Experimental insights in to stabilised mud blocks using FLY ASH, SCBA, and Lime binder
|
Full Text |
Pdf
|
|
Author |
Galanna Karningol and B. S. Patil
|
|
e-ISSN |
1819-6608 |
|
On Pages
|
1891-1898
|
|
Volume No. |
20
|
|
Issue No. |
21
|
|
Issue Date |
January 25, 2026
|
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.59018/1125212
|
|
Keywords |
stabilized mud block, lime, sugarcane bagesses ash (SCBA), fly ash (FA) and compressive strength, water absorption test.
|
Abstract
In recent years, stabilized earth blocks (SEBs) have received significant attention as a sustainable alternative to traditional bricks and cement concrete blocks. As the world focuses more on sustainable construction practices, mud blocks offer several environmental and economic benefits. Mud blocks, also known as compressed earth blocks (CEBs) or stabilized earth blocks (SEBs), are made by compressing a mixture of earth, clay, sand, and sometimes a stabilizing agent like lime or cement. Mud blocks have good thermal properties, providing natural insulation that helps regulate indoor temperature. They have the ability to absorb and release heat slowly, contributing to energy efficiency in buildings. The manufacturing process of mud blocks requires less energy compared to the production of conventional building materials. This makes them more environmentally friendly and sustainable. This paper focuses on investigating the impact of Sugar Cane Bagasse Ash (SCBA) and Fly Ash (FA) on Lime-stabilized mud blocks, leading to the creation of innovative stabilized mud blocks. Both SCBA and FA are industrial waste materials, making this study relevant to sustainable construction practices. The experiment involves varying the percentage of Lime in the mixture from 0% to 10% while keeping the percentages of SCBA and FA constant at 10% and 5%, respectively. Both the water absorption test and compressive test are conducted. The properties of Fly Ash (FA) and Sugar Cane Bagasse Ash (SCBA) as stabilizers in lime-stabilized mud blocks. It is found that FA plays a major role in reducing water absorption rates compared to SCBA, which can be attributed to the nature of FA to form lime-based cementitious mixtures that work, which helps to reduce the interconnectivity of the pores within the mud blocks. For compressive strength, compressed stabilized mud blocks were cast for 7, 14 & 28 days. The CSEB Blocks were tested after a curing period of 7, 14, and 28 days, and we determined the water absorption test for 7, 14, and 28 days. The inclusion of lime, SCBA, and FA increased the compressive strength of the compressed stabilized mud blocks significantly. The reduced water absorption indicates that the stabilized mud blocks are less porous and more resistant to water penetration.
Back