Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluating the flexural strength and failure patterns of cement stabilized rammed earth wallettes reinforced with coir, bamboo and steel

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of coir along with bamboo and steel reinforcement on the flexural strength and failure patterns of cement stabilized rammed earth wallettes. About 10% cement was used as stabilizer and 1% coir of 25 mm length along with bamboo or steel was used as reinforcement for rammed earth wallettes production. To study the bond strength between rammed earth and reinforcement, 20 rammed earth blocks were prepared with bamboo and steel reinforcement and to study the flexural strength of rammed earth wallettes 36 samples were prepared in two categories. First category consists of vertical samples of size 600 mm \(\times\) 230 mm \(\times\) 120 mm (height/length \(\times\) Width \(\times\) thickness) and second category consists of horizontal samples of size 230 mm \(\times\) 600 mm \(\times\) 120 mm (height/length \(\times\) width \(\times\) thickness). The test results show that coir reinforcement improved the bond strength and the highest bond strength was obtained with coir and steel reinforced rammed earth blocks. Coir along with bamboo or steel reinforcement increased the flexural load carrying and lateral deflection capacity of the samples by about 13.42–154.88% and 33.78–76.12% respectively. Rammed earth samples undertake 42.59–63.30% more flexural stress when tested perpendicular rather than parallel to the ramming layers. The current technique of reinforcing cement stabilized rammed walls with coir along with bamboo or steel can be used for constructing internal and external load bearing walls in single or two storey rammed earth houses considering the seismic zone of the area. To predict the ultimate load carrying and lateral deformation capacity of samples, a series of regression analysis was performed using the test data correlating the reinforcement type and loading conditions. With coefficient of correlation R2 > 0.78, the equations obtained from the analysis represent a strong relation between the actual measured and predicted values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dobson S (2015) Rammed earth in the modern world. Rammed earth construction cutting-edge research on traditional and modern rammed earth. Western Australia, D. Ciancio & C. Beckett, pp 3–10

    Google Scholar 

  2. Raavi SSD, Tripura DD (2020) Predicting and evaluating the engineering properties of unstabilized and cement stabilized fibre reinforced rammed earth blocks. Constr Build Mater 262:120845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Miccoli L, Drougkas A, Müller U (2016) In-plane behaviour of rammed earth under cyclic loading: experimental testing and finite element modelling. Eng Struct 125:144–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tennant AG, Foster CD, Reddy BVV (2016) Detailed experimental review of flexural behavior of cement stabilized soil block masonry. J Mater Civ Eng 28:06016004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Miyamoto M, Aoki T, Tominaga Y, Pema (2014) Pull–down test of the rammed earth walls at Paga Lhakhang in the Kingdom of Bhutan. Intl J Sust Const 2:51–59

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wangmo P, Shrestha KC, Miyamoto M, Aoki T (2019) Assessment of out-of-plane behavior of rammed earth walls by pull-down tests. Int J Archit Herit 13:273–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jayasinghe C, Kamaladasa N (2007) Compressive strength characteristics of cement stabilized rammed earth walls. Constr Build Mater 21:1971–1976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tripura DD, Singh KD (2016) Behavior of cement-stabilized rammed earth circular column under axial loading. Mater Struct Constr 49:371–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sangma S, Tripura DD (2021) Flexural strength of cob wallettes reinforced with bamboo and steel mesh. Constr Build Mater 272:121662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Rafi MM, Lodi SH (2017) Comparison of dynamic behaviours of retrofitted and unretrofitted cob material walls. Bull Earthq Eng 15:3855–3869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Reddy BVV, Kumar PP (2011) Cement stabilised rammed earth. Part A: Compaction characteristics and physical properties of compacted cement stabilised soils. Mater Struct Constr 44:681–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jayasinghe C, Mallawaarachchi RS (2009) Flexural strength of compressed stabilized earth masonry materials. Mater Des 30(3859):3868

    Google Scholar 

  13. Tripura DD, Singh KD (2015) Axial load-capacity of rectangular cement stabilized rammed earth column. Eng Struct 99:402–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tripura DD, Gupta S, Debbarma B, Deep RSS (2020) Flexural strength and failure trend of bamboo and coir reinforced cement stabilized rammed earth wallettes. Constr Build Mater 242:117986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Arslan ME, Emiroğlu M, Yalama A (2017) Structural behavior of rammed earth walls under lateral cyclic loading: A comparative experimental study. Constr Build Mater 133:433–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bui TT, Bui QB, Limam A, Maximilien S (2014) Failure of rammed earth walls: from observations to quantifications. Constr Build Mater 51:295–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Karrech A, Strazzeri V, Elchalakani M (2021) Improved thermal insulance of cement stabilised rammed earth embedding lightweight aggregates. Constr Build Mater 268:121075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Arrigoni A, Beckett CTS, Ciancio D, Pelosato R, Dotelli G, Grillet AC (2018) Rammed earth incorporating recycled concrete aggregate: a sustainable, resistant and breathable construction solution. Resour Conserv Recycl 137:11–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kariyawasam KKGKD, Jayasinghe C (2016) Cement stabilized rammed earth as a sustainable construction material. Constr Build Mater 105:519–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Binici H, Aksogan O, Shah T (2005) Investigation of fibre reinforced mud brick as a building material. Constr Build Mater 19:313–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ghavami K, Toledo Filho RD, Barbosa NP (1999) Behaviour of composite soil reinforced with natural fibres. Cem Concr Compos 21:39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yadav JS, Tiwari SK (2016) Behaviour of cement stabilized treated coir fibre-reinforced clay-pond ash mixtures. J Build Eng 8:131–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Raj SS, Sharma AK, Anand KB (2018) Performance appraisal of coal ash stabilized rammed earth. J Build Eng 18:51–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gao Z, Yang X, Tao Z, Chen ZS, Jiao CJ (2002) Experimental study of rammed-earth wall with bamboo cane under monotonic horizontal-load. J Kunming Univ Sci Technol 34:1–4

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tripura DD, Sharma RP (2014) Bond behaviour of bamboo splints in cement-stabilised rammed earth blocks. Int J Sustain Eng 7:24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Meek AH, Beckett CTS, Carsana M, Ciancio D (2018) Corrosion protection of steel embedded in cement-stabilised rammed earth. Constr Build Mater 187:942–953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Srivastava M, Kumar V (2018) The methods of using low cost housing techniques in India. J Build Eng 15:102–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tripura DD, Singh KD (2015) Characteristic properties of cement-stabilized rammed earth blocks. J Mater Civ Eng 27:04014214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hejazi SM, Sheikhzadeh M, Abtahi SM, Zadhoush A (2012) A simple review of soil reinforcement by using natural and synthetic fibers. Constr Build Mater 30:100–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Achenza M, Fenu L (2006) On earth stabilization with natural polymers for earth masonry construction. Mater Struct 39:21–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kesikidou F, Stefanidou M (2019) Natural fiber-reinforced mortars. J Build Eng 25:100786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bouhicha M, Aouissi F, Kenai S (2005) Performance of composite soil reinforced with barley straw. Cem Concr Compos 27:617–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Aymerich F, Fenu L, Meloni P (2012) Effect of reinforcing wool fibres on fracture and energy absorption properties of an earthen material. Constr Build Mater 27:66–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Laborel-Préneron A, Aubert JE, Magniont C, Tribout C, Bertron A (2016) Plant aggregates and fibers in earth construction materials: A review. Constr Build Mater 111:719–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Saha R, Debnath R, Dash S, Haldar S (2020) Engineering reconnaissance following the magnitude 5.7 Tripura earthquake on January 3, 2017. J Perform Constr Facil 34(4):04020052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Miccoli L, Müller U, Gardei A (2011) Structural performances of earthen building materials. A comparison between different typologies, Int Assoc Sci Technol Build Mainte Monum Preserv

    Google Scholar 

  37. Danso H, Martinson DB, Ali M, Williams JB (2015) Physical, mechanical and durability properties of soil building blocks reinforced with natural fibres. Constr Build Mater 101:797–809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Maniatidis V, Walker P (2008) Structural capacity of rammed earth in compression. J Mater Civ Eng 20:230–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hall M, Djerbib Y (2004) Rammed earth sample production: Context, recommendations and consistency. Constr Build Mater 18:281–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Miccoli L, Müller U, Fontana P (2014) Mechanical behaviour of earthen materials: A comparison between earth block masonry, rammed earth and cob. Constr Build Mater 61:327–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Walker P, Dobson S (2002) Reinforced composite rammed earth in flexure. Proc 3rd Int Conf Non-Conventional Mater Technol

  42. Ciancio D, Augarde C (2013) Capacity of unreinforced rammed earth walls subject to lateral wind force: elastic analysis versus ultimate strength analysis. Mater Struct 46:1569–1585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Arya AS, Boen T (1981) Earthquake resistant construction of earthen housing. Earthen Build. Seism. areas. Proc. Int Work held Univ new Mex. albuquerque, may 24–28 1–18

  44. Meli R, Hernandez O, Padilla M (1980) Strengthening of adobe houses for seismic actions. Proc Seventh World Conf Earthq Eng 4:465–472

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ahmadizadeh M, Shakib H (2004) On the December 26, 2003 southeastern Iran earthquake in Bam region. Eng Struct 26:1055–1070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Mahdi T (2005) Behaviour of adobe buildings in the 2003 Bam earthquake Seism 2005

  47. Sayin E, Yön B, Calayir Y, Gör M (2014) Construction failures of masonry and adobe buildings during the 2011 Van earthquakes in Turkey. Struct Eng Mech 51:503–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Calayır Y, Sayın E, Yön B (2012) Performance of structures in the rural area during the March 8, 2010 Elazığ-Kovancılar earthquake. Nat Hazards 61:703–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Dowling DM (2004) Adobe housing in El Salvador: earthquake performance and seismic improvement. Spec Pap Soc Am 281–300

  50. Blondet M, Garcia GV (2004) Earthquake resistant earthen buildings 13th World Conf. Earthq. Eng 1–8

  51. Tripura DD, Sangma S (2019) Failure analysis of earthen masonry and concrete buildings during the 2017 Tripura earthquake. Proc Inst Civ Eng Forensic Eng 172:75–84

    Google Scholar 

  52. IS 2720: Part 4 (1985) Indian standard, methods of test for soils, Part 4: Grain Size Analysis. Bur Indian Stand New Delhi

  53. IS 2720: Part 5 (1995) Determination of Atterberg Limits (Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit)

  54. IS 2720: Part 7 (1980) Determination of water content-dry density relation using light compaction. Bur Indian Stand New Delhi

  55. IS 8112 (2013) Ordinary portland cement, 43 grade - specification. Bur Indian Stand New Delhi

  56. IS:4031–5 (1988) Methods of physical tests for hydraulic cement. Part 5: Determination of initial and final setting times. Bur Indian Stand New Delhi

  57. IS 9096 (2006) Preservation of bamboo for structural purposes—code of practice. Bur Indian Stand New Delhi

  58. Raavi SSD, Tripura DD (2021) Predicting the effect of weathering and corrosion on the bond properties of bamboo- and steel-reinforced cement-stabilized rammed earth blocks. Adv Struct Eng 24:3267–3280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. IS 2770: Part 1 (1967) Methodes of testing bond in reinforced concrete. Bur Indian Stand New Delhi

  60. BS 5628 Part 1 (2005) Code of practice for the use of masonry. Structural Use of Unreinforced Masonry

  61. BS EN 1996-1-1 (2005) Design of masonry structures. General Rules for Reinforced and Unreinforced Masonry Structures

  62. Jayasinghe C, Fonseka WMCDJ, Abeygunawardhene YM (2016) Load bearing properties of composite masonry constructed with recycled building demolition waste and cement stabilized rammed earth. Constr Build Mater 102:471–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Jayasinghe C, Mallawaarachchi RS (2009) Quantification of Lateral load enhancement potential of masonry walls using tie beams. Mason Int Br Mason Soc United Kingdom 21:85–116

    Google Scholar 

  64. IS 516-1959 (2004) Method of tests for strength of concrete. Bur Indian Stand New Delhi

  65. Danso H, Martinson DB, Ali M, Williams J (2015) Effect of fibre aspect ratio on mechanical properties of soil building blocks. Constr Build Mater 83:314–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Yu X, Robuschi S, Fernandez I, Lundgren K (2021) Numerical assessment of bond-slip relationships for naturally corroded plain reinforcement bars in concrete beams. Eng Struct 239:112309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Griffith MC, Lam NTK, Wilson JL, Doherty K (2004) Experimental investigation of unreinforced brick masonry walls in flexure. J Struct Eng 130:423–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. NZS 4297 (1998) Engineering design of earth buildings. New Zeal Stand

  69. Raavi SSD, Tripura DD (2021) Ultrasonic pulse velocity and statistical analysis for predicting and evaluating the properties of rammed earth with natural and brick aggregates. Constr Build Mater 298:123840

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the help provided by Mr. Bharat Debbarma and Mr. Barun Debbarma during the entire experimental program.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Satya Sai Deep Raavi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A

Appendix A

Flexural strength of wallettes can be calculated using Fig. 

Fig. 10
figure 10

Typical bending moment and stress diagrams of wallette (dimensions in mm)

10 and the following formulae.

Flexural stress,\(f={\sigma }_{T}-{\sigma }_{C}\)

Bending stress,\({\sigma }_{T}=\frac{M}{Z}\)

Bending moment, \(M = P a\)

Lateral load applied, \(W = 2P = {R}_{1}+{R}_{2}\)

Section modulus, \(Z= \frac{1}{6}b{t}^{2}\)

Where,

\({\sigma }_{C}\)= Pre-compression applied.

P = Load applied (kN).

a = shear span (mm).

R1 = R2 = Reaction at supports as per IS 516 [64]

b = Width of specimen (mm).

t = Thickness of specimen (mm).

Example

Considering VCSCRRE sample for demonstration.

\(W = 2P = {R}_{1}+{R}_{2}\) = 11.0 kN \(\Rightarrow\) P = 5.50 kN.

a = 160 mm, b = 230 mm, t = 120 mm, \({\sigma }_{C}\) = 0.063 N/mm2.

\(M = P a\Rightarrow\) 5.5 × 1000 × 160 = 880,000 N-mm.

\(Z= \frac{1}{6}b{t}^{2}\Rightarrow \frac{1}{6}\) × 230 × 1202 = 552,000 mm3.

\({\sigma }_{T}=\frac{M}{Z}\Rightarrow\) \(\frac{880000 }{552000}\) = 1.594 N/mm2.

Flexural stress, \(f={\sigma }_{T}-{\sigma }_{C}\) \(\Rightarrow\) 1.594—0.063 = 1.531 MPa.

Hence, flexural strength of VCSCRRE wallette is 1.53 MPa.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Raavi, S.S.D., Tripura, D.D. Evaluating the flexural strength and failure patterns of cement stabilized rammed earth wallettes reinforced with coir, bamboo and steel. Mater Struct 55, 57 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-022-01896-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-022-01896-x

Keywords

Navigation