The contradictions discussed are independent of the purpose, consequently they concern any kind of stabilization.įor obvious reasons it is undeniable that durability is paramount for any material used for construction-a life cycle of a building is generally considered 50 years, but usually we use them for much longer. In this review we focus on the worldwide research and results of stabilization for enhancing durability. The other is enhancing the material’s resistance against water induced erosion, i.e. One of these is increasing the cohesion and strength of soils that are otherwise unsuitable for construction purposes. Conclusions about the existing test methods are drawn, with directions for further development suggested.Įarthen construction materials are usually stabilized for two main reasons. The review features a brief history of this field, but focuses more on recently published data about the water erosion performance of stabilized earthen construction materials. This review provides an overview of research about the durability of stabilized earthen walls, the methods used to assess it and parameters that have been shown to affect it. Since the researcher community has been aware of this more and more results are published of experiments with alternative stabilizers. These side-effects greatly reduce the sustainability appeal of earthen materials, leading to a contradiction in this application of cement. The most commonly used stabilizer is cement, which reinforces earth by enhancing its strength and water resistance with chemical bonds, while at the same time significantly increases its embodied energy and reduces its sorption capacity. It has become general practice to stabilize earthen materials with chemical binders, since one of their main weaknesses is their lack of durability.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |