Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 G E N E R A L
One of the essential preconditions for improving the standard of living of people is the
provision of reasonably good housing (Ghavami & Fang, 1984). Rapid and uncontrolled
urbanisation in many developing countries have resulted in a severe shortage of houses in
recent years, specially in towns and suburban areas. Owing to limited financial resources,
the optimum use of locally available materials and the development of associated
technical information would be the solution for providing economically viable housing
for majority of the low to medium income earners. The promotion of self help schemes is
also a priority area (Lim et al., 1984).
In this context, it would be essential to explore the ways and means of optimising the use
of resources available locally while paying sufficient attention to the safety and protection
of the environment. This is particularly true for Sri Lanka where the shortage of
conventional building materials have made good housing too expensive for majority of
low to medium income earners.
House construction with alternative building materials poses a challenge to the policy
makers,planners^architects and engineers in view of the parameters that have to be looked
into, such as social acceptability, adequate strength, security, economy, ease of
maintenance, availability of materials, level of technology required, duration of
construction and durability (Rao et al., 1983).
In this research, an attempt was made to give a comprehensive coverage to above
parameters by using alternative building materials and methods. In a normal house, the
basic structure consist of foundations, walls, floor slabs and a roof. The conventional
building materials used consist of random rubble, bricks, sand, reinforced concrete and
timber. Out of these, bricks, timber (Fernando, 1979) and sand (Dias et al., 1997) are in
short supply. Over exploitation of these resources in past two or three decades has
resulted in a considerable environmental degradation such as those associated with clay
mining, sand mining and deforestation. Concrete is expensive due to high cement
content. Steel is locally manufactured using imported raw materials. Thus, minimisation
of the usage of these also could be advantageous in reducing the construction cost.
In this research, cement stabilised soil blocks are introduced as an environmentally
friendly and cost effective alternative to burnt clay bricks. The use of reinforced concrete
is optimised for floor slabs with the aim of minimising the use of concrete and steel.

Since two areas of research is covered in this report, the literature review on alternative
building materials can be divided into two main sections namely:
1. cement stabilised soil blocks, and
2. concrete slab systems.

2.2 C E M E N T STABILISED SOIL B L O C K S

The shortage of conventional construction materials and the associated environmental
problems call for an urgent investigation into the possibility of using economical and
environmentally friendly alternative materials that are available locally (Lim et al., 1984).
One such material that is abundantly available is soil. Soil is a broad term used in
engineering to include all deposits of loose materials in the earth crust. This definition
separates soils from rock, from which soils have weathered due to physical, chemical and
biological processes. This is a continuous process and therefore all soils are in transition
which is in the geological time scale (Bryan, 1988a). This is the process that imparts the
properties and great variety to the soils as it is found on the earth crust. The body of the
soil fabric will normally contain a proportion of very small particles of clay minerals,
generally less than 0.002 mm in effective diameter. Clay particles display two important
characteristics; an ion exchange capacity and an affinity for water which includes
volumetric and plasticity changes with changes in moisture content (Rigassi, 1995).
One of the main reasons for lack of popularity of soil is its undesirable qualities. Those
are (Kateregga 1983):
1. its low loadbearing capacity which makes it unsuitable for supporting heavy roofs
of large span buildings,
2. its low resistance to moisture movements and absorption that can lead to
structural weakness,
3. its low compressive strength due to low binding strength of particles,
4. its very high shrinkage or swelling ratio resulting in major structural cracks of its
products when exposed to different weather conditions and therefore making them
unsuitable for building construction purposes, and
5. its low resistance to wear and tear and low durability calling for frequent repairs
and maintenance when used in building construction.
These are the main weaknesses which put earth products at a disadvantageous position
when compared with other widely used building materials such as concrete and bricks.
These weaknesses cause a lot of fear, doubts and hesitations among designers,

10

developers, users, decision makers, financiers, etc., in trying to accept soil products for
building construction.
However, there are a number of qualities that make soil a good building material. Those
are (Kateregga 1983):
1. it has a high resistance to fire, which is one of the most important qualities
required in any building material,
2. it has very high thermal insulating value that enables to keep the interior of a
building cool when outside is hot; this is specially important for tropical climates
such as those prevailing in Sri Lanka,
3. it has good noise absorbent characteristics which is quite suitable for house
designs, and,
4. since it is locally available, it is possible to minimise the transport costs.
Despite these advantages, not much attempt has been made to improve soil to minimise
its disadvantages, so that it will become an economical, environmentally friendly, durable
and strong construction material (Spence & Cook, 1983). One method that has been
successfully used to improve soil characteristics is stabilisation with a suitable agent. The
stabilisation agents can be cement, lime or bitumen (Norton, 1986). Gypsum has also
been used when it is available (Kafescigln et al., 1983). Rise husk ash is another
alternative that can be used (Rahman, 1986). Another technique that has been used with
soil to obtain desirable characteristics is increasing the density by compaction.
With the advent of Cinva ram compressed block press in 1952 by Raoul Ramirez at the
Cinva Centre of Bogota, Colombia, stabilisation and compaction of soil has been used to
produce blocks of sufficient strength (Guillaud et al., 1995). Presently, there are a
number of manual and motorised machines in use. The compaction pressure of these
machines vary between 2 N/mm to 10 N/mm (Bryan, 1988 b).
2

The most popular stabilising agent has been cement due to its wide availability and its
suitability to stabilise laterite soils found in tropical and sub-tropical countries. Lime and
rice husk ash also have been used in certain areas. Lime is particularly suitable for
stabilising soils with high clay contents.
In Sri Lanka, laterite soil can be found few centimetres below the ground level, beneath
the organic top soil. Laterite is a generic name given to a material found in tropical and
sub-tropical areas of the world where the weather produces reasonable quantities of warm
water filtering through the soil removing the soluble chemical salts, leaving a material
which is rich in compounds of iron and aluminium. This accounts for the general reddish
appearance of lateritic soil (Lilley & Robinson, 1995). This name has originated from the

11

Latin word 'later', which means 'brick', since laterite blocks have been used as bricks in
India (Rahman, 1987).
It can appear in many forms with significantly different characteristics, depending on the
distribution of particle sizes within an individual soil. A very important feature of
lateritic soil is its clay content in relation to the overall particle size distribution, which
can vary considerably at sites separated by a few hundred metres (Rigassi, 1995).
It has been suggested by Spence & Cook (1983) that one reason for soil construction
being under utilised in developing countries is the enormous variability of the naturally
occurring soils. This has created difficulties in making specifications and has led to
selection of options such as bricks and concrete as conventional building materials.

2.2.1 Stabilisation of soil

Stabilisation of soil means alteration of its properties in such a way that the soil does not
loose strength on saturation. Stabilisation of soil is intended to reduce the volume of
voids, fill the voids that cannot be eliminated and increase the bond between the grains.
Stabilisation is achieved by (Rigassi, 1995):
a. densification: this is the creation of a dense medium blocking pores,
b. reinforcement: creating an isotropic network limiting movement,
c. cementation: creating an inert matrix of opposing movements,
d. linkage: creating stable chemical bonds between clays and crystals,
e. imperviousness: surrounding soil grains with a water proofing film, and
f.

water proofing: eliminating absorption.

2.2.2 Selection of soils for block making

Soils are made up of inert materials (gravel, sand, silt) and active materials (clay). The
former acts as a skeleton and the latter acts as a binding agent. The proportion in which
each type of material present will determine the behaviour and the properties of different
soils. There is a requirement for a small amount of fines (clay and silt), but an upper limit
is also necessary to limit shrinkage to ensure effective stabilisation. The grading curve of
soils selected for stabilisation should preferably fall within the boundaries shown in
Figure 2.1, to ensure a satisfactory compaction and durability (Rigassi, 1995).

12

It was found by Lasisi & Ogunjde (1984) that the compressive strength of cement
stabilised soil blocks increases as the maximum grain size decreases. This could be
attributed to the increase in surface area associated with smaller particles that lead to
improved cohesion between particles.
In order to determine the suitability of soils for stabilisation, the following soil testing
methods can be used (Rigassi, 1995):
1. Grain size distribution: this can be used to determine the grading curve for larger
particles of the soil. The soil used for stabilisation should be well graded to form
a dense structure upon compaction. A dense structure will give a higher number
of contacting particles leading to a better loadbearing skeleton, and a reduced
porosity thus reducing the susceptibility to water penetration. Gravel and sand
give strength to stabilised soil and clay binds the material together both at green
state and at dry state. It is important to ensure that the largest particle size fraction
is not too much to cause a poor surface finish. Sufficient fines (silt and clay)
should also be present to allow handling just after demoulding. According to
Saxton (1995), soils having more than 15% fines would be able to act as a binder
between coarse particles.
2. Sedimentation analysis: this can be used to determine the grading of materials
finer than 0.08 mm, generally identified as silt and clay.
3. Atterburg limits: this can be used to determine the liquid, plastic limits and
plasticity index of the soil intended for stabilisation according to BS 1377 (1975).
Plasticity defines the extent to which a soil can be distorted without significant
cracking and crumbling. Plasticity of soil is mainly due to the clay and silt
content in it. Plasticity Index, PI, which is equal to the difference between Liquid
limit and Plastic limit, determines the extent of the plastic behaviour of the soil.
For stabilisation of soil, both PL and LL should be within certain limits since
these two defines the sensitivity of the soil to variations in humidity. According
to Rahman (1987), soils having a liquid limit less than 40% and Plasticity Index
less than 18% are suitable for stabilisation. An upper limit of 40% for liquid
limit was suggested by Bryan( 1988c) as well on the basis of a comprehensive
testing programme.
4. Proctor compaction test: this can be used to determine the optimum moisture
content for compaction. The compressibility of a soil defines its maximum
capacity to be compressed for a given amount of compaction energy and at a given
moisture content. When compacted, the density of soil increases lowering the
porosity thus making it difficult for water to penetrate through the block. Hence,
compaction makes the block less susceptible to modifications in the presence of
water while giving it a higher loadbearing capacity. Optimum water content
should be worked out for the soil with cement added but not for the soil alone
since the cement changes the particle size profile and would raise the optimum

13

water content (Spence & Cook, 1983). However, compaction test results such as
Procter Compaction should be used with care since the optimum moisture content
for cement stabilised soil blocks may depend on the compaction pressure exerted
by the machine used for making blocks (Bryan, 1988 a).

2.2.3 Physical identification of soils suitable for stabilisation

In addition to these laboratory tests, there is another set of physical tests that can be used
for the selection of a suitable soil. These physical tests can be used while manufacturing
of blocks to check the consistency and suitability of the material prepared for block
making. Since the soil characteristics vary from location to location, these simple
physical tests can be extremely useful because it is not always possible to undertake
laboratory testing while constructing buildings at various remote places. The following
soils are unsuitable for making blocks and can be easily identified with physical testing
(Norton, 1986):
1. soils containing organic matter,
2. soils which are highly expansive, and
3. soils containing excessive amounts of soluble salts such as gypsum, chalk etc.
The following are the simple tests to identify the soil type:
1. By observation: Soils which contain high amount of clay tend to crack when dry.
Cracking in dry soil indicate high clay in it. If a damp lump of soil is cut into half
with a blade and if the cut surface is smooth and bright it has got clay in it. If the
soil is in loose state and grainy, it contains a considerable amount of sand.
2. Touch: Rub the soil between fingers and if the soil is smooth or powdery, then
clay is present. Sand is gritty and coarse in hand.
3. Smell: Presence of organic matter could be identified with a musty smell.
4. Cigar test: This test can be used to identify a soil suitable for stabilisation. Cigar
test is carried out as follows (Riggasi, 1995). First all gravel from the sample is
removed. Then soil is moistened and kneaded well until a smooth paste is
obtained. It is left to stand for 30 minutes to allow it to become very smooth and
rolled between the palms into a cigar shape to about 3 cm in diameter. Then the
"cigar" is placed across the palm of the hand and pushed it gently forward with
the other. Finally the length of the piece which breaks off is measured. The
above procedure is repeated for several times. If the average length measured is
less than 5 cm, the soil contains too much sand. If it is more than 15 cm, it
contains too much clay and if it is between 5 and 15 cm, the soil is good.

14

5. Sedimentation test (Jar test): This test can be used to determine the fines content.
A transparent cylindrical jar of at least Vi litre capacity is used for this test. The
jar is filled with soil up to about quarter of the capacity and the rest with water
with some salt added to act as a dispersing agent. Then the top of the jar is sealed
with the palm and shaken well. The jar is left to stand for at least 30 minutes and
the sedimentation is observed. Generally the coarse material like gravel will be
deposited at the bottom followed by sands and then silts with clay at the top. The
depth of each layer gives an indication of the proportions of each type of material
(Rigassi, 1995). The accuracy of jar test results was determined by Perera (1994)
using results of sieve analysis. For soils containing fines (clay and silt) more than
20%, jar test could be used to determine the fines content within 5% of the actual
value, where the values predicted by the jar test were always overestimates. This
means that when the actual fines content is 30%, jar test may predict a value
between 30% and 35%.
6. Shrinkage box test: This test can be used to determine the amount of cement
required for proper stabilisation. Shrinkage box test can be carried out using a
simple shrinkage box which can be made at the site. The procedure given below
should be followed:

oil the internal surface of wooden box of 600 mm x 40 mm x 40 mm;

select the sample of soil intended for stabilisation and add water to its
optimum water content;
tamp the soil into the box with a stick and smoothen the surface;
sun dry the contents for three days and keep for a week in shade;
when the sample is completely dry, push all the soil tightly up to one end
of the box and measure the gap created by shrinkage in the soil.

Interpretation of results of shrinkage box test for the laterite soils available in Sri
Lanka is given in Table 2.1 (Perera, 1994):
Table 2.1 Results of Shrinkage box test (Perera, 1994)
Shrinkage
< 12 mm
12 mm - 24 mm
25 mm - 39 mm
40 mm - 50 mm

Cement: soil by volume

1:18
1:16
1:14
1:12

15

2.2.4 M e t h o d s of stabilisation for soil blocks

In cement stabilised laterite soil blocks, the stabilisation is achieved by three different
means. Those are mechanical stabilisation, physical stabilisation and chemical
stabilisation as illustrated below.

Stablised soil blocks

Mechnical
stabilisation
- compaction

Physical
stabilisation
- sieving

Chemical
stabilisation
- cement,
lime,
bitumen,

Mechanical stabilisation, in the form of compaction, is used to change the structure of the
soil, thus improving density and mechanical strength. It will also reduce the porosity and
permeability. Physical stabilisation is used to change the composition and texture. For
example, large particles are removed by sieving. When the fines content is too high, sand
is added. Chemical stabilisation is used by adding products like cement, lime etc. to
modify the soil properties.

2.2.5 Chemical stabilising agents of soil

Chemical stabilisation can be used successfully along with physical and mechanical
stabilisation processes to produce strong and durable soil blocks. A number of materials
such as cement, lime, bitumen and pozzolanas can be used for the chemical stabilisation
of soil.
2.2.5.1 Cement
Cement is the most widely used chemical stabilising agent due to its wide availability.
When cement is mixed with soil and water, cement reacts with the water in the mixture to
form an insoluble cementitious colloidal gel. Cement is able to disperse itself to fill the
pore spaces where it sets and hardens to form a continuous matrix which surrounds the
particles of soil and binds them together.
The main difference between concrete and soil cement is that in concrete all materials
finer than 0.1 mm diameter are excluded as aggregates, where as in soil cement they are
tolerated (Riggasi, 1995). Clay forms a continuous matrix through the soil causing
swelling and shrinkage of soils. The properties of soil cement are considerably affected

16

by the type of soil, compacting effort, density of soil cement mixture and proportion of
cement used.
The hydration of cement is a time dependant process. The increase in strength and
durability continues at a decreasing rate for some months provided that moisture is
available to feed the reaction. Compressive strength is adversely affected by any delay
between mixing and compaction. The initial setting time of cement complying with
BS:12 should be 45 minutes or more. Thus, it is advisable to use cement soil mix for
block making within 45 minutes of adding water. According to Lim et al. (1984), the
compressive strength of blocks were reduced by 20% when used for block making with a
lapse of 2 hours after mixing cement and water.
Efficiency of cement stabilisation also depends on the efficiency of compaction.
According to Bryan (1988a), in clayey soils, the strength properties improve with
increasing compaction pressure. However, for sandy soils, this advantage is not so
significant.
As cement is used in low proportions (2% to 8%) it is not easy to evenly distribute the
cement. Mixing should be done in two stages; dry and wet mixing. The cement will
begin to act on contact with water and hence water should be added to the dry mix at the
last moment before compacting in order to keep the time before it is used to a minimum;
this is called the reaction time ( Riggasi, 1995).
Cement stabilised soil blocks must be kept in a humid environment for at least 7 days.
The surface of the blocks must not be allowed to dry out too quickly as this causes
shrinkage cracks. The blocks must be sheltered from direct sun and wind and kept in
conditions of relative humidity approaching 100% by covering them with waterproof
plastic sheets. After about 28 days there would not be a further significant increase in the
strength of the blocks.
High temperatures will increase the strength obtained and
temperature of the stacked blocks can be raised using black plastic sheeting as a covering
material (Riggasi, 1995).
It is shown by Rahman (1987) with a comprehensive testing programme carried out using
a soil containing 30% fines that for a given compaction effort, the optimum moisture
content varies with the cement content. It was also found that the cement content can
change the dry density marginally, but compressive strength increases significantly with
the cement content. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) values also have been determined at
both unsoaked and soaked conditions, which also show a considerable improvement with
increasing cement content. The compressive strengths were obtained with 115.5mm
high, 105 mm diameter specimen air cured at room temperature. The results reported for
the testing programme is presented in Table 2.2.

17

Table 2.2 Effect of cement on compaction characteristics, CBR characteristics and

unconfined compressive strength of soil (Rahman, 1987)
cement %

OMC % based
on Procter
compaction test

Air dried
density
(kg/m )

14.4
15.48
15.8
16.0

1820
1810
1840
1880

0
3
6
9

Unconfined
compressive strength
(NW)
7day
14day 28day
1.03
1.03
1.03
2.34
2.64
2.86
3.04
3.74
3.29
3.70
4.72
5.26

CBR%

unsoaked
27.2
78.7
131.7
195.2

soaked
11.7
52.7
109.7
178.0

2.2.5.2 Lime
Unlike cement, which works with coarse particles of soil, lime works with clay minerals
in the soil. Lime on its own does not have a cementitious effect. However, it reacts with
certain clay minerals at the presence of water and produces a cementing effect which in
turn increases the soil's strength and reduces susceptibility to water. This is known as a
pozzolanic reaction which is rather slow. The cementitious material produced has lower
strength than Portland cement and the strength depends on the presence of suitable
minerals. Also, to ensure sufficient dispersion of lime in soil, the proportion of lime
needed is considerably in excess of that required for the reaction. Soils with significant
amount of clay minerals are suitable for stabilisation with lime, which are less suitable for
mechanical compaction and tend to be more prone to dimensional changes (Norton,
1986).
The effects of Lime-pozzolan mixture is considerably enhanced by curing at elevated
temperatures. Thus lime may be suitable for stabilised soil blocks if the blocks can be
heated in a water tank. There are some additives such as Calcium sulphate (Gypsum),
Sodium silicate and Sodium chloride (salt) to improve the pozzolanic reaction (Spence &
Cook, 1983). According to Rigassi (1995), lime stabilisation should be considered only if
cement stabilisation is impossible.
2.2.5.3 Bitumen
The action of bitumen mixed with soil is to act as a water repellent, reducing the
dimensional changes, loss of strength and surface erosion associated with wetting. Better
results can be achieved by combining stabilisation with compaction. When making
compressed blocks, bitumen acts as a lubricant helping the ejection of the block from the
mould.
If bitumen is used as a stabiliser, thorough mixing with soil is essential. Bitumen is too
viscous to distribute at room temperature and must be heated or dissolved in an aqueous
emulsion. When the dilutes have evaporated, the bitumen is left as a thin coating around

18

clay particles. This prevents the soil from absorbing water. Therefore, bitumen can be
used to improve the wet strength of stabilised soil blocks (Norton, 1986).
2.2.5.4 Pozzolanas
Pozzolanas can be defined as a material composed mainly of reactive silica which will
combine with lime at ordinary temperatures at the presence of water and forms stable
insoluble compounds with cementing properties.
Many plant ashes have a high silica content, which can made to be pozzolanic. The
prime factor of using any plant material is the amount of ash produced during
combustion. Amount of ash produced with rice husks is about 20% but for bamboo
leaves and some timber species it is less than 10%. This ash essentially composes of
silica (Spence & Cook, 1983).

2.2.6 Process o f b l o c k m a k i n g

Since machines are used for making cement stabilised soil blocks, it would be possible to
achieve good dimensional accuracy and quality by following a proper block making
process. According to Rigassi (1995), the following steps should be carefully followed:
1. Soil preparation: Lumps in soil should be broken manually. This soil is then be
ready for screening. The mesh size of the sieve can be either 6 mm or 10 mm.
2. Measuring of quantities: Measuring can be done either by weight or by volume
with volume batching being the most common and easiest. In volume batching, it
is advisable to use a container of fixed volume.
3. Mixing: Mixing of soil with cement should be carried out in dry condition
initially. Attention should be placed to obtain a homogeneous mix. After a
thorough dry mixing, water can be sprinkled to bring soil cement mix to a
desirable moisture content. The quantity of water to be added can be determined
by performing a simple drop test. For the drop test, a fistful of moist material
taken and then it is shaped into a ball in the hand. It is then dropped from a height
of 1.0 m on to a hard surface. If the ball has completely disintegrated, the mix is
too dry. If it has broken into 4 to 5 pieces, the moisture content is acceptable. If it
has flattened without breaking, it is too wet.
4. Compressing of blocks: A block making machine should be used for this purpose.
It is important to use the correct quantity of soil with correct compaction
procedure given for the machine. Use of less soil will result in weaker blocks
since the compaction ratio is fixed.

19

o - ~

5. Curing: For cement stabilised blocks, continuous presence of water within the
block is crucial for development of adequate strength. Any rise in temperature
within the block is also helpful. Therefore, green blocks should be carefully
stacked and should be completely covered with black polythene so that it would
be possible to create almost 100% moisture content around the blocks. This
minimises any evaporation of moisture from blocks and also helps to raise the
temperature around the blocks. Blocks should be kept covered for at least 7 days
and preferably for 14 days.
During block making, as a quality controlling measure, it is possible to use a
penetrometer with green blocks where the depth of penetration can be used as an
indication of the degree of compaction. Excessive penetration of the penetrometer
can be an indication of the use of insufficient soil or the use of too much water. Such
penetrometers are generally supplied with the block making machines.
Larger particles from laterite soils left after sieving can be used as coarse aggregates
in concrete. Many studies have been carried out on the use of lateritic soil in concrete
such as Osunade (1993) and Adepegba (1983). The main emphasis of these studies
was on replacing sand with finer fraction of laterite soils. It was shown by Rai (1987)
that larger particles could be used as coarse aggregates in concrete and the
compressive strengths obtained were in the range of 10-12 N/mm at an age of 28
days. With such applications, it may be possible to further optimise the usage of
materials. Such concrete can be used for non structural applications such as mass
concrete paved on ground to lay cement rendering.
2

2.2.7 P r o p e r t i e s o f c e m e n t stabilised soil b l o c k m a s o n r y

Cement stabilised soil blocks are one of energy efficient and economical alternatives to
burnt bricks. Unlike the design of reinforced concrete, where a mathematical model
exists to predict moments of resistance from the properties and geometry of concrete and
steel, no such model as yet exists which can predict the axial compressive strength of
masonry walls from the properties and geometric details of units and mortar. Because of
this situation, masonry design codes generally have relied upon tests carried out on mortar
and units, and also on panels built with mortar and units to develop necessary strength
properties (Render & Phillips, 1986).
The strength properties that would generally be used in masonry design includes
compressive strength of blocks, compressive strength of mortar, compressive strength of
panels, shear strength of panels and flexural strength of panels (Hendry, 1981).
Generally, compressive strength of blocks and wall panels are the most important
properties in loadbearing construction.

20

In order to determine the strength characteristics of cement stabilised soil block masonry,
a comprehensive testing programme had been carried out by Reddy & Jagadish (1989).
The properties investigated were:
1. Effects of mortar properties on the compressive strength and modulus of elasticity
of cement stabilised soil block masonry.
2. Effects of moisture absorption on the compressive strength and modulus of
elasticity of cement stabilised soil block masonry.
The blocks used for this testing programme were made using a manually operated
machine called ASTRAM which has a compaction ratio of 1.7. The liquid and plastic
limits of the soils used were 36.1% and 22.5% respectively. This soil thus has a plasticity
index of 13.6%.
2.2.7.1 Compressive strength of cement stabilised soil blocks

Strength of masonry is influenced by a number of factors such as block strength, mortar

bed thickness, mortar strength, nature of bonding and slenderness ratio. In the study by
Reddy and Jagadish (1989), six mortar mixes were used to construct masonry prisms of a
height of four blocks to give a slenderness ratio of 2.52. The size of the cement stabilised
soil block used for the determination of strength properties was 305 mm x 146 mm x 82
mm. The mortar mixes were 1:2, 1:4, 1:6, 1:10, 1:12 of cement and sand. It also
included a lateritic soil mortar with 5% cement by weight where the soil was prepared by
passing through a 3 mm mesh. The mortar thickness has been maintained at 10mm.
For the determination of elastic modulus, soil blocks of size 230 mm x 190 mm x 82 mm
had been used to make the prisms of height four blocks. The properties of blocks cured
for 21 days are given in Table 2.3. It can be seen that the wet compressive strength of
blocks is about 25% of the dry strength.
Table 2.3 : properties of pressed soil - cement blocks of 5% cement cured for 21 days
(Reddy & Jagadish, 1989)
Block size

air dried density (kg/m )

dry strength ( N/mm )
wet strength (N/mm )
water absorption %
ratio of wet to dry strength

305 x 146 x 82

230 x 190 x 82

length x width x height

(mm)
1840
9.85
2.51
15.34
0.25

length x width x height

(mm)
1830
10.38
2.72
15.63
0.26

The prism testing was done at an age of 28 days to determine the compressive strength.
The prism size was 305 mm in length, 368 mm in height and 146 mm in thickness. The

21

prisms were tested both in dry condition and wet condition. For wet strength, the prisms
were saturated by sprinkling with water before testing. It was observed that in most of
the prisms, the failure was initiated by vertical splitting cracks and completed by crushing
of the soil blocks at the mortar block interface. In the case of prisms using soil cement
mortar, the mortar joints were crushed before the vertical splitting started, which could be
attributed to weaker mortar strength.
When interpreting the results of testing, a new term called masonry efficiency, r\, had
been introduced (Reddy & Jagadish, 1989).
r) = masonry efficiency = Masonry prism strength/ Block strength
The results of this testing programme are given in Table 2.4. It can be stated that the wet
compressive strength of cement stabilised soil block prisms is less than the dry strength.
Generally, wet compressive strength of prisms is about 50% of the dry strength. The
masonry efficiency of cement stabilised soil blockwork in the wet state is nearly twice as
large as the value in the dry state. This indicates that although there can be a considerable
drop in the compressive strength of blocks in wet stage, the compressive strength of wall
panels would be affected to a lesser extent.
Table 2.4 Compressive strength of soil cement block masonry prisms at 28 days (Reddy
& Jagadish, 1989)
Mortar mix

Masonry Prism strength

dry (N/mm ) wet(N/mm )
2.10
3.87
3.33
1.68
1.52
3.21
2.73
1.37
1.31
2.55
0.90
2.01
2

1:2 cement sand

1:4 cement sand
1:6 cement sand
1:10 cement sand
1:12 cement sand
5% cement soil

Masonry ef 'iciency (r|)

dry
wet
0.84
0.39
0.34
0.67
0.33
0.61
0.28
0.55
0.26
0.52
0.20
0.36

2.2.7.2 Modulus of elasticity of cement stabilised soil block masonry

In the study by Reddy and Jagadish (1989), the modulus of elasticity of cement stabilised
soil blocks had also been determined. The modulus of elasticity was obtained by
measuring stress-strain characteristics of five block high prisms. The prisms prepared by
using blocks of 5% cement by weight were cured for 28 days under cover and then dried
in air for 30 days. The stress-strain characteristics of wet specimens were obtained after
immersing them in water for 48 hours prior to testing. The moisture content of the dry
and wet specimens were 3.61% and 15.84% respectively, at the time of testingv^^lfe^v^
modulus of elasticity of cement stabilised soil block masonry based on tangent r n ^ u l u s is
given at a stress of 0.3 N / m m . These results are given in Table 2.5 .
2

22

Table 2.5 : Modulus of elasticity of soil - cement block masonry prisms at 0.3 N/mm
stress (Reddy & Jagadish, 1989)

*
Modulus
of
elasticity
(N/mm
dry state
wet )state
1080
630
950
650
550
510
490
350
490
390
340
210

Mortar mix
1:2 cement sand
1:4 cement sand
1:6 cement sand
1:10 cement sand
1:12 cement sand
5% cement soil

This indicates that modulus of elasticity is affected by the strength of mortar. This result
is predictable since strong mortars will have higher elastic modulus, which would reduce
the shortening of the mortar under compressive stresses. For low strength mortars such as
1:6, 1:10 and 1:12, the modulus of elasticity is affected to a lesser degree when the walls
are wet.
2.2.7.3 Determination of blockwork strength based on elastic analysis
A

It can be seen from Sections 2.2.7.1 and 2.2.7.2 that the strength properties of blocks and
mortars can affect the strength properties of block walls. A theoretical expression was
derived to determine the strength of brickwork in terms of elastic properties of bricks and
mortar such as elastic modulus, tensile strength, mortar joint thickness, thickness of
blocks and Poisson's ratio (Henry et al, 1981). That is presented here since it would be
possible to use the same concepts for cement stabilised soil blocks as well.
This expression is derived on the basis that the strains in mortar and blocks should be
equal at the interface between blocks and mortar, and the total lateral forces in mortar and
blocks should be equal and opposite as shown in Figure 2.2. It should be noted that there
are limitations in expressing block compressive strength on the basis of elastic properties
since blocks and particularly mortar will not behave elastically up to the point of failure.
However, this expression helps to identify the quantities which can be important for
strength of blockwork, such as the ratio of joint thickness to block depth, the ratio of
elastic moduli of blocks and mortar, and the tensile strength of blocks.
The horizontal stains in blocks and mortar can be used to determine the equilibrium
condition. The tensile strains are taken as positive.
The lateral strain of mortar is due to (see Figure 2.2):
1. a confining lateral stress, ~a acting on the mortar which gives rise to a strain of
-a /E in the lateral direction
m

23

2. a lateral strain v .a /E
due to lateral stress resulting from vertical stress, o ,
acting on the mortar where v is the Poisson's ratio.
m

Strain in mortar:
= - <y /E + v . a /E
m

(2.1)

The lateral strain in the block is due to the outward lateral stress, a , acting on the block
due to confinement offered to the mortar and the lateral strain due to vertical stress, o ,
acting on the block. Strain in block:
b

e = a /E
b

+ v . a /E

(2.2)

where Em, E , v , v are the elastic moduli and Poisson's ratio for mortar and block
respectively as denoted by the subscripts.
b

For statical equilibrium, the total lateral forces in mortar and block are equal and
opposite. Hence, when d = depth of block, t = thickness of mortar joint and d/t = r, and
considering a unit length of blockwork:
o . t = a . d;
m

= r o

Substituting from (2.1) and (2.2), and rearranging:

O (1/E + r/EJ = O (vJE
b

and substituting Ei/E

=m

O = G (v .m - v )/(]
b

- Vt/E )

+ r.m)

(2.3)

If the failure criterion for the blocks is reaching the limiting tensile strain given by eit,
which consist of the strains in blocks due to Ob and Vt>. c>c:
/, = o /E
b

+ v . o /E
b

(2.4)

If the corresponding failure stress is cr# = E . e it, then it is possible to determine the
stress in blockwork due to the interaction between mortar and blocks as:
b

Ob = Ojb - v . o
b

Substituting and rearranging the above equations, the limiting compressive stress in the
vertical direction can be written as:

24

^
v .m-v.
(1 + r.m)

(2.5)

This relationship shows that the following are of importance when predicting the strength
of blockwork.
1.
2.
3.
4.

tensile strength of blocks,

Poisson's ratio of blocks and mortar,
elastic modulus of block and mortar, and
the ratio of mortar joint thickness to thickness of block.

However, it should be noted that this relationship only indicates the factors that influence
the interaction between mortar and blocks, but should not be used in practice in
predicting the ultimate strength of blockwork. This is because the elastic behaviour
would not prevail prior to failure of blockwork.
2.2.7.4 M o r t a r s suitable for cement stabilised soil blocks
For the construction of cement stabilised soil block walls, either cement sand mortar or
cement soil sand mortar can be used. Cement sand mortars can be either 1:8 or 1:6.
Masons generally use rather high water cement ratios for satisfactory workability leading
to low strengths. The higher the sand - cement ratio, the greater the water requirement.
There can be a number of cement soil and sand mortars that can be used for cement
stabilised soil block construction. It was reported by Reddy and Jagadish (1989), soil
cement mortar with 5% cement by weight appears to be more ductile than the cement
sand mortars. Alternatively, Cement, lime and sand in 1:1:6 or 1:1:8 also can be used for
cement stabilised soil block wall construction. When it is necessary to reduce the cost of
mortar further, stabilised mud mortars such as 1:2:6 and 1:2:8 cement, soil and sand are
recommended (Reddy, 1995).
It is reported by Falade (1993) that the compressive strength of lateritic mortars decreases
with higher water/cement ratios. Thus, it is important to control the water content to that
is just sufficient for giving adequate workability.

2.2.8 Machines available for making compressed blocks

A number of machines have been developed in various parts of the world for making
compressed blocks. The compacting pressure of a hand operated simple machines like
Cinva ram is about 2 N/mm while a motorised press could provide about 10 N/mm
(Bryan, 1988a). The manual machines can have compaction transferred through
mechanical means such as in Cinva ram. It could be through hydraulic pistons as in
Brepak machine developed at Building Research Establishment of United Kingdom.
25

Such machines can deliver up to 10 N/mm compacting pressure. In Brepak machine, the
compression mechanism of Cinva ram machine is replaced with a hydraulic piston. For
large outputs, motorised machines have been produced where compaction pressures can
be in the range of 10 N/mm (Houben & Guillaud, 1989).
2

In this section, soil block making machines used in Sri Lanka are described in detail
while the characteristics of other machines are given in tabular form in Table 2.6 (Houben
& Verney, 1989). These machines are generally categorised as light manual, heavy
manual, motorised and industrial units in Auram Press 3000 manual.
Table 2.6: Details of some of the cement stabilised soil block making machines (Houben
and Verney, 1989)
Machine Name

ELLSON
(heavy manual)
ASTRAM
(light manual)
TARA
BALRAM
(heavy manual)
CERAMEN
(heavy manual)
DYNATE PRE
4M
(Motorised)
CINVA RAM
(light manual)
Auram Press
3000 (heavy
manual)
AIT
interlocking
(light manual)

Size of block
(cm)
a) 29 x
b) 29 x
b) 30 x
c) 23 x
a) 23 x

14 x 9
19x9
14 x 10
19 x 10
11 x 5.5

Compaction
ratio
1.7:1
1.7:1
1.8:1

Number of
blocks per
cycle
1
1
1
1
1

Output
per hour

2
1
4
4

300
150
250
250

5 men

90
80
56
56
124

Labour force
required
8 to 12 men
5 men
5 men

a) 22 x 10.7 x 7
b) 29 x 14 x 8
a) 40 x 20 x 20
b) 40 x 15 x 2 0

2:1

a) 29 x 14 x 9

1.5:1

40

4 men

a) 29 x 14 x 9
b) 24 x 24 x 9

1.65:1
1.65:1

1
1

100

6 men

a) 29 x 14 x 9

1.5:1

40

4 men

2:1

8-10 men

2.2.8.1 Cinva r a m machine

Cinva ram was designed by Rural Ramirez in Inter-American Housing Centre (CINVA)
in 1952 (Guillaud et al., 1995). This is the oldest, low cost portable soil block press.
This machine has been used for housing construction in many parts of the world. The
compaction ratio is 1.5:1. These blocks can generally satisfy the design strengths
required for single storey houses, which are generally in the range of 0.25 - 0.4 N/mm
2

26

with light roofing materials. This machine is made entirely of steel and consists of a
mould box with a cover. The mould box also has a movable base plate connected to a
piston. The whole unit is mounted on a heavy wooden base board to provide stability
during operation.
After greasing the sides of the mould the soil mix is filled in making sure that the corners
are properly filled and slightly compressed by hand. When the machine is operated, it
will first compress the block and then release the block by ejecting it. Then the green
block can be removed and carefully stacked for curing.
A comprehensive block testing programme was reported by Perera (1994) for the blocks
manufactured with Cinva ram machine. The variation of block strength with 0%, 2%,
4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 15% and 20% cement percentages by weight have been investigated.
Six soil samples with different fines (clay and silt) percentages were used. The
compressive strengths were presented at the ages of 7 days and 28 days. The 28 day wet
compressive strengths were also reported. The wet compressive strength of blocks were
obtained after soaking in water for a minimum of 96 hours. A summary of the test results
are given in Table 2.7. The details of the testing programme can be found in Perera
(1993).
Table 2.7 Summary of test results for Cinva ram machine (Perera, 1994)
Cement %

Average
compressive
strength (N/mm )
7 day
0.85
1.21
1.60
1.76
2.13
2.47
3.32

Average
compressive
strength (N/mm )
28 day
1.31
1.98
2.73
3.20
3.65
4.35
5.50

2
4
6
8
10
15
20

Average wet
compressive
strength (N/mm )
28 day
0.32
0.49
0.76
1.29
1.70
1.93
2.70
2

In order to determine the wall strengths that can be achieved with Cinva ram blocks, a
panel testing programme was carried out by Perera & Jayasinghe (1995). The panel sizes
used were two blocks in length and five blocks in height. The blocks used for the
construction of panels were not cured, but kept in shade after casting. The results
obtained were given in Table 2.8. These results also show that Cinva ram machine gives
low compressive strengths. However, these strengths could be sufficient for single storey
houses provided with roofs where light roofing materials such as asbestos are used.

-4.

27

Table 2.8: Characteristic compressive strength of panels made with Cinva ram blocks
(Perera & Jayasinghe, 1995)
Fines %

Cement %

Average
compressive
strength of uncured
blocks (N/mm )
0.955
0.955
0.71
0.79
0.43
0.47
2

20%
25%
30%

2%
4%
2%
4%
2%
4%

Characteristic
- compressive
strength of panels
(N/mm )
0.255
0.333
0.306
0.348
0.279
0.278
2

2.2.8.2 The A u r a m Press 3000

The Auram Press 3000 is manufactured by AUREKA, at Auroville India. The practical
output is about 100 blocks per hour with three men working on the machine and three
men for mixing and stacking. During operation, the lid is closed manually and it unlocks
and opens automatically with the movement of the lever. Different moulds can be fitted
on the frame which are either square or rectangular in shape. The height of block can be
adjusted with washers from 5 cm to 10 cm, depending on the compression ratio required.
The compacting pressure varies from 2.7 to 5.3 MPa.
In this machine, compression and ejection mechanisms are operated in the same direction,
hence more efficient than Cinva ram machine. This leads to a higher output. The
compaction ratio is adjustable from 1.6 up to 1.9. It is 1.65 for a block of height 90 mm.
The press is self stable without any extra brace and two men are required to move the
machine by haulage. It is possible to manufacture block sizes of 290 mm x 140 mm x 90
mm, 240 mm x 240 mm x 90 mm or many other sizes by using appropriate moulds.
2.2.8.3 Modified Cinva r a m Interlocking block press
The interlocking blocks do not require any mortar joints in the masonry work. Positive
and negative frogs provided on top and bottom of the blocks facilitate interlocking with
each other. Grout holes are filled with 1:6 cement, sand slurry to give continuity in the
vertical direction of the wall.
A locally manufactured modified Cinva ram interlocking block press was used for a
detailed testing programme carried out at University of Moratuwa (Perera & Jayasinghe,
1995). Both bending strength and panel strengths were determined for a number of soil
types and different percentages of cement. The panels constructed using blocks from this
machine have given rather low strengths. This can be attributed to the long mortar
columns formed to give the continuity for the interlocked wall. Since the thin mortar
columns formed by using the cement sand slurry of 1: 6 are slender, they tend to fail by

28

buckling. Buckling of mortar columns will cause cracking in the blocks thus causing
them to disintegrate. This machine may need some modifications such as making the
mortar columns discontinuous to obtain satisfactory results. A summary of test results
are given in Table 2.9.
Table 2.9: Bending strength of blocks and characteristic compressive strength of wall
panels made with interlocking blocks (Perera & Jayasinghe, 1995)
Fines %

Cement %

Bending strength
(N/mm )
0.104
0.181
0.095
0.158
0.157
0.104
0.281
2

25%

30%

35%

40%

2%
4%
6%
2%
4%
6%
2%
4%
6%
4%

Characteristic compressive
strength of panels (N/mm )
0.233
0.197
0.287
0.173
0.219
0.214
0.231
0.274
0.340
0.148
2

2.2.9 Construction of structures with cement stabilised soil blocks

When building with cement stabilised soil blocks, in addition to the design concepts
pertaining to the masonry construction, there are few "good practises" that should be
followed. These can be summarised as follows (Guillaud et al., 1995):
1. Limitations on the plan layouts and opening sizes: The designer should be willing
to adopt simple building systems that are compatible with the properties of the
blocks such as good compressive strength, but low tensile, bending and shear
strengths.
2. Protection of building elements: The designer should be willing to adopt design
principles and building solutions, which are suitable for building with earth.
These can be the use of large eaves or water repellent coatings to reduce the
excessive moisture movements which is a main cause of degradation. ,
3. Quality controlling: It is necessary to ensure that the execution of the building
work is carefully carried out with certain level of quality controlling. This is
specially true for loadbearing cement stabilised soil block construction since the
material strengths obtained with economical low cement contents are just
sufficient to satisfy the safety margins imposed by the partial factors of safety
used in masonry design.

29

With due consideration to these good practices, cement stabilised soil blocks have been
successfully used for single storey houses, two storey houses with loadbearing walls, and
multi-storey buildings such as hostel buildings (Guillaud et al., 1995, Middleton, 1985).
These structures have been constructed in a number of countries including France,
Australia, Morocco, Guyana, Saudi Arabia, India etc.
2.2.9.1 Foundations for cement stabilised soil block buildings
The foundations should fulfil two functions in buildings constructed with cement
stabilised soil blocks. Those are as follows (Houben & Guillaud, 1989):
1. provision of adequate distribution of wall loads to prevent failure of soils below
the foundation and to provide adequate strength against disintegration of
foundation due to settlements or earthquakes.
2. minimisation of ingress of moisture through the foundation since earth is
inherently vulnerable to fluctuations in moisture content.
Thus the use of good foundation material such as random rubble masonry will be
essential. Proper drainage also should be provided around the foundations.
The possibility of providing a reinforced concrete tie beam at the plinth level should also
be considered. It was shown by Jayasinghe & Maharachchi (1998) that provision of a tie
beam at window sill level can serve the dual purposes of reducing cracks due to thermal
movement while enhancing the resistance of the structure to foundation settlements. It
was reported by McHendry & May (1984) that the provision of adequate continuity by
using reinforcement can enhance the earthquake resistance of stabilised soil walls.
2.2.9.2 Provision of openings in walls
Size and location of openings should be carefully selected in order to minimise
concentration of stresses. The following undesirable features were identified (Guillaud et
al., 1995):
1. Making of openings too long thus placing excessive load on lintels. The
maximum length of openings should be determined depending on the strength of
blocks which depends on cement and fines content, and the compaction ratio.
2. Locating of openings immediately next to the corner of the buildings, making the
corner to buckle.
3. Locating two openings too close to each other leading to a pier which may be
liable to buckle.

30

The following rules have been suggested as good practices for cement stabilised soil
block walls (Guillaud et al., 1995):
1. In a wall, the ratio of voids to total surface areas should not exceed 1:3 and voids
should be evenly spaced.
2. The overall length of openings should not exceed 35% of the length of the wall.
The length of each opening should not exceed 1.2 m.
3. The minimum distance of 1.0 m should be left from the edge of the wall. When
two adjacent openings form a pier, it should at least be 0.6 m in length.
It was reported by Chandrakeerty (1991 b) that for blockwork construction, careful
consideration should be given at the design stage in dimensioning the structure and
openings. Failure to do so would result in considerable inconvenience and higher cost.
Wall openings should be designed and constructed to dimensions that minimise the
cutting of units at the site as shown in Figure 2.3. This leads to wastage of material and
slow down the speed of construction. The same concepts should be adopted for cement
stabilised soil blockwork as well.
For cement stabilised soil block buildings, the guidelines given in Table 2.10 were
suggested by Middleton (1987) on the distance between two adjacent openings.
Table 2.10: Minimum distance between adjacent openings of cement stabilised soil block
walls (Middleton, 1987)
Wall thickness (mm)
250
300
350
400
450

Minimum distance between

adjacent openings (mm)
1100
1000
900
800
700

It was reported by Lilley and Robinson (1995) that in rammed earth walls, openings with
curved arch shapes have performed better than rectangular openings where concentrated
loads were applied at the centre of the openings. This may be an indication that heavy
concentrated loads should be avoided within the span of openings when openings of
rectangular shape are used.
2.2.9.3 Plasters and coatings
According to Bryan(1988 b), surface erosion could occur when driving rain or abrasive
wind blown sand causes mechanical damage and then wash away the loosened material.
Thus, when soil is used for building construction, good detailing and stabilisation could

31

eliminate this problem. Many sheltered cob walls, which was a traditional earth
construction in United Kingdom, has survived without any surface coatings over long
durations sometimes exceeding one hundred years (Saxton, 1995).
For the climatic conditions prevailing in Sri Lanka, resistance to rain penetration is one of
the most important functions of a building envelope. This should be achieved by
controlling the rain penetration resistance of masonry walls (Chandrakeerthy, 1991 a).
Rain penetration is defined as the penetration of water into a wall either through the
surface of the wall or through leakage at openings such as windows and doors. Common
entry paths are through pores in the face of the masonry units and mortar, through cracks
in masonry units and mortar, or through improperly sealed cracks between masonry and
other building elements. Such entry paths can be substantially cut off in walls when
external finishes such as renderings are applied. It is also possible to use large overhangs
for these buildings.
As regards to rain penetration, bond strength of mortar is more important than its
compressive strength. Thus the use of lime in mortar is preferred in this respect since it
improves the workability and water retentivity of mortar, which is essential for maximum
bond (Chandrakeerthy, 1991 a).
It was reported^ Jamal & Sheikh (1987) that cement stabilised soil block walls can be
made water resistant by painting them with liquid sodium silicate. It was recommended
to apply three coats of sodium silicate at two day intervals to the exterior walls.

2.3 C O N C R E T E F L O O R S Y S T E M S
In multi-storey construction, a suitable floor system should be used. The material usually
used in Sri Lanka is reinforced concrete. Timber floors also have been used successfully
in some houses, but may not be appropriate in present day context since timber is a scarce
material. The concrete floor slab systems generally used in multi-storey buildings can be
presented diagramatically as below. The detail descriptions of these systems are given in
the sub sections to follow.

one
way
slabs

two
way
slabs

pan
joist
slabs

flat
slabs

waffle
slabs

32

precast beam
& insitu
slabs

precast
beam &
slabs

2.3.1 Floor systems used in multi-storey buildings

An appropriate floor system is an important factor in the overall economy of two storey
houses. Reinforced concrete floor systems can be grouped into two categories:
1. one-way slabs in which the slab spans in one direction between supporting beams
and walls
X

2. two-way slabs, in which the slab spans in orthogonal directions.

In both systems, advantage of continuity over interior supports is utilised by providing
negative moment reinforcement in the slab.
The floor systems that have been used in buildings can be categorised as follows (Smith
&Coull 1991):
1. one way slabs on beams or walls,
2. two way slabs on beams or walls,

3. one way pan joists and beams,

4. one way slab on beams and girders,
5. two way flat plate,
6. two way flat slab, and
7. waffle flat slab.
2.3.1.1 One way slabs on beams and walls

^_

A solid slab up to 200 mm thickness, spanning continuously over walls or beams up to

7.5 m apart provides a floor system requiring simple formwork with simple reinforcement
(Figure 2.4). The thickness used for residential buildings vary between 115 mm to 150
mm. This system is heavy and inefficient in its use of both concrete and reinforcement
(Smith & Coull, 1991).
2.3.1.2 Two-way slab on beams
The slab spans two ways between orthogonal set of beams that transfer the load to the
columns and walls (Figure 2.5). The two way system allows a thinner slab and is
economical than one way slabs in the utilisation of concrete and reinforcement. The
maximum length-to-width ratio for a slab to be effective in two directions is
approximately 2 (BS 8110, 1985).

33

2.3.1.3 One way pan joists and beams

A thin, mesh-reinforced slab sits on closely spaced cast-in-place joists spanning between
major beams which transfer the loads to the columns (Figure 2.6). The slab may be as
thin as 60 mm while the joists are in 150 mm to 500 mm in depth and spaced 600 mm to
900 mm. The slab acting in composite with joists form in effect a set of closely spaced Tbeams capable of spanning up to 12 m (Smith & Coull, 1991).
2.3.1.4 One-way slab on beams and girders
A one-way slab spans between beams at a relatively close spacing while the beams are
supported by girders that transfer the load to the columns (Figure 2.7). The short
spanning slab may be thin, from 75 mm to 150 mm thick, while the system is capable of
providing long spans up to 14.0 m (Smith & Coull, 1991).
2.3.1.5 Two way flat plate
The uniformly thick, two way reinforced slab is supported directly by columns or
individual short walls (Figure 2.8). It can span up to 8.0 m in the ordinary reinforced
form and up to 11.0 m, when post-tensioned, specially in apartment and residential
buildings where the imposed loads are not large. It can be economical in buildings due to
saving obtained with simple formwork and reinforcement (Taranath, 1988).
2.3.1.6 Two way flat slab
The flat slab differs from the flat plate in having column heads and drop panels (Figure
2.9). The column heads increase the shear capacity while the drop panels increase both
the shear and negative moment capacities at the supports, where the maximum values
occur. Thus, two way flat slabs can carry heavier loads than flat plate (Taranath, 1988).
2.3.1.7 Waffle flat slab
A slab is supported by a square grid of closely spaced joists with filler panels over the
columns (Figure 2.10). These joists carry loads simultaneously in both directions. The
slabs and joists are pored integrally over square, domed forms that are omitted around the
columns to form the filler panels. The forms which are of sizes up to 750 mm square and
up to 500 mm deep provide a geometrically interesting soffit, which is often left without
further finish (Taranath, 1988).
2.3.2 Alternative floor systems used for houses in S r i L a n k a
The conventional one way solid slabs, two way solid slabs and flat slabs have been used
in residential buildings of Sri Lanka. However, due to shortage of timber and bamboos
used for shuttering work, a number of alternative systems have been developed recently.
These systems minimise the usage of formwork and falsework. They can be identified as:

34

1. Precast prestressed concrete beam and insitu cast slab system developed at
National Engineering Research and Development centre (Kulasinghe,1998).
2. Precast prestressed concrete beam slab system with hollow blocks finished with a
screed.
3. Precast reinforced concrete beam and insitu cast slab system adopted for two
storey houses constructed at Koralawella where walls were constructed with
Auram Press 3000 blocks.
2.3.2.1 Precast prestressed concrete beam and insitu cast slab systems
This system consists of precast prestressed concrete beams of trapezoidal shape as shown
in the Figure 2.11. The beams are cast with heights varying from 100 mm to 175 mm.
Since prestressed concrete beams are used, those should be manufactured at factory
conditions. These beams are recommended for spans varying from 3.0 m to 6.0 m.
Those are located at 600 mm centres and a 50 mm slab is constructed by using a
shuttering suspended from the beams. The reinforcement used for the slab is only 50 mm
x 50 mm square mesh with 3 mm diameter wires. In this system, precast beams spaced at
600 mm centres can be seen from below.
The reinforced concrete slab of 50 mm thickness is cast using prefabricated shutter
panels, which are suspended from the precast beams with binding wire. The top of the
shutter, which is lined with a removable thin plastic liner, is kept one inch below the top
of the precast beam. The reinforcement mesh is supported on top of the precast beams
and a 50 mm thick concrete is cast embedding 25 mm of the beam. No props are required
except for long spans of over 4.5 m where a prop is placed at the centre of the precast
beams to prevent unacceptable deflections (Kulasinghe, 1998).
2.3.2.2 Precast prestressed concrete beam and slab systems with hollow blocks
This floor system consists of precast prestressed concrete beams spaced at 572 mm,
which support infill blocks spanning between them. This floor system is similar to that
reported by Moss (1993). A 50 mm thick screed is laid on top of this system to give a
continuous top surface. The reinforcement is 50 mm x 50 mm square mesh or 6 mm
diameter mild steel bars at 200 mm centres in both ways. The arrangement is shown in
Figure 2.12. The main advantage of this system is that it gives a flat soffit. No formwork
or falsework is required for the construction.
2.3.2.3 Precast reinforced concrete beam and insitu cast slab system
This slab system was used successfully for a few two storey houses constructed using
cement stabilised soil blocks as a loadbearing material at Korelawella, Moratuwa. It
consists of a precast reinforced concrete beams of size 150 mm x 150 mm with the

35

reinforcement arrangement shown in Figure 2.13. The slab was cast insitu using a set of
formwork which was suspended from the beam. Hence, no falsework was required. The
shuttering could be reused thus minimising the formwork cost. The reinforcement
requirement also could be reduced since the span of slabs was small.

2.3.3 O t h e r floor systems

A precast reinforced concrete beam and plank system was developed in India to use as
roof slabs in cost effective houses (Jindal et al., 1984). This system is quite similar to one
way pan joists and beam system described in Section 2.3.1.3. The exception is the ability
to construct this system without any formwork. The joists are located at a spacing of 1.5
m. The details of the roof slab system is given in Figure 2.14 a and b . In this system,
the structural efficiency is improved by using small spans for slabs, thus leading to a
reduction in the amount of concrete and reinforcement. This slab system developed for
roof slabs could be extended for floor slabs as well. For this, it is necessary to determine
suitable member sizes and to evaluate the dynamic behaviour with respect to floor
vibrations.

j^.

Another precast roof system that could be constructed successfully is long span brick
panels (Chitharanjan, 1986). In a concrete slab, the concrete below the neutral axis is
used only to locate the reinforcement and to provide sufficient corrosion resistance to
reinforcement. This fact was used very effectively in brick panel roof slabs. In this
system, slab panels were precast using the following method. The reinforcement cage
was laid on the ground supported by cover blocks. Bricks were placed within the
reinforcement cage so that adequate cover can be provided for the reinforcement. The
spacing between the bricks were filled up with concrete. Then, a thin layer of concrete
was laid covering the bricks which will take compression when the panel is subjected to
flexure. The bricks will act as an infill material in the tension zone. The advantage is
that certain amount of concrete is replaced by a cheaper material thus leading to a cost
saving. The cost saving depends on the cost difference between a brick and the cost of
concrete for the volume of a brick. It was reported by Rao et al. (1983) that the roof slabs
made with long span brick panels have shown corrosion of reinforcement to a certain
degree four years after the construction, which was attributed to insufficient cover to
reinforcement.

2.3.4 M e m b r a n e action in one way slab strips

Generally it is considered that membrane forces will develop in one way restrained slabs
only in the post yield stage when the collapse mechanism is formed. However, it was
reported by Lahlouh & Waldron (1992) that membrane forces develop right at the on set
of cracking in concrete, well before the yield of the reinforcement has been reached.
Hence, the benefits of compressive membrane action apply not only to the ultimate limit
state but could also be available under working load conditions.

36

The development of the membrane action can be explained by considering the movement
of the neutral axis, with the on set of micro cracks. When the slab is loaded there can be
micro cracking in the slab as shown in Figure 2.15. As soon as these cracks form, the
neutral axis will move towards the compression face with a corresponding axial extension
of the slab through the tension zone.
If these extensions are prevented by external
restraints to a certain extent, the movement of the slab neutral axis is sufficient to induce
the membrane forces as shown in Figure 2.15.
The reinforced concrete beam and plank system reported in Section 2.3.3 has one way
thin slabs spanning on to beams and walls. When this slab system is used for a floor slab,
some of the slab panels, specially of those located in the interior of the building could be
benefited by the membrane action. The membrane action can enhance the load carrying
capacity and also control the deflections associated with over loading.

2.3.5 Load testing of slabs

Load testing involves the systematic application of known test loads to a structure or part
of it, and an assessment of the measured response of the structure under the influence of
those loads. The guidelines for load testing a structure is given in Section 9 of BS 8110 :
Part 2 : 1985. The methods of load testing and precautions to be taken are explained with
a lot of details in Menzies (1978), Jones & Oliver (1978), Bungey (1982).
The following important observations have been highlighted by Menzies (1978):
1. The strength of floors, as built, does not necessarily correspond with the strength
for which those were designed. This often happens since the reinforcement
provided will generally depend on the available bar sizes. Hence, often, the area
provided could exceed the reinforcement area required.
2. The degree of recovery can be important to assess the response of a slab, when the
deflections are within the allowable limits.
3. When the stiffness of a structure is high giving very small deflections, the
percentage recovery becomes less significant.
In composite systems, there can be a considerable amount of load sharing between
adjacent members. The degree of load sharing can be predicted by using a simple
formula which considers that slab behaves as a linear elastic member. The load carried
by each member can be predicted with respect to the deflection of the member (Moss,
1993).
W

= ^ - ^

(2.6)

2A

37

where W = the load on r beam

8 = the deflection of the r beam
ZW = sum of the corresponding beam loads
Z8 = sum of the corresponding beam deflections
r

,h

When carrying out a load test for a composite slab systems, it is important to consider the
effects of movements caused by environmental temperature changes which can alter the
thermal gradient across the depth of construction.
In some cases these thermal
movements can be in excess of the deflections due to applied loads and also could be in
opposite direction, thus resulting in a net upward movement (Moss, 1993). Therefore, to
make an assessment of the response of the structure under the influence of test loads,
compensation needs to be made for the influence of the environmental changes on the
load induced deformations. In order to overcome the influence due to environmental
temperature changes, the following action can be taken. Before the start of the load test,
deflection should be taken for a period of time to establish the extent of any interference
such as thermal movements (Menzies, 1978). If substantial movements are measured, it
is necessary to make allowance for them in the deflections measured when the load test is
in progress.
2.3.6 Stiffness increases in slabs due to non structural screeds
In composite floor systems assembled with different elements, the screeds can have a
considerable influence on the structural behaviour with respect to the increased stiffness
and greater load distribution characteristics. The most effective type of screeds are those
of concrete which are bonded to the slab.
It was shown by Moss(1994) that for one way spanning slab panel, the effective flexural
rigidity of the composite section can be calculated using the following equation:
2

E Ieff = Z (1-S) + k (E I it + E I ed) /k

un

scre

where E I it and E I eed are the individual flexural rigidities for the structural units and
on assumed width of screed. Z is the lever arm between neutral axis position in the
screed and the structural unit.
scr

un

k = [ l/E j|A j + 1 /E ed A
un

un

scre

scree(

j]

and s = % slippage /100

For fully bonded screeds, slippage can be considered as 0 %.
2.3.7 V i b r a t i o n a l characteristics of slab panels
The problem of occupant induced vibrations in buildings is one of growing importance.
Until recently, this problem was thought to be confined to floors of timber or steel

38

composite construction. When light concrete floors are used, those can be sufficiently
light and flexible to give rise to disturbing levels of vibrations.
Assessment of floor vibrations requires knowledge of the level of vibrations that will
cause disturbance, the dynamic characteristics of the floor, and the response of the floor
to the occupant loads. It was reported by Williams and Waldron (1994) that most of the
methods available for determining the dynamic response can underestimate the response
of the structure and hence should be used carefully.
According to Schuller (1990), light weight long span floor structures may be susceptible
to dynamic excitation, such as that due to people walking or dancing. Such activities
cause typical periods of 0.25 to 0.5 seconds. Thus, the floors having a natural period of
vibration of 0.2 seconds or more are liable to develop resonance, together with motions
objectionable to humans.

2.4 S U M M A R Y
The construction industry is one of the largest consumers of engineering materials. The
shortage and rising prices of the traditional materials such as cement, bricks, sand and
timber are encouraging those in the construction industry to look for alternative materials.
This is necessary not only from the point of view of maintaining a lower construction cost
but also to relieve pressure on the existing supply and to reduce associated environmental
degradation.
An appreciable saving in cost also can be achieved through the use of locally available
materials especially indigenous materials found in the vicinity of the construction. The
saving comes both in terms of materials as well as transportation costs. One such
material is laterite soil. It is readily available and hence a cheap material found in most
parts of Sri Lanka. It is easy to work with, requires less skill, and hence it encourages and
facilitates unskilled individuals and groups of people to participate on self help basis. It
offers a very high resistance to fire destruction and provides a comfortable built
environment due to its high heat insulation properties.
With increasing population and associated rapid rate of urbanisation, there is a growing
concern in many developing countries to find cheaper solutions to the problems of
providing decent and affordable shelter to the majority of the population. When
alternative building materials are proposed to meet the above, it would require a thorough
understanding of their properties and detailed investigation to determine the suitability for
a particular form of application.
When alternative building materials are selected it is very important to consider the
durability of the materials very seriously. If the alternative building materials are not as
durable as the conventional materials, life time cost of cheaper materials can be more than
the life time costs of more expensive, durable counterparts. The durability requirements

39

for different parts of the building should be stated as the minimum service life expressed
in years or as resistance to some environmental agents.
When alternative building materials are introduced there can be some sociological
problems to be overcome than technological. This comes with the social acceptance of
alternative building materials. For example, many people may not like living in earth
houses because they may denote a low social status. Thus, when earth is used to produce
cement stabilised soil blocks, those should be as strong, durable and aesthetically
appealing as burnt clay bricks.
When alternative building materials are used, they must be able to withstand the
environmental agents.
In climatic conditions that prevail in Sri Lanka, there can be a
number of weathering agents such as solar radiation, rain and air constituents, biological
agents such as termites and fungi, and mechanical agents such as winds and floods. Thus,
it would be necessary to assess the resistance against each of these agents and to take
appropriate protective action to ensure the required service life.
When developing
could be adopted:

alternative building materials for Sri Lanka the following strategy

1. If there is a possibility to produce alternative materials which are as good as

traditional material by using locally available materials without causing
environmental degradation, then those should be developed scientifically so that
engineers will be able to use them with confidence.
2. If the present application of traditional materials can be further optimised, it
should be pursued with a proper scientific background.
In this research work, the first approach was used with cement stabilised soil blocks
using laterite soils. In this case, Auram Press 3000 machine giving a compaction ratio of
1.65 was selected for the experimental investigation since it could produce blocks which
are strong enough for loadbearing two storey building construction. The buildings
constructed using these blocks can be made as attractive as those built with traditional
materials. Since laterite soils are available in most parts of Sri Lanka, the cost of blocks
also could be comparatively lower than burnt clay bricks. It was also shown by
Ranasinghe (1997) that the levelling of lands containing laterite soil hills could be
advantageous with respect to reaching the ground water sources using open wells and
also levelling of the land makes it more attractive to house builders. Hence, it can be
considered as an activity that does not degrade the environment very much.
The second approach has been used to optimise the concrete floor slabs. The traditional
solid slab construction with thickness ranging from 100 mm to 125 mm, though
aesthetically appealing , does not optimise the use of concrete and steel. This is because
the concrete below the neutral axis, which can be about 75-90% of the depth, does
contribute to the dead weight while merely providing cover to reinforcement to prevent

40

corrosion and providing depth required for controlling deflections. In lightly loaded solid
slabs of low spans, the reinforcement requirement is generally not governed by the
flexural requirements, but by the need to control cracking. On the other hand, the
reinforced concrete beam slab construction with precast slabs explained in Section 2.3.3
can be an attractive alternative since it optimises the use of concrete while minimising the
area of reinforcement required. This has the added advantage of precast construction,
which eliminate the use of traditional bamboo and timber falsework and formwork, thus
forms a more environmentally friendly alternative. The only drawback of this system is
that it could be aesthetically less appealing for some since the beams spaced at 1.5 m are
visible. On the other hand, some others might find it more attractive than a flat soffit
obtained with traditional construction.
The research information gathered from literature and those found in this research for
cement stabilised soil blocks can be illustrated as follows.
Selection of soils for blocks
Selection of stabilisers
Manufacturing of blocks

Information
available in
literature

Mortars suitable for blockwork

Strength properties of blockwork

Cement
stabilised soil
blocks

Strength data for blocks and

blockwork
Development of quality
controlling measures for
blockwork construction

Information
found in this
research for
blocks having
a compaction
ratio of 1.65

Design methods for blockwork

as a loadbearing material

Guidelines for construction of

two storey residential buildings
Cost studies for cost
comparison purposes

41

The research information gathered from literature and those found in this research for
concrete floor systems can be illustrated as follows.

Insitu cast floor systems

used for slabs
Precast floor systems

Information
available in
literature

Precast roof slab systems

Behaviour of floor systems

Concrete floor systems

Design methods for precast
beam slab systems
Information
found in this
research for
reinforced
concrete
precast beam
slab systems

Construction techniques
for beam slab systems

Behaviour of precast componenets

and slab systems

Cost studies for cost

comparison purposes

The detailed testing programme carried out for cement stabilised soil blocks is presented
in Chapter 3. The detailed experimental programme carried out for the composite precast
beam slab system is given in Chapter 4. The design study carried out to determine the
feasibility of using the composite beam slab system with cement stabilised soil block
loadbearing walls is presented in Chapter 5. A detailed cost study which could be useful
for comparison of the proposed alternative materials with traditional materials is
presented in Chapter 6.

42

100

80
WILL
60

40

Si
20

<
CL

COARSE
STONES 1 GRAVEL , SAND
200

20

.FINE SAND
0,2

SILT

0,02

,CLAV
0,002

SIZE OF PARTICLES
PASSING THROUGH SIEVE (mm)

Figure 2.1: Boundaries of grading curve for soils suitable for stabilisation (Guillaud et al.
1995)

p.

Mortar

4
^

Block

Figure 2.2: Elastic theory of failure of brickwork

43

'Ml.

.
1

1
1

11

vI

^ 1

1
1

S|

k-v
is

1
i

1
1

K->

^>A

I-

l :

I kl ^ 1

t,

blocks need cutting

I no wastage
of blocks

Figure 2.3: Selection of dimensions and locations of opening to minimise cutting of

Figure 2.7: One way slab on beams and girders

Figure 2.8: Two way flat plate

Figure 2.9: Two way flat slab

Figure 2.10: Waffle flat slab

45

insitu cast concrete

50 mm
25 mm
100- 175 mm
prestressed concrete beam
600 mm

Figure 2.11 Precast prestressed concrete beam system with insitu cast slabs

T50 mm screed

tprecast beam

hollow block

Figure 2.12 Precast prestressed concrete beam slab system with hollow blocks and insitu
cast screed

R6 at 200c/c

Figure 2 . 1 3 : Precast beam and insitu cast slab system used for Koralawella houses

-4.

46

10 | 10 | 10 |

Lc

m
6

3 Nos.

6 0 20mm c/c
( Clear cover. 1-5 cm ',
SEC. 1-1

4^
SEC

R . C PLANK
-3- 6mm

h
2-2

M.S. bar

6 m m 0 M.S. bars
20 c/c

30C-m

30 Ci-o

L_3.

t1 5 0 / 130

cm

L- SECTION R . C PLANK - 3-3

1 No. 6 m m 0 tie bar

2 Nos. 6mm 0 bars-

-6mm 0 stirrups e 13 cm. c / c

A
-~5
15 c m

t4

3 5 0 / 280 / 200
2 Nos. 12 | 1 No. 10 $ (For 35 c m joist)
0,
2 Nos. 10 $ ( for 200 & 280 cm. joists )
L-SECTION OF R.CJOIST

0, Tie

0.

Tie bar

6 0.13 cm c/c

bar
6 0.13cm c/c
6 tj) 2 Nos.
6

15

6 0 , b a r 2 Nos.
12

J,

2 Nos.

10 $ 1 No.
-10

$ 2 Nos.

SEC A- A
FOR 200 & 280 era LONG R. C-JOIST

SEC-A-A
FOR 350 cm.R.CJOIST

Figure 2.14(a): Precast reinforced concrete beam and plank system used for roof slabs
(Jindal etal., 1984)

47

Figure 2.14(b): Precast reinforced concrete beam and plank system used for roof slabs
(Jindal et al., 1984)

48

Figure 2.15: Compressive membrane action in axially restrained reinforced concrete slabs
(Lahlouh & Waldron, 1992)

49