You are on page 1of 39

1

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

The Problem

In constructing farm or housing structures, one of the most used construction

materials is Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) and due to its expensive cost, most of the

consumers can’t afford, particularly those who have inadequate budget for construction.

One of the world’s major rice producers is the Philippines and the major by-

products of rice milling are hull or the outer shell of the rice grain. Hull constitutes about

20 to 22 percent by weight of the grain. The hull is made of hard material to protect the

seed during the growing season, and is indigestible to humans. However, rice hull should

not be looked upon as a useless material. In the Philippines, rice hull is used as fuel for

drying purposes, hull briquettes used in domestic stoves as an alternative to liquefied

petroleum gas or LPG. It also serves as bedding or litter and as pillow stuffing in some

parts of the world.

But still, big portions of rice hull are not utilized because of its large volume. It is

even considered as waste dumped into open fields and waterways or burned in open

grounds.

Now, rice hull can be used as aggregate for Rice Hull Block (RHB), a substitute

for Concrete Hollow Block (CHB). Rice hull block is a combination of rice hull, cement

and sand. A wall composed of Rice Hull Block (RHB) units may not have the

compressive strength of ordinary CHB but RHB wall can provide the same function of

Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) wall of a common residential building or farm structure.

Yet it is cheaper and faster to build. (Mangmangon and Reyes, 2008)

2

Results of this study may contribute to our economy particularly to the low-

income consumers in the sense that instead of using CHB, they may now use RHB which

have a similar compressive strength with that of CHB but at a significant lower cost.

Significance of the Study

Results of this study may benefit the following

1. Researchers and students, as their basis for future research on using different

materials such as biodegradable and/or non-biodegradable waste.

2. Farmers and suppliers of construction materials, as their reference in producing

RHB.

Objectives of the Study

This study was conducted to attain the following objectives:

1. Determine the proper ratio of the cement, sand and ground rice hull that will

produce a compressive strength equivalent with the common CHB.

2. Show the difference between common CHB and RHB in terms of weight and

unit cost.

Scope and Limitations of the study

This study was limited to the production and compressive strength testing of Rice

Hull Block (RHB) using different ratios of cement, sand, ground rice hull and water.

3

Time and Place of the Study

This study was conducted from November, 2010 to February, 2011 at the College

of Engineering, Nueva Vizcaya State University, Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya. The

testing for RHB was conducted at the Construction Materials and Testing (CMT)

Laboratory of the Provincial Engineer’s Office of Nueva Vizcaya.

Definition of Terms

Aggregate. Inert material which is mixed with Portland cement and water to

produced concrete.

Compressive Strength. The capacity of a material to withstand axially directed

pushing forces.

Compression Testing Machine. A machine used to determine the compressive

strength of any solid object.

Curing. The process of becoming hard or solid by cooling, drying or

crystallization.

Foot pressure. Application of load equivalent to the average human weight or

about 70kg.

Ground Rice Hull. This is commercially available known as D3 or “TUYO”.

Lignin. A complex organic compound that binds to cellulose fibers and hardens

and strengthens the cell wall of plants.

Litter. Materials such as straw, used as bedding for animals.

Pyrolysis. The chemical process of decomposition under the effect of heat.

Rice hull. The hard protecting covering of rice grain.

Various forms occur widely in the earth’s crust as quartz or cristobalite or tridymite or lechatelierite. Free from viable microorganisms. A white or colorless vitreous insoluble solids. Sterile. 4 Silica. .

With a heating value of 13. their high lignin content can make this a slow process. Rice hull is a good source of energy. Sometimes earthworms are used to accelerate the process. . It was found out that rice hull when burned produced amounts of silica. Rice hulls are organic material and can be composted. The following percentages are obtained by milling and polishing: whole rice 50. 5 Chapter II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE About 20% of paddy consists of husks (hulls). meal 3. points and broken rice 17. 1975). rice hull can sum up to this volume given ideal conditions. 1995 states that 2-3million tons of rice hull materials are generated in the Philippines annually. a very conservative estimate is that only 5% are utilized as fuel. husk 30 (Grist. A ton of rice hull is equivalent to 318 liters of fuel. bran 10. However. the miller may therefore expect to obtain about 75% of rice and it’s by products. while the remaining balance (95%) is either dumped or burned indiscriminately with no regard for environmental degradation. the hulls can be converted to fertilizer in about four months (Wales. dead grain and other extraneous matter. Of this total tonnage. In addition. Nicolas. there is about 5% of dirt. Rice hulls are class A insulating materials because they are difficult to burn and less likely to allow moisture to propagate mold or fungi.900 kilojoules per kilogram. Using vermicomposting techniques. and feeds. 2010). For these reasons it provides excellent thermal insulation.

To produce CRH. . porous. Adding 10%-20% ground gray or white ash to ordinary Portland cement does not affect the strength of the construction materials compared to 100% cement. al. CRH is sterile and is free from disease organisms (Jensen et. Another product that is becoming increasingly popular is the Carbonized Rice (CRH).2010). This is because rice hull contains more than 87% silica. raw rice hull is burned without air so that it will not turn into ash. 2006). CRH results from the incomplete combustion of rice hulls under high heat and oxygen conditions (pyrolasis). 6 Some Filipino researchers have discovered rice hull ash (RHA) as a suitable cement binder in the manufacture of hallows blocks. and hard but brittle (Tacio. CRH is crucial Ingredients of bokashi organic fertilizer and can be used in composting toilets and animal bedding. Adding 30% RHA by weight or 50% RHA by volume to ordinary cement in the manufacture of roof tiles makes the materials light.

Mixing board h. Fabricated PVC molder j. Portland cement d. Calibrated containers g. Electronic weighing Scale b.5cm3. Commercial 5-in concrete hollow blocks (5-in CHB) f. Micrometer caliper The equipments used in this study were the following: a. Screened sand passing ½-in screen c. Compression Testing Machine The standard weight of Portland Cement ( 40kg per bag) was divided into 80 equal parts which is 500gm and the standard volume of construction box (30x30x30cm = 27000cm3) was also divided into 80 equal parts which is 337. Potable water e. . Ground rice hull b. However. All samples were mixed with 500 gm (1 part) of cement and an initial 250 cm3 volume of water. Hand trowel i. 7 Chapter III MATERIALS AND METHODS Materials and Equipments The materials used in this study were the following: a.

There were forty eight (48) ratios (cement: sand : ground rice hull) considered in the study. 1 : 12 : 1 to 1 : 12 : 4 f. 1 : 6 : 1 to 1 : 6 : 4 k. 1 : 2 : 1 to 1 : 2 : 4 g. a. Sand. ground rice hull. water was added in increments of 500 cm3.5 cm3 was used as a measuring container for sand and ground rice hull. 1 : 13 : 1 to 1 : 13 : 4 Procedure 1. 8 if the mixture was too sticky for proper blending. 1 : 4 : 1 to 1 : 4 : 4 i. 1 : 10 : 1 to 1 : 10 :4 d. The mixture is then placed in the PVC molder with inside diameter of 70 mm and a height of 110 mm in three layers and each layer was lightly tamped 8 times with a round tipped 6 mm plain steel rod to eliminate air voids. Preparation of Cylindrical Samples 1. where sand ranges from 2 to 13 parts and ground rice hull ranging from one to four resulting to the following ratios. Mixing and Molding Process. The . 1 : 8 : 1 to 1 : 8 : 4 b. 1: 11 : 1 to 1 : 11 : 4 e.a. Ratios for Cylindrical Samples For ease and simplicity of labor. cement was constant at 1 part and water at an initial volume of 250 cm3. 1 : 3 : 1 to 1 : 3 : 4 h. cement and water was thoroughly mixed together on a clean mixing board using a hand trowel. 1 : 5 : 1 to 1 : 5 : 4 j. 1: 9 : 1 to 1 : 9 : 4 c. A calibrated container with a volume of 337. 1 : 7 : 1 to 1 : 7 : 4 l.

b. Preparation of the CHB Cylindrical Samples To facilitate the comparison of the compressive strength of the samples with the commercial Concrete Hollow Block (CHB). Curing Process. To obtain the sufficient compressive strength. the samples were kept moist by regularly spraying with water for three days which is the same process and duration in curing done by commercial CHB producer.c. 1. Compression Testing All dried Rice Hull Block (RHB) samples were tested for compression using human weight or foot pressure. The mold then was loosened and moved vertically upward in a swift motion. The partially hardened cylindrical samples were transferred to a flat stable surface that is covered from rain. Adapting the same number of days of exposing commercial CHB under the sun. All samples that cracked were eliminated and the remaining samples together with the dried Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) cylindrical samples from a known local manufacturer were brought to the Construction Materials Testing (CMT) laboratory of the Provincial Engineering Office (PEO) to determine their compressive strength . 2. the samples were likewise totally exposed under the sun for four days. Sun Drying Process. 1. 9 molder was then lightly tapped on four sides to ensure that the mixture is settled and would easily separate from the molder. The sample was kept untouched for 30 minutes or until it is hard enough to be moved for curing. CHB mix were taken from a known local CHB plant and made into cylindrical samples.

For comparison. And a standard 12”x12”x12” (30x30x30 cm = 27000 cm3) mixing box was used as 1 part for the sand and ground rice hull. five samples of 5” Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) were bought from a known local supplier and its average compressive strength and weight were also taken at the CMT laboratory. rice hull blocks are then machine made using the same procedures and equipment for producing Concrete Hollow Block (CHB). Then the dried Rice Hull Block (RHB) products were brought to the Construction Materials Testing (CMT) laboratory for compression testing. . 10 Production of Rice Hull Blocks In producing RHB. Adopting the ratio of the cylindrical sample with a compressive strength equal to or slightly more than that of the cylindrical samples of Concrete Hollow Block (CHB). 1 bag (1 part) cement was used.

22. 8. 12. 11 Chapter IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Cylindrical Samples Table 1 shows the performance of the cylindrical samples under human weight or foot pressure. Results showed that the mixture numbers 1. 17. 25. (C:S:GRH) Pressure No. 41. 37. 26. 29. 21. 45 and 46 passed the foot pressure test. 4. 34. Cylindrical Samples Under Foot Pressure Mixture Ratio Foot Mixture Ratio Foot No. 33. Table 1. 5. 9. The remaining cylindrical samples were then brought to the Construction Materials Testing (CMT) laboratory for compression testing. (C:S:GRH) Pressure 1 1:2:1 Passed 25 1:8:1 Passed 2 1:2:2 Failed 26 1:8:2 Passed 3 1:2:3 Failed 27 1:8:3 Failed 4 1:2:4 Passed 28 1:8:4 Failed 5 1:3:1 Passed 29 1:9:1 Passed 6 1:3:2 Failed 30 1:9:2 Failed 7 1:3:3 Failed 31 1:9:3 Failed 8 1:3:4 Passed 32 1:9:4 Failed 9 1:4:1 Passed 33 1:10:1 Passed 10 1:4:2 Failed 34 1:10:2 Passed 11 1:4:3 Failed 35 1:10:3 Failed 12 1:4:4 Passed 36 1:10:4 Failed 13 1:5:1 Failed 37 1:11:1 Passed 14 1:5:2 Failed 38 1:11:2 Failed 15 1:5:3 Failed 39 1:11:3 Failed 16 1:5:4 Failed 40 1:11:4 Failed 17 1:6:1 Passed 41 1:12:1 Passed 18 1:6:2 Failed 42 1:12:2 Failed 19 1:6:3 Failed 43 1:12:3 Failed 20 1:6:4 Failed 44 1:12:4 Failed 21 1:7:1 Passed 45 1:13:1 Passed 22 1:7:2 Passed 46 1:13:2 Passed 23 1:7:3 Failed 47 1:13:3 Failed 24 1:7:4 Failed 48 1:13:4 Failed .

08 3 0. 12 Table 2 shows the compressive strength of three cylindrical samples taken from the CHB plant. Mean Compressive Strength of Rice Hull Block (RHB) Cylindrical Samples Mixture No.76 Mpa 22 1:7:2 72.78 Table 3 shows the ratios with its number of cylinders produced.74 25 1:8:1 70.25 9 1:4:1 70. This was used as the basis for selecting the ratio for making RHB.53 2 0.76 Mpa . Ratio Mean Mean Load Mean Comp.75 34 1:10:2 71.76 Mpa 12 1:4:4 71.76 3 70 0.50 3 0. diameter.73 1 0.25 5 1:3:1 71.76 Mega Pascals.00 3 0.76 0.98 3 0.37 2 0.50 8 1:3:4 70. Table 2. Mean compressive Strength of Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) Cylindrical Samples Sample Diameter Mean Load Comp.75 3 0. mean load. Strength Mean Comp.76 Mpa 26 1:8:2 71.76 = .76 33 1:10:1 71.51 45 1:13:1 71. 34 and 46 have compressive strength equal to or greater than 0.65 3 0. This showed that the mean compressive strength is 0.76MPa.93 3 0.76 2 71 3 0.76 = .75 46 1:13:2 70.25 17 1:6:1 71.77 > . Remarks Diameter Strength(Mpa) 1 1:2:1 71.76 = .73 3 0. (mm) (KN) (Mpa) Strength (Mpa) 1 71.76 Mpa 37 1:11:1 71. and mean compressive strength of the different cylindrical samples.50 41 1:12:1 70.60 1 0.73 3 0.50 3 0. 25. Mixture numbers 9.74 29 1:9:1 71.74 21 1:7:1 70.63 2 0.53 3 0.6 1 0.1 0. Table 3.74 4 1:2:4 71.77 > .00 3 0. 21. These ratios were used in the production of Rice Hull Blocks (RHB).

and 2 boxes of ground rice hull.87 34 1:10:2 400.00 2. compressive strength. of Mean No.33 28536.00 6.00 119.00 2.04 54 11.33 58.00 85904.(Kg) (mm) (mm) (KN) (mm2) 9 1:4:1 399.23 175.67 kg.11 15 11.75 76. Manufacturers use a ratio of 1:13 in producing an average of 50 pieces of Concrete Hollow Block (CHB).67 2.95 Mega Pascals and 11.33 119.95 60.00 2. The mixture that will produce a compressive strength equivalent with the common Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) is 1:13:2 or a mixture consisting of 1 bag Portland cement.00 119. No. This table also showed that RHB has a ratio of 1:13:2 having a mean weight of 11.95 60.17 36 1:13:2 404. 13 Rice Hull Blocks Table 4 shows the size.67 28370.00 25 1:8:1 400. And this mean compressive strength of CHB was the basis for making of Rice Hull Block (RHB) that shown in table 4. Ratio Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Comp. and weight of Rice Hull Block (RHB). 13 boxes of sand.00 28394.33 122. It shows that mixture 9 has the highest mean compressive strength but has the lowest RHB produced.00 119.11 49 11.28 Concrete Hollow Blocks Table 5 shows the mean compressive strength and mean weight are 1.11 38 11.47 21 1:7:1 400. .17 28 11. Table 4: Compressive Strength and Weight of 5-in Rice Hull Blocks (RHB) Mix. Length Width Load Area Strength(Mpa) Blocks Wt.28 kg per block.00 28394.

08 11.00 P 5.92 11.75 11.06 . Table 6. 14 Table 5.62 2 404 120 55 28600 1. Comparison of Direct Unit Cost of Rice Hull Block (RHB) and Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) Material Cost Material Unit Cost Labor Cost Direct Unit Cost (per mix) (per piece) (per piece) (per piece) CHB P 268.80 cent.00 P 5.64 5 398 122 55 28540 1.80 cent.95 11. Weight (Kg) 2 (mm) (mm) (KN) (mm ) Strength (Mpa) 1 405 122 60 28890 2.78 4 407 121 60 28870 2.16 RHB P 284.26 0.77 Mean 1.36 0.67 Cost Analysis Result of the Cost Analysis (Appendix F) shows that Rice Hull Block (RHB) is cheaper than Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) by Php 0.55 3 402 120 50 28500 1.93 11. Compressive Strength and Weight of Commercial 5-in Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) CHB Length Width Load Area Comp. P 6.08 11.10. P 6.

For comparison. cylindrical samples of RHB were prepared. b) to show the difference between common Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) and Rice Hull Block (RHB) in terms of weight and unit cost. sand and ground rice hull that will produce a compressive strength equivalent with the common Concrete Hollow Block (CHB). rice hull blocks were machine made using the same procedures and equipment for producing Concrete Hollow Block (CHB). Rice Hull Block (RHB) is slightly stronger than Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) by 0. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary and Conclusion The purpose of this study were: a) to determine the proper ratio of the cement. All blocks were brought to the CMT laboratory for testing and weighing. The ratio of cement. dried then tested for compression at the CMT laboratory.09 Mega . commercial 5” Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) were also bought. Using different ratios. cured. cured. For comparison. sand and ground rice hull that produced an equivalent compressive strength with Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) is 1:13:2. Adopting the ratio of the cylindrical sample with a compressive strength equal to or slightly more than that of the cylindrical samples of Concrete Hollow Block (CHB). 15 Chapter V SUMMARY. However. cylindrical samples using Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) mix from a known local supplier were also prepared. dried then tested for compression at the Construction Materials Laboratory (CMT) laboratory.

Recommendations Based on the results of study. Rice Hull Block (RHB) with a ratio of 1:13:2 is recommended as Concrete Hollow Block substitute for wall of residential building and farm structures. 3. . Study on the use of ground rice hull as an aggregate for reinforced concrete. B.62%.62%. Study on the use of ground rice hull as an additional raw material for clay products. ands 4. 2. Study on the use of ground rice hull as additional raw material for plastering of Concrete surfaces.39kg or 3. Rice hull block is lighter than concrete Hollow Block (CHB) by 0.34% and the direct unit cost of Rice Hull Block (RHB) is cheaper than Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) by P0. the following are recommended: 1. 16 Pascals or 4.10 or 1.

com/doc/15940714/Bokashi-Nature-Farming-Manual- Phlippines.”Bokashi Nature Farming Manual Philippines” http://www. Donald H. http://en. 2010. J.ph/davao/rice-hull-should-not-go-to-waste Wales. London and New York. Nicolas. NVSU. Nueva Vizcaya.com. http://www.”Abundance of Rice hulls Stirs Imagination” http://www.”Rice hulls”. Jose S.Fifth Edition. Longman.et.1995. . al. 2006. 2008.February.1975.wikipedia. March 7. H.scribd. C.sunstar. and Reyes. 17 Literature Cited Grist.”Rice”.org/wiki/Rice_hulls . N. Unpublished BS Thesis. 2010.”Rice hull Should Not go to Waste”. Mangmangon. ”Investigation of Rice hull as Aggregate in the Production of Concrete Hollow Block”. Jensen. Bayombong.org/greenstone3/nzdl Tacio.greenstone. Henrylito D.

18 APPENDICES .

6 102.55 4111.1 110.3 1:7:1 70.1 112.95 3892.1 112.3 1:6:1 72.1 1:7:1 70.1 1:6:1 72.3 1:2:1 71.9 110.1 1:4:1 70.65 3 21.05 4015.45 3998.82 3 21.10 3859.2 1:2:1 71.05 2 5.2 1:3:4 70.05 3 22.00 4429.______ Project: Thesis_________________________ Location: Nueva Vizcaya State University___ Contrator/ Client: Maricel P.6 113.2 1:4:1 70.15 108.3 110.35 1 4.3 1:4:4 71.95 4003.9 110.2 1:2:4 72.2 1:6:1 71.82 3 1.45 111.54 1 17.1 112.1 1:3:3 70.15 3 1.05 108.65 3881.55 4065.32 1 5.95 4060. Dulnuan and Romelyn P.10 4071.9 108.2 1:4:4 71.4 109.1 112.5 113.1 111.3 112.71 3 9.75 111.95 113.40 3948.65 4009.1 109.10 4082.1 1:4:4 71.35 109.0 112.65 4082.75 4077.2 1:7:2 72.2 1:7:1 71.39 1 12.20 3 .15 4082.55 3975.45 3 9. Serafin s Sample/ Part of Structure Taken/ Diameter Length Area Load Specimen Mark Station Taken (mm) (mm) (mm2) (KN) Cement: Sand: Ground rice hull 1. 19 APPENDIX A Republic of the Philippines PROVINCE OF NUEVA VIZCAYA Bayombong -oOo- OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ENGINEER TEST REPORT ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF CYLINDRICAL SAMPLES PASSING FOOT PRESSURE Date of Test: January 7.70 3914.1 1:2:1 72.50 3 17.15 3997.2 1:3:3 71.85 3 21.94 1 8.4 112.34 110.93 3 17. 2011 Laboratory Billing No.10 4105.3 1:4:1 70.35 111.65 4043.16 2 8.18 1 4.82 3 22.3 1:7:2 71.25 4026.25 3948.94 2 5.20 3 4.1 1:7:2 72.50 3 22.3 1:3:3 72.56 3 12.1 1:3:4 71.85 3970.28 1 12.95 3975.1 1:2:4 71.1 1:2:4 71.51 1 9.

15 3892.1 1:9:1 70.1 1:12:1 70. (Sgd) EDWIN C.28 3 37.45 3 29.25 3914.0 111.6 111.95 3881.05 3970.50 3 29.48 2 45.1 112.90 4009.45 3 Tested by: Evaluated by: (Sgd) EDUARDO J.35 3 CHB 2 1:13 71.80 3898.3 112.85 3 34.95 4026. OLARTE Laboratory Technician II Engineering Assistant .09 2 41.54 3 29.0 110.2 1:13:2 70.75 113.6 109.05 111.1 1:13:2 70.1 1:10:1 71.54 2 41.71 2 41.45 3848.77 3 45.0 109.77 3 33.85 112.6 112.00 3859.3 1:9:1 71.71 3 46.85 3 46.2 1:9:1 71.3 1:8:1 71.95 112.1 1:13:1 71.1 1:8:1 70.55 3959.2 1:8:1 70.30 4009.53 3 26.1 110.30 3981.05 3 25.1 1:10:2 71.15 4065.2 1:10:2 70.51 3 25.55 112.05 111.39 2 37. 20 25.48 3 CHB 1 1:13 71.3 108.85 3964.77 3 33.45 112. JR.53 3 26.85 112.56 3 34.60 3914.15 4065.1 1:11:1 71.35 3 34.19 3 CHB 3 1:13 70.45 3970.20 3942.2 1:11:1 71.00 3942.70 3964.10 4020.2 1:12:1 70.2 112.1 112.10 3848.55 4105.95 112. ONATO.05 4043.2 1:13:1 71.3 1:12:1 70.3 1:10:2 71.4 110.1 1:8:2 71.45 111.2 1:10:1 71.05 3981.2 1:8:2 72.45 108.2 109.

74 1:7:1 70.24 1:2:4 71.77 12 1:4:4 71.35 1 0.75 1:6:1 72. 2011 Laboratory Billing No.25 1:4:4 71.25 1:2:4 72. Serafin Mixture No.75 4 1:2:4 71.51 1:3:3 71.73 1:2:1 71.77 1:4:1 70. Ratio Diameter(mm) Load(KN) Compressive Strength(Mpa) 1 1:2:1 72. 21 APPENDIX B Republic of the Philippines PROVINCE OF NUEVA VIZCAYA Bayombong -oOo- OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ENGINEER TEST REPORT ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF RHB CYLINDRICAL SAMPLES Date of Test: January 7.75 1:2:1 71.1 3 0.4 3 0.50 1:3:3 72.25 1:4:4 71.25 1:3:4 70.25 5 1:3:3 70.25 17 1:6:1 72.1 1 0.95 3 0.3 1 0.1 3 0.34 3 0.76 To be continued…… .15 2 0.78 1:4:1 70.49 8 1:3:4 71.26 9 1:4:1 70.75 1 0.5 3 0.9 3 0.05 2 0.9 2 0. Dulnuan and Romelyn P.1 3 0.1 3 0.6 1 0.78 1:7:1 71.45 1 0.15 1 0.______ Project: Thesis_________________________ Location: Nueva Vizcaya State University___ Contrator/ Client: Maricel P.6 3 0.73 1:6:1 71.73 21 1:7:1 70.35 1 0.3 3 0.4 3 0.

1 3 0. 22 ……. (Sgd) EDWIN C.51 45 1:13:1 71.05 3 0.1 3 0. ONATO.74 25 1:8:1 70.76 1:10:2 70.77 1:10:2 71.95 3 0.0 3 0.75 3 0.75 26 1:8:2 71.1 3 0.74 37 1:11:1 71.45 2 0.6 2 0. OLARTE Laboratory Technician II Engineering Assistant .75 1:8:2 72.76 1:13:1 71.51 1:12:1 70.2 3 0.74 1:7:2 71.95 3 0.9 3 0.Continuation 22 1:7:2 72.6 2 0.50 41 1:12:1 70.85 3 0.3 3 0.76 Tested by: Evaluated by: (Sgd) EDUARDO J.85 2 0.77 1:8:1 71.55 3 0. JR.45 3 075 1:9:1 71.50 1:11:1 71.74 46 1:13:2 70.78 1:9:1 71.78 1:8:1 70.05 3 0.77 1:13:2 70.74 34 1:10:2 71.45 2 0.73 1:7:2 72.6 3 0.4 3 0.76 1:10:1 71.51 1:12:1 70.2 3 0.73 29 1:9:1 70 3 0.75 33 1:10:1 71.3 3 0.

ONATO. (Sgd) EDWIN C.76 3 1:13 70.76 2 1:13 71.78 Tested by: Evaluated by: (Sgd) EDUARDO J. Ratio Diameter(mm) Load(KN) Compressive Strength(Mpa) 1 1:13 71. Dulnuan and Romelyn P. 23 APPENDIX C Republic of the Philippines PROVINCE OF NUEVA VIZCAYA Bayombong -oOo- OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ENGINEER TEST REPORT ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF CHB CYLINDRICAL SAMPLES Date of Test: January 7.0 3 0. Serafin Mixture No. OLARTE Laboratory Technician II Engineering Assistant . JR.1 3 0. 2011 Laboratory Billing No.0 3 0.______ Project: Thesis_________________________ Location: Nueva Vizcaya State University___ Contrator/ Client: Maricel P.

7 28364 170 RHB 1:7:1 400 120.0 28870 60 CHB 1:13 398 122. 2011 Laboratory Billing No: ______ Project: Thesis_________________________ Location: Nueva Vizcaya State University___ Contrator/ Client: Maricel P.0 28410 55 RHB 1:13:2 400 120.7 28364 60 RHB 1:13:2 400 118. OLARTE Laboratory Technician II Engineering Assistant .05 28406 80 RHB 1:7:1 400 119.45 28454 50 RHB 1:10:2 400 119.0 28650 65 RHB 1:13:2 400 120. ONATO.5 28200 170 RHB 1:4:1 408 124.0 28890 60 CHB 1:13 404 120.0 28500 50 CHB 1:13 407 121.0 28550 55 CHB 1:13 405 122. JR.8 28376 80 RHB 1:8:1 400 119.5 29340 185 RHB 1:4:1 400 119.7 28364 60 RHB 1:10:2 400 119. (Sgd) EDWIN C.45 28454 50 RHB 1:8:1 400 119.0 28600 55 CHB 1:13 402 120. Dulnuan and Romelyn P. 24 APPENDIX D Republic of the Philippines PROVINCE OF NUEVA VIZCAYA Bayombong -oOo- OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ENGINEER TEST REPORT ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF MASONRY UNITS Date of Test: February 28.4 28328 70 RHB 1:7:1 400 119.0 28540 55 Tested by: Evaluated by: (Sgd) EDUARDO J.7 28364 70 RHB 1:8:1 400 120. Serafin Sample Part of Structure Length Width(mm) Area(mm2) Load(KN) /Specimen Taken/Station (mm) Mark Taken Cement: Sand: Ground rice hull RHB 1:4:1 390 122.7 28364 70 RHB 1:10:2 400 120.

25 APPENDIX E Cross Section of Hollow Blocks 30 mm 30 mm 30 mm 30 mm 25 mm W 25 mm L C.S.S. = Compressive strength of hollow block P = Load A= (L x 50) + 120 (W-50) L = Length of the hollow block W = Width of the hollow block . = P/A Where: C.

028 m3 Price per box = P170/cu. m. Prices of Raw Materials Sand= P170/cu. Direct Unit Cost of 5” CHB Using 1 bag of cement and 13 boxes of sand (1:13) at a production rate of 50 pieces per mix. .6 kg = P7. 26 APPENDIX F Computation of Cost Analysis 1. computation of unit cost is below: 1 bag PorPtland cement= P203 13 boxes of sand = P65 Material cost = P268 per mix Material unit cost = P268/50 pc.80 Say P8. Volume of 12”x12”x12’ box = (0. = P4.m.028 cu.00 per box of sand Ground rice hull = P3/kg Weight of ground rice hull in 12”x12”x12” box = 2.6 kg Price per box = P3/kg x 2.00 per box of ground rice hull 2.305m)3 = 0. = P5.36 per piece Labor cost was added direct unit cost is P6. x 0.82 Say P5.m.16 per piece.

computation of unit cost is shown below: 1 bag Portland cement = P203 13 boxes of sand = P65 2 boxes of ground rice hull = P16 Material cost = P284 Labor cost was added and the direct unit cost is P6. Direct unit cost of 5” RHB Using 1 bag of cement. 27 3. 13 boxes of sand and. . 2 boxes of ground rice hull (1:13:2) at a production rate of 54 pieces per mix.06 per piece.

28 PICTORIAL PRESENTATION .

29 Front view Top view A photograph of PVC molders .

30 Compression Testing Machine .

31 Cylindrical samples under compression load .

32 A photograph of CHB mixer A photograph of CHB molders .

and water in a mixer . ground rice hull. 33 Mixing the cement. sand.

34 Forming a new RHB .

35 Newly molded RHB .

36 Fresh RHB ready for drying and curing .

37 Measuring the thickness and height of RHB before the compression testing .

38 CHB under compression load .

39 RHB under compression load .