CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTINGS

1.1 Background of the Study

Hundreds of millions of people in the world today live in poor housing under adverse

climatic conditions that stress their undernourished bodies toward the limits of human

endurance and occasionally beyond (Shearer, 1986). To meet housing needs, many people have

resorted to renting backyard shacks and squatting on illegal land. The World Bank identified

152 developing countries as of the year 2007, of which it is reported that lees than one-third of

the population can afford proper shelter in the Philippines. There still exist huge problems on

housing in the country and even in the rural and urban areas. There is an urban housing crisis

in most of the developing countries and this is largely attributed by the rapid urbanisation

(Dwyer et al, 1981, 33). According to Kamete (2006), the housing crisis is often sold and

pushed onto the agenda in pre-dominantly quantitative terms and the mismatch between supply

and demand is perhaps the scariest indicator used by advocates of increased housing delivery.

In order to provide a sustainable house, most of the people in a community prefer to build low

cost housing with locally available materials.

Low cost housing is a new concept of techniques which help in reducing the cost

construction through the use of locally available materials along with improved skills and

technology without sacrificing the strength, performance, and life of the structure. The fact is

that low cost is done by proper management of resources. The definition of low cost, in a
 2

housing sense, depends greatly on the economic capacity of the target cluster in a certain

society with in the community group. Providing affordable housing is a challenge around the

world, especially in developing countries. The impediments to solving the housing problem

are scarcity and high cost of building materials. Ideally, low-cost housing must rely on locally

available raw materials. Furthermore, such materials must be abundantly available and be

renewable in nature. Due to this various reasons, the investigation of alternative materials for

the construction of low cost housing has been the focus of many studies in many developing

countries.

A house is composed of several materials such as brick, cement, timber, window frames

and several other building materials and the use of bricks as a standard building material began

in the early 1900s in most of the countries. Brick, cement, sand and timber are the major

construction materials which are unaffordable nowadays and an appropriate building material

and construction technique needs to develop to solve the urban housing crisis (Zami, 2010).

Most of the time, alternative materials for low cost housing construction include wood and

bamboo (stick-frame, timber frame, post and beam), structural masonry (brick, concrete block,

rock, stone, compressed earth block), earth-mix (adobe, rammed earth, stabilized earth blocks,

cob, and earth bag). Other natural building materials such as: straw bale, cordwood, paper

Crete, earth ships and variations of all types.

On the other hand, people have changed from one type of building material in a

continuing effort to obtain the best possible protection from weather and the environment

(Jackson and Plur, 1988). Attempts have also been made by various researchers to reduce the
 3

cost of its constituent and the total construction cost by investigating and ascertaining the

usefulness of material which could be classified as local materials. Some of these local

materials are agricultural or industrial waste which includes sawdust, palm kernel shell,

pulverized fuel ash, slag, fly ash, coconut shells and fibers among others which are produced

from milling stations, thermal power station, waste treatment plant and so on (Fernandez,

2007). Since most building construction works consist of concrete work; therefore, reduction

in cost of concrete production will reduce the cost of building construction. As a result of the

increase in the cost of construction materials, especially cement, crushed stone (coarse

aggregate), fine sand (fine aggregate); there is the need to investigate the use of alternative

building materials which are locally available.

Thus, the aim of this study is to evaluate the response of the people towards earth

structure and the performance of low technology and sustainable materials used in the

construction of low cost housing. The use of local labour and the absence of imported materials

will sent a message to the local communities that the solution of affordable sustainable and

low cost housing is possible.

Red Soil as a Local Material:

Red soil is soil that has a reddish tinge as a result of the presence of iron compounds in

it. Some types of red soil are clays, and this type can be used for ceramic projects, either alone

or blended with other materials. It has also historically been used in the production of building

materials, such as bricks. India produces around 170 billion bricks per year, in the process

consuming around 442 million tonnes of soil (website: http://www.ecobrick.in/clay-

 4

pfabrick.aspx). Therefore, all the experimented low cost stabilised earth construction housing

projects have been a success.According to Denyer (1978), “earth architecture should not of

course be considered a miraculous solution to neither all our housing problems, nor one which

can be applied successfully anywhere, everywhere.” Before any building is constructed with

earth, it is essential to identify the soil to be used.

Sources, Properties and Uses of Coconut Fiber

Coir is the fibrous material found between the hard, internal shell and the outer coat of

a coconut. Coir or coconut fiber belongs to the group of hard structural fibers. According to

official website of International Year for Natural Fibers 2009, approximately, 500 000 tons of

coconut fibers are produced annually worldwide, mainly in India, Sri Lanka, Thailand,

Vietnam, Philippines and Indonesia. It is useful in construction of houses, landscaping, and

laying out pathways on gardens, yard and resort. With its heat retardant and biodegradable

characteristic, coir has the advantages of functioning as soil conditioner and soil erosion

reducer. Since Coconut fiber can be an additive material in making bricks (Mumemo website,

2009), the researchers will investigate the effect of coconut fiber to produce a potent

compressed stabilized earth block for low cost housing.

Compressed Stabilized Earth Block

Compressed Earth Block, is a type of manufactured construction material formed out

of an appropriate mix of fairly dry inorganic soil, non-expansive clay, aggregate, and

sometimes a small amount of cement. They are low cost and can be designed to be earthquake

resistant (New Zealand Standard 4297: 1998, new Zealand Standard 4298: 1998). CSEB are
 5

sound resistant, fire resistant, none-toxic, insect resistant (Vermeer Construction Company,

2001). Compressed stabilised earth blocks were successfully used for low-income housing in

Sudan (Adam and Agib,2001 cited in Hadjri et al. 2007). According to Adam and Agib (2001),

the cost of producing compressed stabilised earth blocks will vary a great deal from country to

country and even from one area to another within the same country. Adam and Agib (2001)

also noted that block making can be carried out on a self-help basis, where labour costs are

eliminated and soil is often available at no cost.

With regards to above matters, the researchers would choose to investigate earth block

where soil is the primary material to be use with a twist of adding coconut fiber that will hold

the soil in preventing erosion in block production. The researchers thought that producing

CSEB will be a cheaper way to build a house due to the abundance of red soil and the

availability of coconut fiber in our locality. Consequently, thisstudy arrived to such point of

utilizing these materials in order to produce a beneficial matter that will contribute the needs

in the construction. If this would possibly happen, producing this kind of alternative materials

for low cost housing will be a great realization in providing economical building material.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The scarcity of houses, the very low standard of the existing houses and the ever-

increasing cost of construction also demands the need for producing low cost construction

materials of acceptable quality. This initiated professionals to seek low cost materials and low
 6

cost methods of construction to solve the problems. In this research, utilizing red soil and

coconut fiber with cement as compressed stabilized earth blocks are consider as an alternative

walling material.

The use of natural, locally-available materials such as soil and coconut fiber makes

good housing available to more people, and keeps money in the local economy rather than

spending it to import materials, fuel and replacement parts. Building with local materials can

employ local people, and is more sustainable in times of civil unrest or economic difficulties.

People can often continue to build good shelters for themselves regardless of the political

situation of the country especially here in Bislig City, Surigao del Sur.

Since red clay soil and coconut fiber is abundant worldwide in the society and

considered as a conventional material. This study aimed to produce an alternative walling

material for low cost housing using red clay soil and coconut fiber with cement as compressed

stabilized earth block. Specifically, it aims to justify the research with the following questions:

a. What would be the compressive strength of the Compressed Stabilized Earth Block

(CSEB) using soil and coconut fiber?

b. What would be the properties of the soil selected?

c. In which mixture does cement performs well in terms of compressive strength of

the CSEB using soil and coir?

d. With reference to its standard strength according to mixture, which is more durable

in terms of compressive strength? The CSEB orthe Commercial CHB?

 7

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The objective of this thesis is thus to provide detailed technical and economic

information on the production of compressed stabilized earth blocks with a view to making

available existing experiences in this field to those who produce or plan to manufacture blocks

so as to improve production techniques and quality of output. This includes information on

suitable soil types, local stabilizers, production of compressed stabilized earth blocks, quality

of the blocks, and their economic value. It also comes up with optimum cement content of

stabilized soil blocks for low cost housing.

A conventional concrete hollow block willbe compare to compressed stabilized earth

block with red clay soil and coconut fiber of the certain proportions. Observations from the

tests perform is to be conducted in the laboratory where precise data were gathered and

completely attained. Some of the interesting insights of the study are:

a. To determine thecompressive strength of compressed stabilized earth block using

soil and coconut fiber in producing a good quality hollow block for low cost

housing.

b. To compare the compressive strength of the compressed stabilized earth block and

commercial concrete hollow block.

1.4 Significance of the Study

 8

The desire to build a reasonably good house of one’s own with maximum possible

amenities is cherish by one and all. However, with the rising cost of construction it is becoming

increasingly difficult for people in the low-income group to build a house. Therefore,

development of material and technology for low cost housing is the need of the hour. One such

material in the recent times is the soil cement block. As soil is the basic ingredient of the soil

cement block, the properties of the soil greatly affect the strength and durability characteristics

of the blocks.

Due to some circumstances nowadays, people are lack of financial matters that would

satisfy the needs for housing materials. In this case, the researcher tried to produce a potent

alternative blocks made of soil and coir combined with cement and enough water. In this study,

a locally available inorganic soil has been use for stabilized soil blocks for masonry. Since soil

is from natural environment and coir is from agricultural waste material, both are compatible

with each other in the possibility of producing a qualified block as an alternative walling

material.

Thus, if the result of this research proves that compressed stabilized earth block using

soil and coconut fiber could be suitable in producing a good quality hollow block for low cost

housing; this would be helpful to the society. All would be benefitted since soil and coir can

be found anywhere that would save up cost in building their concrete houses.

1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Study

 9

This study is limited to the investigation of the efficiency of compressed stabilized

earth block in producing an alternative walling material for low cost housing using soil and

coir. Due to high cost of sand in the market, the analysis of stabilized earth blocks will reveal

that this could be a substitute to reduce the cost of the entire building or used stabilized earth

blocks where there is no sand in such an area where the work is going to be sited. A great job

would be done throughout this work, although it is limited in scope to assess their suitability

as standard concrete aggregates.

In line with sustainable development and the urgent need to provide shelter for the

world’s growing population, there is a need for alternative environmental kind of researches

in construction that lessen demands on renewable resources. The study will be conducted for

the purpose of producing a competitive CSEB that would meet the strength of a standard

hollow block. The procedure will be properly conducted by the researchers.

The aim of this study, therefore, is to examine the use of locally available construction

materials (such as red clay soil and coconut fiber) as compressed stabilized earth block (CSEB)

as an alternative to traditional brick and mortar construction. However, strength test is to be

obtained to measure the compressive strength of the compressed stabilized earth block with a

certain mixture of cement. Otherwise, other test such as rapture test, tensile test, etc. is not

anymore scope of this study.

1.6 Theoretical Framework of the Study

 10

MOLDING
DESIGN MIXING
MIXTURE

CURING
TESTING

Figure 2.1 Schematic diagram of the Study

INPUT OUTPUT

CSEB Components
Test Result
1. Soil
1. Compressive Strength
2. Coconut fiber
3. Cement
4. Water

Figure 2.2 Research Study Variables

CHAPTER 2
 11

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

2.1 Review of Related Literature

This research aims to study an alternative block for low cost housing known as

compressed stabilized earth block using soil and coconut fiber. To do so, further information

on this research study is required. This information will be presented, via a literature review:

The motivation of this thesis is the standardization of earth as an alternative building

material. Historically, earth has been the most widely known and used building material in

construction and probably has been the most important of all building materials (Legget, 1960).

According to Middendorf (2001) recorded cases of the use of earth bricks dates back to

Mesopotamia “around 8000 BC”. Recent reports indicated that, about half of the world’s

populations are still living in earth buildings (McHenry, 1984; EBAA. Australia). Of all urban

housing units worldwide there are about 25 % that does not conform to building regulations

while 18 % are considered non-permanent structures (Habitat, 2001).

2.1.1 Earth

Earth as a building material has the following salient features:

A. Strength

Earth block buildings are structurally sound. New Mexico adobe code requires a

minimum of 2MPa for traditional adobe blocks. The strength, durability and longevity of Earth

Blocks stand in stark contrast to other building materials. A typical wood frame building has
 12

an average life span of 75 years while earthen structures will stand for centuries [Cebtex,

Compressed Earth Block Construction - Http://Cebtex.Com].

The technology of the hydraulic press machine has enhanced the fundamentals of

earthen construction, durability, simplicity and sustainability. These characteristics have

remained constant throughout the ages. For thousands of years people around the world have

relied on earthen construction for their shelter with minimal impact on the environment.

Approximately about half of the world’s population currently resides in earthen dwellings.

Earth block construction combines the purity and timelessness of a natural material with the

opportunities and innovations of today, a timeless technology.

B. Cost and Energy efficient

Probably the most impressive and important selling point of earth block building is the

incredible energy savings the owner will be awarded throughout the life of the building. The

thermal mass quality alone defines the strongest attribute of earth block and can be spelled out

in energy savings to the owner, which means the community, saves as well. Energy efficiency

can also be realized in the construction process itself. Earth blocks are made on-site saving in

transportation costs and fuel consumption and require little energy in the block making process.

C. Virtually Sound Proof

Earth Block is so dense a building material that occupants are relatively protected from

the outside World [9]. Sound recording studios have been built with pressed block for that very

quality.
 13

D. Non-Toxic

Block making itself is a non-toxic process; therefore, buildings themselves are clean.

Often, man-made ingredients of modern construction set up an environment that is filled with

toxic chemicals and gases. Earth block is a frequently chosen material for home construction

for those people suffering from chemical sensitivity.

E. Environmentally friendly

When you consider the attributes listed above, the underlying theme is that building

with Earth block is environmentally friendly. From the construction of the block itself to the

finished product, this is a way to build that benefit everyone.

F. Durable

Durability is the measure of the ability of the block to endure or sustain its distinctive

characteristics of strength, dimensional stability and resistance to weathering under conditions

of use for the duration of the services lifetime of the structure [10].Earth blocks have to be

durable and water proof to exclude any undesirable influences of the environment such as rain,

winds, rising damp or other severe weather conditions of exposure. When you consider that

the oldest structures standing throughout the world today are made of earth, the statement that

earth block is durable speaks for itself. Earth block has a good resistance for fire and pest.

G. Uses available and abundant raw materials

 14

Three ingredients make up the right combination used for earth block: sand, clay and

silt materials, which are combined with a small percentage of Portland cement. The only other

ingredient needed for wall construction is water, to make the mud slurry that binds the blocks

together.

H. Aesthetically pleasing

Earth block buildings can be made to look like any kind of finished structure; however,

most people who adopt for this type of construction find they love the look of the block itself

and the adobe look of a finish plaster. Exteriors typically are given a weather-resistant skin that

can be colored or left natural and interiors plastered with a variety of mixtures or left exposed.

Arches and rounded corners are an option that allow for flexibility in design. They have a look

and a feel that envelops their occupants and blends beautifully with the natural world.

I. Thermal Properties

Building materials are rated for thermal performance based on measurements known

as R and U values. The R-value indicates the ability of a wall to insulate efficiently. Insulation

is nothing more than the resistance of a material to the transference of heat. It makes sense that

the higher the R-value, or resistance, the better insulator the material is. The R-value is

calculated by dividing the thickness of the wall by the wall’s thermal conductivity, a value

established by the amount of heat (per sq. ft. per hour) flowing from the hotter to the cooler

side of the wall.

 15

The U-value, or value of conductance, is represented by the reciprocal of the R-value

and reflects the rate at which heat is conducted through material. Total R- and U- values may

be calculated for a given wall by adding the sum of the values of each of the individual

components of the wall structure (all insulation, interior sheathing, framing, or masonry must

be taken into consideration).

2.1.2 Cement Stabilization

Soil stabilization according to [1] is the alteration of any property of a soil to improve

its engineering performance. The chief factors affecting stabilization are soil type, cement

content, compaction and method of mixing with soil type being the most important. The

modification of the properties of soil-water-air system makes the soil compatible with desired

applications in construction. One of the main functions of the stabilizing medium is to reduce

the swelling properties of the soil through forming a rigid framework with the soil mass,

enhancing its strength and durability [2]. Portland cement is the most widely used stabilizer

for earth stabilization. Cement has the ability to reduce liquid limit (LL) and increase plasticity

index (PI) and hence increases the workability of soil. The addition of chemical stabilizers like

cement and lime has twofold effects of acceleration of flocculation and promotion of chemical

binding. The chemical binding depends upon the type of stabilizers employed. The study of

[7] revealed that soilswith Plasticity Index (PI) less than 15% are suitable for cement

stabilization. In cementstabilization [12] observed that the content of the cement binder in the

mix ranges between 4%and 10% of the soil dry weight. However, [4] posited that if the content

of the cement binder isgreater than 10% it becomes uneconomical for the production of CSEB.
 16

2.1.3 Bricks

Brick is a block or a single unit of a ceramic material used in masonry construction. It

has been regarded as one of the lasting and strongest building materials used throughout

history. The bricks might be made from clay, lime, lime and sand, concrete or shaped stone,

from dried earth, usually from clay-bearing subsoil.

The Ancient Egyptians used sun dried mud bricks as building materials, evidence from

which can still be seen today at ruins such as Harappa Buhen and Mohenjo-Daro.

In addition, also the Romans distinguished further those which had been dried by the

sun, on air, and those bricks which were burnt in a kiln. During spring, the Romans held on to

their bricks for 2 years before they were used or sold. They prefer to use whitish or red color

for their bricks.

In the Philippines, most Filipinos consider the rice hull and river silt as waste by-

products. But these raw materials can be regarded by making it into something useful like fire-

resistant bricks (Emmanuel “Manny” Alkuino). The rice hull was then grinded and turned into

ash and combined it with the river silt. After the long months of research and investigations

done by Manny, the results was fire bricks are five times stronger than cement because of

bricks has no hollows, and it did not require finishing.

 17

Here in Bislig, many Bisliganon, throw their coconut coir anywhere, so our study gives

focus on these waste products, with the red soil found in USEP-Bislig campus in making

bricks. The curing will only drying the bricks under the sun and will be sprinkled by small

amount of water, since we have no tunnel kiln in Bislig.

2.1.4 Soil-Cement

Soil-cement is a construction material, mix with pulverized natural soil with small

amount of Portland cement and water. It is used as a construction material for pipe bedding,

slope protection, and road construction as a sub base layer reinforcing and protecting the sub

grade. It has good compressive and shear strength, but low in tensile strength and brittle (J. L.

Werle; and B. Luke, 2007).

The compressive strength of soil cement increases while it was growing old by age

starting at the age of 28 days (Hongxia Yang, Department of Civil Engineering, Shandong

Jiaotong University, 250023, China). When the bricks aged are more than 3 months later, soil-

cement strength growth to slow down. Therefore, it is better to be three months aged as the

standard suitable for engineering.Any type of cement can be used to stabilization soil, but the

most commonly used is the ordinary Portland cement (Janz and Johansson, 2002), therefore

this type of cement was used in this study.

Among many soil mixing systems, the most common is the deep soil mixing system

that uses cement slurry as an additive mixture. At the present time, however, strength properties
 18

of soil cement produced by deep mixing are not well understood. For example, their

relationship with mixing methods is not well established nor is the concept of uniformity of

soil cement. Strength test data of soil cement cores from two project sites were obtained with

cooperation from the project owners and specialty contractors. The projects involved two deep

mixing systems using cement slurry; the multi-shaft CDM (Cement Deep Mixing) and the

single-shaft SBM (Shear Blade Mixing) systems (Osamu Taki Permalink:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/40663(2003)36).Histograms were used to analyze the strength

distributions. A method to determine the design strength is presented which utilizes the

standard deviation and the coefficient of variation of the strength test data.

The wet method of deep mixing is an important technology used to construct

excavation support systems and improve ground beneath embankments and structures.

However, a wide variety of terminology and varying definitions for the same terms create

confusion and cause miscommunication among designers, contractors, and testing laboratories.

Furthermore, different testing laboratories produce quite different strength test results because

there is not a standardized and widely-accepted laboratory procedure in the United States for

preparing, curing, and testing soil-cement specimens applicable to the wet method of deep

mixing (G. M. Filz; D. K. Hodges; D. E. Weatherby; and W. A. Marr Permalink:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/40783(162)1).

The method of mixing cement slurry or powder into soft ground (deep mixing) tocreate

soil-cement columns is widely used to improve the engineering properties (shear strength and

compressibility) of the thick deposit of soft ground (Broms and Boman, 1979; and Bergado et
 19

al., 1994).Most of the available researches related to the deep mixing method were confined to

the strength and the overall stiffness of the soil-cement columns (Fang et al., 2001).The field

mixing effect such as installation rate, water/cement ratio and rate of rotation on the strength

development of soil-cement columns was investigated by Nishida et al. (1996) and

Horpibulsuk et al. (2004c and 2011b). Based on the available compression and shear test

results, many constitutive models were developed to describe the engineering behavior of

cemented clay (Gens and Nova, 1993; Kasama et al., 2002; Horpibulsuk et al., 2010; Suebsuk

et al., 2010 and 2011). Chai et al. (2006) made a discussion on this issue and explained that the

soil-cement column accelerated the consolidation process due to its high stiffness, which

resulted in a higher coefficient of consolidation rather than higher coefficient of permeability.

Basically, the soil-cement column and the surrounding clay were consolidated under the same

overburden pressure after deep mixing execution; therefore, they possess practically the same

void ratio and coefficient of permeability (Horpibulsuk et al., 2011b).

2.1.5 Coconut Fiber

Coconut cultivation can be found spreading across the tropical and subtropical regions
o o
between the latitudes 20 N and 20 S. It can be seen in most of Asia countries especially

Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, India, and Malaysia and the tropical climate countries like

Hawaii and Fiji Islands. Coconuts are mainly cultivated on the coastal clays and sands.

Coconut trees can grow up to 30 m height.

 20

The coconut is the fruit of the Cocosnucifera, a tropical plant of the Arecaceae

(Palmae) family. The cross section of a coconut fruit as shown in Figure 1, which is egg

shaped, consists of four basic parts [15]:

(i) Epicarp, a shiny hard surface that partly prevents the loss of water from the fiber.

(ii) Mesocarp, it is where the thick fibers located (the interest of this study). It is the

part from which the fibers for the study are to be extracted.

(iii) Endocarp, the very rigid shell of 5 mm thick for mature coconut fruit

(iv) Amendoa, the edible part of the coconut, which is white in colour inside a large

cavity that contains coconut milk.

Figure 1 Cross section of a coconut palm

The development of strength properties in fiber-cement matrix mostly depends on the

formation of the fiber – matrix, matrix- matrix, and fiber-fiber bond that is the ability of the

fiber to bond to the matrix, one fiber bond to another fiber and/or to each other. The fiber
 21

interaction characteristics will determine the maximum load carrying capacity of the composite

and post-peak load deformation behavior. The fiber and the matrix must cooperate for the

composite to be an effective load bearing system. The cooperation between fiber and the matrix

will not materialize without the presence of interface that act as ‘binder’ and transfer the load

between the matrix and the reinforcing fibers. The interfacial interaction in the composite

depends on fiber aspect ratio, size of the interface, strength of the interaction, anisotropy,

orientation, aggregation, etc. The composition, structure or properties of the interface may vary

across the region and may also differ from the composition, structure or properties of either of

the two contacting phases.

Therefore, the interface plays a key role in controlling the mechanical properties of a

composite. Interfacial bonding is a result of good wetting of the fibers by the matrix as well as

the formation of a chemical bond between the fibers surface and the matrix.

The inclusion of coconut fibersis expected to influence the behavior of the binder with

regards to the flexural, tensile and compressive strength. The durability of the binder in term

of its resistance to deterioration due to internal and external factors such as weathering,

chemical reaction, alkalinity attacks, water absorption, bulking and permeability should also

be taken into consideration. The matrix is responsible to protect the fibers from environmental

attacks once the composite material is formed into a shape.

2.1.6 Compressed Stabilized Earth Block

 22

The compressed earth block is one of the most important modern building materials

which have enough production flexibility to let it be integrated into both formal and informal

sectors of structural activities (Rigassi, 2000).

Recently, the technology of traditional earth construction has undergone considerable

developments that have enhanced earth’s durability and quality as a construction material for

low-cost building (Adam and Agib, 2001). The compressed earth block is the modern

descendent of the molded earth block. The earth compressed blocks became widely used

around the world in the last 30 years or more, not only in third world countries, but also in

developed countries like USA, France, Canada, and Austria. The performance of the stabilized

compressed earth block was comparable with others in terms of their strength characteristics.

Meanwhile, the reduction of transportation time, cost and attendant pollution can also make

earth blocks more environmentally friendly than other materials.

The main ingredients of CSEB is the soil and it is visible everywhere. Roughly 65% of

the soil on the planet can be used to make CSEB and it can be found in many locations. This

obviously means that CSEB is an earth-friendly material because it is not too much expensive

in manufacturing unlike in making the concrete hollow block. CSEB is having a thermal mass

that naturally provide a home of some passive heating and cooling and providing increase

comfort for its inhabitants.

About the durability and strength of the structures using CSEB, both stabilized CEB

and unstabilized CEB are appropriate for buildings and meet the US Building Code Standard
 23

for compression and modulus for raptured tests. The fact is that the durability of a CSEB

building will allow it last for centuries. The evidence is that, as we all know, ancient earthen

structures still stand today in many parts of the world. CSEB have proven to be water proof,

fireproof, bugproof, and bulletproof. These structures can be built to resist earthquake damage

in seismic zone. By utilizing soil and coconut fiber, CSEB would be an incredible building

material.

Good production could be performed by increasing compressive strength and using

improved curing (Kerali, 2001). A lot of research work has been done in the development of

local and stabilized soil area (Guettala, 2002; Bahar et al., 2004). National and international

standards have also been developed for these procedures such as New Zealand standard 1998

and Standards Australia handbook 2002 (Walker 1996; Morel et al., 2007). The test methods

of earth walls vary from country to country because of the varied weather conditions. They are

also not based on the evaluation of field performance (Heathcota, 1995). A number of

guidelines and publications that explain various aspects of earth wall construction and testing

have been produced as well (Burroughs, 2001). The effect of compaction methods on the

chemical and mechanical properties needs further studies (Bahar et al., 2004).

ADVANTAGES OF COMPRESSED STABILIZED EARTH BLOCK

A. A local material

Ideally, the production is made on the site itself or in the nearby area. Thus, it will save

the transportation, fuel, time and money.

 24

B. A bio-degradable material

Well-designed CSEB houses can withstand, with a minimum of maintenance, heavy

rains, snowfall or frost without being damaged. The strength and durability has been proven

since half a century. If a building fallen down and that a jungle grows on it: the bio-chemicals

contained in the humus of the topsoil will destroy the soil cement mix in 10 or 20 years. And

CSEB will come back to our Mother Earth.

C. Limiting deforestation

Firewood is not needed to produce CSEB. It will save the forests, which are being

depleted quickly in the world, due to short view developments and the mismanagement of

resources.

D. Management of resources

Each quarry should be planned for various utilizations: water harvesting pond,

wastewater treatment, reservoirs, landscaping, etc. It is crucial to be aware of this point: very

profitable if well managed, but disastrous if unplanned.

E. Energy efficiency and eco friendliness

Requiring only a little stabilizer the energy consumption in an m³ can be from 5 to 15

times less than an m³ of fired bricks. The pollution emission will also be 2.4 to 7.8 times less

than fired bricks.

F. Cost efficiency
 25

Produced locally, with a natural resource and semi-skilled labor, almost without

transport, it will be definitely cost effective.

G. An adapted material

Being produced locally it is easily adapted to the various needs: technical, social,

cultural habits.

H. A job creation opportunity

CSEB allow unskilled and unemployed people to learn a skill, get a job and rise in the

social values.

I. Market opportunity

According to the local context (materials, labor, equipment, etc.) the final price will vary,

but in most of the cases it will be cheaper than fired bricks.

J. Reducing imports

Produced locally by semi-skilled people, no need import from far away expensive materials

or transport over long distances heavy and costly building materials.

K. Flexible production scale

Equipment for CSEB is available from manual to motorized tools ranging from village to

semi industry scale. The selection of the equipment is crucial, but once done properly, it will

be easy to use the most adapted equipment for each case.

 26

2.2 Review of Related Studies

This chapter will critically appraise the history, advancement, technical qualities,

construction methods and sustainable potential of earth blocks. It aims to establish the

structural identify of earth blocks and the reason for the wide variety of designs implemented

throughout the world. Earth blocks will be analyzed to fully comprehend their standing within

construction and why it is important to continue to progress in improving the lifetime of earth

blocks. To provide an efficient and competent study, here are some previous studies in order

to make this research a realistic one:

Blight [11] – Durability of and Material Characteristics of Soil Cement Blocks

Blight looked at the durability of Hydra form soil cement blocks by varying the cement

content (0, 4, 6 and 8 percent) of a block and undertaking strength, drying shrinkage, wet/dry

durability,sorptivity and spray jet testing. Two soil samples were chosen to manufacture test

blocks, firstly decomposed granite and secondly quaternary sand. Blight used a combination
 27

of 85% Portland cement blended to 15% fly ash. Soils used were not classified according to

any soil grading standards.

Blight reports that the addition of 4 percent OPC15FA (85% Ordinary Portland Cement

15% Fly Ash blend) will give an average block strength of 3MPa at 28 day strength for ‘most’

soils. It must however be noted that Blight tested the dry strengths of blocks only. Blight also

does not indicate the compacted pressures used to compress blocks.

Moreover, the addition of 4% OPC15FA reduces rain induced erosion of bricks, where

this amount is also sufficient to prevent abrasion damage. The porosity of soil cement blocks

is reduced by increasing the concentration of OPC15FA used in mix design. Blights study

concludes that a 4%OPC15FA blend produces durable blocks suitable for one storey load

bearing masonry construction.

Walker [6] – Strength, Durability and Shrinkage Characteristics of Cement Stabilised

Bricks

Walker studied the influence of soil characteristics and cement content on the physical

properties of stabilized bricks. Walker mixed two soil types together, one a clay soil with 50%

clay content and a river soil with 1% clay content to get a combination of soil properties. A

manually operated machined was used to press blocks, under compaction pressures of 4MPa.

The blocks were then cured under polythene sheeting.

 28

Both saturated and dry unconfined compressive strength testing was undertaken.

Shrinkage was assessed using a 200mm demec gauge. Determination of the resistance to water

erosion was undertaken by means of the wire brush test specified in wet/dry durability test.

Dry compressive strength ranged between 5.54 MPa and 3MPa whilst saturated

compressive0.95 and 3.2 MPa. Compressive strengths varied largely depending on the clay

content. Walkerconcluded that clays have a uniaxial dry compressive strength which is lost

with saturation.

Drying shrinkage of the blocks is primarily governed by plasticity index of the parent

soil. Once the plasticity index exceeded 20, there is a steady increase in drying shrinkage with

increasing clay content.

Resistance to abrasion from the wire brush is improved with increasing cement content

and reduced by clay content. Cement acts to bond soil particles together whereas clay minerals

disrupt cement bonding. At 10% cement content, at maximum clay content, 11% mass is lost

while at minimum clay content 1% mass is lost.Water absorption increases with increasing

clay content as a greater portion of water is absorbed by the clay minerals. Thus porosity

increases as clay content increases. Moisture is attracting characteristics of increasing clay

content. Water absorption ranges between 13.4 at highest clay content and 8.2% at lowest clay

content.
 29

Obonyo et al [3]: Durability of Compressed Earth Blocks: Assessing Erosion Resistance

Using the Modified Spray Testing

Obonyo et al looked at spray testing of compressed bricks from Tanzania in order to

counter deterioration due to wind driven erosion. The impacts of using cement, lime, fiber and

a commercial stabilizing fluid were assessed. Compressed blocks were benchmarked against a

standard factory produced bricks. Factory produced bricks hardly eroded whereas the depth of

erosion of soil-cement blocks maximum depth of erosion was 40mm. Inclusion of natural fiber

in bricks sharply increase the rate of erosion.

Pave [8] – Strength Evaluation of Dry-Stack Masonry

Pave looked at the structural behaviour of Hydra form CSEB by investigating the unit

compressive strength, masonry wall compressive strength and flexural resistance of dry stack

masonry/reinforced concrete beams. More to the point of durability, Pave looked at three type

compressive strength tests, the shoulder test, the centre test and the cube test for block strength

evaluation. These tests were carried out during dry, wet and normal humidity conditions. It

must be noted that the soil properties used by Pave in the assessment of strength are not

presented.

From test results Pave found that wet strength is approximately 60% of normal strength

and that the shoulder test was an adequate measure of block strength. Pave also recommended

that a minimum strength of 5MPa for testing be maintained. Pave further recommends the

following nominal block strengths, based on shoulder testing

 30

Cement Content (%) Compressive Strength (MPa)

5 3.0
7 5.0
10 8.0
15 10.0
20 12.0
25 14.0

Table 1: Recommended nominal block strengths

Summary of Test Results from Previous Studies

 31

Country Compactive Clay Cemen Wet Dry Absorptio Abrasion

PI
(Author, Effort Conten t Strengt Strength n by Water by
(%)
Date) (MPa) t (%) Conten h (%) (MPa) Uptake Wet/Dry
0 - .9 - -
South t (%) Test (%) Durabilit
4 - 4.17 4.2 14.6
y Test
Africa
10 12 -
(Blight, 6 - 4.2 2.75 (%)
11.7

1994)
8 - 7.93 2.72 10.9

10 5 1.6 3.67 14.6 4.9

Zimbabw 9
e 10 10 3.2 7.11 13.1 .7
4
(Walker, 35 5 .3 .3 27.3 75.7
1997) 40
35 10 .95 2.13 25.9 25.7

Algeria 5 9 15.4 8.27 1.4

(Guettala 15 18 14
8 12.7 18.4 7.35 1.25
et al,
South - - 5 3.1 6.1 - -
2005)
Africa
10 - - 7 4.8 8.2 - -
(Pave,
- - 10 9 13.6 - -
2009)

Table 2: Summary of durability results obtained from various sources

2.2.1 Concluding Remarks

 32

Table 2.1 presents different studies of various aspects that affect the durability of

CSEBs. Commonly found CSEB durability measures are also presented. Generally what can

be observed from the above results is that the strength of CSEBs is dependent on the compacted

effort imparted by the block press, the clay and cement contents of the soil-cement-water mix

used to make blocks. Increases in cement contents are accompanied by increases in wet and

dry strength, whereas increases in clay content reduce wet and dry strengths.

What would be a helpful observation is whether the wet strength increases or decreases

with amount of compacted effort imparted to the soil; however such studies are yet to be

undertaken thus. One must note that the results presented by the different authors cannot be

conclusively compared owing to the fact that varying block parameters (soil characteristics,

compacted effort, and cement content) are used in each individual study presented. The

resulting durability measures used to assess the quality of blocks depend on the block

production parameters.

The methods of compressive strength testing are also unknown, where incorrect testing

procedures affect the outcome of results. In general what the above results show is that with

increasing wet strength, generally resistance to abrasion and resistance to water uptake

increase. This shows the connection between strength and durability of blocks, in that the

increase in strength of CSEB’s leads to increased durability of blocks.

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY
 33

This work begins with explanation of the importance of the research (identify the

problem) and objectives of the research work, followed by literature review. For the

development of concepts,these are fundamental for the formulation of the whole research

work. Both primary data (collected personally) from the source itself (such as experiments,

observations, and photograph records) and secondary data from different research work are

collected and used for the analysis. The analysis of the collected data is both qualitative and

quantitative. In order to achieve the aim of this research project, simplifying the methodology

has been divided into a number of sections. In general the whole methodologies of this work

are:

3.1 Research Design

The experimental program covers series of physical property test like sieve analysis,

specific gravity, moisture content and mechanical property test such as compressive test were

undertaken in accordance with the ASTM standard. The soil and coconut fiber used in this

researchwas taken along the local area of Bislig City. The materials to be gather will screen

discarding foreign materials then placed in a container and sealed to preserved and retain its

natural conditions in order to achieve an accurate data for the experiment. As the production

will start, the required amounts of soil, coconut fiber and Portland cement are to be measureto

obtain the proper amounts of each material. After the dry materials are blend, a small amount

of water is to be added. The concrete is then mixed and formed in shapes. When the molds are

full, the concrete is compacted by the weight of the upper mold head coming down on the mold
 34

cavities. The compacted block are pushed down and out of the molds onto a flat steel pallet

and places them in a curing rack.

3.2 Research Setting

This research study is to be conducted on the Civil Engineering Laboratory of

University of Southeastern Philippines-Bislig Campus in performing the sieve analysis of the

soil, the setting of the sample mixtures and the time of its curing. After 18 days of normal

curing of the CSEB sample, the samples will be transported to Qualitest Solutions &

Technologies, Inc. or QSTI, an engineering company that provides quality-testing services and

implement engineering solutions for the construction industry. It is located at Carlos P. Garcia

Highway (Diversion Road), beside Maa Bridge, Davao City. It provides testing, monitoring

and quality control for construction materials such as steel products, concrete, aggregates, soil

as base course and embankments as part of quality assurance for any project for obtaining

reliable data.
 35

Figure 2 Shows the Map Location of QualitestSolutions and Technologies. Inc.

3.3 Research Instrument of the Study

The instrument used in this study is the sieve pan set by sieving analysis of the soil.

Soil for the two samples are sieved and then fused on each desired mixture. On the other hand,

to determine the compressive strengthand durability of two hollow block samples, treatment

procedures are to be conductedand compression test is also to be done by a machine at QSTI.

Durability of concrete will then be determined after the procedures.

3.4 Research Study Procedure

The following tasks are to be carried out in order to achieve the research objectives:

3.4.1. Collection of Materials

Materials will be prepared the days before the conduct of the experiment. Soil

and coir are to be gathered which are available in the local area. Cement will be bought
 36

in the market. The sieve pan and other laboratory materials that will be using would

be from Civil Engineering Laboratory of USeP-Bislig Campus, Maharlika, Bislig City.

3.4.2. Soil Preparation and Selection

The soil for block production is typically sourced from the site where block

production takes place. The soil sourced for block production must be free from topsoil,

soil with organic material usually found up to 1m below ground surface. The soil must

be dried under the heat of the sun after dig up and then sieved through anaperture size

No. 4, No. 40, No. 100according to U.S.A. Standard Testing Sieve (ASTME-II

Specification).

3.4.3. Preparation of Coir

Coconut fiber must be dry and extract the fiber into tiny pieces like a hair.

3.4.4. Proportioning

The CSEB production will be having two set-ups and the process would be

preferably proportion by weight. Cement content will be varied in fixed proportioning

of the soil, coconut fiber, and water mixture to observe the effect of increase in cement

content on the compressive strength of the blocks.

BLOCK SAMPLE CEMENT (kg) SOIL (kg) COCONUT FIBER (kg)

BLOCK A (3 samples) 2 8 .2

BLOCK B (3 samples) 4 8 .2
 37

3.4.5. Block Production

A. Mixing

1. By hand mixing method, mix the weighted cement and soil then add enough

water on a watertight none-absorbent platform until the mixture is thoroughly

blended and is of uniform color.

2. Add the extracted tiny fine fiber and mix thoroughlyuntil it will uniformly

distribute throughout the batch.

B. Sampling

1. Clean the mounds and apply oil.

2. Fill the concrete in the molds in layers.

3. Form the block in accordance to the desired size and shape.

4. The research will produce two set-up of CSEB. Every set-up will compose of

three samples to compute the average data needed in the study.

3.4.6. Curing Process

1. After the blocks willproduce, test specimens are stored in moist air for 24hours

in order for it to be completely formed.

2. Blocks will be mark and remove from the molds and cured under plastic

sheeting for up to 18 days before they can gain adequate strength for use.

3. Further suggestion, in a hot and dry climate the blocks must be watered twice

daily.
 38

4. Enough water is to be used to facilitate the hydration of cement, but not too

much.

3.5.7 Testing

After the curing process, the researchers will then travel to the QSTI testing

center to test the properties of the soil and the compressive strength of the CSEB.