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

net/publication/281653059

DEVELOPMENT OF INTERLOCKING LIGHTWEIGHT CEMENT BLOCKS

Conference Paper · December 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 5,076

4 authors:

Saya Ramakrishnan Ilamaran Sivalingam

Swinburne University of Technology National University of Singapore
21 PUBLICATIONS   277 CITATIONS    1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Mohamed Rifdy Rafiudeen Anura Nanayakkara

University of Moratuwa University of Moratuwa
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   95 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Thermal Performance Enhancement of Buildings using Cementitious Composites containing Phase Change Materials View project

EVALUATION OF CONCRETE DURABILITY INDICATORS WITH DIFFERENT SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Saya Ramakrishnan on 11 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 th
Special Session on Construction Materials & Systems, 4 International Conference on
th th
Structural Engineering and Construction Management 2013, Kandy, Sri Lanka, 13 , 14 &
th
15 December 2013

SECM/13/53

DEVELOPMENT OF INTERLOCKING LIGHTWEIGHT CEMENT BLOCKS

R.Sayanthan1, S.Ilamaran2, Mohamed Rifdy3 and S.M.A Nanayakkara4

1
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka
Telephone: +94-77-2935513 Fax: -
E-mail: [email protected]
2
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka
Telephone: +94-77-2262851 Fax: -
E-mail: [email protected]
3
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka
Telephone: +94-77-2266423 Fax: -
E-mail: [email protected]
4
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka
Telephone: +94-11-2650567-8(Ext.2113) Fax: +94-11-2651216
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Self-weight of building units, construction time and sound workmanship are key factors affecting the
quality and cost effectiveness of masonry construction. Amongst the loads a structure should resist,
self-weight is a major component thus the reduction of self-weight by introducing lightweight
material would effectively reduce the load as well as the cost of construction. Furthermore, large
individual units would help speedy construction and results in cost reduction. Yet, it is difficult to
achieve sound workmanship in construction of masonry works without skilled workers. By having
interlocking blocks, requirement of skilled workers can be reduced. Hence an experimental
investigation was carried out to develop interlocking lightweight cement blocks, contrary to those
existing, to address the above mentioned requirements. The interlocking hollow blocks developed are
600mm x200mm x200mm in size with a weight of 20 kg. The expanded polystyrene beads have been
used to reduce the self-weight. Experimental investigation has shown that average compressive
strength of block was 4.91N/mm2 and wall panel strength was 2.13 N/mm2, therefore it can be used
for load bearing masonry walls. It was also observed ductile load deformation behaviour at the failure
of the masonry wall panel, which is an added advantage.

Keywords: Expanded polystyrene beads, Interlocking blocks, Lightweight

1.0 Introduction

A wide variety of materials are used in the construction industry. When considering their application
in wall elements, cement blocks are the most commonly used. Conventional cement blocks are made
from a cement-sand mortar mix, which is heavy (density: 1800-2000kg/m3) and adds greatly to the
self-weight of the structure. The self-weight of the structure represents a very large portion of the
design load (Zaher Kuhail, 2001). Hence by reducing the weight of the blocks, the self-weight of the
structure can be reduced. This in turn would aid in the reduction of the size of structural members and
the resulting use of materials.

194
The weight of cement blocks can be reduced by adopting the following.

1. Use of lightweight aggregate

Various lightweight materials such as saw dust, straw, sintered fly ash or industrial cinders,
expanded clay or shale, expanded polystyrene beads etc. are being used in producing
lightweight blocks (EuroLightCon, 2000). Polystyrene beads were chosen as aggregates due
to their inherent lightweight (density 16-27 kg/m3) and good thermal insulation properties.
2. Making the blocks hollow
Incorporating hollow open spaces within the blocks reduces its self-weight. Furthermore, they
are good in fire resistance, partial sound resistance and acceptable to a certain degree in
thermal insulation since air filled in these hollow spaces reduce the transfer of heat across the
block. Also these hollow open spaces can be utilized for the construction of reinforced
masonry systems, since these spaces can be used to place reinforcing bars and concrete, hence
the wall will have higher compressive strength and better lateral stability. Such voids can also
be used for the concealment and conveyance of electrical conduits and water pipelines.

Furthermore, the reduction in self-weight helps to increase block sizes within the limit of handling by
a single person. Such large units also have many desirable aspects such as more economical in
transportation, an easiness in its on-site and production handling, the requirement of less amount of
mortar for the joints and a speedy construction. Therefore it is favourable to have larger lightweight
cement blocks, but of an interlocking nature to improve the workmanship.

The proposed interlocking arrangement for these blocks allows for a quick and cost effective
construction. In other words, tongue and groove nature of these blocks aid in maintaining alignment in
both horizontal and vertical directions without the need of any skilled workers. Also, to enhance the
interlocking nature of these blocks, it is favourable to adapt a thin mortar joint construction practice,
where a thin layer of cement slurry is applied and will set within a short duration, resulting to a
speedy construction. Other beneficial aspects of using a thin mortar joint are as follows (Thamboo et
al., 2011).

 Minimized heat loses due to the reduced thickness of the heat conductive mortar layer
 Prevention of joint cracks by alleviating stress concentrations in the mortar joint
 The non-requirement of any special curing for most ambient conditions.

2.0 Objectives

This research project considers the development of a lightweight cement block and its suitable
interlocking arrangements with following characteristic requirements.

 Compressive strength of 5 N/mm2

 Size of the block: 200 mmX200 mmX600 mm
 Maximum weight of block: 20 kg

3.0 Experimental Investigation

3.1 Shape of the Block

Considering the interlocking and hollow arrangement with the required dimensions, the
following block shape was proposed.

195
 Figure 4: 3D view of block Figure 5: Interlocking arrangement of blocks

Figure 6: plan view of Block

Figure 7: Front view of block

Based on the selected dimensions and for the required weight of block, the maximum density of
mortar mix was found to be 1254 Kg/m3.

3.2 Materials

Cement:
Ordinary Portland cement was selected as it gives high early strength when compared with blended
cements.

196
Sand:
River sand sieved through 1.18 mm was used as fine aggregate. The maximum particle size of 1.18
mm allows uniform distribution of polystyrene beads and coating of mortar uniformly around the
beads (Ravindrarajah et al., 1993).

Expanded Polystyrene Beads:

Expanded polystyrene beads are fine spherical particles (size range from 3-6 mm) containing 98% air
and 2% of polystyrene. As it has a closed cell structure it cannot absorb water. Therefore it has good
sound and thermal insulation characteristics as well as impact resistance. They are ultra-lightweight
material with density in the range of 16-27 kg/m3.They are chemically inert material, quite resistant to
most of the alkalis, acids, oxidizing and reducing agents (Tengku Fitriani L. & Subhan, 2006).

3.3 Mix Design

Cube test was carried out for various mix proportions and for different water/cement ratios to obtain
optimum mix proportion and water cement ratio for the required strength and density

Mixing method:
Closed pan mixer was used to avoid polystyrene beads float during the mixing.

Mixing procedure:
Part of dry sand and cement were first added together and mixed in the pan mixer sufficiently. Then
water was added and mixed to produce a cohesive cement mortar. Then the polystyrene beads were
added and thoroughly mixed with the mortar until cohesive cement mortar coats the polystyrene
beads. Finally remaining sand and water were added and mixed adequately to produce a homogenous
mix.

Compaction method:
Compaction by vibration was avoided because beads have the tendency to float to the top surface
during vibration; causing segregation of particles (Idawati Ismail et al., 2003). Therefore compaction
was done by hand tamping.

3.4 Tests carried out on blocks

To evaluate physical properties and mechanical properties of blocks as well as wall panel, following
tests were carried out.

Unit compressive strength and water absorption test were carried out according to SLS 855: Part 2
Compressive strength of wall panel made with lightweight interlocking blocks was determined in
accordance with BS 5628: Part 1(1992).

4.0 Experimental Results and Discussion

4.1 Determination of optimum mix proportion

In order to obtain the optimum mix proportion which gives the required strength (block compressive
strength of 5 N/mm2) and density (1250 kg/m3), several mix proportions of cement mortar with
Expanded Polystyrene beads (EPS) were tested.

Figure 5 shows the variation of compressive strength with density for different mix proportions with a
water cement ratio of 0.4. To achieve block strength of 5 N/mm2, minimum cube strength of 7.5

197
Nmm2 was considered based on the solid area of block (which is 66% of the gross area). Based on the
test results, the optimum mix proportion can be selected as 1:1:2 (Cement: Sand: Expanded
Polystyrene beads).

10
Mix proportion- Cement: Sand: EPS (W/C ratio) 1::1:2(0.4)
9
1:1:EPS(0.4)
8 1:2:EPS(0.4)
Compressive Strength (N/mm2)

1:3:EPS(0.4)
7

6 1:2:3(0.4)
1:1:3(0.4)
5
1:3:4(0.4)
4 1:1:4(0.4)

3
1:2:4(0.4) 1:3:5(0.4)
2
1:2:5(0.4)
1

0
700 900 Density (kg/m3) 1100 1300

Figure 8: Variation of Compressive strength with the density for various mix proportions

4.2 Determination of optimum water/cement ratio

For the selected mix of 1:1:2 of cement: sand: EPS, cube test was carried for different water/cement
ratio to obtain optimum water/cement ratio. The variation of compressive strength of mortar cubes
with water cement ratio is shown in Figure 6. Based on the test results shown in figure 6, the optimum
water cement ratio can be taken as 0.35.

12
Compressive strength

10

6
(N/mm2)

0
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55
water/cement ratio
Figure 9: Compressive strength variation for different w/c ratio for the mix 1:1:2

198
4.3 Physical Properties of Lightweight Block

The Figure 7 & 8 show the lightweight interlocking blocks produced with the optimum mix
proportion 1:1:2 (0.35) cement: sand: EPS beads (w/c).

Figure 10: Lightweight Interlocking Block Figure 11: Half Block

The physical properties (i.e. weight and water absorption) measured are given Table 1. The average
weight of a block (i.e.20.4 kg) is within the expected limit which the weight a single person can lift.
The water absorption of blocks is within the permissible limit (240 kg/m3) specified by SLS
855:Part1.

Table 1: Physical properties of lightweight block

Property Required limit Experimental value
Average weight of a block < 20 kg 20.4 kg
Absorption of net volume 240 kg/m3 75 kg/m3
Moisture content percentage based on maximum 40% 37.5 %
possible moisture in the block

4.4 Mechanical properties of lightweight blocks

Compressive strength of blocks:

Compressive strength test was carried out in accordance with SLS 855: Part 2 for three samples and
average compressive strength obtained was 4.9 N/mm2 (see Table 2).

Figure 12: Compressive strength test Figure 13: Crack pattern on failure

According to SLS 855: Part 1 (Table 6); block strength of 4.9 N/mm2 is sufficient to construct load
bearing masonry walls up to five (05) stories with any mortar designation.

Strength of wall panel

A masonry panel (1.2 m x 0.6 m) was constructed with the lightweight interlocking blocks to obtain
the compressive strength of the masonry panel. The loading arrangement and crack pattern on failure
199
are shown in Figure 11. Dial gauges were fixed to measure vertical deflection. Figure 12 shows the
load deformation of the panel tested, which shows ductile failure.

The Ultimate stress at failure = 2.13 N/mm2.

Table 2: Compressive strength results of blocks

Dimension(mm)

Load on failure (Tons)

Average Compressive
Compressive strength
Sample no

Weight (kg)

(N/mm2)

(N/mm2)
strength
Breadth
Length

Height
1 599 198 198 20.2 58.4 4.83
Average
2 599 199 202 20.4 62.2 5.11 4.9
Dimensions
3 598 199 202 20.15 58.2 4.80

Compressive strength tests carried out on ordinary brick wall panels by S.R De S. Chandrakeerthy et
al., (1982) shows that the ultimate stress at failure was 1.125 N/mm2. Therefore comparison of wall
panel strength evidences that lightweight masonry wall panel has high compressive strength than
ordinary brick wall.

Figure 14: Wall panel test (a) Loading arrangement, (b) crack initiation on failure

200
 Load Vs vertical deflection
60

50
Load ( Tons)
40

30

20

10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Deformation (mm)

Figure 15: Load deformation curve for vertical loads

5.0 Conclusions

An interlocking lightweight cement block was developed to use in load bearing masonry walls. The
blocks are much larger than the commonly used masonry blocks, yet are of moderate weight because
of lightweight material (i.e. EPS beads). It was found that the mix proportion of constituent materials
to achieve the target strength and density to be 1:1:2 of cement: sand: polystyrene beads, with water
cement ratio of 0.35. The average weight of an individual block was 20.4 kg, which is an acceptable
weight for a single person to handle. A unit compressive strength test and wall panel test revealed that
a masonry wall of up to five stories can be constructed with the use of these blocks for any mortar
designation (SLS 855: Part 1). It was also observed ductile load deformation behaviour at the failure
of the masonry panel, which is an added advantage.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank the technical staffs of Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Moratuwa for their assistance during the experimental work.

References

Akeem Ayinde Raheem et al (2012). “Comparative analysis of sandcrete hollow blocks And laterite
interlocking blocks as walling Elements” Vol 3, Issue 1, International Journal of Sustainable
Construction Engineering & Technology

British Standards Institution (1992), “Code of practice for use of masonry-Part 1: Structural use of
unreinforced masonry”, BS 5628: Part 1(1992)

Chandrakeerthy, S.R.De S., Hettiarachchi, S.S.L., and Guruge, D.C.G., (1982), "Some Tests on
Brickwork Panels Using Local Bricks and Masonry Cement", Engineer, Vol.II, pages 36-40

201
 Chen B. and Liu J (2007), “Mechanical properties of polymer-modified concrete containing expanded
polystyrene beads” Construction and Building Materials, Volume 21, Issue 1, January 2007,
Pages 7-11

EuroLightCon. Light weight aggregates. Document BE96-3942/R15, European Union – Brite EuRam
III, 2000

Idawati Ismail, A.Aziz Saim, Abd Latif Saleh(2003). “Properties of hardened concrete bricks
containing expanded polystyrene beads” Proceedings of the 5th Asia-Pacific Structural
Engineering and Construction Conference (APSEC 2003) Johor Bahru, MALAYSIA

Park S.G, Chisholm D.H. (1999), Polystyrene Aggregate Concrete. Study Report No. 85. Building
Research Levy, (1999)

Ravindrarajah,R.S., & Tuck, A.J.(1993), “Lightweight concrete with expanded polystyrene beads”,
Civil Engineering Monograph No. C.E. 93/1 M.E, Sydney, March 1993

Sohrab Veiseh and Ali A. Yousefi (2003), “The Use of Polystyrene in Lightweight Brick Production”,
Iranian Polymer Journal, Volume 12 Number 4, Pages 323-329

Sri Lanka Standards Institution (1989), “Specification for Cement Blocks - Part 1: Requirements, Part
2: Method for specifying precast concrete masonry units”, SLS 855:1989

Tengku Fitriani L. & Subhan (2006) “Lightweight high strength Concrete with Expanded Polystyrene
Beads” “MEKTEK” Tahun viii No.1 Januari 2006

Thamboo, Julian Ajith, Dhanasekar, Manicka, &Yan, Cheng (2011), “Thin bed masonry system:
review and future prospects”. International Conference on Structural Engineering, Construction
and Management, SEC-11-30

V. Ferrandiz-Mas and E. Garcia-Alcocel (2012) “Physical and mechanical characterization of

Portland cement mortars made with expanded polystyrene particles addition (EPS)” Materiales
de Construction, Vol. 62, 308, Pages 547-566

Zaher Kuhail & Samir Shihada (2003), “Mechanical properties of Polystyrene Lightweight Concrete”
Journal of the Islamic University of Gaza, Vol 11, No.2, Pages 93-114

Zaher Kuhail(2001) “Polystyrene Lightweight Concrete (Polyconcrete)” An-Najah University Journal

Research, Vol 15, Pages 41–61

202

View publication stats