Courrier du Savoir – N°02, Juin 2002, pp.

61-66

DURABILITY OF LIME STABILIZED EARTH BLOCKS

A GUETTALA1), H. HOUARI2), B. MEZGHICHE1) AND R. CHEBILI1)

1) Department of Civil Engineering University of Biskra and Constantine, Algeria
2) University of Constantine, Algeria

ABSTRACT
The main drawback of earth construction is the rapid deterioration of the material under severe weather
conditions. The objective of this work is to improve the behaviour of stabilised blocks of earth blocks against
water attacks. The blocks manufactured with one type of earth were tested in compressive strength as dry blocks
and after immersion, in intensive sprinkling and in absorption. Tests of wetting-drying. The tests of freeze- thaw
were also carried out. The results show the influence of the different manufacturing parameters: compacting
intensity, sand content and lime content on the mechanical strength in the dry state as well as in the wet state,
water resistance coefficient, the weight loss and the absorption.

1. INTRODUCTION subjected to several laboratory tests under ASTM

normalization, (ASTAM 1993).
For economical reasons and by studying what
already has been done until now, scientists and
builders consider that it is judicious to try to improve
the life span of construction materials (Ghoumari 2.1 Grading Aggregate Analysis
1989). The durability prevision of stabilized earth In figure 1, the grading curves of the soils as well as
blocks is still a controversial matter amongst the corrected soils with sand and limits of the
construction actors. In order to know the limits of recommended zone for compressed earth blocks are
this kind of material destined to construction, it is represented (Doat and al 1981). It is noted through
intended to find solutions that can improve its life these curves that soil and corrected soil with
span by the know how of its general use as well as contents of 10, 20 and 30 % of sand are very close to
its mass treatment (additions of binders, compacting the lowr limit of recommended zone; whereas
energies,…). corrected soil with content of 40 % of sand is out of
Obtaining a durable material would need a treatment the recommended limit zone.
which would result in a sufficient mechanical
strength as well as low sensitivity to water attacks
(Guettala, and Mezghiche 1995). These two main 2.2 Atterberg Limits
conditions should be preceded by a very precise
study of parameters related to the grading and According to Michel (Michel 1976), the best earth
mineralogy of these materials. soils for stabilization are those with low plasticity
index (P.I) and the product (P.I x M) in the vicinity
of 500 to 800, where M is the percentage of mortar,
The type and the content of the binders, aggregates in this case P.I x M = 644, see Table 1.
grading, compacting stresses and water content
would be adapted as conditions of making of these
materials, [(Guettala and al 1998, Guettala and al Table 1 : Atterberg's limits.
1997). In this present work, we have tried to Sample WL WP PI Ws Wa Ca PIxM
improve the durability of earth blocks by several N1 31 17 14 10 0.77
9.5 644
methods: by the additions of lime (5, 8 and 12%), Biskra P.Z(1) P.Z P.Z P.Z A.A(2)
sand content (0, 10, 20, 30 and 40%) and the
compacting stresses (5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5 and 20
MPa). 2.3 Chemical Analysis
Clay analysis has been accomplished in the cement
factory of Hamma Bouziane (Constantine, east of
2. SOIL PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Algeria) using Fluorescence X ray, in accordance to
Soil samples of the region of Biskra (south east of NF6 P 15-467. The obtained results showing the
Algeria) have been taken as reference samples and constituents of the soil are presented in Table 2.

Université Mohamed Khider – Biskra, Algérie, 2002

 A. Guettala & al.

Table 2 : Chemical Composition of the Soil. 2.5 Physical Characteristics of Sand

Sample CONTENT (%)
Using France's AFNOR (AFNOR 1984)]
SiO2 AL2O3 Fe2O3 MgO CaO SO3
regulations, the sand samples have been tested and
N1 32.22 2.24 0.53 0.03 31.8 5.81 found the following results;
ƒ Disturbed Apparent Density ( ρ o) = 1520
Sample CONTENT (%)

kg/m3 Specific Mass ( γ ) = 2640 kg/m3

K2O Na2O CL TiO2 MnO F.W(1)
N1 0.15 0.03 0.005 0.2 0.02 26.9
ƒ Fineness Modulus (F.M) = 2.33
100 ƒ Sand Equivalence Value by Sight (SE) =
70 ; Value by Test (SEt) = 64
90

80
3. INFLUENCE OF SAND CONTENT
PASSING SIEVE, %

70
In order to determine the influence of sand content
60 on the mechanical strength, durability and the
optimal quantity of soil- sand mix, several blends
50
have been used (0 – 40%) with lime content of 8%
40
and a compacting stress of 10 MPa. Samples have
been stored in a humid environment.
30

20
3.1 Compressive Strength
10
2 3 4 56789 2 3 4 56789 2 3 4 56789 2 3 4 56789 2 3 4 56789
Figure 2a, shows that the mechanical compressive
0 0 0 1 10 10 strength of dry and humid sand-soil samples
DIAMETER, mm
increases with increasing the sand content. However,
Figure 1 : Grading curves Aggregate analysis of used
soil, corrected soil and the recommended limit
in percentage terms, the compressive strength
zone of stabilized earth concrete. evolution is 30% for dry samples and 36 % for
humid samples, when the concentration of sand is
10 % of sand + 90 % of soil
30%.
20 % of sand + 80 % of soil
30 % of sand + 70 % of soil
40 % of sand + 60 % of soil
100 % of soil 3.2 Water Strength Coefficient
Limit Zones
The water strength coefficient is determined from
the compressive strength ratio for dry and humid
Ideal curve
states. Figure 2b shows that the sand content does
not affect the water strength coefficient which varies
between 0.51 and 0.53 when sand content varies
2.4 Mineralogical Analysis between 0 and 40%.
To differentiate the clay soils, a mineralogical
16
analysis by X rays is important. The analyses have
been carried out in the geology laboratory of 14
Boumerdes (Algiers, Algeria) using a diffractometre
SIEMENS 500, interfaced to a computer for data 12

collecting. Tests have been conducted on aggregates

STRENGTH, MPa

10
passing on sieves of 80 microns. The obtained
results see Table 3 show that the soil is composed 8
mainly of kaolin (non-expansive and non-absorbent)
6
and illites.
4

Table 3 : Soil Mineralogical constituents. Dry Stale

2
Humid Stale
Non clayey minerals
Sample Clayey minerals (%)
(%) 0
kaolin illites I. M(1) Quartz Calcite 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
SAND, %
N1 45 40 15 5 10
(1) a) Mechanical strength
P.Z: Preference Zone.
(2)
A.A: Average Activity.

62
 Durability of Lime Stabilized Earth Blocks

1.00
WATER RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT(Rh/Rd) dried in an at 71 °C for a period of 42 hours. The
0.90 procedure is repeated for 12 cycles, samples are
brushed every cycle to remove the fragment of the
0.80
material affected by the wetting and drying cycles.
0.70 For presented in the diagrams of weight (Houben
0.60
and Guillaud 1984); Figure 3b. As it can be seen
from the histograms, the weight loss diminishes by
0.50 65% when the sand content is added by 30%, and
0.40 then it increases only by 4% on the addition of 10%
of sand.
0.30

0.20
18
0.10 Total Absorption
16

0.00
14
Capillary Absorption
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
SAND, % 12

ABSORPTION, %
b) Water strength coefficient 10

Figure 2 : Sand content influences on compressive 6

strength and water strength. Coefficient with
4
8% lime stabilizer and 10 MPa compacting
stress. 2

0
0 10 20 30 40

SAND, %
3.3 Water Absorption
The absorption capacity of earth stabilized blocks a) Absorption
gives a general idea on the presence and importance
of voids. When a volume of soil subjected to the
5
action of a stress, the material is compressed and the Walling-Drying
4.5
voids ratio decreases. As the density of soil is
increased, its porosity is reduced and less water can 4 Freez-Than
WEIGHT LOSS, %

penetrate it (Houben and Guillaud 1984). 3.5

2.5

3.4 Capillary Absorption 2

1.5
Capillary absorption test consists of placing the soil
1
sample on a humid surface with voids, constantly
0.5
water saturated, and measuring its weight after 7
0
days. Absorption is evaluated in percentage of dry 0 10 20 30 40
weight. Figure 3a, shows that the absorption SAND (%)
diminishes by 20% when the sand content increases
by 30%.
b) weight loss

Figure 3 : Influence of sand content on the absorption

3.5 Total Absorption and loss of weight (8% lime and compacting
stress of 10 MPa)
The present test consists of immersing the soil
samples in water and measuring the increase in
weight during 24 hours. The absorption is evaluated
in dry weight percentage. Figure 3a, shows the 3.7 Freeze - Thaw
decreasing of the total absorption by 9% above 20% Following the procedure described by ASTM D560,
of sand content. the freeze-thaw test consists of placing a soil sample
on an absorbent water saturated material in a
refrigerator at a temperature of -23°C for a period of
3.6 Wetting and Drying Test 24 hours and then removed. The sample is then
thawed in a moist environment at a temperature of
This test is carried out according to the ASTM D
21°C for a period of 23 hours and then removed and
559-57; it consists of immersing soil samples in
brushed. The test is repeated for 12 freeze-thaw
water a for period of 5 hours and then removed to be

63
 A. Guettala & al.

cycles and then dried in an oven to obtain a constant 4.2 Mechanical Compressive Strength in Humid
weight (Houben and Guillaud 1984). The weight Samples
loss is then calculated and reported on diagrams,
The mechanical strength of humid soil sample
Figure 3b. We can see clearly that there is no big
increases with increasing the compacting stresses,
effect in the weight loss above the value of 30%
Figure 4. The strength evolution is 70% when the
sand content. This value is taken for further
compacting stress passes from 5 to 20 MPa.
investigations.
However, the evolution is not regular: it starts with
19% from 5 to 7.5 MPa and only 5% for a
compacting stresses variation of 12.5 to 15 MPa for
4. INFLUENCE OF THE COMPACTING the case of 8% lime content sample. The mechanical
STRESS AND THE LIME CONTENT compressive strength also increases when increasing
In the following section, the effect of the compacting the lime content for humid samples. Like in the case
stresses (5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5 and 20 MPa) and of dry samples, the compressive strength evolution
the lime content (5, 8, and 12 %) on the mechanical is not regular.
compressive strength on dry and humid sand
samples is studied. Also the durability (wetting and
drying, freeze-thaw) and capillary tests with the 4.3 Water Strength Coefficient
optimal sand content of 30% are carried out.
The water strength coefficient evolution depends on
the lime percentage and on the compacting stresses,
Figure 5. It increases with increase of lime content
4.1 Mechanical Compressive Strength in Dry and the compacting stresses. For 8% of lime and a
Samples compacting stress range of 5 - 20 MPa, the strength
Figure 4 shows clearly that the compressive strength coefficient increases from 0.5 to 0.66. And for 15
evolution is the same for the different lime content: MPa, the water strength coefficient takes the values
the compressive strength increases with increasing of 0.54, 0.64 and 0.66 for the lime content of 5, 8
the compacting stress until 17.5 MPa, which is the and 12% respectively.
optimal compacting stress. The compressive strength
increases by 70 % and then decreases again by 7% 1.00
WATER STRENGTH COEFFICIENT (Rh/Rd)

when the compacting stress reaches 20 MPa for the 0.90

case of 8% lime content sample. We can see also
0.80
from Figure 4 that the compressive strength
increases with the increase of lime content but in an 0.70
irregular manner: Changing from 5% to 8% lime has
0.60
resulted in 54% increase in strength whereas the
increase from 8% to 12% lime has resulted only in 0.50

18% increase in strength, using a compacting stress 0.40

of 10 MPa. 5 % of Lime
0.30
8 % of Lime
0.20 12 % of Lime

20 0.10
7.50 12.50 17.50
18 5 10 15 20
COMPACTING STRESS, MPa
16 Figure 5 : Influence of compacting force and cement
14
content on the mechanical strength
STRENGTH MPa

12

10
4.4 Total Absorption
8
Figure 6a, shows that the absorption decreases when
6
5 % of Lime (Dry Stale) increasing the compacting stresses. At and above the
8 % of Lime (Dry Stale)
4
12 % of Lime (Dry Stale) value of 12.5 MPa, the effect is much more
2
5 % of Lime (Humid Stale)
8 % of Lime (Humid Stale)
important. We also noticed that the increase in lime
0
12 % of Lime (Humid Stale)
content decreases the water absorption factor and the
5
7.50
10
12.50
15
17.50
20
effect is much more important up to the value of the
CO MPA CTING STRE SS, MPa compacting stress of 10 MPa when the lime content
passes from 8 to 12%.
Figure 4 : Influence of compacting force and cement
content on the water strength coefficient

64
 Durability of Lime Stabilized Earth Blocks

4.5 Capillary Absorption 4.7 Freeze-Thaw Test

Figure 6b, shows that the capillary absorption Figure 7b shows that the weight loss diminishes
decreases when increasing the compacting stresses when increasing the compacting stress and the lime
and the lime content. For instance, it varies from 3.8 content as in the case of wetting and drying test
to 2.7% when the lime content varies from 5 to 12% discussed previously. For the 5% lime sample, the
with a compacting stress of 17.5 MPa. And for the weight loss changes from 2.7 to 0.7% when the
case of 8% lime sample, the capillary absorption compacting stress varies from 5 to 20 MPa. And the
percentage varies from 4.9 to 2.9% when the weight loss is very important with low compacting
compacting stress varies from 5 to 20 MPa. stresses.

18 7
5% of Lime 5% of Lime
16
8% of Lime 6 8% of Lime

WEIGTH LOSS, %
14
ABSORPTION, %

12% of Lime 5 12% of Lime

12
10 4
8
3
6
4 2
2 1
0
5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 0
5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20
COMPACTING STRESS, MPa COMPACTING STRESS, MPa

a) Total Absorption
a) Wetting and drying test

6 5% of Lime 3
5
5% of Lime
ABSORPTION, %

8% of Lime 2.5 8% of Lime

WEIGHT LOSS, %

4
2 12% of Lime
3
1.5
2
1
1

0 0.5
5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20
0
COMPACTING STRESS, MPa 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20

COMPACTING STRESS,
b) Capillary Absorption MPa

Figure 6 : Influence of the compacting stress and lime b) freeze- thaw test
content on the absorption.

Figure 7 : Influence of compacting stress and lime

content on the weight loss.
4.6 Wetting and Drying Test
Figure 7a shows that the loss in weight diminishes
when increasing the compacting stress and the lime 5. CONCLUSION
content. The weight loss evolution is not regular. For
the case of 5% lime, the weight loss is very The present work showed the important influence of
important up to 15 MPa. For the cases of 8 and 12% sand content, the compacting stress and the lime
lime, the effect of lime on the weight loss is content on the behaviour of stabilized earth blocks
important for the compacting stresses up to 12.5 with respect to water attacks as well as elucidating
MPa. Above this value the addition of lime is less certain points:
significant. The principal effect of the stabilization with the lime
is to prevent water attacks. We would achieve then a

65
 A. Guettala & al.

good stabilization if we could obtain a durable [4] GUETTALA A., GUENFOUD M.

material with a limited loss in mechanical strength in (1997), "Béton de Terre Stabilisée
a wet state (Guettala and al 2000). Propriétés Physico-Mécaniques et
Influence des Types d’Argiles", La
The sand content does not affect considerably the Technique Moderne N°1-2, Paris, 21-26.
compressive strength and the water strength [5] American Society for Testing and
coefficient. However, the sand content diminishes Materials (1993). Annual Book of
the weight loss and water absorption. ASTAM Standards, V.04.01,
Increasing the compacting stress from 5 to 20 MPa Philadelphia.
and the lime content from 5 to 12% improve the [6] DOAT P., HAYS A., HOUBEN H.,
compressive strength in dry as well as wet state and (1981), "Construire en Terre, Collection
the water strength coefficient. We notice also that en Architecture, Paris, 1981.
the increase of these two parameters decrease the [7] MICHEL J. (1976), "Etude sur la
weight loss and the water absorption. Stabilisation et la Compression des Terres
Pour leur Utilisation dans la
Construction", Annales de l’Institut
Technique de Bâtiment et des Travaux
REFERENCES Publics, Série Matériaux N° 339 Mai, 22-
[1] GHOUMARI F. (1989), "Matériau en 35.
Terre Crue Compactée: Amélioration de [8] AFNOR (1984), "Recueil de Norme
sa Durabilité à l'Eau"; Thèse de Doctorat, Françaises", Bâtiment Béton et
INSA de Lyon. Constituants du Béton. Paris.
[2] GUETTALA A., MEZGHICHE M. [9] HOUBEN H., GUILLAUD H.,
(1995), "Caractéristiques Mécaniques de (CRATerre), Earth (1984)
Béton de Terre Stabilisée à base des Sols ,"Construction", Primer Brussels,
de la Région de Biskra", Proceedings de CRATerre / PGC / CRA / UNCHS /
6ème Congrès Arabe en Génie Civil, AGCD.
Damas, Syrie 21,22, 23 et 24 Octobre. [10] GUETTALA A., MEZGHICHE B.,
[3] GUETTALA A., GUENFOUD M. (1998) CHEBILI R., HOUARI H. (2000),
"Influence des Types d’Argiles sur les "Durability of Blocks of Earth Concrete",
Propriétés Physico-mécaniques du Béton Proceedings of II International
de Terre Stabilisée au Ciment", Symposium Cement and Concrete
ANNALES du Bâtiment et des Travaux Technology in the 2000, September 6-10,
Publics N° 1 Février, Paris, 15-25. Istanbul, Turkey, 273-281.

66