Behavior of cement-stabilized rammed earth circular column under axial loading

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Deb Dulal Tripura ; Konjengbam Darunkumar Singh
• 关键词：Rammed earth ; Stabilized soil ; Cylinder ; Circular column ; Strength ; Splitting
• 刊名：Materials and Structures
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：January 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：49
• 期：1-2
• 页码：371-382
• 全文大小：1,206 KB
• 参考文献：1.ASTM (2010) Standard guide for design of earthen wall building systems. E2392/E2392 M-10. ASTM International, West Conshohocken
  2.ASTM (2012) Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort. D698-12. ASTM International, West Conshohocken
  3.Bleich F (1952) Buckling strength of metal structures. McGraw-Hill, New York
  4.BS 5628 Part 1 (1992) Structural use of unreinforced masonry. British Standard Institute, London
  5.Bui QB, Morel JC, Hans S, Walker P (2014) Effect of moisture content on the mechanical characteristics of rammed earth. Constr Build Mater 54:163–169CrossRef
  6.Easton D (1982) The rammed earth experience, 1st edn. Blue Mountain Press, Wilseyville
  7.Giamundo V, Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G (2014) Nonlinear analyses of adobe masonry walls reinforced with fiberglass mesh. Polymers. 6(2):464–478CrossRef
  8.Hall M (2002) Rammed earth: traditional methods, modern techniques, sustainable future. Build Eng 77(11):22–24
  9.Indian Standard (1989) Specification for 43 grade ordinary portland cement. IS 8112. Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi
  10.Indian Standard (1995) Determination of liquid and plastic limit. IS 2720 (part 5). Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi
  11.Indian Standard (1995) Specification for methods of test for soils-grain size analysis. IS 2720 (part 4). Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi
  12.Indian Standard (1998) Improving earthquake resistance of earthen buildings—guidelines. IS 13827. Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi
  13.Indian Standard (2002) Code of practice for structural use of unreinforced masonry. IS 1905. Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi
  14.Indian Standard (2002) Determination of water content-dry density relation using light compaction. IS 2720 (part 7). Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi
  15.Jaquin P (2008) Analysis of historic rammed earth construction. Ph.D. thesis, School of Engineering, Durham University
  16.Jayasinghe C (1999) Alternative building materials and methods for Sri Lanka. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa
  17.Jayasinghe C, Kamaladasa N (2007) Compressive strength characteristics of cement stabilized rammed earth walls. Constr Build Mater 21:1971–1976CrossRef
  18.Kotak T (2007) Constructing cement stabilised rammed earth houses in Gujarat after 2001 Bhuj earthquake. In: Proceedings of international symposium on earthen structures. Interline Publishers, Bangalore, pp 62–71
  19.Maniatidis V, Walker P (2008) Structural capacity of rammed earth in compression. J Mater Civ Eng 20(3):230–238CrossRef
  20.Middleton GF (1987) Bulletin 5. Earth wall construction, 4th edn. CSIRO Division of Building, Construction and Engineering, North Ryde [Revised by Schneider LM (1992)]
  21.Minke G (2000) Earth construction handbook. The building material earth in modern architecture. WIT Press, Southampton
  22.New Zealand Standard (NZS) (1998) Engineering design of earth buildings. NZS No. 4297. New Zealand Standard, Wellington
  23.Reddy VBV, Kumar PP (2009) Compressive strength and elastic properties of stabilised rammed earth and masonry. Masonry Int 22(2):39–46
  24.Reddy VBV, Kumar PP (2011) Structural behavior of story-high cement-stabilized rammed earth wall under compression. J Mater Civ Eng 23(3):240–247MathSciNet CrossRef
  25.Sahlin S (1971) Structural masonry. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
  26.Southwell RV (1932) On the analysis of experimental observations in problems of elastic stability. Proc Royal Soc London Ser A 135:601–616MATH CrossRef
  27.Standards Australia (2002) Australian earth building handbook, HB 195. Standards Australia International, Sydney
  28.Tibbets JM (2001) Emphasis on rammed earth—the rational. Interaméricas Adobe Builder 9:4–33
  29.Tripura D, Sharma R (2014) Bond behavior of bamboo splints in cement-stabilized rammed earth blocks. Int J Sustain Eng 7(1):24–33CrossRef
  30.Tripura D, Singh KD (2014) Characteristic properties of cement-stabilized rammed earth blocks. J Mater Civ Eng. doi:10.​1061/​(ASCE)MT.​1943-5533.​0001170
  31.Turanli L, Saritas A (2011) Strengthening the structural behavior of adobe walls through the use of plaster reinforcement mesh. Constr Build Mater 25:1747–1752CrossRef
  32.Verma PL, Mehra SR (1950) Use of soil-cement in house construction in the Punjab. Indian Concr J 24(4):91–96
  33.Walker P, Keable R, Martin J, Maniatidis V (2005) Rammed earth design and construction guidelines. BRE Press, Bracknell
  
• 作者单位：Deb Dulal Tripura (1)
  Konjengbam Darunkumar Singh (1)
  
  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati, 781039, Assam, India
  
• 刊物类别：Engineering
• 刊物主题：Structural Mechanics
  Theoretical and Applied Mechanics
  Mechanical Engineering
  Operating Procedures and Materials Treatment
  Civil Engineering
  Building Materials
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1871-6873

文摘

Detailed study has been carried out on the load carrying capacity of cement stabilized rammed earth (CSRE) circular columns under axial compression. Tests on CSRE cylinders and columns were performed to determine the effects of concentric axial loading and slenderness ratio; and stress reduction factors were assessed. A comparative study was made between the ultimate compressive strength (σ _u) of columns determined using tangent modulus theory and experimental values. Furthermore, the validity of using masonry design rules for the design of CSRE columns was also assessed. The result shows that with increasing slenderness ratio the load carrying capacity of columns decreases. The ultimate compressive strength of column predicted by tangent modulus theory tend to converge with experimental values at higher slenderness ratio and the masonry codal predictions are observed to be un-conservative as compared to experimental reduction factors. Lastly, the characteristic strength determined for columns yields relatively higher safety factor and indicates that it is possible to construct a single storey load bearing houses when designed properly.