Autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC)

the story of a low-weight material

Bo G. Hellers1, Bo R. Schmidt2
1
2

Emeritus professor at KTH/ABE-school, Stockholm

Civ.eng., former marketing manager of Siporex, Sweden

THE PRESENT SITUATION

AAC is attractive on the world market. The production is growing by some 5 Mm3
per year, while the total demand will reach 100 Mm3 in the year 2010, according to H.
Bagheri (2006). It is a high-class building material made of simple or even waste
ingredients (sand and/or fly ash), with a limited amount of mineral binders (lime,
cement). Foaming is generally activated by aluminium powder. The elevation to
a higher level is an example of the current trend towards material economy, activated
through a well-adapted, low-temperature manufacturing process. The pressurized
autoclaving (180-200C, at about 1 MPa for around 10 h) converts the minerals
chemically into a strong crystal structure of torbermorite. And the level of embodied
energy is relatively low. Cutting with wires is very accurate, which allows for precise
block geometry and masonry with thin bed (1-3 mm) mortar.
In practice AAC now appears in dry densities from 275-400 kg/m3 (insulating
densities) to 450-750 kg/m3 (structural qualities). It is used for plain masonry or
insulating purposes and for reinforced components such as lintels, roof/floor and wall
panels. The creep factor increases with lowering the material density. This may have an
important influence on load-bearing walls with a low content of reinforcement. In
practice, the density 500 kg/m3 is a good compromise in such cases. Horizontal
members have reinforcement also on the compressed side, which make them less
sensitive to long-term effects. Investigations of up to 70 year-old horizontal elements
confirm to this fact. A lower density is compensated by more steel, which has a fourfold
purpose, to resist tension, compression, shear and supply anchorage.
The span limit of a horizontal member was traditionally 6 m. The amount of steel
was then still moderate. Increasing the span led to a rapid increase of steel. Siporex, a
Swedish producer, expanded the mould to 8.0 m, but in practice the limit was held at
7.2 m with densities 500 or 600 kg/m3, (Lttbetonghandboken, 1993). One factor of
critical importance was the deflection under dead weight a test member of 8 m span
had a substantial hang.

BCE
A completely different solution to the span problem is given by the BCEtechnology, originally suggested by one of the authors in the early 1990s, (Hellers B.G.
& Lundvall O., 1992). It is a hybrid combination of AAC (PFA or sand), and HPC
(High Performing Concrete) and has a special attraction to a block producer, who wants
to expand his production to a complete building system. The basic idea behind BCE
was to expand the capacity of AAC into 9 m for floor panels and 12 m for roof panels.

64
The units are composed of blocks, stacked in vertical or horizontal directions in
a second production stage. The compatibility is secured by pre-stressing, which is
carried by the HPC-component, while AAC is an in-fill component, building up the
body of the structure. The pre-stressing is designed to eliminate the dead weight
deflection. This production is well adapted to CAD/CAM conditions, applied to
a specific project. The combination is material saving in that concrete is used for
compression but also for shear and anchorage of the reinforcement. Three out of four
requirements on steel in a genuine AAC-panel are eliminated. Typically, coming from
the AAC-side, 75% of the steel is saved, while 75% of the concrete and half the
embodied energy is saved (Aroni, 1993), if you come from the pure concrete side (HDelements, hollow core decks). It indicates that going from concrete to BCE, half the
emission of carbon dioxide is saved. A complication comes from handling two different
concretes. The BCE project is still being developed.

PROPERTIES IN SHORT
The embodied energy of AAC is comparatively low, 1.0 GJ/m3 (one third of
concrete).
The density of AAC varies between 275 (insulating quality) and 750 kg/m3
(structural quality).
The conductivity (W/mK) of insulating materials is in practice 0.08 (275), 0.09
(350), 0.10 (400).
The characteristic compressive strength (N/mm2) of AAC is 2.3 (450), 3.0 (500), 5.0
(600), 10.0 (750) (sand recipe).
The characteristic compressive strength (N/mm2) of AAC is 2.9 (460), 3.6 (600),
7.3/8.7 (750) (PFA recipe).
The creep factor is 0.5 (750), 0.7 (600), 1.0 (500), 1.5 (450) (sand recipe).
Reinforced panels in practice are made of genuine AAC up to 6.0/7.2 m span (sand
recipe). Reinforced members cannot be made with a genuine PFA-recipe.
Reinforced panels are made in hybrid technology (HPConcrete/AAC:PFA recipe or
sand recipe) up to 9.0 m span (roof panels up to 12.0 m).
The modulus of elasticity (N/mm2) is 1 200 (450), 1 700 (500), 2 500 (600), 4 000
(750).

THE BEGINNING OF AAC

It all began in 1923, when a Swedish architect, J Axel Eriksson, almost by chance,
discovered the possibility to use an autoclaving process to stabilize a mix of slate and
burnt lime, foamed by aluminium powder. It had very limited moisture-depending
shrinkage (in older literature (Ytong, 1942), it is claimed that its shrinkage is nil!).
A patent was granted in 1924, but it took a full five years, until 1929, before the
invention was commercially exploited, by Yxhults stenhuggeri AB, a natural
stonemasonry, converting to a producer of artificial stone blocks. It was a daring step by
the industrialist, Carl August Carln, soon paying off, since the market was anxiously
looking for an insulating masonry material. Sweden had experienced a serious energy
shortage after WW1. Ytong, as the material was named after 1940, was widely accepted
for its combination of desirable properties, load bearing, heat and sound insulating, fire
proof and durable, resisting moisture rot and insects. Reinforced components were

65
produced after 1933/34 (Ytong, 1954). The reinforcement in lintels was embedded in
ordinary concrete, which was covered on both sides by AAC (Ytong, 1942). To our
knowledge, this is the first case of hybrid combination of two concretes, an idea now
recurring in the BCE-system, previously introduced. Still, Ytong has remained, first of
all, a block producer.
The immediate success of Erikssons product soon attracted domestic competition.
In the case of Carlsro kalkbruk at Skvde, the competition was of a friendly kind, built
on exchange of experience. The competitor had a reputation for producing plain foamed
concrete blocks since 1924 (Rnnow, 1948) and it later invested in autoclaves,
following the example from Yxhult, in order to stabilize the product. The modernized
production of AAC started in 1932. The company name was changed to Skvde
Gasbetong AB in 1943 and again to AB Durox in 1964/65, taking the company name
from its AAC product. The Durox name is now related to a Dutch group, still producing
AAC in more than ten plants around the world, of which nine are in Europe.
A much more severe situation arose, when Siporit (from 1937 Siporex) was
launched on the Swedish market in 1934, (Rosenborg, 1998). This material was made of
a full cement-based recipe, developed as an alternative to the older slate/lime
composition, used by Eriksson and others. The original purpose of Siporex was to form
a complete building system, including plain blocks and reinforced products. Lintels
were available from the start and roof elements the year after (1935). Typically, the
proportion of reinforced products from Siporex exceeded 60% (1964), whereas Ytongs
proportion was always far less. On a European scale, the relation has remained low,
16 % in 1991 (Dubral, 1992), which indicates that AAC as a material was generally
approached on a rather low level. It is believed that the current tendency is much
in favour of reinforced material, forming components of complete building systems,
a higher level of approach. Also, present architecture favours a free hand in choosing
components, which are designed to project, beside any standard of sizes.
A Danish group, H+H A/S (Henriksen og Henriksen Aktieselskab) was formed in
1937. Later, it has merged with the British company Celcon Ltd. and it is currently
expanding into Eastern Europe, through buy-out of production facilities, where PFArecipes were established after WW2. Celcon had initiated the use of PFA, replacing
siliceous sand, in their products, already after 1955.
The spread of AAC technology around the world indicates that the market has
been ripe for this kind of product and that maintaining patent rights has been difficult,
indeed. It was long tried by Ytong AB, opposing Siporex AB, which ended in an
agreement, based on a modus vivendi. Meanwhile, other producers, such as H+H A/S,
tried their luck on the market with a long-term success.

THE INITIATIVE OF HEBEL

Another recipe for making AAC, the third to appear and probably inspired, like
Siporex (Rosenborg, 1998), by the German material Mikroporit, was developed at the
technical universities in Aachen and Stuttgart after 1942 (Schramm, 2005). It is more
than likely that an inspiration came from the Siporex patent of 1937. Whether the rights
were in fact violated under the war conditions is still an open question. But the
researchers were certainly aware of the sensitivity of traditional wooden floorings by
war actions in 1942 the bombing of German cities started causing devastating firestorms, fed by an extensive use of wood material in buildings, especially in floor

66
structures, all the way from medieval times up until 1935 (Berg, 2006). (Some roof
structures are still made of wood, e.g. in Scandinavia.) The walls and chimneys were
normally brick structures, which remained standing after all that could burn had
disappeared (Friedrich, 2002). Under war conditions, it was concluded that a new
building material must be fireproof and be made of simple materials in a process of low
stress on resources. This is a fully modern aspect, important in our times, when we
must, for climate reasons, favour efficient solutions to building material supply,
measured by some sharp resource or energy index. AAC has a low embodied energy
compared to most other products.
Josef Hebel, a Bavarian contractor of high reputation since 1926, was informed
about the new material, AAC, through the Generalbaurat of Munich, Hermann Giesler,
who organized a meeting with important contractors of Southern Germany, on request
from the Reichsregierung (L Hebel, 2008)! J Hebel was commissioned some time in
1941-42 to visit the new AAC-factories (Siporex) in the Baltics (Tallinn and Riga) to
learn about reinforced panel production (Rosenborg, 1998). This is a surprising piece of
information, not that a capable engineer was assigned to industrial espionage, although
with Swedish consent (Jnsson, 2009), but that this happened in war-time, when the
German industry, by Fhrerbefehl, was fully geared to belligerent production. In fact, it
was a downright crime to engage in anything beside the purpose of warfare itself.
Obviously, the in-house and the public policies did not match! Some kind of accepted
disobedience must have characterized the Wirtschaftsministerium, where a man like
Otto Ohlendorf was open to long term planning for Germany, despite the prohibition
(Herbst, 1982). It is not known whether there was in fact a connection between
Ohlendorf and Giesler, but it is a sign of common sense that there were good people in
the time of the Third Reich, who were preparing for other conditions than the current.
Or were they so convinced that the war would be won, one-way or the other? Not until
the 9th of Sept 1943, was the dangerous situation altered by the Fhrererlass allowing
the production of emergency housing for the many unfortunate people, victimized by
the bombing. It is highly probable that the Hebel production of AAC at Memmingen,
starting in March 1943, was part of the programme. Josef Hebel expanded his business
by acquiring an abandoned silicate brick factory at Emmering later that year, which had
operative autoclaves, ready for use. His office in Memmingen (since 1921) was bombed
to pieces in 1945, just before the end of the war. He had then developed his production
into reinforced panels, cut in shape from soft material by thin wire. Wire cutting was an
old technology, used e.g. on cheese, but now subject to patent application by Ytong
(1942), (Byttner, 1968). It is very likely that Hebel knew about this application.
Josef Hebel was a capable engineer but not a true inventor himself. The
technology that he applied in the production, starting again in 1948 at Emmering, was
a wise selection of available procedures. The AAC recipe was German, but the
reinforcement and the cutting technologies came from Sweden. The initial money came
from the Marshall aid to Germany. Hebel specialized in reinforced panels and elements,
a profile close to that of Siporex. In 1961 the first home was built by Hebel and the next
year another division, Hebel House, was formed to concentrate on residential projects
throughout Germany. Hebel has since then swallowed the Siporex plants on several
markets. As late as in the 1980s, (Wittmann, 1992/Pytlik & Saxena) the number of
production sites was about equal, or 35, between the two companies. In 1994, there
were 45 plants named Hebel. In 2002 (Charleston RBJ, 2002) the number of Hebel
plants was 115, growing by on average with 4 new plants per year. The identity of

67
Siporex has eventually been lost to Hebel. The success of Hebels brand of AAC,
throughout the world, is a proof of his high engineering status, combined with superior
management. The total number of plants in the world was exceeding 300 in 2004
(Budwell, 2004), of which Hebel had a 40% share. His name has become a brand in
itself.

FURTHER STEPS OF DEVELOPMENT

The AAC material, combined with reinforcing steel, forms a building system, to
be used exclusively or in combination with steel, concrete and sometimes wood. The
composition of AAC has been refined to include waste materials (already in the 1950s,
based on patents from the 1930s !), such as PFA (Pulverized Fuel Ash), class F,
replacing part of the sand commercially, or being the only source of siliceous matter,
eliminating the grinding process. This is an environmental friendly step, working well
with lower densities. At present, it is being tried to use such compositions with
reinforced products. According to available experience (Siporex), it was not possible to
replace more than 70% of the sand in order to avoid longitudinal cracking, but this
conclusion is being questioned by other producers, such as H+H Celcon. A way of
avoiding such cracking is to include calcinated magnesium oxide in the recipe. To our
knowledge, Hebel is not using PFA anymore, after serious problems with a test facility
in 1986.
The production of integral panels, up to say 30 m2 is possible with a one-way prestressing, in the vertical direction. Such a technology is inspired by G Dahls
development of Integral walls (Rosenborg, 1998). The BCE-system is semi-heavy
building technology characteristically, it carries a live load double its dead weight,
while massive concrete carries only half.
It is believed that the BCE technology helps overcome some of the drawbacks of
the traditional AAC-technology. This is rather wasteful with steel, like the HDtechnology (not to mention massive concrete on-site structures) is wasteful with
concrete. This material is not to be approached as a free commodity in our modern
world, due to a large embodied energy, related to cement, and severe restrictions on
natural gravel. Similar restrictions will possibly be extended to crushed rock, now
substituting natural gravel on Scandinavian markets. And, why destroy nature, if not
absolutely necessary? In the long perspective, we feel that the prefab concrete industry
will also need to approach the BCE-technology. Either way of approach, the new
technology is more efficient than the origin.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Aroni S., et al., 1993. Auyoclaved Aerated Concrete: Properties, Testing &
Design, RILEM Technical Committees 78-MCA & 51-ALC. E & FN Spon,
London.
[2] Bagheri H., 2006. Prestressed hybrids of AAC and HPC The BCE (Block
Composed Element) building system, KTH, TRITA-ARK 2006:9, Stockholm.
[3] Berg S.A., 2006. History of Reinforced Concrete to 1950; the Development of the
Composite in Properties, Computation Models and Safety, KTH, TRITA-ARK
2005:2, Stockholm.
[4] Byttner A., 1968. Ytong Yxhults historia, Del II, rebro.

68
[5] Charleston Regional Business Journal, Nov 18, 2002.
[6] Dubral, W., Ytong AG, Munich, 1992. On production and application of AAC
worldwide, 3rd Int Symp on AAC, Zrich, ISBN 90 5410 0869.
[7] Friedrich, Jrg, 2002. Der Brand.
[8] Hebel L., 2008. Private correspondence.
[9] Hellers B.G., Lundvall O., 1992. Aerated Concrete used in Composite Action with
Ordinary Concrete from Block to Element, 3rd Int Symp on AAC, Zrich, ISBN
90 5410 0869.
[10] Herbst L., 1982. Der totale Krieg und die Ordnung der Wirtschaft.
[11] Jnsson L., 2009. Private communication.
[12] Lttbetonghandboken (Ytong/Siporex), Kumla/Dalby, 1993.
[13] McLeod R.S., 2005. Ordinary Portland cement, with extra ordinary high CO2
emissions, BFF Autumn, p. 30.
[14] Pytlik E., Saxena J., 1992. Autoclaved Cellular Concrete: The Building Material
for the 21st Century; 3rd Int Symp on AAC, Zrich, ISBN 90 5410 0869.
[15] Rosenborg G., 1998. Siporex 1934-94, Private print, Liding.
[16] Rnnow, Sixten, 1948. Skvde gasbetong aktiebolag 1918-1948: Historik till
bolagets trettiorsjubileum, Skvde.
[17] Schramm R., 2005. Porenbeton Chronik einer Entwicklung, Bundeverband
Porenbeton, Hannover.
[18] Ytong, 1942. Ytong nutidens och framtidens byggnadsmaterial, Yxhult
stenhuggeri AB.
[19] Ytong, 1954. 25 r Ytong: [1929-1954]: en berttelse I ord och bild om ett
byggnadsmaterial, Ytongbolagens reklamavdelning.
[20] Wittman F.H., 1992. Advances in Autoclaved Aerated Concrete, 3rd RILEM Int
Symp. on AAC, Zrich, ISBN 90 5410 0869.

69
Annex
Critical moments in the development of AAC
1880 First attempts by V. Zemikov to boil lime-mortar in pressurized steam. The
results were not impressing, but continued work by W Michaelis, under reduced
water content, were all the more successful. He was granted a patent, which
forms the basis of all later calcined hydrosilicate products.
1889 E. Hoffman of Czechoslovakia was able to produce aerated concrete. The
aeration was produced by carbon dioxide generated in the reaction between
hydrochloric acid and limestone.
1914 Powdered aluminium and calcium hydroxide were used as aeration agents in
cementitious mixtures by J. Aylsworth & F. Dyer, USA.
1919 The use of metal powder as a hydrogen gas foaming agent was further developed
by I. Grosahe in Berlin, Germany.
1920 Aerated concrete was produced industrially by Carlsro kalkbruk (Skvde), after
successful tests by the Swedes A. Eriksson & H. Kreger. The composition
was based on slate and lime. The product was later named Durox.
1924 The Swede A. Eriksson combines the process of aeration (foaming) with
pressurized steam curing to form the first modern AAC product. The
composition was identical with Durox. The process was patented.
1929 A large-scale industrial production (blocks), based on the 1924 patent, was
initiated by Yxhult stenhuggeri AB through the manager C. A. Carln. The
product was later (1940) to be called Ytong.
1931 Reinforced lintels, replacing vaults and arches, were produced by Yxhult
stenhuggeri AB. Calculation of reinforcement (tension, compression, shear and
anchorage) followed an instruction by C. Forssell.
1933 An alternative composition of AAC was introduced by a Swedish cement group,
the so-called cement recipe. It was developed by I. Eklund & L. Forsn. The
intention was to form a building system, including all necessary reinforced
components. The product was later (1937) to be called Siporex.
1933-34 Both Ytong and Siporex started producing reinforced roof elements, to be
followed by floor elements. The aspect of offering complete building systems
was coming close.
1935-36 Ytong was produced at a density of 0.5 kg/dm3, by H. Blomqvist, which
formed the basis for the general use in the late 1930s of AAC as heat insulation,
in combination with brick or concrete.
1942 The cutting of soft AAC by wire was patented by K.-G. Ringdahl, the
technology being borrowed from the food industry (e.g. cheese cutting). The
patent application had been preceded by extensive testing.
1943 Another composition of AAC (the third, developed in Aachen/Stuttgart) was
introduced in Germany, soon to be adopted by J. Hebel. A block production at
Memmingen was tried.
1945 Reinforcement and wire cutting are introduced by J. Hebel, starting the
production of panels at Emmering. The production was stopped, due to end-ofwar turmoil. It was not until 1948, when the high-class production was restarted.
1948 The production of a full variety of AAC products is resumed at Emmering,
by J. Hebel.

70
1953 Horizontal wire cutting is introduced by Ytong. Inventor W. Sebardt. This
method was further developed by Siporex in the 1970s by R. Gransson of
Siporex (project Prometheus).
1955 Celcon Ltd. of England tries to use PFA (Pulverized Fuel Ash), type F, replacing
sand as source of siliceous matter, thus saving grinding energy and using an
otherwise waste material.
1956 Ytong introduced the so-called turning method, which improved cutting
procedures at better precision and lower tolerances. The team of development
included P Jakobsson, W. Sebardt & K.G. hrn.
1960 Tolerances are down to thin bed mortar, i.e. less than 3 mm.
1977 Tongue and groove indications on blocks are introduced by Hebel A.G. (The
corresponding quality on panels was introduced already in the 1950s.)
1983 The hand-grip on block sides was introduced by YTONG in order to facilitate
handling and masonry building, followed by several other manufacturers.
1992 An introduction of the BCE-technology, by O. Lundvall & B. G. Hellers.
2006 A conceptual study of the BCE building system, by H. Bagheri.