4.7 Article

Physical, mechanical and hygrothermal properties of lateritic building stones (LBS) from Burkina Faso

Journal

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
Volume 125, Issue -, Pages 731-741

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.082

Keywords

Lateritic building stones; Physical, mechanical and hygrothermal characteristics; Building materials; Burkina Faso

Funding

  1. Indo-French Centre for the Promotion of Advance Research (IFCPRA/CEFIPRA) [4608-1]
  2. Ecole Nationale des Travaux Publics de L'Etat (ENTPE), Vaulx-en-Velin, France

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Earth is a predominant eco-friendly construction material which provides a good occupational comfort consuming less energy. To improve the durability performance, stabilization is commonly adopted. However the additional costs induced by such process cannot be afforded by the majority of the population in developing countries, and in some circumstances, the environmental side effect may be controversial. Alternatively, laterite stone which is natural available and readily stabilized material that can be used for building construction is studied in this paper. Lateritic building stones (LBS) from Burkina Faso are studied for their hygroscopic, physical and mechanical characteristics by conducting experimental investigation such as moisture sorption and desorption, moisture buffering, three-point bending, and cyclic unconfined compression test. The analysis is focused on the moisture ingress of the material and its impact on the mechanical strength and also an insight on understanding linear elastic behaviour of LBS is carried out. The experimental results are compared with the stabilized and un-stabilized earthen construction materials. This comparison underlines the good performances of LBS, in both mechanical and hygrothermal properties as a building material. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available