See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320445757

Strength properties of interlocking compressed earth brick units

Conference Paper  in  AIP Conference Proceedings · October 2017

DOI: 10.1063/1.5005648

CITATIONS READS
0 2,436

3 authors, including:

Syahmi Saari B.H. Abu Bakar

Universiti Sains Malaysia Universiti Sains Malaysia
3 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    81 PUBLICATIONS   824 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Interlocking Compressed Earth Brick View project

this is time, I am working on UHSC. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Syahmi Saari on 28 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Strength properties of interlocking compressed earth brick units
S. Saari, B. H. Abu Bakar, and N. A. Surip

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1892, 020017 (2017);

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5005648
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1892/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

Water absorption characteristic of interlocking compressed earth brick units
AIP Conference Proceedings 1892, 020018 (2017); 10.1063/1.5005649

Improvement of torsional resistance from bond strength and reinforcement indexes in fibrous normal strength
concrete beams
AIP Conference Proceedings 1892, 020011 (2017); 10.1063/1.5005642

Preface: Proceedings of the International Conference of Global Network for Innovative Technology and AWAM
International Conference in Civil Engineering 2017
AIP Conference Proceedings 1892, 010001 (2017); 10.1063/1.5005631
 Strength Properties of Interlocking Compressed Earth Brick
Units
S. Saari1, B. H. Abu Bakar1, a) and N. A. Surip2
1
School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Engineering Campus, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang,
Malaysia
2
ICEB Company, ICEB Trading, Lot 223, Padang Temusu, 08000 Sungai Petani, Kedah, Malaysia
a)
Corresponding author: cebad@usm.my

Abstract. This study presents a laboratory investigation on the properties of interlocking compressed earth brick (ICEB)
units. Compressive strength, which is one of the most important properties in masonry structures, is used to determine
masonry performance. The compressive strength of the ICEB units was determined by applying a compressive strength
test for 340 units from four types of ICEB. To analyze the strength of the ICEB units, each unit was capped by a steel plate
at the top and bottom to create a flat surface, and then ICEB was loaded until failure. The average compressive strength of
the corresponding ICEB units are as follows: wall brick, 19.15 N/mm2; beam brick, 16.99 N/mm2; column brick, 13.18
N/mm2; and half brick, 11.79 N/mm2. All the ICEB units had compressive strength of over 5 N/mm2, which is the minimum
strength for a load-bearing brick. This study proves that ICEB units may be used as load-bearing bricks. The strength of
ICEBs is equal to that of other common bricks and blocks that are currently available in the market.

INTRODUCTION
In Malaysia, the conventional bricklaying method is often used by contractors for building construction. This
method is inconvenient in constructions because it is costly and time consuming. The use of IBS (e.g., concrete block)
would reduce the time required for construction. However, IBS cannot significantly reduce construction costs because
of the large quantity of cement needed for the structural member and for plastering the wall with mortar. Therefore,
an alternative method is necessary for developing low cost and rapid construction to replace the conventional
bricklaying method.
The interlocking compressed earth brick (ICEB) is a new construction material in the industry. The use of ICEBs
hastens the construction process. ICEBs eliminate the use of formwork because ICEB unit itself will be the formwork
for the structural member. Given that the shape of ICEB includes holes and grooves, steel can be placed inside each
ICEB unit for reinforcement, thereby significantly reducing construction costs. Using ICEBs can accelerate
construction because it can forgo work for installation and open the formwork for beams and columns.
The installation of an ICEB wall is easy due to the interlocking feature of the ICEB units. The bricks will interlock
through dowels and the wall will automatically align vertically and horizontally. The installation process of an ICEB
wall is faster than normal bricklaying because ICEBs can be dry stacked. After a certain height of an ICEB wall is
stacked, grout will be poured into ICEBs to bond the bricks together.
At present, many types of interlocking dry stacked block and brick are available. These materials differ in size,
shape, and mixture composition depending upon the materials available in the country of origin and the brick- or
block-maker. Several types of interlocking blocks have been invented, including the Mecano, Sparfil, Haener, and
Sparlock systems [1]. The Putra block developed by Thanoon et al. comprises three types of blocks with compressive
strength of 15.2 N/mm2, namely, stretcher, corner, and half blocks [2].
Anand and Ramamurthy developed interlocking blocks called Silblock-1 and Silblock-2 made from cement, river
sand, and 12 mm aggregate [1]. These blocks have three block units (i.e., stretcher, jamb, and corner units) with

Proceedings of the International Conference of Global Network for Innovative Technology and AWAM International Conference in Civil Engineering (IGNITE-AICCE’17)
AIP Conf. Proc. 1892, 020017-1–020017-6; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5005648
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1574-4/$30.00

020017-1
average length, width, and height of 400, 150, and 200 mm. The mean compressive strength of Silblock-1 is 5.42
N/mm2 and 11.59 N/mm2, while that of Silblock-2 is 6.58 N/mm2.
In the ICEB system, Herskedal et al. and Bales developed ICEBs and studied their properties. Herskedal et al. used
a mixture of 74.3% soil, 10% sand, 6.2% cement, and 9.5% water to produce ICEBs and determined an average
compressive strength of 7.76 N/mm2 [3]. Bales et al. produced ICEBs with a compressive strength of 6.03 N/mm2.
Their ICEBs used a mixture of 68% soil, 16% sand, 5% cement, and 11% water [4].

INTERLOCKING COMPRESSED EARTH BRICK

ICEB comprises soil, sand, cement, and water. The manufacturing process of ICEBs requires only low skilled
workers because this method only entails a simple three-stage process. These stages include soil preparation, mix
compression, and curing [5]. For soil preparation, the selection of the optimal soil and mixture content will yield the
ideal ICEBs. Proper compression is necessary to produce ICEBs with good strength. Moreover, curing of ICEBs
requires only the open-air method.
ICEBs have dowels for interlocking joints and holes for grout and reinforcement. ICEBs enable for dry stacking
without mortar by creating interlocking joints between the layers of bricks. Subsequently, grout could be poured into
the holes after ICEBs are stacked. An unskilled laborer can quickly build using ICEBs because it is easier to connect
between such units compared with using the conventional bricklaying method which requires spreading the mortar
carefully to prevent skewed bricklaying. The ICEBs can hasten construction by omitting the work necessary for
installation and opening the formwork for beams and columns as the ICEBs themselves will function as beams and
columns.
ICEBs include several types of bricks and all of them have different sizes and shapes. The size and shape of bricks
vary based on the function and location where they will be placed. The common size of an ICEB brick is 250 mm
long, 125 mm wide, and 100 mm in height. A half size ICEB is available for a location that requires such brick because
ICEB cannot be cut.

MATERIALS AND TEST

The ICEB used in this study was manufactured and supplied by ICEB Trading, a local company located at Sungai
Petani, Kedah. This company produces 13 types of bricks. However, but this research involves only the four ICEBs
commonly used in construction, namely, wall, beam, half, and column bricks. Others brick are less frequently used in
the structural member compared with the aforementioned four types. The wall and beam bricks are made using a
hydraulic compression machine, whereas other ICEBs were made using a manual compression machine. Moreover,
the wall and beam bricks are made in large quantities because both ICEBs are frequently used in buildings compared
with other ICEB types. Figure 1 shows the four ICEBs used in this study.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
FIGURE 1. ICEBs: (a) Wall brick, (b) Beam brick, (c) Colum brick, and (d) Half brick.

020017-2
 In this study, each ICEB unit was tested using a compressive strength test. A total of 340 ICEB units from the four
ICEB types were used in this study (i.e., 100 units of wall bricks and 80 units each of the beam, column, and half
bricks). All tested units were sampled at random as prescribed in Clause 9 of BS 3921 (British Standard Institute,
1985) [6].
The test was conducted based on the specifications of BS EN 772-1 [7]. Both sides of each sample were capped
with steel plates to ensure that both faces have a flat surface for compression. Both top and bottom steel plates that
were used to cap the ICEBs (see Figure 2). All samples were oven dried for 24 h to attain a constant mass among the
ICEB units. Compressive strength was calculated using the total load applied to the brick divided by the net gross area
of the brick. The net gross area is the total area of the ICEB minus by the void area on the brick.

FIGURE 2. Top and bottom steel plates for the beam brick.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

All the experiments conducted to determine the compressive strength of the ICEBs were performed at the Concrete
and Structure Laboratory in Universiti Sains Malaysia. Figure 3 shows the compressive strength graph for the wall,
beam, column, and half bricks. Evidently, the graph distribution for the compressive strength of ICEBs is variable.
However, the average value of the compressive strength is located at the highest frequency in the graph.
Figure 4 and Table 1 show the average compressive strength of the four ICEB types. Table 1 shows that the wall
brick has the highest compressive strength at 19.15 N/mm2 followed by the beam brick at 16.99 N/mm2. The half brick
has the lowest compressive strength at 11.79 N/mm2. The significant factor that causes the higher compressive strength
of the wall and beam bricks compared with those of the column and half bricks is the difference in their manufacturing
methods. The wall and beam bricks were made using a hydraulic compression machine that has a higher compression
rate compared with the column and half bricks, which are made using manual compression. The difference in strength

020017-3
between the wall and beam bricks and the column and half bricks despite being made using the same machine is due
to the variation of the shape under the bricks. The beam and half bricks have U-shaped undersides, whereas the wall
and column bricks have full shapes, thereby giving them higher compressive strength than the beam and half bricks.
Hendry et al. [10] explained that the minimum compressive strength of load-bearing concrete masonry is 5 N/mm2.
Under this condition, all ICEB units can be used as load-bearing masonry units because the average value of the
compressive strength of each ICEB is higher than the minimum requirement. Although the half brick has lower
compressive strength value compared with other ICEBs, it can also be used in construction because it is only used in
the non-structural member in construction.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

FIGURE 3. Compressive strength: (a) Wall brick, (b) Beam brick, (c) Column brick, and (d) Half brick.

20 19.15
Compressive Strength (N/mm2)

18 16.99
16
14 13.18
11.79
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Wall Brick Beam Brick Column Brick Half Brick
FIGURE 4. Average compressive strength of ICEBs.

020017-4
 TABLE 1. Compressive strength.
Brick Type Average Strength Standard COV Range (N/mm2)
(N/mm2) Deviation (%)
Wall Brick 19.15 1.99 10.37 12.60 – 23.76
Beam Brick 16.99 2.03 11.96 10.26 – 21.17
Column Brick 13.18 1.88 14.25 9.07 – 17.22
Half Brick 11.79 3.08 26.17 5.29 – 19.07

Figure 5 shows the crack pattern of the ICEB units after the experiment. The failure mode of the ICEB unit in
compression can be seen as a conical break, which is similar to the failure of the concrete cube. The failure crack
started from the corner edge of the brick and spread to the middle of the brick.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

FIGURE 5. Crack pattern: (a) Wall brick, (b) Beam brick, (c) Column brick, and (d) Half brick.

CONCLUSION
This study presents the results of the compressive strength tests of ICEBs from laboratory investigation. The
following conclusions are drawn.
1. ICEBs produced by a compression machine have higher compressive strength than ICEBs made from manual
compression.
2. All the studied ICEBs can be used as load-bearing structures because their lowest compressive strength (i.e.,
11.79 N/mm2, for the half brick) surpassed the minimum load-bearing compressive strength of 5 N/mm2.
3. The ICEB failure mode is a conical break with cracks occurring at the edge of the brick.

020017-5
 Overall, ICEBs can be used as load-bearing bricks, with strength equal to that of other common bricks and blocks
currently at in the market.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank ICEB Trading for supplying the materials used in this study.

REFERENCES
1. K. B. Anand, and K. Ramamurthy, Journal of Architectural Engineering 6, 45-51. (2000).
2. W. A. Thanoon, M. S. Jaafar, M. R. A. Kadir, A. A. A. Ali, D. N. Trikha, & A. M. Najm, Construction and
Building Materials 18, 445-454. (2004).
3. N. A. Herskedal, P. T. Laursen, D. C. Jansen, and B. Qu, in 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
(2012).
4. C. Bales, C. Donahue, M. Fischer, A. Mellbom, & T. Pearson, Senior Project (2009).
5. F. V. Riza, I. A. Rahman, & A. M. A. Zaidi, in 2010 International Conference on Science and Social Research
(CSSR 2010) (IEEE, 2010), pp. 999-1004.
6. BS 3921, Specification for Clay bricks (British Standards Institute, 1985).
7. EN, BS. 772-1, Methods of test for masonry units. Part 1: Determination of compressive strength (British
Standards Institute, 2011).
8. ASTM C140, Standard test methods for sampling and testing concrete masonry units and related units (ASTM
International 2015).
9. ASTM C67, Standard Test Methods of Sampling and Testing Brick and Structural Clay Tile (ASTM
International 2014).
10. A. W. Hendry, B. P. Sinha, and S. R. Davies, Design of masonry structures (E & FN Spon, 2004).
11. ASTM C90, Standard Specification for Loadbearing Concrete Masonry Units (ASTM International 2014).
12. Wheeler, Geoffrey. Interlocking Compressed Earth Blocks Volume II. Manual of Construction (Center for
Vocational Building Technology, Thailand, 2005).

020017-6
View publication stats