Skip to main content

Compressed stabilized earth block: environmentally sustainable alternative for villages housing

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 28 November 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Construction materials contribute to environmental pollution and the impoverishment of natural raw materials. The villages of Upper Egypt were exposed to high thermal loads owing to their geographical location. Moreover, the current building materials do not comply with the principles of sustainability and environmental adaptation of the residents of these buildings. Therefore, attaining admission to one sustainable building material in Upper Egypt and using it as an environmentally compatible, inexpensive, accessible, and easy building material for the users of these blocks is essential. In this study, the author selected various sites in Upper Egypt, analyzed climate and urban data, and after that, suggested prototypes with many variables and measured using the DesignBuilder V5 computer simulation program to select an optimal building type. Reached that can be saved energy about 40:50% and decreased annual discomfort hours more than 50%, finally, discussed with community members by a questionnaire on societal acceptance. The research concluded that building with compressed stabilized earth block is an environmentally sustainable solution applied in residential areas in the villages of Upper Egypt to reduce deficiencies in environmental adaptation.

Introduction

Environmental problems are central in the consciousness of researchers. Buildings and their materials are an essential part of the architectural product and have received much attention for preparing sustainable natural materials.

Soil has been a major component of buildings since antiquity, used in 6000 BC as a building material in Mesopotamian civilizations, the Tibetan and Andean in Peru, in the fertile valleys in China and Thebes in Egypt. Therefore, thousands of years ago, people lived sustainably, in accord with nature, and respected and benefited from it. However, construction using reinforced concrete and burned bricks has extended to negative impacts on the environment.

Therefore, it is critical to produce environmentally friendly building materials and improve the characteristics of building materials, manufacturing, lower energy consumption, and simultaneously cut costs. Therefore, this study highlights the compressed stabilized earth block used in Upper Egypt villages as a solution to the problem of constructing housing units in these degraded areas [1,2,3,4,5].

The applied study was used to define areas as a case study. Thus, the research identified the analytical field area data and properties of the suggested material and deduced a set of variables measured according to their classification using a computer simulation program to find an optimal architectural model. Community members completed a questionnaire to examine the research hypothesis of the feasibility of construction using compressed stabilized earth block (CSEB) in the villages of Upper Egypt. Finally, the results are discussed, and recommendations are proposed.

Research aim and methodology

The research aim

investigates a sustainable building material for the construction of residential areas in Upper Egypt. Therefore how to use them as environmentally compatible, inexpensive, available, and easy to use materials. Furthermore, the study investigates the impact of these materials on the environmental adaptation of users of these areas.

Methodology

A research methodology was implemented to achieve the research objectives. First, qualitative research and analysis of the data were collected about construction using compressed stabilized earth block. Moreover, climate, urban, and building status of Upper Egypt villages. Then, qualitative and quantitative approach to suggested prototypes, its variables, and questionnaire. Analysis was used to identify the system through the data from the literature review, as well as knowing the degree of acceptance and satisfaction with this technology. The research limitations are Upper Egypt villages and CSEB as construction building materials.

Consequently, CSEB was identified as a low-cost and environmentally friendly material found in developing countries with hot climates or in tropical [6, 7].

It consists of a mixture (soil + fixing material, often 5% + water); stripped topsoil and only deep soils are used (Fig. 1) [8, 9].

Fig. 1
figure 1

Examples of compressed stabilized earth block

The various components and stabilizers, such as Portland cement or lime, are mixed with clay soil and sand, with different percentages of mixing. The mold is compressed in the process (manual or automatic compression) and dried for 28 days; however, it does not burn [10,11,12] (CSEB = soil + water + stabilization (fixing material) (Table 1).

Table 1 Fixings used to improve soil properties in (CSEB) [13,14,15,16]

Natural building materials, such as soil in general and specially CSEB are an ideal solution in hot areas because of the thermal comfort and insulation of the soil and its low impact on the environment. Table 2 lists the advantages and disadvantages of the CSEB technique [17,18,19,20].

Table 2 The advantages and disadvantages of using CSEB in construction [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]

Also by CSEB in constructions, it decreases carbon dioxide emission 2 to 7 times less than that of burned bricks (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

CO2 emission (KgCO2/m3) comparison (fired brick/ CSEB) [32, 33]

Several buildings with different activities and designs in many hot-climate countries (not limited to developing countries) and clarifies the advantages of using the CSEB, Table 3 shows some examples.

Table 3 Shows Different types of CSEB International buildings

Recently, the Egyptian Center for Housing and Building Research interested in CSEB as the best method for sustainable construction, especially in developing areas of state development efforts. The rise of prices for building materials has resulted in higher housing prices in Egypt, such as iron and cement. Therefore, Egypt adopted the Egyptian building code of CSEB [38].

Methods/experimental

Six villages were chosen from different governorates in Upper Egypt (Giza, Fayoum, Dahkla, Assuit, Aswan, and the Red Sea) as a case study, shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Case study areas map

Reasons to choose villages in Upper Egypt as a case study are as follows:

  1. 1-

    These villages are deprived, with challenges for economic growth are characterized by low construction standards and comfort for users and a lack of services and infrastructure.

  2. 2-

    With the increasing population of these villages, the need to provide low-cost construction materials for housing is an alternative to using traditional building materials.

  3. 3-

    Burned clay blocks remain the main construction material, even though it is a huge source of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) [39, 40].

  4. 4-

    In general, Upper Egypt is in the southern part of Egypt. The warm, arid climate provides a comfort zone for construction and urbanization. Overall, a lack of sustainability exists in the villages in Upper Egypt (socially, economically, and ecologically). Therefore, the Upper Egyptian villages were chosen as a case study [41]. Table 4 conclude its main data.

Table 4 Data of case study areas

Climatic data for case studies was higher temperatures in summer reach 35–45 °C, whereas lower temperatures in winter can reach 15–20 °C, and rain is scarce [42] (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Monthly most temperatures (°C) in choosing areas. Source: World meteorological organization

The figure shows that most of the temperatures are outside the thermal comfort zone (shaded part).

The main building material in these villages is burned brick in most buildings in the village and wood and stones (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Buildings state in the case study areas, by researcher, 3-10-2019

The aim is to build and retrofit buildings in Upper Egypt using local and stronger materials to obtain a better thermal and esthetic shelter.

Method: After the analytical study, a set of variables was observed and evaluated using the alternative proposal design to arrive and an ideal suggested model.

Design variables: The variables chosen were reduced energy loads, thermal comfort, energy consumption, budget, lifecycle, and social acceptance. Table 5 shows the design parameters

Table 5 Design parameters

Each variable was measured using either computer simulation or a questionnaire, depending on the variable type.

Simulations

The simulation program is DesignBuilder V5 and design proposal type as shown in Fig.11, Table 6.

Table 6 Building specification

Questionnaires

A sample is taken from the chosen community, and 20 questionnaires were distributed in each village.

Factors and variables, to research the drivers and barriers of CSEB building technology in Upper Egypt, with analytical, and not statistical, generalization. Questionnaire forms were filled out from the sample of the study population with semi-structured interviews. The issues under question were shown in Table 7.

Table 7 Issues raised

Result

Simulation

The simulation program is DesignBuilder. All 84-simulation readings in six countries and two classes of readings were obtained from the annual energy consumption and annual thermal comfort indicators. The analysis is as shown in Table 8.

Table 8 Max/Min discomfort hours and energy consumption in building types.

From Table 8, we conclude a better-proposed building model in each governorate, which achieved the least number of hours of thermal discomfort and less energy consumption. Figures 6 and 7 show the energy consumption in the model and the amount of energy saving.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Energy consumption in the best/ worst building types. By: researcher

Fig. 7
figure 7

Decrease in yearly discomfort hours and amount of saving in energy. By: researcher

Questionnaire

A sample was taken from the study community and 20 questionnaires were distributed in each village (quantitative method) to obtain the residents’ ability to use CSEB construction as an alternative to the traditional building materials used in the region. Fig. 8.

Fig. 8
figure 8

User expectation for (CSEB) advantages/disadvantages. By: researcher

Discussion

CSEB is an environmentally friendly substance with high thermal insulation properties and strength and durability, contributing to the thermal comfort of its users and enhancing the health of the population (indoor houses are cooler in summer and warmer in winter).

The model with code B1T2R2F2C1 includes CSEB with 5% cement, 24 cm wall thickness, a curved roof type, ground and one floor with a vertical courtyard position is achieves the best results in most governorates, which can be generalized in Upper Egypt and its results analyzed below in Table 9.

Table 9 Best-case analysis. By: researcher

The residents’ opinions were obtained regarding the proposed model and the results correlated with most of the sample (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9
figure 9

Resulted of the screening questionnaire applied by the researcher

CSEB will have great potential in the future to build low to medium-cost housing and contribute to sustainable development and was accepted by the residents of the villages, as indicated in the results of the questionnaire.

Using this technology in the villages of Upper Egypt will achieve many advantages and benefits (economic, social, and environmental) and enhance urban development in the villages of Upper Egypt.

Conclusions

Compressed Stabilized Earth Block is one of the world strategies and trends towards back to nature to saving the planet, and producing zero-energy buildings, preserving the environment and quality of life.

The study proved that replacing the traditional building material with CSEB while fixing the other proposed variables in the six governorates in Upper Egypt under investigation reduced the thermal discomfort hours, raising the efficiency of the built environment and the Energy consumption decreased from 35 to 50%. Therefore, building with compressed stabilized earth block is an environmentally sustainable solution applied in residential areas in the villages of Upper Egypt to reduce deficiencies in environmental adaptation. Therefore, the research hypothesis is right.

The proposed design considerations, such as the wall thickness, the shape of the roof, and internal court position help to increase energy efficiency and reduce consumption. The best model with the code B1T2R2F2C1 (Fig. 7) is effective for the thermal comfort of users.

From the questionnaire analysis for residents, there was a great tendency towards adopting these new ideas in construction, the environmental and thermal impact of CSEB would positively affect user satisfaction rate at ~ 65%, due to currently environmental pollution. Some also supported the idea because it is economically, rising in housing prices in Egypt because of higher prices for building materials, such as iron and cement, which reflected resident, so The cheapness of CSEB and the ease of use had the greatest impact on its social acceptance, at a rate of ~ 75%.

Some were worried about maintenance, the rate at ~ 30% of people were concerned about the durability and its final look and needing a multistory building (more than 5 floors).

Land locations like Egypt’s sandy desert soil are suitable construction materials and achieve sustainability.

The research concludes that the CSEB house is a promising passive solution for saving energy. The hot desert climate in Egypt has resulted in a decrease in energy demand of between 35% and 50%.

prefer CSEB houses because it has potential in energy saving, reduced maintenance and operating costs, lower environmental impact, construction efficiencies facing expansions and contractions in arid climates, dual land use with minimal visual impact because landscaped areas replacing the building leave better visual images, and lower noise. Furthermore, it has low carbon emissions, does not disturb the ecosystem, and is an adaptable subject and suitable for culture, customs, and traditions.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Change history

Abbreviations

CSEB:

Compressed stabilized earth block

WWR:

Window wall ratio

R value:

Resists the flow of heat from the window or a complete wall or ceiling

SHGC :

The fraction of incident solar radiation admitted through a window

References

  1. Tekle, G. (2018) “Study of Compressed Cement and Lime Stabilized Soil Block as an Alternative Wall Making Material,” master thesis, Addis Ababa Institute of Technology, pp. 55-61

  2. Sbci UNEP (2009) Buildings and climate change: Summary for decision-makers. United Nations Environmental Programme, Sustainable Buildings and Climate Initiative, Paris, pp 2–18

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mominur Rahman, M. Md. Rashiduzzaman, M., Zawad Akhand, F. and Bayzid Kabir, K. 2016. Compressed Stabilized Earth Block: A Green Alternative for Non-load Bearing Building Block in Developing Countries like Bangladesh. Chemical Science International Journal. 12, 3 (Jan. 2016), pp. 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/ACSJ/2016/23071 . Accessed 20 June 2021

  4. Smith, P.F.,( 2005) “Architecture in a Climate of Change: a Guide to Sustainable Design”, second Ed. Architectural Press, an imprint of Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 1-11.

  5. Think brick. (2017) http://www.thinkbrick.com.au/why-brick .Accessed 6 June 2021.

  6. Danquah A.J. (2009) Production of Affordable but Quality Housing for the Low Income Urban Dweller. Promoting the Use of Local Building Materials. BRRI, Kumasi-Ghana. URI: http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/232 , http://csirspace.csirgh.com/handle/123456789/232 Accessed 6 June 2021

  7. UN-HABITAT (2015) Interlocking Stabilized Soil Blocks (ISSB) -The Eco-friendly Building Material: UN-HABITAT, https://www.hamk.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Interlocking-Stabilised-Soil-Blocks-ISSB-UETN-20.pdf , .

  8. Garg, Ayan & Yalawar, Amit & Kamath, Anuradha & Vinay, Jagannath. (2014). Effect Of Varying Cement Proportions On Properties Of Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks (CSEB) - A Sustainable Low-Cost Housing Material. 10.13140/2.1.4966.4963, ASCE India Section 17–18 October 2014, At Hyderabad, India, Volume: pp. 1000-1010. .

  9. Building The Future with Earth housing compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks (CSEB), Auroville Earth Institute, Unesco Chair Earthen Architecture. https://www.grihaindia.org/events/ncgd/2012/pdf/satprem.pdf . Accessed June 22, 2021.

  10. Auroville Earth Institute, UNESCO Chair Earthen Architecture, (n.d.) http://www.earth-auroville.com/raw_material_introduction_en.php .Accessed November 10, 2019.

  11. Auroville Earth Institute (AVEI). Earth as a Raw Material. UNESCO Chair Earthen Architecture; 2009. Available: http://www.earthauroville.com/maintenance/uploaded_pics/1-earth-raw-material-en.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2020.

  12. Fetra Venny Riza, Ismail Abdul Rahman and Ahmad Mujahid Ahmad Zaidi, (2010) "A brief review of Compressed Stabilized Earth Brick (CSEB)," International Conference on Science and Social Research (CSSR 2010), 2010, pp. 999-1004.

  13. Dmdok D (2021) Properties of Compressed Interlock Earth Blocks Manufactured from Locally Available Lateritic Soil for Low Cost Housing Projects. Advanced Engineering Forum 39:85–93. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AEF.39.85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Reddy BVV, Kumar PP (2010) Embodied energy in cement stabilized rammed earth walls. Energy and Buildings 42(3):380–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.10.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ciancio D, Beckett CTS, Carraro JAH (2014) Optimum lime content identification for lime-stabilized rammed earth. in Construction and Building Materials 53:59–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.11.077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nagaraj H. B., Sravan M. V., Arun T. G., Jagadish K. S.( 2014 ) “Role of lime with cement in the long-term strength of Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks,” International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, Vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 54–61. (Article in press) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.03.001. .

  17. Real R (2010) “Earth architecture”, first ed. Princeton Architectural Press, New York, pp. 16–24:158–174

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hoff, Elena. (2016) "Appraisal of the Sustainability of Compressed Stabilized Earthen Masonry." University of Nebraska-Lincoln, pp. 8–14.

  19. Reddy, BV Venkatarama. (2015) "Design of a manual press for the production of compacted stabilized soil blocks." Current Science, pp. 1651-1659.

  20. Chastas P, Theodosiou T, Bikas D, Kontoleon K (2017) Embodied Energy and Nearly Zero Energy Buildings: a Review in Residential Building. in Procedia Environmental Science 38:554–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2017.03.123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. UN environment, Global Status Report (2018) “Towards a zero-emission, efficient, and resilient building and construction sector”, Global Alliance for Building and Construction, International Energy Agency. [Online] Available at: https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/27140/Global_Status_2018.pdf?sequence=&isAllowed=y. Accessed 24 June 2021.

  22. Crawford RH, Bartak EL, Stephan A, Jensen CA (2016) Evaluating the life cycle energy benefits of energy efficiency regulations for buildings. in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63:435–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Danso H (2013) Building Houses with Locally Available Materials in Ghana: Benefits and Problems. International Journal of Science and Technology. 2(2):225–231

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pacheco-Torgal F, Jalali S (2012) Earth construction: Lessons from the past for future eco- efficient construction. in Construction and Building Materials 29:512–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Vandna Sharma, Bhanu M. Marwaha, Hemant K. Vinayak,( 2016) ” Enhancing durability of adobe by natural reinforcement for propagating sustainable mud housing”, International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, Vol. 5, Issue 1,2016, Retrieved from Science Direct: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212609015300480. .

  26. Oti JE, Kinuthia JM, Bai J (2009) Engineering properties of unfired clay masonry bricks. Engineering Geology 107(3-4):130–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Burroughs, Steve (2008) “Soil Property Criteria for Rammed Earth Stabilization,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, pp 264-273.

  28. Habitat UN (2012) Going Green: A Handbook of Sustainable Housing Practice in Developing Countries. United Nations Human Settlements Program, Nairobi https://www.uncclearn.org/wp-content/uploads/library/going_green.pdf ,

    Google Scholar 

  29. Danso H, Martinson B, Ali M, Mant C (2015) Performance characteristics of enhanced soil blocks: a quantitative review. Building Research & Information 43(2):253–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.933293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Patowary BN, Nath N, Hussain I, Kakoti HJ (2015) Study of Compressed Stabilized Earth Block. Int. J. SCI. Res. Publ. 5(6):4–7

    Google Scholar 

  31. Deboucha S, Hashim R (2011) A Review on Bricks and Stabilized Compressed Earth Blocks. Scientific Research and Essays, vol. 6(3):499–506

    Google Scholar 

  32. Akbarnezhad A, Xiao J (2017) Estimation and Minimization of Embodied Carbon of Buildings: A Review. Buildings 7(5):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  33. Melia P, Ruggieri G, Sabbadini S, Dotelli G (2014) Environmental impacts of natural and conventional building materials: a case study on earth plasters. J. Clean. Prod. 80:179–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Architecture E Design, and Culture using of mud, clay, soil, dirt & dust. Compressed Earth Block. Primary School Tanouan IBI http://eartharchitecture.org/?cat=79.

  35. Auroville Earth Institute (AVEI), Earth as a Raw Material, UNESCO Chair Earthen Architecture, Al Medy mosque Saudi Arabia, http://www.earth-auroville.com/al_medy_mosque_en.php. Accessed April 16, 2020.

  36. Auroville Earth Institute (AVEI), Earth as a Raw Material, UNESCO Chair Earthen Architecture, Vikas Community http://www.earth-auroville.com/vikas_community_en.php. Accessed April 22, 2020.

  37. Archello, Women’s Health Centre Burkina Faso https://archello.com/project/womens-health-centre-in-burkina-faso. .

  38. National Center for Housing and Building Research HBRC, (2019) the Egyptian Code for Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks Part 1: Building with Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks. pp.1-143.

  39. Gustavsson, L., Joelsson, A., (2010) “Life cycle primary energy analysis of residential buildings”. Energy Build.42, pp.210-220.

  40. B. Bharath, M. Reddy, J. Pathan, and R. Patel,( 2014) “Studies on stabilized adobe blocks,” International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 259–264.

  41. Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics–Egypt, https://www.capmas.gov.eg/Pages/populationClock.aspx. Accessed August 30, 2019.

  42. Egyptian Meteorological Authority, http://ema.gov.eg/. Accessed August 2, 2019.

  43. Dorra M, Farroh H, Amer L (2018) A Proposal for Desert House Design in Egypt Using Passive Ground Cooling Techniques. Renew. Energy Sustain. Dev 4(1):21–41. https://doi.org/10.21622/resd.2018.04.1.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable

Funding

This study had no funding from any resource.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Not applicable

Authors’ information

'W.H' is an author: Architecture, environmental Design in Ain Shams University (BSc. MSc., PhD.), a member in Advisory Committee – Egypt Society of Energy Efficiency Engineers and Investors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walaa Hussein Hussein Hanafi.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hanafi, W.H.H. Compressed stabilized earth block: environmentally sustainable alternative for villages housing. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 68, 20 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s44147-021-00017-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s44147-021-00017-9

Keywords

  • Compressed stabilized earth block
  • Environmental
  • Sustainable
  • Housing
  • Villages
  • Upper Egypt