effects of portland cement and quicklime on physical and
TRANSCRIPT
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.
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 4, 2021
- 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
Effects of Portland Cement and… Khedidja Himouri, Abdelmadjid Hamouine and Lamia Guettatfi
- 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
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 4, 2021
- 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
Effects of Portland Cement and… Khedidja Himouri, Abdelmadjid Hamouine and Lamia Guettatfi
- 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
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 4, 2021
- 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
Effects of Portland Cement and… Khedidja Himouri, Abdelmadjid Hamouine and Lamia Guettatfi
- 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
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 4, 2021
- 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
Effects of Portland Cement and… Khedidja Himouri, Abdelmadjid Hamouine and Lamia Guettatfi
- 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
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 4, 2021
- 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
Effects of Portland Cement and… Khedidja Himouri, Abdelmadjid Hamouine and Lamia Guettatfi
- 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.
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 4, 2021
- 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."
Construction and Building Materials, 139, 114-122.
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."
Construction and Building Materials, 139, 193-202.
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.
Effects of Portland Cement and… Khedidja Himouri, Abdelmadjid Hamouine and Lamia Guettatfi
- 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."
Construction and Building Materials, 36, 276-286.
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."
Construction and Building Materials, 106, 179-188.