EARTHSHACK

Showcasing Rammed Earth Construction

Riverside Campus, Texas A&M University

Instructor
Dr. Richard Burt

Team Members
Steve McGann, Jonathan Altman Ryan Levy Kevin Sample Gregory Lee Mini Malhotra

Table of Content

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 3 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 3 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Introduction............................................................................................................................. 4 Construction technique ........................................................................................................... 6 Project planning ...................................................................................................................... 6 Materials ................................................................................................................................. 8 Soil characteristics .................................................................................................................. 9 Field tests .............................................................................................................................. 10 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 7. 8. Jar test ........................................................................................................................... 10 Sausage test................................................................................................................... 10 Ball dropping test.......................................................................................................... 10

Formwork.............................................................................................................................. 12 On-site construction .............................................................................................................. 13 8.1. 8.2. 8.3. 8.4. 8.5. 8.6. Wall structure................................................................................................................ 13 Window openings in the second lift.............................................................................. 17 Protection against the weather ...................................................................................... 20 Additional reinforcement in third lift............................................................................ 21 Bond beams over the wall structure.............................................................................. 22 Roof structure................................................................................................................ 23

9.

Lessons learned..................................................................................................................... 24

References..................................................................................................................................... 27 APPENDIX A Details of Roof Truss Assembly .......................................................................... 28 APPENDIX B Details of Exterior Finish ..................................................................................... 33 APPENDIX C Time Sheet............................................................................................................ 34

List of Tables
Table 1: Schedule of Activities....................................................................................................... 7 Table 2: Items and quantity estimates............................................................................................. 8 Table 3: Composition of soil........................................................................................................... 9

List of Figures
Figure 1: Location of the site .......................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Construction phases......................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3: Constituents of the soil .................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Field tests....................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 5: Formwork as designed................................................................................................... 12 Figure 6: Formwork as constructed for the first lift...................................................................... 12 Figure 7: Setting up formwork for the first lift (4/10) .................................................................. 14 Figure 8: Soil brought to the site (4/10)....................................................................................... 14 Figure 9: Erecting the first lift (4/12)............................................................................................ 14 Figure 10: Securing the first lift (4/12) ......................................................................................... 15 Figure 11: First lift form stripped (4/17)...................................................................................... 15 Figure 12: Left wall before and after trowelling (4/17)................................................................ 15 Figure 13: Preparing for the second lift after letting lift #1 dry out (4/17)................................... 16 Figure 14: Edges of the wall ......................................................................................................... 16 Figure 15: Window opening ......................................................................................................... 18 Figure 16: Formwork for the second lift (4/17) ............................................................................ 19 Figure 17: Early removal of the forms of the second lift (4/19)................................................. 19 Figure 18: Structure protected against the rain after the first and second lifts ............................. 20 Figure 19: Impact of thunderstorm (52mph) on different sides of the first lift ............................ 20 Figure 20: Third lift, with previous lifts protected at the back (4/24) .......................................... 20 Figure 21: Additional reinforcement ............................................................................................ 21 Figure 22: Placing and leveling the bond beams (5/5) ................................................................. 22 Figure 23: Stringers and joists (5/5).............................................................................................. 23

1.

Introduction

Designed on a 13'-8" x 8'-0" footprint, the Earthshack was intended to experiment with, and showcase the rammed earth construction. The site is located on the Riverside campus, Texas A&M University, adjacent to State Highway 47 and Highway 21 west of Bryan (Figure 1). The Earthshack was designed to be a 6'-6" high rammed earth wall enclosure with sloping metal roofing supported by wood frames. Two 2' x 2'-6" window openings on the north and south, and an existing 8'-6" wide door opening on the east were spanned by bond beams with 15 bearing on the walls. The walls were protected by 4' wide roof overhangs on all sides (Figure 2).

Figure 1: Location of the site

Figure 2: Construction phases

2.

Construction technique

Rammed earth is a method of building walls whereby a mixture of earth is compacted in layers between forms. Each layer of earth is approximately 4 inches deep. As each form is filled and the earth hardens, the formwork is removed and placed for the next lift, and the process continues until the desired wall height is achieved. Forms can be stripped off as soon as the earth between the formwork is set, as the compressed earth wall is self-supporting immediately. The soil mix needs to be carefully balanced between clay, sand and aggregate. The clay and moisture content of rammed earth is relatively low compared to that used for mud brick or other earth building methods.

3.

Project planning

The planning and execution was done in three phases that include: (1) design, quantity estimate, obtaining materials; (2) construction of formwork in the wood shop; and (3) on-site construction. Figure 2 shows the on-site construction phases, which include: the concrete base, wall structure, bond beams, stringer and joists, and roofing. The on-site activities were planned considering the weather, which is critical for drying of the consecutive lifts. Curing or complete drying of the wall, which increases the compressive strength of the wall, takes a period of time dependant on wall thickness, temperature, wind, and humidity. The initial compressive strength should be adequate to allow construction of the successive lifts. Rain and the wind direction were the other two factors that needed additional consideration, in this project. Table 1lists the schedule of activities and the weather conditions: dry bulb temperature (DBT), wet bulb temperature (WBT) and wind speed. The high humidity conditions occur when the DBT and WBT coincide. Hot, dry and windy weather conditions are suitable for curing.

Table 1: Schedule of Activities

Temperature (F) 100
Date Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Mar-27 Mar-28 Mar-29 Mar-30 Mar-31 Apr-1 Apr-2 Apr-3 Apr-4 Apr-5 Apr-6 Apr-7 Apr-8 Apr-9 Apr-10 Apr-11 Apr-12 Apr-13 Apr-14 Apr-15 Apr-16 Apr-17 Apr-18 Apr-19 Apr-20 Apr-21 Apr-22 Apr-23 Apr-24 Apr-25 Apr-26 Apr-27 Apr-28 Apr-29 Apr-30 May-1 May-2 May-3 May-4 May-5 May-6 May-7 May-8 May-9 Activity Scheduling, assignment of tasks Design completed Quantity Estimation Form work design

20

40

60

80

0 3/27 3/28 3/29 3/30 3/31 4/1 4/2 4/3 4/4 4/5 4/6 4/7 4/8 4/9 4/10 4/11 4/12 4/13 4/14 4/15 4/16 4/17 4/18 4/19 4/20 4/21 4/22 4/23 4/24 4/25 4/26 4/27 4/28 4/29 4/30 5/1 5/2 5/3 5/4 5/5 5/6 5/7 5/8 5/9 5/10 5/11 5/12 0

Final review of tasks

Purchased construction materials Formwork Completed

Weather Data (March-April 2006)

Placed formwork for first lift Erected first lift

Placed formwork for second lift Rammed second lift Removed inside formwork and replaced it back

Placed formwork for third lift Completed formwork for third lift Rammed third lift

Max. DBT Avg. DBT Wind Speed

Placed bond beams and stringers

Min. DBT Avg. WBT

Days with high humidity and/or precipitation

Wind Speed (mph)

10

20

30

40

50

4.

Materials

Table 2 lists the materials used for the construction. The materials can be categorized in four categories: (1) Earth: The soil used was purchased from Youngs soil yard in Bryan. 25 tons soil was purchased for the rammed earth structure. (2) Lumber: Lumber for the formwork and roof frames that include plywood and studs, were purchased from Lowes Hardware Store, Bryan. (3) Hardware: The main components required were for the ties of the formwork, vertical reinforcement, connection of the bond beams with the earth wall, roof frame and metal roofing. (4) Other: Besides the construction materials, other supplies included: sieves, rammers, glue, trowels, plainer, buckets, drill, rope, tarp, and various other tools.

Table 2: Items and quantity estimates

Material Soil soil soil delivery Lumber ply wood ply wood 2"x4" 2"x4" 2"x4" 2"x8" Hardware screws nails scaffold tarps anchor bolts dowl rod 6" bolts all thread rods flat washers lock washers nuts sockets Metal roof steel roof Other silicon sealant tarp tie downs rope litium grease CMUs super flex Type Quantity 25 25 7 5 6 10 14 17 250 200 26'x20' 18" 3/4" Measure tons tons Unit Cost $14.75 $2.50 Total Cost $368.75 $62.50

5/8" 3/4" 18' 12' 8' 16'

15 14' 28 12 30 30 30 2

12'x18' standing seam 175 sq. ft. bundle of stakes 1/4" white

100' 1 12

5.

Soil characteristics

Ideally, for use in earth wall construction, the soil must contain four elements: coarse sand or aggregate, fine sand, silt and clay. The aggregate provides strength, the fine sand is a filler to lock the grains of aggregate, and silt and clay, (generally identified by particle size, rather than chemical analysis) act as binder or plastic medium to glue the other ingredients together. Soil structures with a high percentage of aggregate (sand) may be strong when dry, but are more vulnerable to erosion from rain. Soil structures high in clay may be much more resistant to water and erosion, but less strong (McHenry 1984). For rammed earth, a soil with small gravel aggregate, sand, silt, and clay is most suitable. The durability and waterproof qualities of the wall are dependent on the clay content, which ideally will approximate 15-18%. Higher clay content is allowable and desirable in soils used for rammed earth. The moisture content is much lower initially in rammed earth and therefore is less subject to shrinkage on drying (McHenry 1984).

Table 3: Composition of soil

Constituents Particle size AASHO standard Gravel over 2.000 mm Sand or Coarse Aggregate 2.000-0.425 mm Fine Sand 0.425-0.075 mm Silt 0.075-0.005 mm Clay less than 0.005 mm Composition 23% 30% 32% 15%

Figure 3: Constituents of the soil

6.

Field tests

For this project, the composition of the soil, and its suitability for the rammed earth construction was tested through various field tests.

6.1. Jar test Simple field soil tests are made with a glass jar and water. The jar was partially filled with the available soil, and water is added above the soil level. The mixture was shaken and allowed to settle until the water becomes clear. The resulting stratification with bands of coarse aggregates at the bottom, sand, silt and clay on top indicated the proportions of various ingredients.

6.2. Sausage test Additional simple field testing of clay content and plasticity was done with the sausage test. A sample of soil is mixed with a small amount of water to make a stiff lump of mud. The mud is rolled by hand into a sausage like shape. It is then sled along the palm to overhang as much as possible until it breaks. The cracking of the sausage will indicate the clay content. If the free length before breaking is more than 8, it has a high binding force, implying high clay content. If it breaks after only a few inches, the mixture has too little clay.

6.3. Ball dropping test The precise proportions of aggregate, clay and sand are not critical and a simple field test may be made to determine the readiness of the soil for use. First, it should appear damp, but not wet. A handful of soil is squeezed into a firm ball readily by hand. In this test, a soil with too high a moisture content will feel sticky and will not form a firm solid ball when squeezed. On the other hand, if too little moisture is present, the soil will not compact and hang together at all. The successful compacted soil ball should be firm and solid, and compact firmly, neither hard nor wet and sticky. The hand compacted soil ball is dropped on to a firm surface from a distance of approximately 3 feet. If the soil ball shatters the moisture content is adequate. If it does not, too much moisture is present.

10

Soil ball test: a shatter soil ball indicates that the proper amount of moisture is present

Sausage test Figure 4: Field tests

Jar test

11

7.

Formwork

The forms were made using 8x4 sheets of 5/8 thick plywood. These boards were cut into three 2-8 high pieces, in order to achieve a 2 high lift with 4 to 8 overlap over the base/previous lift. 2 x 4 studs were attached to the boards horizontally to provide lateral strengthen and were extended for at least 4-5 on both sides of the board to connect the adjoining boards using bolts. Forms were prepared in architecture woodshop, and was brought to and erected on site.
138

40

40

40

18 40

80

53

111
40

711

53

40 28 28

40

30

40

28

80 14 14 28 40

27
80 14

86
80 10

27
80 14 18

28

28 80

28

40

40

28

40 54

30

28

28

28

28

28

28

24

28

14

28

28

28

54

Figure 5: Formwork as designed

Front right corner

Interior of the formwork.

Formwork completed

Figure 6: Formwork as constructed for the first lift

12

8.

On-site construction

8.1. Wall structure An existing 8" high, 16" wide base of 8" hollow concrete blocks on an existing leveled concrete floor was used for the wall footing (Figure 7). The earth was brought to site and piled adjacent to the proposed structure for easy handling and transportation of the soil mix (Figure 8). The earth was mixed with adequate amount of water to achieve desired moisture content. This was tested by the drop ball test, as described in section 6.3 . Forms were placed and secured using ties and cross spanning studs for each lift, and damp earth was filled in the cavity. The wall fill was placed in layers of 4-6" depth and tamped to total compaction (Figure 9). The tamping was done by hand using hand tampers of 18 lbs., and by boots for the upper lifts. Full compaction was determined by a change of sound or ringing when tamping. After each lift has been compacted, another layer was placed for compaction. When the wall was compacted, dried for few days, and the forms removed, it was stable enough for further construction, and was expected to have a compressive strength of approximately 3090 psi. This was sufficient for most anticipated loads, allowing construction to continue, but the surface and corners would be fragile until curing has occurred. Full drying and curing of the wall may require several months or even years, dependant on weather and humidity. Ultimate compressive strength should be approximately 450-800 psi. For stability of bearing walls, a minimum of 10/1 wall height/thickness ratio seem to be an international vernacular standard (McHenry 1984). The structure was built in three lifts of 2' height, each. After each lift, the structure was covered with tarp to protect against the expected rain (Figure 10). The forms were reused repeatedly for the three lifts. After stripping the forms, the gaps, through holes and irregularities on the surface were patched with mud plaster (Figure 11 and Figure 12). The dampness of the material, the uniformity of compaction and adequate drying of the wall were important, or the result might be dry, crumbly bands of loose material in the wall, creating planes of structural weakness after the forms have been removed. This was observed after an early removal of formwork of the second lift which was done the day before (Figure 17). The wall started to bulge where we took the first piece of formwork off. We ended up cutting way part of the wall where it cracked and re-rammed it after putting the forms back on. In the entire process, material handling was a major task, and if it is to be done by hand (as in this project); adequate labor, budget and time requirements must be recognized. It will require approximately one one-hour of labor to place one cubic yard of material by shovel (McHenry 1984).

13

Concrete base

Securing formwork horizontally

Securing formwork vertically

Figure 7: Setting up formwork for the first lift (4/10)

Figure 8: Soil brought to the site (4/10)

Preparing the soil mix Figure 9: Erecting the first lift (4/12)

Earth was filled in 4-6 layers

Handheld rammers for tamping

14

Figure 10: Securing the first lift (4/12)

Figure 11: First lift form stripped (4/17)

Figure 12: Left wall before and after trowelling (4/17)

15

Figure 13: Preparing for the second lift after letting lift #1 dry out (4/17)

Figure 14: Edges of the wall Provision was made in the form work for preventing the weak edges of the formwork to crumble off

16

8.2. Window openings in the second lift All openings in the earth walls must be provided with a lintel structure strong enough to span the opening width, with provisions for anchoring door and window jambs to the wall. Generally, doors present more of a problem than window frames because of the vibration. While a solid cured earth wall seems to accept material fastener such as nails and expansion bolt fasteners securely at inception; vibration, time, different expansion coefficients, and the oxidation effects of material fasteners will ultimately cause a loosening the fasteners in the wall. Solid wood anchors, placed in the wall as it is built, are less likely to cause future problems (McHenry 1984). For this structure, only two 2 wide window openings and an 8 wide door opening without jambs were planned. Provision was made in the second lift to accommodate the window openings. After securing forms on one side of the wall, an outward sloping thin layer of slurry prepared with finer soil was laid as a base for the window sill. The sills for the windows were made of glued and varnished 2x4' studs. The overall dimensions were 26" x 14.25" x 1.5". The lintels were made of the same, with overall dimensions of 28" x 14.25" x 3". The window sills were installed and the window forms were placed over them. The forms for the other side of the wall were placed in position. To protect the edges of the openings, triangular members were placed before filling the earth for the second lift. The lintels were installed over the window forms while constructing the third lift.

(a) An outward sloping thin layer of slurry with finer soil (b) The window forms were placed and forms for the was laid as a base for the window sill. other side of the wall were placed in position.

17

To protect the edges of the openings, triangular members The earth was filled around the window forms and were placed before filling the earth rammed

Due to ramming the right side of the wall, the bottom of the right formwork shifted towards the left as it was secured only at the top Figure 15: Window opening

18

Placing the interior and outer forms Figure 16: Formwork for the second lift (4/17)

Tow strap was used to line up the pin holes

The second lift was too wet due to high humidity Figure 17: Early removal of the forms of the second lift (4/19)

Re-ramming the part of the wall we cut down

19

8.3. Protection against the weather After each lift, the structure was covered with tarp to protect it from the expected rain and thunderstorms (Figure 18), however, the impact of rain on the windward side of the exposed wall (below the formwork) was severe (Figure 19), and it required extra protection as shown in Figure 20.

First lift (4/10)

Second lift (4/17)

Figure 18: Structure protected against the rain after the first and second lifts

No impact on the left wall

Severe impact on the back wall

Less impact on the right wall

Figure 19: Impact of thunderstorm (52mph) on different sides of the first lift

Figure 20: Third lift, with previous lifts protected at the back (4/24)

20

8.4. Additional reinforcement in third lift Additional vertical reinforcement was provided in the third lift using 3 long all-threaded bars. Besides providing lateral strength, these bars acted as elements to secure bond beams against the wall. These bars were placed vertically in the formwork at approximately 2 on center, with twisted metal plates on the bottom for good anchoring. Studs spanning over the entire width of the wall, were used as cross supports to secure these bars vertically while compacting the earth around them. As a safety measure, the exposed ends of these bars were covered with empty cans of coke (Figure 21).

Figure 21: Additional reinforcement Threaded bars used for vertical reinforcement; cross supports securing the vertical bars in place; coke cans covering the exposed bars

21

8.5. Bond beams over the wall structure Relatively low static compressive loads are easily handled by the strength of most earth walls, but the possibility of movement either by settling or by seismic activity may exceed the tensile strength. Due to the low tensile strength of earth walls, bond/ collar beam at certain locations are required to provide horizontal reinforcement that contains those stresses to smaller areas. Several materials may be considered for this task, such as concrete, wood, metal. Depending on ceiling heights, the bond beam may also be incorporated as all or a part of lintel requirements for the openings (McHenry 1984). For this structure, wood studs glued together to cover the entire thickness of the wall were used as bond beams. As the beams were composed of large or small segments of wood studs, provisions were made for the horizontal connection of its smaller elements. These beams were constructed on the ground, with holes drilled to connect the stringers. They were then hoisted up onto the earth walls, leveled and joined securely at the ends and corners (Figure 22).

Figure 22: Placing and leveling the bond beams (5/5)

22

8.6. Roof structure Vertical stringers were connected to the bond beams to support the joists. The detail of the truss assembly is included in Appendix A.

Front stringer secured against the bond beam Figure 23: Stringers and joists (5/5)

Placing the joists over the stringers

23

9.

Lessons learned

Suitability of soil As we advanced with the construction of wall, it was found that to get the proper consolidation we had to add more water than was ideal. This may be due to much aggregate or to large aggregate in the soil. Also, when first starting a lift, the largest of the aggregate tends to fall to the bottom of the mix, hurting the cohesion between lifts. This can be seen in several of the pictures. Thus, to avoid this, it is recommended to have had the soil yard sieve the soil before delivering it, or to lay down a layer of finely sieved soil to start each layer to aid in cohesion between layers.

Method of compaction The best method of compaction we found to be standing in the formwork and simply stomping down 4 or so inches of dirt at a time. Considering the amount of water we ended up needing, a stronger method of compaction was unnecessary.

24

Proper foundation There were major inconsistencies in the foundation we were building on. The edges of the foundation were not straight, so clamping to the sides of it was not an option for the first lift. Also, it was not square and varied in width as much as 1/2", making it very difficult when dealing with the resulting width of the wall and getting the lintels in. This can be avoided by using the same formwork to actually POUR a foundation, and have a consistent wall thickness from bottom of the wall up to the top.

Design of the formwork Having the ties go through the earth wall caused cracking on every lift while the ties were removed. This might have been avoided by design of the formwork with ties not penetrating the wall, but securing the forms from the sides and top.

25

Adequate time for curing Adequate drying of the wall was important, or the result might be planes of structural weakness after the forms have been removed. This was observed after an early removal of formwork of the second lift which was done the day before. The wall started to bulge where we took the first piece of formwork off. We ended up cutting way part of the wall where it cracked and rerammed it after putting the forms back on.

Availability of electricity on-site By the end of the project, we managed to get electricity and a water source at the site. This made things go MUCH faster, and would have been great from the beginning. However, this pertains to general construction practices and not specifically to rammed earth (except maybe for having ready access to water) but it made a world of difference in how quickly things went.

26

References
McHenry, P.G. 1984. Adobe and Rammed Earth Buildings. Design and Construction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York. Minke, G. 2000. Earth Construction Handbook. The Building Material Earth is Modern Architecture. WIT Press. Southampton, Boston.

27

APPENDIX A Details of Roof Truss Assembly

28

29

30

31

32

APPENDIX B Details of Exterior Finish

33

APPENDIX C Time Sheet

Tasks Initial Design Formwork Design Materials Pricing Cost Estimate Materials Purchase Formwork Day 1 Formwork Day 2 Materials Purchase Formwork Erection Caliche Test Patch Lift 1 Day 1 Lift 1 Day 2 Lift 1 Finishing Resetting Formwork (4/17) Remove & Replace Formwork from Lift 2 (4/19) Materials Purchase (4/21) Replace formwork for Lift 3 (4/24) Finish Replacing Formwork for Lift 3 (4/26) Lift 3 (4/28) Start Bond Beam (5/2) Put up Bond Beam and Joists (5/5) Finishing Preliminary Documentation Prefinal Documentation Final Documentation Total 43.5 37 3 3 51 31.5 10 8 4 3 4 5 3 1 0.5 8 8 1 8 2.5 1 0.5 3 3 1 3 2.5 2.5 2 3 3 3 3 3 2.5 4 5 2 4 3 8.5 5 2 4 3 2.5 3 2.5 3 3.5 2.5 1 0.5 3 Steven 2 3 Gregory Kevin** Jonathan** Ryan Mini Total 2 3 5 3 1.5 14 11 2 14 5 8.5 9.5 8 18 5 4 10 4 8 3 8.5 10 8 4 0 169

** To be updated

34

And more

We borrowed a mega drill (basically a small auger) from the Marine Archeology lab. Much to Kevin's surprise, it proved no match for the Spear of Death

Greg and Johnathan hard at work

The aftermath of a run in with Liquid Nails

I'm not exactly sure what Kevin is doing ;)

Stephen using the other end of "The Spear of Death"....notice the glove covering the sharp pointy end.... safety is our success

The Caliche Eggs multiply once more to a total of 5

Comments: by Ryan

35