You are on page 1of 11

The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th

to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

Character of lime as an alternative stabilizer to improve the long term strength of mud
concrete block
Chameera Udawattha1* and Rangika Halwatura 2
1,2 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa
*udawatthe@gmail.com , TP: +94777222658
Abstract: The Mud concrete block (MCB) is a novel walling unit manufactured using
cement as stabilizers to provide adequate compressive strength and durability. Even
though the cement has been used as a stabilizer, the energy content of the cement
demands a study to replace cement with an alternative stabilizer. This experimental
study was conducted to prepare mud concrete block using lime as a replacement for
cement in order to improve long-term build up the strength of the mud concrete block.
Several proportions of lime were taken into the experimental criteria and the destructive
method of compressive strength test according to (test method) was used to understand
the effectiveness of different formulas of the lime-MCB mixture.
The study shows that mud concrete blocks prepared with an optimum quantity of lime
along with 4% cement have led to the continuous development of compressive strength.
However, the strength improvement delays even take months to come to the optimum
strength. Interestingly, mud blocks made of cement alone shows short period strength
improvement. Therefore, the study needs to re-attend at the chemical formulation and
stabilization effect of lime addition to mud concrete block. Finally, adding lime as an
alternative stabilize would benefit by reducing cost as well as it can improve the long-
term durability of the mud concrete block.
Keywords: Mud concrete block; stabilization; Lime; cement; compressive strength

1. Introduction Sri Lanka is a middle income developing


The very first civilizations such as country; the country does not have the
Mesopotamia (dated 6000 years) and Indus luxury of importing building materials. Not
valley civilization (date 5000 years back) use only the country is poor, it needs to build
of earth as a building material. Earth is the much affordable housing and accommodate
most abundantly available material and is the booming population. Therefore, as a
invariably the main construction material. nation the country should look into
Earth as a walling materials has a number of affordable building materials and yet eco-
environmental benefits. For an instance, friendly enough to make no harm to the
walling materials made out of earth have the natural setting island, thus provides the
lowest embedded energy, high thermal suiTable structural capacity to accommodate
mass, providing the essential thermal the urban context requirement in the country
comfort and maximizing the eco-friendly (Nanayakkara, Udawattha, & Halwatura,
qualities such as recyclability and 2017).
reusability. Using earth as a walling material Therefore, the countrys careful
is not a novel concept. But the development consideration has to be given to the
of the earth as a walling materials needs suitability and adaptability of such methods
lots of Research and developments. Because, and technologies, due to the reason that,
the raw application of earth as a walling most of modern and highly sophisticated
materials doesnt suit in an urban context, methods and technologies can create
and may pose serious practical difficulties economically adverse conditions to the
(Udawattha & Halwatura, 2017). developing countries by draining their
resources to procure sophisticated
technology from developed countries.
122
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

Hence, discoveries of Sri Lankan ancestors In order to gain more strength to the soil
(wattle and daub) and develop structures, early man used a straw and dried
it with modern technologies such as leaves(Christoforou, Kylili, Fokaides, &
developed stabilizers would be a
Ioannou, 2015). This was initially used the in
considerably advanced research problem
the Mesopotamian civilizations where they
(Udawattha, Arooz, & Halwatura, 2016c). In
addition to the cost, earth as a walling used sun-baked bricks and the main
material gives cooling effect and structural stabilizer was strewed. Use of straw and soil
cooling to reduce the outdoor temperature called sod bricks, called terrone in Spanish,
into favourable indoor temperature The sod is that combination of a heavy mat
(Udawattha & Halwatura, 2016c; of grassroots, which may be found in river
Udawattha, Galabada, & Halwatura, 2017;
bottomlands and grasslands. This was
Udawattha & Halwatura, 2016a; Udawattha,
Arooz, & Halwatura, 2016a). popular in Mesopotamian civilization since
The shelter is the secondary main the entire civilization was based on
requirement for a human being (Corvaln, grasslands. Not only early civilizations but
Hales, McMichael, Program, & also European settlers on the North
Organization, 2005) (Pogge, 2008). Perhaps American Grasslands found that the sod
shelter (building envelope) is considered as walls least likely to deteriorate due to harsh
building third skin(Gratia & De Herde,
weather conditions. And sod walls were
2004). Constructing this third skin for
mankind is considered as the construction once all-encompassing used for the walls of
technology(Edgerton, 2011). Therefore, the houses in Ireland, Scotland, and Iceland,
higher commitment has been emplaced on where some turf houses may still exist as a
the development of building construction tradition of sod brick.
technology (Morel, Mesbah, Oggero, & After the sod brick invention, mankind
Walker, 2001).
invented baked brick such as sun-baked
Using earth as primary building materials to
brick and kiln-baked bricks. The main
construct shelter has an age of humankind
stabilizers of the sun-baked bricks and kiln
(Raddin, 1964 ; Padavic & Mulligan, 2002).
baked bricks are the mud (dust). Therefore,
Earth structures are a type of building made
not all the types of soil are suiTable for this
of largely from soil and soil-related building
manufacturing. But there are many
components. The soil was most popular
structures made of sun-baked bricks and
because of its availability on earth. Even
kiln-baked brick on earth. Indus valley
from the very beginning cradle of the
civilization is one of the most famous users
civilization soil (earth) may be combined
of sun-baked bricks and kiln baked bricks
with other materials, stabilizers, compressed
(Udawattha, Arooz, & Halwatura, 2016c;
and/or baked to add strength. Gaining the
Udawattha & Halwatura, 2016a).
strength and improving the strength of the
Lime and other carbonate chemicals were
soil was the only issue to resolve other than
used to strengthen the soil and used to build
building out of the soil. Because the soil was
structures. There have been many
the most economical building materials for
experiments to use lime, the famous wattle
early man to use; it is the most affordable
and daub walls made in European countries
walling material for the world and may have
have the same materials combination of
a low environmental impact both during and
earth and lime. By adding lime to the soil
after construction (Udawattha & Halwatura,
they expected more lifespan(Amu,
2016b ; Pacheco-Torgal & Jalali, 2012).
Bamisaye, & Komolafe, 2011). Because

123
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

carbonated soil structures have more (Udawattha, Jayasinghe, & Halwatura,


compressive strength than just earth 2017).
structures. Cement and lime consume a large a) Sieve analysis
In order to classify the soil sieve analysis
amount of energy at their production stage,
was carried out to check the particle size
therefore the embedded energy of cement distribution of existing soil.
and lime are very expensive (Cai, Shi, Ng, &
Coarse Medium Fine SILT/CLAY
GRAVEL
Tang, 2006; Amu et al., 2011; Dias & SAND SAND SAND
#4 #10 #40 #200
Pooliyadda, 2004; Monahan & Powell, 2011). 100

The accession of lime to the soil water 90


mixture produces (Ca+2) and (OH)
80
(Conshohocken, 1997). In cation exchange,
bivalent calcium ions (Ca+2) are 70
interchanged by univalent cations. The Ca+2
60
ions link the soil minerals (negative)
unitedly. This process strengthening the 50

bond between the soil particles. The 40


remaining anions (OH) in the solution are
% Passing
30
responsible for the increased alkalinity.
Alkalinity is the acidic capacity of the soil- 20
lime mixture. More the alkaline can helps to
10
develop the bond and strength of the block
(Alhassan, 2008). The silica and alumina in 0
10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01
the soil minerals become soluble and
absolved by the addition of lime when the Particle Diameter (mm)
pH excess more than 12.4. The reaction
Figure 1: Particle size distribution of soil used
between the mixture shown in equation 1
for testing
and 2 (Vejmelkov, Keppert, Kerner,
Rovnankov, & ern, 2012; Sezer, Inan, 3. Preparation of soil composition
Yilmaz, & Ramyar, 2006). Studying of Variety of two or few
characteristics at once will not be accurate
and can be led to a wrong conclusion. Hence,
only the presence of lime proportion was
varied for the convenience of the study. The
(Equation 1: Long-term hydration with lime) moisture content of all mixtures was
maintained at a constant level. Selected
2. Methodology moisture content level was 15% of the total
The basic necessitate is to understand the dry mixture of the dry weight of the mixture
strength development of mud concrete block and it was decided after considering the
stabilized by using lime. Thus, the study was workability of all the mixtures (Udawattha,
started by altering the cement (key stabilizer et al., 2017).
of mud concrete block). Then different ratios Further, 4% of cement for each and every soil
of lime were added and the strength and mixtures was added to gain an additional
durability of lime stabilize mud concrete strength for the convenience of testing
block were tested. The strength development compressive strength of cubes. The lime
was checked following time gaps such as 7 percentage was varied from a mixture to a
days, 14 day, 21days, 28 days, two months, 3 mixture and the soil mixtures shown in Table
months, 6 months and 1 year. The testing 1 were prepared to study the strength
was started after conducting following development. Here lime was used as an
studies in order to generalize the study alternative stabilizer.

124
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

MATERIALS similar soil conditions in of the soil


(Udawattha, Arooz, & Halwatura, 2016b).
The different materials used in this work are:
The soil was subjected to several laboratory
soil, cement, and lime
tests as specified by ASTM standards. The
A. Soil
mineralogy and character of the soil are
The soil was selected from the university
shown in the Table one and the Figure 2.
premises. The soil was selected considering
the previous studies conducted with the
Table 1: Soil Characteristics
Constituents/ properties Values Constituents/ properties Values
Textural composition Mineralogical constituents Kaolinite 45
Sand 46.00% Mineralogical constituents Dickite 40
Silt 44.00% Quartz 05
Clay 10.00% Calcite 10

Atterberg limits Physio-chemical characteristics


Liquid limit, % 31
Plastic limit, % 17 pH 6.5
Shrinkage limit 10 Methylene blue 0.18
Plasticity index, PI 14 Organic matter, % 0.12
Water content, % 9.5 Optimum (Wc), % 10.74
Activity coefficient 0.77 Max. dry density (c), kg/m3 1650
Product (PI M) 644

Peak shown minerals are

Kaolinite Al2Si2O5(OH)4

Dickite (Al2Si2O5 (OH)4)


Intensity

studied in order to understand the chemical


Figure 2: Soil chemical composition
formulation of the soil shown in Figure 2.
2) Chemical analysis and mineralogy 4. Block fabrication for testing
analysis of soil a) Preparation of soil
As the soil was taken from university The soil was selected from the university
premises, the mineralogy of the soil was premises. A grave laterite soil was selected to

125
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

Table 2: Mix design and experimental program


Sample design Lime proportion Cement Proportion Soil (<20mm Sieve)

No. Days Sample % Kg % Kg % Kg


Name
7 days LC1 0% 0 4% 1.6 96% 38.4
14 days LC2 4% 1.6 4% 1.6 92% 36.8
21 days LC3 8% 3.2 4% 1.6 88% 35.2
28 days LC4 12% 4.8 4% 1.6 84% 33.6
60 days LC5 8% 1.6 4% 1.6 92% 36.8
90 days LC6 8% 1.6 4% 1.6 92% 36.8
180 days LC7 8% 1.6 4% 1.6 92% 36.8
360 days LC8 8% 1.6 4% 1.6 92% 36.8
7 days L1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 40
14 days L2 4% 1.6 0% 0 96% 38.4
21 days L3 8% 3.2 0% 0 92% 36.8
28 days L4 12% 4.8 0% 0 88% 35.2
60 days L5 8% 1.6 0% 0 96% 38.4
90 days L6 8% 1.6 0% 0 96% 38.4
180 days L7 8% 1.6 0% 0 96% 38.4
360 days L8 8% 1.6 0% 0 96% 38.4
develop the lime stabilized the earth blocks. specimens were cast into 100mmX100mm
The soil was sun dried to remove all the molds
water in the soil. The existing soil of 14 %( see
the Table 1). After that soil was mixed with 4) Data collection and pre-processing
following mixtures in order to understand After mixing soil prepared according to
the suitability of lime as stabilized to develop above-mentioned proportions, water was
the long-term strength development of Mud added (30% of total dry weight) little by little
concrete block. and mixing was done manually. After
3) Manufacturing of Soil Cubes finishing mixing, the mixture was poured
Soil cubes were cast for 5 different soil-lime into 100mm 100mm 100mm molds by 3
mixtures which are shown in Table 1. layers and each and every layer was
Following proportions were calculated after compacted by using 25 number of blows.
considering existing literature about lime Once the casting process was completed, soil
and soil mixtures. The idea of using cement cubes were cured for 7 days and after 7 days,
was to understand the quality of the lime 14 days, 21 days, and 28 days, cubes were
mixture against an original mix of MCB, tested by using compressive strength
cement, and soil. For each soil mixtures, 24 machine to find the compressive strength of
cubes were cast and cured by using gunny cubes. Both dry and wet strength
bags. Half of them to check the wet compressive strength were checked. Before
compressive strength and another half for checking the wet compressive strength,
dry compressive strength. The test relevant cubes were immersed in water for
126
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

24 hours before testing to obtain saturated


surface condition.

5) Curing
In this study, two methods of curing were
used: a humid atmosphere and a humid
atmosphere immersion with gunny bags.
After intermixture, the samples were put on
a Table , covered by a gunny bag and then
kept in a humid atmosphere for periods
mentioned in Table 2.

Figure 4: testing the mix moisture content.


b) Compressive strength

A compressive strength test was done


according to ASTM C 67 at 28 days. The
dimensions of each test cubes were
measured before soaking them in water and
calculated the plan area. The test cubes were
Figure 3: Mould used for brick making.
then soaked in water for 24 hours and tested
5. Laboratory tests for the compressive strength-testing machine
The stabilized bricks have undergone for wet compressive strength. The minimum
different laboratory tests: Moisture condition
strength requirement for strength is 2 N/
test, Compressive strength in the dry and
wet status. mm2.
a) Moisture condition test 6) Capillary absorption
The mud concrete is a novel material Capillary absorption test consists of placing
developed at the University of Moratuwa, the lime stabilized mud concrete block
sample on a humid surface. The voids
The developed soil, cement and water was
(permeability effect) of the block help to
15%-20% dry weight of the total mixture absorb water. The weight of the blocks was
(Udawattha et al., 2016b). But the for the measured after 7 days and the value was
experiment purpose, the moisture condition evaluated in comparison with the dry
was tested and evaluated. Because this study weight.
utilizes lime instead of cement. The mix
moisture content was tested to understand
the value needed to stabilize the mud
concrete block. The moisture condition was
very important to create bonds between soil
lime and cement.

Figure 5: Capillary Absorption test


127
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

7) Cold Water absorption moisture condition to develop the lime


The cold water absorption test is for stabilized mud concrete block mixture.
evaluating the density quality standard of After the sieve analysis and particle
paving blocks. The testing was carried out by distribution study, the next step was to find
using ten whole paving blocks from similar out the most suiTable mix proportions and
condition samples developed by the study. the manufacturing method for lime
The specimens were dried in a ventilated stabilized mud concrete block. As per the
oven at a temperature of 105C to 115C until results indicated in Table 3, the best wet
they attained a substantially constant mass. compressive strength was shown when the
All the specimens were cooled to room moisture content was between 14% to 15%.
temperature and then their weights of And it was confirmed used for the future
specimens as (M1) were measured. Then, the experimental development.
dried specimens were immersed completely
Table 3: Moisture content and dry
in clean water at a temperature of 27+2C for
compressive strength
24 hours (see Figure 5Error! Reference
source not found.). The specimens were Moisture Average dry compressive
% strength ( N/mm2)
removed and any traces of water wiped off
No 15s 30s
with a damp cloth and the specimens were
vibration vibration vibration
weighed to obtain (M2).
3.6 1.89 0.9 1.83
The cold-water absorption, percentage by
4.23 2.61 2.37 3.75
mass, after 24 hours immersion in cold 4.68 1.98 2.4 2.31
water was measured and calculated using 3.09 0.93 0.48 0.63
the following formula shown in Equation 2. 4.17 3.75 3.63 3.75
2 1 4.44 4.29 3.57 4.2
= X100 (2)
1 3.81 1.53 0.87 2.7
(Equation 2: Coldwater absorption 4.05 3.24 3.27 3.66
calculating equation) 4.26 3.96 4.53 3.78
The present test consists of immersing the 4.26 1.83 1.62 1.8
soil samples in water and measuring the 4.83 2.49 2.88 3.21
increase in weight during 24 h. The 5.52 2.07 2.19 1.77
absorption is evaluated in dry weight
percentage.
6. Results
The results show that use of lime as an
alternative stabilizer for mud concrete block
shall provide long-term strength rather than
quick hardening. Perhaps, the cement along
mix do develop a strength within 7 days.
However, the lime mix takes a minimum of
21 days gets the required strength. Thus, the
lime helps to develop long-term hardening
process.
6.1. Moisture content and strength
development.
The moisture condition is good to
understand the value of appropriate
128
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

Moisture content and average The initial experiment results


dry compressive strength 4
5.00N/mm2
3.5
4.50N/mm2

4.00N/mm2 3

3.50N/mm2
2.5
3.00N/mm2

2.50N/mm2 2

2.00N/mm2
1.5
1.50N/mm2

1
1.00N/mm2

0.50N/mm2 0.5

0.00N/mm2
1.08%
3.09%
3.60%
3.81%
4.05%
4.17%
4.23%
4.26%
4.26%
4.44%
4.68%
4.83%
5.52%

0
Lime (%) 14days 30days 60days 90days

No vibration 15s vibration Lime 0% Lime 4%


30s vibration Lime 8% Lime 12%

Figure 6: Moisture content and average dry Figure 7: The initial experiment results
compressive strength
After the initial experiment, the long-term
6.2. Compressive strength development of compressive strength.
Compressive strength is an important After the experiment with lime, cement and
parameter in this study to understand the lime experiments were started. The idea of
strength development by lime. The adding is to understand the initial mix
evaluation of the quality of this block needs
development of cement-lime for mud
the standard testing procedure.
6.2.1. Initial experiment concrete block. And also, the idea of utilizing
The optimum lime percentage is 8%, which lime is to alter the cement. Therefore, this is
gives maximum strength for mud concrete necessary to understand the effect of cement
block. on lime stabilized mud concrete block
mixture.
Table 4: the initial experiment results Table 5: the experiment results with
with lime cement
LIME Cement 14days 30days 60days 90days
LIME 14days 30days 60days 90days (%)
(%)
(%)
0% 4% 0.27 1.58 1.60 1.60
0% 0.27 1.58 1.60 1.60
4% 4% 0.29 2.60 2.68 2.72
4% 0.29 2.60 2.68 2.72
8% 4% 0.68 3.04 3.20 3.30
8% 0.68 3.04 3.20 3.30
12% 4% 0.75 3.07 3.30 3.51
12% 0.75 3.07 3.30 3.51
129
The 7th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 16th to 18th December 2016

ICSECM2017-PaperID

The experiment results with Lime Propertions


6.00N/mm2

4.00N/mm2

2.00N/mm2

0.00N/mm2
Lime (%) 14days 30days 60days 90days

Lime 0% Lime 4% Lime 8% Lime 12% Series5 Series6 Series7 Series8

Figure 8: The initial experiment results


Table 6: The long-term strength development in lime-stabilized mud concrete blocks.

Duration Strength
14days 0.68N/mm2 The Long term strenght development by lime
One Month 3.04 N/mm2 for Mud concrete block
Two 6
Months
3.2 N/mm2
4
Three
Months
3.3 N/mm2
2
Four Strenght Vs Time
Months
4.56 N/mm2 0
Five Lime (%) 14days One Two Three Four Five Six
Months
4.59 N/mm2 Month Months Months Months Months Months
Six Months 4.52 N/mm2
21 days gets the required strength. Thus, the
Figure 9: The long-term strength development lime helps to develop long-term hardening
in lime-stabilized mud concrete blocks. process.
Finally, 8% of lime soil mixture was selected The optimum lime percentage is 8%, which
to study the long-term development of lime gives maximum strength for the mud
stabilized mud concrete block. And the concrete block. The study was extended to
results show that it would take six months to understand any chemical that can help to
stabilize the mud concrete block. develop the hardening process of the lime
6.3. Cold water absorption results stabilized mud concrete block.
Thus, a cold-water absorption test was Cold water absorption results
Lime Precentage
carried out and results obtained was 12
calculated using equation 1. The requirement 10 Cold water Absorption
of cold water absorption results is to 8
understand the permeability factor of lime 6
stabilized mud concrete block. If the cold 4
water absorption is below 5% means less 2
amount of pores spaces within the materials 0
and good for masonry constructions. Lime 0% Lime 4% Lime 8% Lime 12%

7. Conclusion
Figure 10: cold water absorption results
The results show that the use of lime as an
alternative stabilizer for mud concrete block And the lime stabilization is slow and steady
shall provide long-term strength rather than than cement. This has both pros and cons
quick hardening. Perhaps, the cement along when applying it into real-world masonry
mix do develop a strength within 7 days. unit construction. In addition to the strength,
However, the lime mix takes a minimum of it was found that the lime can reduce the
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

porosity factor of the lime. Thus fewer pores Energy, 29(4), 561580.
were developed by the finer content of lime. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2003.10.001
And both soil and lime fine help to reduce Edgerton, D. (2011). Shock Of The Old:
the pores factor. Technology and Global History since 1900.
The study should be extending to Profile Books. Retrieved from
understand the shrinkage due to the lime
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=
stabilization. Even though this study
&id=IdVGikvzIHoC&pgis=1
suggests that lime help improve the long-
term strength of mud concrete block, the Gratia, E., & De Herde, A. (2004). Natural cooling
shrinkage factor needs to be studied strategies efficiency in an office building with
separately in order to understand the real a double-skin faade. Energy and Buildings,
world application of lime stabilized mud 36(11), 11391152.
concrete block. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2004.05.004
References Monahan, J., & Powell, J. C. (2011). An embodied
Alhassan, M. (2008). Permeability of Lateritic Soil carbon and energy analysis of modern
Treated with Lime and Rice Husk Ash, 12(2), methods of construction in housing: A case
115120. study using a lifecycle assessment framework.
Amu, O. O., Bamisaye, O. F., & Komolafe, I. A. Energy and Buildings, 43(1), 179188.
(2011). The Suitability and Lime Stabilization https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.09.005
Requirement of Some Lateritic Soil Samples as Morel, J. C., Mesbah, a., Oggero, M., & Walker, P.
Pavemen. Journal, 2(1), 2946. (2001). Building houses with local materials:
Cai, Y., Shi, B., Ng, C. W. W., & Tang, C. sheng. Means to drastically reduce the
(2006). Effect of polypropylene fibre and lime environmental impact of construction.
admixture on engineering properties of clayey Building and Environment, 36(10), 11191126.
soil. Engineering Geology, 87(34), 230240. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.07.007 1323(00)00054-8
Christoforou, E., Kylili, A., Fokaides, P. A., & Nanayakkara, N. H. V. T. N., Udawattha, C., &
Ioannou, I. (2015). Cradle to site Life Cycle Halwatura, R. U. (2017). Investigation on
Assessment (LCA) of adobe bricks. Journal of Elements and their Fraction of Housing
Cleaner Production, 110. Construction Cost. In 2017 Moratuwa
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.016 Engineering Research Conference (MERCon)
Conshohocken, W. (1997). Standard Practice for (pp. 277282).
Laboratory Preparation of Soil-Lime Mixtures http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/documen
Using a, 90(Reapproved 1996), 56. t/7980495/?reload=true
https://doi.org/10.1520/D3551-08.2 Pacheco-Torgal, F., & Jalali, S. (2012). Earth
Corvaln, C., Hales, S., McMichael, A. J., Program, construction: Lessons from the past for future
M. E. A., & Organization, W. H. (2005). eco-efficient construction. Construction and
Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Health Building Materials, 29, 512519.
Synthesis. World Health Organization. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.1
Retrieved from 0.054
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr= Padavic, M., & Mulligan, M. (2002). Resurrection:
&id=vKIXu2Z-9QsC&pgis=1 Rammed Earth Construction.
Dias, W. P. S., & Pooliyadda, S. P. (2004). Quality Pogge, T. W. (2008). World Poverty and Human
based energy contents and carbon coefficients Rights. Polity. Retrieved from
for building materials: A systems approach. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=
&id=co77RZDwqNAC&pgis=1

131
The 8th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earls Regency Hotel, Kandy, Sri Lanka from 7th to 9th December 2017

ICSECM2017-65

Raddin, J. B. (1964). The Sumerians: Their History, Udawattha, C., & Halwatura, R. (2016b).
Culture and Character. Archives of Internal Embodied energy of mud concrete block
Medicine (Vol. 113). (MCB) versus brick and cement blocks.
https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1964.002800 Energy and Buildings, 126(0), 2835.
80145038 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.04.059
Sezer, A., Inan, G., Yilmaz, H. R., & Ramyar, K. Udawattha, C., & Halwatura, R. (2016c). Thermal
(2006). Utilization of a very high lime fly ash performance and structural cooling analysis
for improvement of Izmir clay. Building and of brick, cement block, and mud concrete
Environment, 41(2), 150155. block. Advances in Building Energy Research,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.12.0 126(0), 2835.
09 https://doi.org/10.1080/17512549.2016.12574
Udawattha, C., Arooz, R., & Halwatura, R. (2016). 38
Energy content of walling materials- a Udawattha, C., & Halwatura, R. (2017). Life cycle
comparison of mud concrete blocks , bricks cost of different Walling material used to
cabook and cement blocks in tropics. In build affordable housing in tropics. Case
International Conference on Sustainable Built Studies in Construction Materials,
Environment 2016. 7(November 2016), 1529.
http://www.civil.mrt.ac.lk/conference/ICSB https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2017.04.005
E_2016/ICSBE2016-54.pdf Udawattha, C., Jayasinghe, D., & Halwatura, R.
Udawattha, C., Arooz, R., & Halwatura, R. (2016). (2017). Investigation of bottom ash as
Manufacturing framework and Cost alternative stabilizer for Mud Concrete Block.
optimization for Building Mud concrete In The annual International Research
Blocks (MCB). In Mobilization modern Conference of KDU (pp. 37).
technologies for sustainable development in Vejmelkov, E., Keppert, M., Kerner, Z.,
Asia (p. 112). Rovnankov, P., & ern, R. (2012).
Udawattha, C., Arooz, R., & Halwatura, R. (2016). Mechanical, fracture-mechanical, hydric,
New Earth Walling Material: Integrating thermal, and durability properties of lime-
Modern Technology into Ancient Mud Wall. metakaolin plasters for renovation of
In 7th International Conference on Sustainable historical buildings. Construction and
Built Environment 2016, Kandy, Sri Lanka, Building Materials, 31, 2228.
16th to 18th December 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.1
Udawattha, C., Galabada, H., & Halwatura, R. 2.084
(2017). Mud concrete paving block for
pedestrian pavements. Case Studies in
Construction Materials, 7(March), 249262.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CSCM.2017.08.005
Udawattha, C., & Halwatura, R. (2016a).
Comparative Study of Embodied Energy in
Different Walling Materials. In Proceedings of
the International Forestry and Environment
Symposium 2016, Department of Forestry and
Environmental Science, University of Sri
Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka (p. 2016).
http://journals.sjp.ac.lk/index.php/fesympo
/article/view/3090

132

You might also like