than the compressive strength of control concrete

CEC. This effect can be explained by the lack of the

binder dosage (below the optimum) that reduces the soil

particles cohesion instead of stabilizing it (Himouri et

al., 2021). Houben et al. (2006) stated that for low

dosages (2 to 3%), some soils behave worse than their

un-stabilized state behavior. Minke (2006) reported that

adding a small amount of lime may decrease the

compressive strength of loam. On the other hand, the

interesting stress value of the witness adobes, which

presented the highest shrinkage, is due to the direct

contact of the soil particles to each other. As explained

in the paper of Zak et al. (2016), during shrinkage, clay

minerals are attracted closer together and generate

hydrogen bridges with the water molecules.

Regarding the binder type at the same dosage, the

quicklime-stabilized concrete offered lower

improvement of stress values. These findings show the

efficacy of PC compared to QL that can be due to the

fact that our soil contains more sand than clay, since

cement acts mainly on sands and gravel, besides its

reaction with clay particles. Doat et al. (1979) declared

that with cement it is useless or even harmful to use soil

that is too clayey (> 30%), which confirms that for our

soil with contents of about 10% of clay and 51% of sand

cement is more suitable as a stabilizer. Whilst,

quicklime will mostly create bonds with clays and

hardly any with sands and that makes lime generally

very reputed to be used with clayey soils (30 to 40%,

even 70%), (Houben et al., 1996).

Figure (9): The compressive strength of the mud bricks at 28 and 42 days

In the case of combinations, adding 3%PC to 6%QL

in the mix SEC7 and 6%PC to 3%QL in the mix SEC8

enhanced the compressive strength respectively by

about 39.23% and 145.04% compared to the concrete

mixes SEC5 and SEC4 at the age of 42 days. Nagaraj et

al. (2014) stated that the combination of cement and lime

was more effective than using each binder alone,

because the clay portion was stabilized by the lime and

the sand portion was stabilized by cement. From the

point of view of age impact, the mechanical strengths

increased with time.

The resulted stress values are much higher than the


- 607 -

minimum limit of 0.784 MPa (8kg/cm2) stated by the

Turkish standard for adobes (Degirmenci, 2008). The

compressive strength values of SEC5, SEC6, SEC2,

SEC7 and SEC8 mixtures exceed 2 MPa.

Bending Tensile Strength

The flexural strengths of the specimens are plotted in

Figure 10. As it can be observed, stabilization shows the

same effect on tensile strength as on compression

strength. However, the tensile stress improvement was

lower, with values in the range of 28.7%-103.1%,

compared to compressive stress with an enhancement

rate in the span of 22.9%-205.3% at the age of 42 days.

In accordance with the results of mechanical tests on

compressed earth bricks reported in the literature

(Venkatarama Reddy and Gupta, 2005; Bahar et al.,

2004; Mostafa and Uddin, 2016), the tensile strength to

compressive strength ratio follows to a certain extent the

rule of concrete (which estimated a value known to be

about 10 to 15%) and that could be a result of

manufacturing procedure by using the compaction effort

at low water percentage (water content ranges between

10-12%), thus offering much higher compression

strength than flexural strength. However, in the case of

earthen materials produced with important water content

needed for workability (concrete, mortar or plaster), this

ratio may have higher values that surpass 50% in some

studies, including the outcomes in this paper.

The flexure to compression ratio for the studied earth

concrete has values between 56.26 and 88.52%, except

mixes SEC1 and SEC4 due to the negative effect of

stabilization on their mechanical characteristics. These

findings are in line with previous research; Aguilar et al.

(2016) reported that compressive and bending strengths

respectively of adobes made of low plastic clay soil

(control samples) were around 1.2 MPa and 2.1 MPa,

which makes the ratio equal to 57.14%. Calatan et al.

(2017) found that adobes (witness specimens)

manufactured of loamy sand soil gave mechanical

strengths of about 1.7 MPa and 2.1 MPa, hence the ratio

value is around 80.95%. Also, in the work of Papayianni

and Pachta (2018), the mud-based grouts designated as

AB3 and AB4, prepared from a sandy loam soil and

stabilized with white cement, offered mechanical

stresses correspondingly equal to 0.09 MPa, 0.15 MPa

for tensile strength and 0.13 MPa, 0.2 MPa for

compressive strength; so the ratio values make 69.23%

and 75%.

Figure (10): The flexural tensile strength of the mud bricks at 28 and 42 days


- 608 -

CONCLUSIONS

The main objective of this study is to investigate the

characteristics of earth concrete stabilized with different

proportions of Portland cement and quicklime to

contribute to a better understanding of its physical and

mechanical behavior. The drawn conclusions can be

summarized as follows:

1. Drying shrinkage was decreased by stabilization

with both binders; however, cement (separately or in

combination) offered better improvement compared

to quicklime.

2. The important retraction values of the sample

heights gave much higher volumetric shrinkage rates

in comparison to longitudinal shrinkage, in the range

of 235.26% -332.97%.

3. The positive effect of using cement on the

mechanical characteristics of the earth concrete was

more remarkable than the quicklime’s effect,

contrary to water absorption resistance that was

enhanced remarkably by adding quicklime.

4. The samples with 3% of binders showed a stabilized

behavior than in un-stabilized specimens in the

capillary water absorption test, whilst an amount of

6% was necessary to obtain an efficient stabilization

in the water absorption by immersion test.

5. Stabilization by using both binders in combination is

more effective to improve physical and mechanical

properties than incorporating each one separately.

Acknowledgement The authors are grateful for the hospitality and

support of Mr. Tayeb RIKIOUI via the west public

works laboratory (LTPO) unit of Bechar state and the

laboratory staff for providing a good atmosphere to achieve this work.

REFERENCES

Abbey, S.J., and Eyo, E.U. et al. (2020). "Swell and

microstructural characteristics of high-plasticity clay

blended with cement." Bulletin of Engineering Geology

and the Environment, 79 (4), 2119-2130.

Aguilar, R., and Nakamatsu, J. et al. (2016). "The potential

use of chitosan as a biopolymer additive for enhanced

mechanical properties and water resistance of earthen

construction." Construction and Building Materials,

114, 625-637.

Al-Joulani, N. (2012). "Effect of stone powder and lime on

strength, compaction and CBR properties of fine soils."

Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 6 (1), 1-16.

Aubert, J.E., and Fabbri, A. et al. (2013). "An earth block

with a compressive strength higher than 45MPa!"

Construction and Building Materials, 47, 366-369.

Bahar, R., and Benazzoug, M. et al. (2004). "Performance

of compacted cement-stabilized soil." Cement and

Concrete Composites, 26 (7), 811-820.

Basha, E.A., and Hashim, R. et al. (2005). "Stabilization of

residual soil with rice husk ash and cement."

Construction and Building Materials, 19 (6), 448-453.

Bouhicha, M., and Aouissi, F. et al. (2005). "Performance

of composite soil reinforced with barley straw."

Cement and Concrete Composites, 27 (5), 617-621.

Bui, Q.-B., and Morel, J.-C. et al. (2014). "Effect of

moisture content on the mechanical characteristics of

rammed earth." Construction and Building Materials,

54, 163-169.

Calatan, G., and Hegyi, A. et al. (2017). "Experimental

research on the recyclability of the clay material used

in the fabrication of adobe bricks type masonry units."

Procedia-Engineering 181, 363-369.

Corrêa, A.A.R. (2013). "Incorporação de partículas

lignocelusósicas e “baba de cupim sintética” no adobe".

PhD Thesis, Universidade Federal de Lavras, MG.

Corrêa, A.A.R., and Mendes, L.M. et al. (2015).

"Incorporation of bamboo particles and “synthetic

termite saliva” in adobes." Construction and Building

Materials, 98, 250-256.

Degirmenci, N. (2008). "The using of waste

phosphogypsum and natural gypsum in adobe

stabilization." Construction and Building Materials, 22

(6), 1220-1224.

Doat, P., and Hays, A. et al. (1979). "Construire en terre"

CRAterre, Collection an Architecture Paris.


- 609 -

Gomes, M.I., and Faria, P. et al. (2018). "Earth-based

mortars for repair and protection of rammed earth

walls: Stabilization with mineral binders and fibers."

Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 2401-2414.

Himouri, K., and Hamouine, A. et al. (2021) "Influence of

date palm fibres on characteristics of stabilised earth

blocks with Portland cement and quicklime". MRS

Advances, 6, 513-518.

Hossain, K.M.A., and Mol, L. (2011). "Some engineering

properties of stabilized clayey soils incorporating

natural pozzolans and industrial wastes." Construction

and Building Materials, 25 (8), 3495-3501.

Houben, H., and Guillaud, H. et al. (2006). "Traité de

construction en terre". 3e édition, Éditions Parenthèses,

Marseille.

Houben, H., and Rigassi, V. et al. (1996). "Blocs de terre

comprimée: équipements de production". 2e édition

CDI; CRATerre-EAG.

Islam, M.S., and Elahi, T.E. et al. (2020). "Effectiveness of

fly ash and cement for compressed stabilized earth

block construction." Construction and Building

Materials, 255, 119392.

Kariyawasam, K.K.G.K.D., and Jayasinghe, C. (2016).

"Cement-stabilized rammed earth as a sustainable

construction material." Construction and Building

Materials, 105, 519-527.

Kenai, S., and Bahar, R. et al. (2006). "Experimental

analysis of the effect of some compaction methods on

mechanical properties and durability of cement-

stabilized soil." Journal of Materials Science, 41 (21):

6956-6964.

Khattab, S., and Al-Mukhtar, M. et al. (2007). "Long-term

stability characteristics of a lime-treated plastic soil."

Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 19 (4), 358-

366.

Lanzón, M., and Martínez, E. et al. (2017). "Use of zinc

stearate to produce highly-hydrophobic adobe materials

with extended durability to water and acid-rain."


Millogo, Y., and Hajjaji, M. et al. (2008). "Microstructure

and physical properties of lime-clayey adobe bricks."

Construction and Building Materials, 22 (12), 2386-

2392.

Millogo, Y., and Morel, J.-C. (2012). "Microstructural

characterization and mechanical properties of cement-

stabilized adobes." Materials and Structures, 45 (9),

1311-1318.

Minke, G. (2006). "Building with earth: Design and

technology of a sustainable architecture." Birkhauser-

Publishers for Architecture, Basel, Berlin, Boston.

Miqueleiz, L., and Ramírez, F. et al. (2012). "The use of

stabilized Spanish clay soil for sustainable construction

materials." Engineering Geology, 133-134, 9-15.

Mostafa, M., and Uddin, N. (2016). "Experimental analysis

of compressed earth block (CEB) with banana fibers

resisting flexural and compression forces." Case

Studies in Construction Materials, 5, 53-63.

Nagaraj, H.B., and Sravan, M.V. et al. (2014). "Role of

lime with cement in long-term strength of compressed

stabilized earth blocks." International Journal of

Sustainable Built Environment 3 (1), 54-61.

Nakamatsu, J., and Kim, S. et al. (2017). "Eco-friendly

modification of earthen construction with carrageenan:

Water durability and mechanical assessment."


Papayianni, I., and Pachta, V. (2018). “Development of

mud-based grouts for the consolidation of earth-block

masonry”. 10th International Symposium on the

Conservation of Monuments in the Mediterranean

Basin: Natural and Anthropogenic Hazards and

Sustainable Preservation. M. Koui, F. Zezza and D.

Kouis. Cham, Springer International Publishing, 127-

133.

Taallah, B., and Guettala, A. et al. (2014). "Mechanical

properties and hygroscopicity behavior of compressed

earth block filled by date palm fibers." Construction

and Building Materials, 59, 161-168.

Türkmen, İ., and Ekinci, E. et al. (2017). "The mechanical

and physical properties of unfired earth bricks

stabilized with gypsum and elazığ ferrochrome slag."

International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment,

6 (2), 565-573.

UNESCO-ICOMOS. (2012). "The venice charter (1964)".

UNESCO-ICOMOS Documentation Centre, Paris.

Van Damme, H., and Houben, H. (2018). "Earth concrete:

stabilization revisited." Cement and Concrete Research,

114, 90-102.

Vega, P., and Juan, A. et al. (2011). "Mechanical

characterisation of traditional adobes from the north of

Spain." Construction and Building Materials, 25 (7),

3020-3023.

Venkatarama Reddy, B.V., and Gupta, A. (2005).

"Characteristics of cement-soil mortars." Materials and

Structures, 38 (6), 639-650.


- 610 -

Venkatarama Reddy, B.V., and Gupta, A. (2005).

"Characteristics of soil-cement blocks using highly

sandy soils." Materials and Structures, 38 (6), 651.

Venkatarama Reddy, B.V., and Hubli, S.R. (2002).

"Properties of lime stabilized steam-cured blocks for

masonry." Materials and Structures, 35 (5), 293.

Villamizar, M.C.N., and Araque, V.S. et al. (2012). "Effect

of the addition of coal-ash and cassava peels on the

engineering properties of compressed earth blocks."


Warren, J. (1999). "Conservation of earth structures". 1st

Ed. Butterworth Heinemann, British Library, Oxford,

UK.

Zak, P., and Ashour, T. et al. (2016). "The influence of

natural reinforcement fibers, gypsum and cement on

compressive strength of earth bricks materials."


effects of portland cement and quicklime on physical and

Documents