strengthofhollowcompressedstabilizedearth-block masonryprismsdownloads.hindawi.com › journals ›...

Research ArticleStrength of Hollow Compressed Stabilized Earth-BlockMasonry Prisms

Xinlei Yang 12 and Hailiang Wang 12

1School of Civil Engineering Tianjin Chengjian University No 26 Jinjing Road Xiqing District Tianjin 300384 China2Tianjin Key Laboratory of Civil Buildings Protection and Reinforcement No 26 Jinjing Road Xiqing DistrictTianjin 300384 China

Correspondence should be addressed to Xinlei Yang yxltcueducn

Received 13 July 2018 Accepted 30 December 2018 Published 5 February 2019

Academic Editor Constantin Chalioris

Copyright copy 2019 Xinlei Yang and Hailiang Wang is is an open access article distributed under the Creative CommonsAttribution License which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in anymedium provided the original work isproperly cited

Earth represents an ecological building material that is thought to reduce the carbon footprint at a point in its life cycle Howeverit is very important to eliminate the undesirable properties of soil in an environmentally friendly way Cement-stabilized rammedearth as a building material has gradually gained popularity due to its higher and faster strength gain durability and availabilitywith a low percentage of cement is paper covers a detailed study of hollow compressed cement-stabilized earth-block masonryprisms to establish the strength properties of hollow compressed cement-stabilized earth-block masonry e test results formasonry prisms constructed with hollow compressed cement-stabilized blocks with two different strength grades and two earthmortars with different strengths are discussed

1 Introduction

Earth has been widely utilized as a building material sinceancient times [1] As a natural and sustainable constructionmaterial earth has the advantages of low embodied energynatural moisture buffering [2] low CO2 emission highrecyclability and good thermal inertia [3] At present thereare many earth buildings in many countries includingYemen Iran India and China It is reported that approx-imately one-fourth of the worldrsquos population lives indwellings built from raw earth [4] which shows that theimportance of earth construction remains very highworldwide Earth can be used a building material for walls inmany ways such as earth blocks rammed earth and cob [5]However there are a few undesirable properties such aspoor dimensional stability low strength brittle behaviourerosion due to wind or rain and especially low resistance todynamic actions [6ndash10] ese drawbacks can be reduced oreliminated by stabilizing the soil with stabilizing additivessuch as cement and lime [11ndash14] Among these stabilizingadditives cement is cost-effective and environment friendly

Generally cement-stabilized soil is used to make com-pressed cement-stabilized earth blocks compacted eithermanually or by hydraulically operated machines Com-pressed cement-stabilized earth blocks are the most-usedearth building technique and represent a modern evolutionof the moulded earth block [15]

Compressed cement-stabilized earth-block constructionis currently a popular topic with growing interest due to itshigh levels of sustainability and thermal and acoustic per-formance the low energy required for production andtransport the decrease in landfill waste its fire resistanceand the cost of the raw material [15 16] Compressedcement-stabilized earth-block construction is a feasible so-lution for sustainable buildings in many developed anddeveloping countries because cement-stabilized earth blocksoffer a number of advantages such as simple constructionmethods and maximal utilization of local materials [17]Much research has been undertaken to investigate themechanical properties of compressed cement-stabilizedearth blocks [18ndash20] e test results show that the effectof adding cement on the compressive stress is quite

HindawiAdvances in Civil EngineeringVolume 2019 Article ID 7854721 8 pageshttpsdoiorg10115520197854721

noticeable However most of the research on the mechanicalproperties of compressed cement-stabilized earth blocks hasfocused on solid blocks

In remote mountainous areas and Loess Plateau regionin western China due to the lack of high-performancebuilding materials a large number of houses have to bebuilt using local earth as building materials and the localearth is often used to make adobe bricks However thestrength of these locally made adobe bricks is low whose rawmaterials are free and locally available e seismic behav-iour of these buildings built with locally made adobe bricks ispoor In order to use locally made adobe bricks for wideapplication it is necessary to develop high-strength adobebricks to improve the seismic performance of adobe brickstructures

At present the environmental pollution in China is veryserious and green building materials are increasinglyattracting everyonersquos attention ere are very large marketdemands for ecological building materials Earth as a nat-ural and sustainable construction material has graduallyattracted peoplersquos attention and captured the interest ofmany researchers in recent years due to its low embodiedenergies and low life cycle cost

In order to make full use of locally available natural soilresources and minimize environmental impact decrease theweight of adobe structures and improve the constructionefficiency an extensive research program has been carriedout at Tianjin Chengjian University e aim of this projectis to develop a type of hollow compressed cement-stabilizedearth block (HCCSEB) e results of this investigationcould enrich the data available documenting the behaviourof hollow compressed cement-stabilized earth-block ma-sonry and contributed to enlarge the application of hollowcompressed cement-stabilized earth blocks when con-structing rural houses in remote mountainous areas andLoess Plateau region in western China

Hollow compressed cement-stabilized earth blocks in-vestigated in the manuscript are intended primarily for theconstruction of single-storey or two-storey rural houses andwere successfully used to build a two-storey building inTianjin China as shown in Figure 1

is paper presents experiments on the mechanicalbehaviour of HCCSEB masonry prisms e HCCSEBs weremanufactured from soil taken from Gongyi County inHenan Province China and ordinary Portland cement Asingle HCCSEB was tested under compression and three-point bending and the HCCSEB masonry prisms weretested for compression behaviour and shear behaviour

2 Experimental Program

21 Geometry of the HCCSEBs and the Masonry Systeme general dimensions of the HCCSEBs used in this studyare 390mm (length) 190mm (height) and 190mm (width)e face and web shell thickness is 50mm ese physicaldimensions are the same as those of the hollow concreteblocks used in China which allows single- and double-layerwalls to be built Two mortars specially designed forHCCSEBs are used in this study ie M5 and M75 e

details of the mixture proportions for M5 and M75 aregiven in Table 1 ree cubes of 707 times 707 times 707mm3

were cast and tested at 28 days of curing time to determinethe compressive strength of each mortar e averagecompressive strength of the three mortar specimens was62 Nmm2 for mortar M5 and 95 Nmm2 for mortar M75

22 Materials andManufacturing of the HCCSEBs e usedsoil was taken from Gongyi County in Henan ProvinceChina which is located in the East Loess Plateau eproperties of the soil were determined according to Chinesestandard GBT 50123 [21] and are presented in Table 2 eoptimum moisture content (OMC) and the maximum drydensity (MDD) were 165 and 1710 kgm3 respectively asdetermined by the standard Proctor test Ordinary Portlandcement of grade 425 conforming to GB 175 [22] was selectedas a stabilizer and 5sim10 cement by dry mass of soil wasused for the production of the HCCSEBs

e optimum moisture content (OMC) is an importantphysical index of soils e OMCwas first determined by thestandard Proctor test and it served as a reference valueWhen manufacturing the HCCSEBs cement was added forenhancing the strength of blocks and it was found that theOMC could not meet the requirements of productionprocesserefore the water content was adjusted accordingto the production process of vibration forming through alarge number of trial production

e HCCSEBs were manufactured by using a TigerD-Series Concrete Products Machine (Figure 2) which hassynchronized vibrators and counter-rotating shafts andprovided programmable variable vibration as well as dual-layer product capabilityemachine has a vibration systemwhich provides a more uniform wave amplitude from thefront to the rear of the mould and creates denser and morehomogeneous products e strength of the HCCSEBs wascontrolled by adjusting the amount of cement and themoulding pressure Trial production of two compressive-strength-grade HCCSEBs ie MU5 and MU75 was per-formed by Tianjin Yuchuan Building Materials Co Ltd

23 Testing Procedure

231 Methods ere are currently no code provisionsapplicable to HCCSEBs erefore the evaluation of

Figure 1 A two-storey hollow compressed cement-stabilizedearth-block masonry structure in China

2 Advances in Civil Engineering

HCCSEBs is performed according to the requirementsspecified in the test methods section for concrete blocks andbricks (GBT 4111-2013) [23] and the standard for testingthe basic mechanical properties of masonry (GBT 20129-2011) [24] e HCCSEBs were tested individually forcompression and flexural strength (three-point bendingtest) and the masonry prisms were tested under com-pression and shear loading (triplet test) e HCCSEBsrsquocharacteristics are sensitive to their dry density and moisturecontent e dry density of the blocks under dry conditionsvaried within the range from 1243 to 1369 kgm3 and themoisture content ranged from 25 to 33 in air dry at thetime of testing

232 Compression Tests of the HCCSEBs e compressiontests of single HCCSEBs were conducted according toChinese code GBT 4111-2013 [23] and the load was appliedunder load control at a rate of approximately 4 kNssim6 kNsSix specimen groups were tested and each group consistedof five HCCSEBs in each strength gradee top and bottom

platens were used as testing platens to avoid cutting andcapping the specimens as shown in Figure 3(a) eseplatens have the same shape as the HCCSEBs which meansthat they are able to distribute the load uniformly on the topand bottom surfaces of the specimens

233 2ree-Point Bending Tests of the HCCSEBs e three-point bending tests were performed according to Chinesecode GBT 4111-2013 [23] e specimens were supportedby cylindrical metallic rollers featuring a 350mm span eload was applied at midspan under load control at a rate ofapproximately 100Nssim1000Ns as shown in Figure 3(b)Six specimen groups were tested and each group consistedof five HCCSEBs in each strength grade

234 Compression Tests of Masonry Prisms e compres-sion behaviour of the HCCSEB masonry was assessed bymeans of compression tests on masonry prisms with di-mensions of 590mm (length) 190mm (width) and 990mm(height) as shown in Figure 4(a) e masonry prisms wereconstructed with five courses in a running bond pattern Allthe prisms were moist cured for 28 days before testing

ree sets of HCCSEB prisms were designed One set ofprisms was designated A (MU5 HCCSEBs and M5 mortar)another set of prisms was designated B (MU75 HCCSEBsand M5 mortar) and the last set of prisms was designated C(MU75 HCCSEBs andM75 mortar) there were 9 prisms ineach set e axial strain between the top and bottom blocksand lateral strain were measured by means of two dial in-dicators attached to each face of the masonry prism re-spectively Compression tests of the masonry prisms wereperformed according to the procedure specified by Chinesecode GBT 50129-2011 [24]

235 Shear Tests of the Masonry Prisms e shear behav-iour of the HCCSEB masonry was assessed by means of sheartests on masonry prisms made from three HCCSEBs withaverage dimensions of approximately 390times 590times190mm3

(widthtimes heighttimes thickness) (Figure 4(b)) e tests wereconducted in accordance with Chinese codeGBT 50129-2011[24] e shear load was applied by means of an actuatorparallel to the joints under load control at a rate of ap-proximately 02Nmm2 per minute

ree sets of HCCSEB prisms were designed One set ofprisms was designated D (MU5 HCCSEBs and M5 mortar)another set of prisms was designated E (MU75 HCCSEBsand M5 mortar) and the last set of prisms was designated F(MU75 HCCSEBs and M75 mortar) ere were six prismsin each group Six prisms were tested for each mixturegiving a total of eighteen specimens

3 Results

31 Compression Tests of the HCCSEBs e test results forsingle HCCSEBs with strength grade MU5 are presented inTable 3 and the test results for single HCCSEBs withstrength grade MU75 are presented in Table 4 e

Table 1 e mixture proportions of two mortars

Proportions Cement()

Slag powder()

Earth()

Sand()

Water()

M5 10 75 625 20 317M75 125 10 675 10 336

Table 2 Summary of the soil properties

Property Parameter Percentage

Grain size distribution

Gravel fraction 28Sand fraction 44Silt fraction 13Clay fraction 15

Atterberg limitLiquid limit 278Plastic limit 177Plastic index 101

Proctor testOptimum moisture content 165

Maximum dry density(kgm3) 1710

Hollow compressedcement-stabilized earth block

Transmission device

ce

Pressure head

Figure 2 Machine used for manufacturing the HCCSEBs

Advances in Civil Engineering 3

nomenclature for the tests of single HCCSEBs undercompression was as follows the first and second charactersrefer to ldquoMU5 under compressionrdquo or ldquoMU75 undercompressionrdquo the third character is the group number andthe fourth character is the specimen number A typicalfailure mode of a single HCCSEB tested under compressionis shown in Figure 5

According to the requirements of the Chinese codewhen compressing blocks to obtain their compressivestrength it is necessary to carry out six groups of com-pression tests and each group has five test specimens Eachgroup of tests corresponds to a coefficient of variation Itcould be seen that the mean coefficient of variation ofHCCSEBs with strength gradeMU5 is 1057 and the mean

(a) (b)

Figure 3 Testing of the individual HCCSEBs under (a) compression and (b) three-point bending

(a) (b)

Figure 4 Testing HCCSEB masonry prisms under (a) compression and (b) shearing

Table 3 Compression test results for HCCSEBs with strengthgrade MU5

NumberCompressivestrength(MPa)

Mean compressivestrength value (MPa)

Mean coefficientof variation ()

Group5C-1 32sim45

417 1057

Group5C-2 35sim46

Group5C-3 38sim47

Group5C-4 34sim41

Group5C-5 38sim48

Group5C-6 43sim54

Table 4 Compression tests results for HCCSEBs with strengthgrade MU75



Meancoefficientof variation

Group75C-1 54sim64

592 863

Group75C-2 55sim65

Group75C-3 47sim62

Group75C-4 50sim66

Group75C-5 64sim70

Group75C-6 52sim64


coefficient of variation of HCCSEBs with strength gradeMU75 is 863us it is considered that the little variationin strength was observed when the strength of HCCSEBs washigher

32 2ree-Point Bending Tests of HCCSEBs In masonrystructures due to the fact that the surface of the block itself isnot flat the thickness of the laying mortar is not uniform orthe horizontal joint is not full the single block is not evenlypressed in the masonry and may be in a bent state as shownin Figure 6 In Chinese code ldquoTest methods for the concreteblock and brick (GBT 4111-2013)rdquo there is a clear re-quirement for the three-point bending test erefore theresults are presented herein

Tables 5 and 6 present the results of the three-pointbending tests of single HCCSEB with strength grades MU5and MU75 respectively e nomenclature for the three-point bending tests of single HCCSEBs was similar to that forthe single HCCSEBs under compression except that ldquoTrdquostands for ldquothree-point bending testrdquo e flexural strength ofthe specimens was tested in air dry state e failure of allspecimens occurred at the midspan cross section It can beseen that themean flexural strength is 052MPa for HCCSEBswith strength grade MU5 and 058MPa for HCCSEBs withstrength gradeMU75emean coefficient of variation of theflexural strength exhibited features similar to that of thecompressive strength of single HCCSEBs ie the mean co-efficient of variation for HCCSEBs with strength grade MU5is greater than that for HCCSEBs with strength grade MU75e typical failure mode of a single HCCSEB subjected to athree-point bending test is shown in Figure 7

33 Compression Tests of HCCSEB Masonry Prisms eresponses of HCCSEB masonry prisms to compression wereroughly divided into three phases In the first phase (beforethe first crack was initiated) no obvious damage was foundand the test specimen was in the elastic state In the secondphase the cracks initiated gradually propagated and tendedto merge with increasing loading and the test specimen wasin an elastic-plastic state In the third phase vertical crackspropagated quickly crossing mortar bed joints and blocksand the bearing capacity of the specimen suddenly decreasedand brittle failure occurred e typical failure mode for the

HCCSEB masonry prisms is shown in Figure 8 On thewhole the failure mode of the HCCSEBmasonry prisms dueto compression is similar to that of ordinary hollow-blockconcrete masonry prisms Failures of masonry prisms under

Figure 5 Typical failure mode of a single HCCSEB tested undercompression

Figure 6 Complex stress state of blocks in masonry structures

Table 5 Flexural strength tests results for HCCSEBs with strengthgrade MU5

Number Flexuralstrength (MPa)

Mean value(MPa)


Group 5T-1 04sim06

052 1428

Group 5T-2 04sim06Group 5T-3 04sim06Group 5T-4 04sim06Group 5T-5 06Group 5T-6 04sim06



Mean value(MPa)


Group 75T-1 05sim06

058 863

Group 75T-2 05sim06Group 75T-3 05sim06Group 75T-4 05sim06Group 75T-5 05sim07Group 75T-6 05sim07

Figure 7 Typical failure mode for a single HCCSEB tested underthree-point bending


compression are usually caused by a tension crack thatpropagates through the blocks and mortar in the direction ofthe applied force

Table 7 presents the results of the compression tests ofthe HCCSEB masonry prisms It can be seen that thecompressive strength of the HCCSEB masonry prisms couldbe enhanced by increasing the strength of the mortar or theunitse coefficient of variation for the strength of the threegroups of HCCSEB masonry prisms varied between 139and 197 showing that the strength exhibited relativelyhigh scattering

Relative to Group A Group B exhibited a 5 increase inthe compressive strength and Group C exhibited a 9increase in compressive strength compared with Group Bwhich shows that the effect of the mortarrsquos strength on themechanical properties of HCCSEB masonry is stronger thanthose of the HCCSEBrsquos strength

A predictive model with high prediction accuracy forpredicting the compressive strength of HCCSEB masonry isproposed based on multiple regression analysis e com-pressive strength fm of the HCCSEB masonry can be cal-culated using the following equation

fm 0568f051 1 + 007f2( 1113857 (1)

where fm is the mean compressive strength of HCCSEBmasonry (MPa) f1 is the mean compressive strength ofHCCSEB (MPa) and f2 is the mean compressive strength ofthe mortar (MPa)

A comparison of the calculated and measured values forHCCSEBmasonry is presented in Table 8 It can be seen thatthe calculated results are in remarkably good agreement withthe measured values

e stress-strain relationship of masonry is essential forpredicting the strength and deformation ofmasonry structures

in analytic modelling e stress-strain curves for HCCSEBmasonry prisms under compression are presented in Figure 9

e experimental results show that if the compressivestress and strain are normalized with respect to the com-pressive strength and the peak strain respectively theresulting normalized stress-strain curves are close to eachother Normalized stress-strain curves are obtained by usingthe maximum compressive stress to normalize the com-pressive stress and the reference strain to normalize com-pressive strain e reference strain is defined by the straincorresponding to the maximum compressive stress

Equations to represent the relationship between thenormalized compressive stress and strain were derived usingparabolic regression e best-fit curves are highlighted inred in Figure 9

e best-fit equations are as follows

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 8 Typical failure mode for the HCCSEB masonry prisms tested under compression

Table 7 e results of the compression tests of HCCSEB masonryprisms


Mean value(MPa)

Standarddeviation

Coefficientof variation

Group A 144sim231 184 026 139Group B 154sim258 194 033 169Group C 175sim248 212 042 197

Table 8 e comparison of the calculated and measured values forHCCSEB masonry

Group Group A Group B Group CCalculated value 172 215 206Measured value 184 194 212Correlation coefficient 0632


Group A σ

σmax 18412

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 08819εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group B σ

σmax 19435

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 09689εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group C σ

σmax 20072

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 10016εε0

1113888 1113889

2

(2)

It can be seen from Figure 9 that the best-fit curve usingthe proposed equation is in good agreement with the nor-malized curve for each specimen therefore the parabolicconstitutive relation is reasonable

34 Shear Tests of HCCSEB Masonry Prisms Table 9presents the results of the shear tests of HCCSEB ma-sonry prisms It can be seen that the shear strength of theHCCSEBmasonry prisms can be improved by increasing thestrength of the mortar e coefficient of variation instrength for the three groups of HCCSEB masonry prismsvaried between 352 and 519 which shows that thestrength exhibited relatively low scattering

e failure of all the specimens experienced shear bondfailures at block mortar interface and the typical failuremode for the prisms is shown in Figure 10 where the middleblock slides relative to the left and right blocks e shearfailure of HCCSEB masonry prisms occurs by brittle frac-ture When shear bond failure occurred the bearing capacitywas immediately lost and the blocks themselves remainintact without any damage

4 Conclusions

is paper presents an experimental program in which themechanical behaviour of hollow compressed cement-stabilized earth blocks and masonry prisms is assessede mechanical tests performed on single HCCSEBs showedthat the mean compressive strength reaches approximately

42MPa for HCCSEBs with strength grade MU5 and 6MPafor HCCSEBs with strength grade MU75 the mean flexuralstrength reached 052MPa for HCCSEBs with strength gradeMU5 and 058MPa for HCCSEBs with strength gradeMU75 ese measured mechanical properties were slightlylower than the corresponding design values which show thatthe manufacturing technology and the mixtures should befurther optimized and improved

e failure mode of the HCCSEB masonry prisms undercompression is similar to that of hollow-block masonryprisms made from ordinary concrete Failure of masonryprisms under compression is usually caused by a tensioncrack that propagates through the blocks and mortar in thedirection of the applied force

Triplicate tests showed that the stronger the mortar wasthe greater the shear strength was e failure of HCCSEBtriplicate-test specimens occurred at the bed joint where themiddle block slides relative to the left and right blocks

Data Availability

Experimental data and experimental photographscould be downloaded from httpspanbaiducoms17uk3T2Oanodw0Um_fbpXgg

Conflicts of Interest

e authors declare that there are no conflicts of interestregarding the publication of this paper

Acknowledgments

is work was supported by the Ministry of Science andTechnology of the Peoplersquos Republic of China (grant no2014BAL03B03) and the Tianjin Science and TechnologyCommission (grant no 17ZXCXSF00040) e authors

00

03

06

09

12

00 05 10 15 20Normalized strain

Nor

mal

ized

stre

ss

Group AGroup BGroup C

Figure 9 Stress-strain curves of masonry prisms in compression

Table 9 e results of the shear tests of HCCSEB masonry prisms

Number Shear strength(MPa)

Mean value(MPa)

Coefficient ofvariation ()

Group D 0069sim0079 0074 519Group E 0074sim0081 0078 352Group F 0087sim0097 0092 446

Figure 10 Typical failure mode of the masonry prisms testedunder shear loading


would like to thank Tianjin Yuchuan Building Materials CoLtd for providing the HCCSEBs for testing

References

[1] V Maniatidis and P Walker ldquoStructural capacity of rammedearth in compressionrdquo Journal of Materials in Civil Engi-neering vol 20 no 3 pp 230ndash238 2008

[2] Q-B Bui J-C Morel S Hans and P Walker ldquoEffect ofmoisture content on the mechanical characteristics of ram-med earthrdquo Construction and Building Materials vol 54no 11 pp 163ndash169 2014

[3] E Bernat-Maso L Gil and C Escrig ldquoTextile-reinforcedrammed earth experimental characterisation of flexuralstrength and thoughnessrdquo Construction and Building Mate-rials vol 106 pp 470ndash479 2016

[4] L Miccoli D V Oliveira R A Silva U Muller andL Schueremans ldquoStatic behaviour of rammed earth exper-imental testing and finite element modellingrdquo Materials andStructures vol 48 no 10 pp 3443ndash3456 2014

[5] C Jayasinghe and N Kamaladasa ldquoCompressive strengthcharacteristics of cement stabilized rammed earth wallsrdquoConstruction and Building Materials vol 21 no 11pp 1971ndash1976 2007

[6] Q B Bui J C Morel B V Venkatarama Reddy andW Ghayad ldquoDurability of rammed earth walls exposed for 20years to natural weatheringrdquo Building and Environmentvol 44 no 5 pp 912ndash919 2009

[7] A S Rui E Soares D V Oliveira et al ldquoMechanicalcharacterisation of dry-stack masonry made of CEBs stabi-lised with alkaline activationrdquo Construction and BuildingMaterials vol 75 no 30 pp 349ndash358 2015

[8] K Liu M Wang and Y Wang ldquoSeismic retrofitting of ruralrammed earth buildings using externally bonded fibersrdquoConstruction and Building Materials vol 100 pp 91ndash1012015

[9] L Miccoli U Muller and P Fontana ldquoMechanical behaviourof earthen materials a comparison between earth blockmasonry rammed earth and cobrdquo Construction and BuildingMaterials vol 61 no 7 pp 327ndash339 2014

[10] R Salim J Ndambuki and D Adedokun ldquoImproving thebearing strength of sandy loam soil compressed earth blockbricks using sugercane bagasse ashrdquo Sustainability vol 6no 6 pp 3686ndash3696 2014

[11] A S Muntohar ldquoEngineering characteristics of thecompressed-stabilized earth brickrdquo Construction and BuildingMaterials vol 25 no 11 pp 4215ndash4220 2011

[12] B V V Reddy and P P Kumar ldquoStructural behavior of story-high cement-stabilized rammed-earth walls under compres-sionrdquo Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering vol 23 no 3pp 240ndash247 2011

[13] S Burroughs ldquoSoil property criteria for rammed earth sta-bilizationrdquo Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering vol 20no 3 pp 264ndash273 2008

[14] B V V Reddy and P P Kumar ldquoCement stabilised rammedearth Part A compaction characteristics and physicalproperties of compacted cement stabilised soilsrdquo Materialsand Structures vol 44 no 3 pp 681ndash693 2011

[15] M B Mansour A Jelidi A S Cherif and S B JabrallahldquoOptimizing thermal and mechanical performance of com-pressed earth blocks (CEB)rdquo Construction and BuildingMaterials vol 104 pp 44ndash51 2016

[16] L Holliday C Ramseyer M Reyes and D Butko ldquoBuildingwith compressed earth block within the building coderdquo

Journal of Architectural Engineering vol 22 no 3 article04016007 2016

[17] D D Tripura and K D Singh ldquoCharacteristic properties ofcement-stabilized rammed earth blocksrdquo Journal of Materialsin Civil Engineering vol 27 no 7 article 040414214 2015

[18] B V V Reddy and A Gupta ldquoCharacteristics of soil-cementblocks using highly sandy soilsrdquo Materials and Structuresvol 38 no 6 pp 651ndash658 2005

[19] B V V Reddy and A Gupta ldquoCharacteristics of cement-soilmortarsrdquoMaterials and Structures vol 38 no 6 pp 639ndash6502005

[20] Y Millogo and J-C Morel ldquoMicrostructural characterizationand mechanical properties of cement stabilised adobesrdquoMaterials and Structures vol 45 no 9 pp 1311ndash1318 2012

[21] General Administration of Quality Supervision Inspectionand Quarantine of Peoplersquos Republic of China Standard forSoil test Method GBT50123-1999 China Planning PresssBeijing China 1999

[22] General Administration of Quality Supervision Inspectionand Quarantine of Peoplersquos Republic of China CommonPortland Cement GB175-2007 China Standard Press BeijingChina 2007

[23] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of thePeoplersquos Republic of China Test Methods for the ConcreteBlock and Brick GBT 4111-2013 China ArchitectureBuilding Press Beijing China 2011

[24] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of thePeoplersquos Republic of China Standard for Test Method of BasicMechanics Properties of Masonry GBT 20129-2011 ChinaArchitecture Building Press Beijing China 2011


International Journal of

AerospaceEngineeringHindawiwwwhindawicom Volume 2018

RoboticsJournal of

Hindawiwwwhindawicom Volume 2018


Active and Passive Electronic Components

VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration


Civil EngineeringAdvances in

Acoustics and VibrationAdvances in



Electrical and Computer Engineering

Journal of

Advances inOptoElectronics

Hindawiwwwhindawicom

Volume 2018

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2013Hindawiwwwhindawicom

The Scientific World Journal

Volume 2018

Control Scienceand Engineering

Journal of



Journal ofEngineeringVolume 2018

SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery


Modelling ampSimulationin EngineeringHindawiwwwhindawicom Volume 2018


Chemical EngineeringInternational Journal of Antennas and

Propagation




Navigation and Observation


Hindawi

wwwhindawicom Volume 2018

Advances in

Multimedia

Submit your manuscripts atwwwhindawicom

noticeable However most of the research on the mechanicalproperties of compressed cement-stabilized earth blocks hasfocused on solid blocks

In remote mountainous areas and Loess Plateau regionin western China due to the lack of high-performancebuilding materials a large number of houses have to bebuilt using local earth as building materials and the localearth is often used to make adobe bricks However thestrength of these locally made adobe bricks is low whose rawmaterials are free and locally available e seismic behav-iour of these buildings built with locally made adobe bricks ispoor In order to use locally made adobe bricks for wideapplication it is necessary to develop high-strength adobebricks to improve the seismic performance of adobe brickstructures

At present the environmental pollution in China is veryserious and green building materials are increasinglyattracting everyonersquos attention ere are very large marketdemands for ecological building materials Earth as a nat-ural and sustainable construction material has graduallyattracted peoplersquos attention and captured the interest ofmany researchers in recent years due to its low embodiedenergies and low life cycle cost

In order to make full use of locally available natural soilresources and minimize environmental impact decrease theweight of adobe structures and improve the constructionefficiency an extensive research program has been carriedout at Tianjin Chengjian University e aim of this projectis to develop a type of hollow compressed cement-stabilizedearth block (HCCSEB) e results of this investigationcould enrich the data available documenting the behaviourof hollow compressed cement-stabilized earth-block ma-sonry and contributed to enlarge the application of hollowcompressed cement-stabilized earth blocks when con-structing rural houses in remote mountainous areas andLoess Plateau region in western China

Hollow compressed cement-stabilized earth blocks in-vestigated in the manuscript are intended primarily for theconstruction of single-storey or two-storey rural houses andwere successfully used to build a two-storey building inTianjin China as shown in Figure 1

is paper presents experiments on the mechanicalbehaviour of HCCSEB masonry prisms e HCCSEBs weremanufactured from soil taken from Gongyi County inHenan Province China and ordinary Portland cement Asingle HCCSEB was tested under compression and three-point bending and the HCCSEB masonry prisms weretested for compression behaviour and shear behaviour

2 Experimental Program

21 Geometry of the HCCSEBs and the Masonry Systeme general dimensions of the HCCSEBs used in this studyare 390mm (length) 190mm (height) and 190mm (width)e face and web shell thickness is 50mm ese physicaldimensions are the same as those of the hollow concreteblocks used in China which allows single- and double-layerwalls to be built Two mortars specially designed forHCCSEBs are used in this study ie M5 and M75 e

details of the mixture proportions for M5 and M75 aregiven in Table 1 ree cubes of 707 times 707 times 707mm3

were cast and tested at 28 days of curing time to determinethe compressive strength of each mortar e averagecompressive strength of the three mortar specimens was62 Nmm2 for mortar M5 and 95 Nmm2 for mortar M75

22 Materials andManufacturing of the HCCSEBs e usedsoil was taken from Gongyi County in Henan ProvinceChina which is located in the East Loess Plateau eproperties of the soil were determined according to Chinesestandard GBT 50123 [21] and are presented in Table 2 eoptimum moisture content (OMC) and the maximum drydensity (MDD) were 165 and 1710 kgm3 respectively asdetermined by the standard Proctor test Ordinary Portlandcement of grade 425 conforming to GB 175 [22] was selectedas a stabilizer and 5sim10 cement by dry mass of soil wasused for the production of the HCCSEBs

e optimum moisture content (OMC) is an importantphysical index of soils e OMCwas first determined by thestandard Proctor test and it served as a reference valueWhen manufacturing the HCCSEBs cement was added forenhancing the strength of blocks and it was found that theOMC could not meet the requirements of productionprocesserefore the water content was adjusted accordingto the production process of vibration forming through alarge number of trial production

e HCCSEBs were manufactured by using a TigerD-Series Concrete Products Machine (Figure 2) which hassynchronized vibrators and counter-rotating shafts andprovided programmable variable vibration as well as dual-layer product capabilityemachine has a vibration systemwhich provides a more uniform wave amplitude from thefront to the rear of the mould and creates denser and morehomogeneous products e strength of the HCCSEBs wascontrolled by adjusting the amount of cement and themoulding pressure Trial production of two compressive-strength-grade HCCSEBs ie MU5 and MU75 was per-formed by Tianjin Yuchuan Building Materials Co Ltd

23 Testing Procedure

231 Methods ere are currently no code provisionsapplicable to HCCSEBs erefore the evaluation of

Figure 1 A two-storey hollow compressed cement-stabilizedearth-block masonry structure in China











3 Results




Slag powder()

Earth()

Sand()

Water()

M5 10 75 625 20 317M75 125 10 675 10 336









Transmission device

ce

Pressure head





(a) (b)


(a) (b)






Group5C-1 32sim45

417 1057

Group5C-2 35sim46

Group5C-3 38sim47

Group5C-4 34sim41

Group5C-5 38sim48

Group5C-6 43sim54





Group75C-1 54sim64

592 863

Group75C-2 55sim65

Group75C-3 47sim62

Group75C-4 50sim66

Group75C-5 64sim70

Group75C-6 52sim64











Mean value(MPa)


Group 5T-1 04sim06

052 1428




Mean value(MPa)


Group 75T-1 05sim06

058 863








fm 0568f051 1 + 007f2( 1113857 (1)








(a) (b) (c)




Mean value(MPa)

Standarddeviation






Group A σ

σmax 18412

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 08819εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group B σ

σmax 19435

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 09689εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group C σ

σmax 20072

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 10016εε0

1113888 1113889

2

(2)




4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


00

03

06

09

12


Nor

mal

ized

stre

ss





Mean value(MPa)






References





























RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia











3 Results




Slag powder()

Earth()

Sand()

Water()

M5 10 75 625 20 317M75 125 10 675 10 336









Transmission device

ce

Pressure head





(a) (b)


(a) (b)






Group5C-1 32sim45

417 1057

Group5C-2 35sim46

Group5C-3 38sim47

Group5C-4 34sim41

Group5C-5 38sim48

Group5C-6 43sim54





Group75C-1 54sim64

592 863

Group75C-2 55sim65

Group75C-3 47sim62

Group75C-4 50sim66

Group75C-5 64sim70

Group75C-6 52sim64











Mean value(MPa)


Group 5T-1 04sim06

052 1428




Mean value(MPa)


Group 75T-1 05sim06

058 863








fm 0568f051 1 + 007f2( 1113857 (1)








(a) (b) (c)




Mean value(MPa)

Standarddeviation






Group A σ

σmax 18412

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 08819εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group B σ

σmax 19435

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 09689εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group C σ

σmax 20072

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 10016εε0

1113888 1113889

2

(2)




4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


00

03

06

09

12


Nor

mal

ized

stre

ss





Mean value(MPa)






References





























RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia




(a) (b)


(a) (b)






Group5C-1 32sim45

417 1057

Group5C-2 35sim46

Group5C-3 38sim47

Group5C-4 34sim41

Group5C-5 38sim48

Group5C-6 43sim54





Group75C-1 54sim64

592 863

Group75C-2 55sim65

Group75C-3 47sim62

Group75C-4 50sim66

Group75C-5 64sim70

Group75C-6 52sim64











Mean value(MPa)


Group 5T-1 04sim06

052 1428




Mean value(MPa)


Group 75T-1 05sim06

058 863








fm 0568f051 1 + 007f2( 1113857 (1)








(a) (b) (c)




Mean value(MPa)

Standarddeviation






Group A σ

σmax 18412

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 08819εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group B σ

σmax 19435

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 09689εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group C σ

σmax 20072

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 10016εε0

1113888 1113889

2

(2)




4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


00

03

06

09

12


Nor

mal

ized

stre

ss





Mean value(MPa)






References





























RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia











Mean value(MPa)


Group 5T-1 04sim06

052 1428




Mean value(MPa)


Group 75T-1 05sim06

058 863








fm 0568f051 1 + 007f2( 1113857 (1)








(a) (b) (c)




Mean value(MPa)

Standarddeviation






Group A σ

σmax 18412

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 08819εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group B σ

σmax 19435

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 09689εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group C σ

σmax 20072

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 10016εε0

1113888 1113889

2

(2)




4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


00

03

06

09

12


Nor

mal

ized

stre

ss





Mean value(MPa)






References





























RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia






fm 0568f051 1 + 007f2( 1113857 (1)








(a) (b) (c)




Mean value(MPa)

Standarddeviation






Group A σ

σmax 18412

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 08819εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group B σ

σmax 19435

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 09689εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group C σ

σmax 20072

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 10016εε0

1113888 1113889

2

(2)




4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


00

03

06

09

12


Nor

mal

ized

stre

ss





Mean value(MPa)






References





























RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia


Group A σ

σmax 18412

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 08819εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group B σ

σmax 19435

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 09689εε0

1113888 1113889

2

Group C σ

σmax 20072

εε0

1113888 1113889minus 10016εε0

1113888 1113889

2

(2)




4 Conclusions





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


00

03

06

09

12


Nor

mal

ized

stre

ss





Mean value(MPa)






References





























RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia



References





























RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia




RoboticsJournal of




VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2018



Volume 2018


Journal of




SensorsJournal of



RotatingMachinery





Propagation






Hindawi


Advances in

Multimedia


strengthofhollowcompressedstabilizedearth-block masonryprismsdownloads.hindawi.com › journals ›...

Documents