P II R 3 Mallick

7/31/2019 P II R 3 Mallick

1/18

1

Study on the Sustainable Lightweight Concrete Masonry Blocks

using Coconut Husk

Prepared by

V SRINIVAS MALLICK

Project Batch No. : 02

(Reg. No. : 1521010023)

Review No. III

(Phase II)

Date: 09/April/2012

Guide

Dr. K GUNASEKARAN

Asst. Professor (S.G)

Department of Civil Engineering


2/18

METHODOLOGY

YES


3/18

MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Particle size analysis for husk : Percentage by weight of husk passing through

2.36mm sieve is less then 5%.

Cement

Specific Gravity 3.1

Normal Consistency 27% by cement weight

= 135ml of water

Initial Setting time 44 minutes

Final Setting time 5 hours 45 minutes

Coconut Husk

Un-compacted un-sieved density 432.10 kg/m3

Compacted un-sieved density 496.54 kg/m3

Un-compacted sieved density 428.31 kg/m3

Compacted sieved density 488.96 kg/m3

Sand

Density 2619 kg/m3


4/18

Trail mix results

Ratio

( Cement : Husk)

Compressive Strength (N/mm2)

3-Day 7-Day 14-Day 28-Day

1 : 6 2.9 3.8 5.5 8.0

1 : 7 2.6 3.4 4.9 7.2

1 : 8 2.2 3.01 4.5 6.3

4Contd.,


5/18

INFERENCES

The dimensions of block and mix of concrete selected to carry out

detailed experiments as per IS 2185 are as follows

Dimensions of block : 200 mm x 200 mm x 100 mm

(L) (B) (H)

Concrete mix : Cement : husk = 1 : 6 (by volume)

Water / cement ratio (w/c) : 0.67


6/18

Progress of Work

6


7/18

Summary of Test Results

7

Type of

specimen

Block

Density

(kg/m3)

Compressive

Strength

(N/mm2)

Water

Absorption

(Kg/m3)

Drying

Shrinkage

(%)

Moisture

Movement

(%)

C-CH 1250 8.43 251.63 0.0403 0.014

CS 2170 14.7 107.3 0.0727 0.014

IS 21851600

(max.)

8

(min)

320

(max.)

0.09

(max.)

0.08

(max.)


8/18

Product

Dimensions

(L x B x H)

C-CH (1 : 6) 200 x 200 x 100

C-CH (1 : 8) 200 x 200 x 100

CS (1:6) 200 x 200 x 100

Market VariantsMud Brick 190 x 90 x 90

Cement Block 190 x 90 x 90

Hollow Fly-Ash Block

140 x 190 x 390(80 x 130 x 190)

Hollow Fly-Ash Block

190 x 190 x 390(135 x 125 x 190)

Market Variants

Figure

{

Courtesy : SRM Constructions


9/18

ProductC-CH

(1 : 6)

C-CH

(1 : 8)

CS

(1 :6)

Mud

Brick

Cement

Block

Hollow

Fly-Ash

Block

Hollow

Fly-Ash

Block

Dimensions

Length 200 200 200 190 190 390 390

Width 200 200 200 90 90 140 190

Height 100 100 100 90 90 190 190

Density 1250 1187 2170 1950 2275 2119 2295

Cost 12 9 11 3.5-6 6.6 27 32

Comparison 12 9 11 7-12 13.2 13 16

EconomicViability

Based on Raw Material Cost

Contd.


10/18

10

Assuming a lintel beam of dimensions 1m x 0.23m x 0.15m, load coming onto it from

the wall above and the corresponding reduction in reinforcement (fck= 20 N/mm2,

fy = 250 N/mm2 ) is as follows

Economic Viability

Based on Reduction in Reinforcement

Parameter Mud Brick Wall C-CH brick wall

Beam c/s (m x m) 0.23 x 0.15 0.23 x 0.15

Load of wall

(1 x 1 x 0.23) (N)

5218.92 3433.5

Bending Moment (N-m) 652.37 429.19

Area of Steel (mm2) 1640.6 1640.4

Weight of Steel (in kg) 12.9 12.8

% Reduction 0.77

Contd.


11/18

11

Maximum Productivity of mason = 3 m3 per worker day

No. of red mud bricks in 3 m3 volume = 1500

Weight handled in one day = 5850 kg

No. of C-CH blocks in 5850 kg weight = 1170

Volume of 1170 C-CH blocks = 4.38 m3 per worker day

% increase in productivity = 46

Economic Viability

Based on Labour Productivity

Contd.


12/18

Comparison of bonding in C-CH and CS SEM Analysis

Fig. (in numerical order) SEM image of cement, husk, sand, C-CH and CS

3

4 5

6 7

Courtesy : Dept. of Nano Technology, SRM University.


13/18

13

1. Coconut husk can be validated as a building material as per IS 2185.

2. C-CH block shape proposed in this work can be used in all the brick laying directions.

3. The strengths developed by concrete made using 1: 7, 1:8 (Cement: Husk) by volume were

also superior to strength of generally used red mud bricks.

4. Readily available husk can be used without any further processing.

5. Material cost and reinforcement requirements will be reduced.

6. Labour productivity will be increased due to reduction in density of block.

7. Can be used as a locally available low cost building material.

8. Owing to its light weight damage caused during blasts, earthquakes etc can be reduced.

9. Crack development in the block during accidental loading is arrested.

CONCLUSIONS


14/18

Future Scope

14

This study is first of its kind on coconut husk mainly aimed at finding out the basic

interaction of cement with coconut husk, the results of which are promising. Future

work can be aimed on the following areas

1. Cement can be partially/ fully replaced with fly-ash to make the product more

environment friendly.

2. Fire resistance of the block should be found, as coconut husk is of plant origin.

3. Acoustic and thermal properties of coconut husk are to be explored.

4. Detailed chemical analysis is to be conducted on coconut husk to find its behaviour

in concrete in detail, so that full potent of husk can be explored.

5. Experiments should be directed to check the viability of block shape proposed in

this work with other materials.


15/18

Future Scope

15

Replacing cement fully/ partially with fly ash to make the product moreenvironmental friendly and more economical.

Fig. C-CH mix, FA-CH mix, oven curing of fly-ash blocks


16/18

16

Paper Presentations on Project Work

Second in National Conference KEYNOTE-2012, conducted by CARE

group of institutions, Tiruchirapalli, on 9-10 February 2012.

Gold medal in RESEARCH DAY Celebrations, conducted by SRM

University, Kattankulathur, on 28 February 2012.

Second in AAKAAR-2012, National Civil Engineering Students

Symposium, organised by Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Bombay on

3-4 March 2012.

Presented Paper in RDCE-2012, National Conference, organised by

Department of Civil Engineering, SRM University on 21-22 March 2012.

Judged as one of the top ten ideas during INNOVATION DAY, organised

by SRM University on 28 March 2012.


17/18

Snapshots of Presentations

17

Fig. 1, 2 & 3 Prize distribution at Keynote, Research day and Aakaar

1 2

3


18/18

Thank You

18

Documents

P II R 3 Mallick