TECHNIQUES FOR IMPROVING ADOBE BLOCKS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS IN PLATEAU STATE
Table Of Contents
- <p> <b>TABLE OF CONTENTS </b></p><p>TITLE PAGE-i</p><p> APPROVAL PAGE - ii</p><p> CERTIFICATION - iii</p><p> DEDICATION iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS - v</p><p> TABLE OF CONTENTS - vi </p><p>ABSTRACT -vii </p><p>LIST OF TABLES -iix</p><p> <b>CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION - 1</b> </p><p>
- 1.1Background of the Study - 1</p><p>
- 1.2Statement of the Problem - 4</p><p>
- 1.3Purpose of the Study - 6</p><p>
- 1.4Significance of the Study - 7 </p><p>
- 1.5Research Questions - 9</p><p>
- 1.6Delimitation of the Study - 9</p><p> <b>CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE - 10</b></p><p>
- 2.1Conceptual framework - 11</p><p> 2.
- 1.1History of Building Construction in Plateau State - 12 </p><p>2.
- 1.3Adobe as Material for Building Construction in Plateau State -15 </p><p>2.
- 1.4Manufacture of Sandcrete Blocks -16</p><p>2.1.5 Compressive, Tensile and Shear Strength of Adobe Block -17</p><p> 2.
- 1.5Shear Strength of Sandcrete Blocks - 19 </p><p>2.
- 1.6Water Absorption Rate of Adobe Blocks - 20 </p><p>2.
- 1.7Cow dung as an Additive for improving Adobe Blocks- 22</p><p> 2.
- 2.8Adobe as a Building Material - 22</p><p>2.2.9 Digitaria Exilis Straw (Acha) as an additive -24 </p><p>2.
- 2.10Laterite soils and its properties - 25</p><p>2.3 History of Traditional Techniques of Adobe Construction- 27 </p><p>2.
- 3.1Socio-economic and Environmental Reasons for Alternative materials-30</p><p>
- 2.4Review of Related Empirical Studies - 32 </p><p>
- 2.5Summary of Review of Related Literature-36 </p><p><b>CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY - 39 </b></p><p>
- 3.1Design of the Study - 39</p><p>
- 3.2Area of the Study - 40 </p><p>
- 3.3Instruments for Sample Collection - 40 </p><p>3.
- 3.1Preparation of Sample -41 </p><p>3.
- 3.2Specimen Production - 42</p><p>3.
- 3.3Curing of the Specimen - 42</p><p>3.4 Method of Data Collection -43</p><p>3.
- 4.1Methods of Data Analysis - 43</p><p><b>CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND ANAYLISIS OF DATA -44</b></p><p>
- 4.1Tests Results - 44</p><p>
- 4.2Findings - 53 </p><p>
- 4.3Discussion - 56 </p><p><b>CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS -59</b></p><p>
- 5.1Re-Statement of Problem - 59</p><p>
- 5.2Summary of Procedures - 60</p><p>
- 5.3Major Findings - 60</p><p>
- 5.4Implications of the Findings - 61</p><p>
- 5.5Conclusion - 62</p><p>
- 5.6Recommendations - 63 </p><p>
- 5.7Suggestions for Further Study - 63 </p><p><b>References - 76</b></p><p><b> Appendix -77</b></p>
Project Abstract
<p> <b>ABSTRACT</b></p><p> The two important areas in the housing sector are the promotion of building material units using local materials consistent with ecological balance, and the production of building materials with low energy inputs which substitute for energy intensive building materials. Common burnt clay bricks are increasingly becoming costly due to excessive cost of fuel to burn them and not many suitable brick earths are found everywhere. Stabilized adobe block could be an economic alternative to the traditional brick. This study attempted to use cow dung and digitaria exilis straw as stabilizing agent for adobe to find out whether there is a significant improvement in strengths for use in construction of buildings in Plateau State. The main focus of the study was to determine its compressive, shear, tensile strengths and water absorption of the specimen produced. 280 samples at mix proportions of ( 13 and 14) of digitaria exilis to adobe and cow dung to adobe respectively were produced and subjected to a curing periods of 28 days after which they were subjected to laboratory tests. The results showed that the blocks produced from both additives at specified ratios were poor in shear and tensile strength. However, adobe blocks produced from mixture of digitaria exilis straw and cow dung at mix proportions of 14 and 13 respectively indicates an acceptable strength and has low water absorption which complied with the British Standard. Hence could be recommended for Non Load be <br></p>
Project Overview