Building with earth

1. The Auroville experience

Different trials in earth building have been attempted in Auroville with varying success. In 1989, with the crea
the Auroville Earth Institute and the construction of the Visitors' Centre, a new era in earthen architecture s
This Visitors' Centre, of 1200 m, used Compressed Earth Blocks (CEB) and demonstrated the possibilities o
as a quality building material.

After that, many more projects blossomed: individual houses, clusters of houses, apartments, schools, and the
Community Kitchen designed for 1,000 people. The earthen buildings presently amount to 20 to 40% of th
number of buildings constructed in Auroville.

The diversity and quality of techniques and know-how has increased; and thus the demand for and g
recognition of the value of this natural building material has risen. Its economic advantage, comfort quali
flexibility is now well established. The Auroville red soil makes for aesthetically pleasing buildings. It gets its
from iron oxides, the properties of which enhance the already rich composition of this remarkable building mat

Some may say, "Using soils for building will lead to the destruction of nature..." True, if it is done unconsc
without knowledge; but wrong if one is alert to proper management of resources and the natural balance there

The Auroville Building Centre / Earth Unit lays emphasis on the management of resources, where the qu
planned first, so as to be integrated in the processing of every development. First of all, one should scrape
and put aside the topsoil, which can be re-used later for agriculture or gardens. Two types of quarries m
developed: deep ones which can be used later on for water harvesting, pools, percolation systems, or shallow
which can be used for landscape design, work or play areas, gardens and also percolation features, etc.
2. Compressed Earth Block (CEB)

Today, Compressed Earth Block technology is the widest one used worldwide, as well as in Auroville, beca
represents a synthesis of traditional practice and modern technology. It is also benefitting from scientific input.

In Auroville, the average results obtained with CEB at 5% cement are () 50 kg/cm2 (5 Mpa) for the dry compr
strength, and () 9% for the water absorption. Local fired country bricks are at () 35kg/cm and () 12%
Auroville Building Centre has designed a press for CEBs, which is manufactured by Aureka, and sold in India,
and even Europe.
3. Rammed earth (PISE)

This technology was used traditionally in countries like France, Morocco, northern India and Tibet, and is toda
with stabilisers in USA and Australia. Pis is rammed in forms either manually or pneumatically. Until 1995, Au
had only one house in raw rammed earth. AV-BC / Earth Unit designed slipping forms adapted to Indian con
for building the 600m of Mirramukhi School with stabilised rammed earth. Since then, the demand has ris
houses, workshops and other developments using this technique.
4. Roads

AV-BC / Earth Unit is conducting research on soil stabilisation adapted to tropical climate. The aim is to imp
roads, where the sub-grade courses and the wearing course are done in a single course, so as to redu
construction process and cost. The challenge for Auroville is how to implement a quality road with little mean
without the usual, incredibly heavy machinery.
5. Buildings, from foundation to roof
Vikas community

From the very beginning of the Vikas settlement in Auroville's residential zone, earth was used in all parts
buildings, from foundations to roof. The proper management of earth resources has always been the first p
The quarries where the soil was taken from were planned first. This procedure allowed a perfect integration

excavations with the buildings and landscape.

Alongside the construction of Vikas, the Auroville Building Centre/Earth Unit researched and developed
appropriate building technologies which used stabilised earth. The first and second developments of the col
kitchen and the ten apartments on two floors could integrate the quarries as garden reservoir and waste
treatment sites. The soil needed for these developments was already exceeding the volume of excavation
some soil had to be supplied from elsewhere.

The soil requirement for the third building, which had four floors, was tremendous, and it was not poss
integrate the earth excavation required for the project. This building was planned with a basement floor, whic
half underground (1.20m below the original ground level). The volume of this basement floor was equivalent
volume of soil which was needed to produce the blocks and all the various works of the third bu
Thus, the amount of soil generated by the basement was enough to build 819 m2 (carpet area) on 4 floors.

To protect the basement from the overflow of rainwater, a particular landscape was designed: the imm
surrounding was shaped like a shallow crater to drain rainwater into a percolation pit.

This landscape design generated even more soil than needed. This was used for other projects, which cou
implement the concept of a basement floor.

The third building used stabilised earth on four floors, from foundations to roof, and implemented v
appropriate building technologies with earth and ferrocement. Some of these technologies were a
implemented, on R&D level, for the first two buildings. They were all based on stabilised earth, with 5% of cem
weight. The structure is entirely load-bearing and the walls are 24cm thick from the plinth level to the parape
which is 13.40m higher. Floors and roof used ferrocement channels for the service rooms (bathroom
kitchenettes) and very flat vaults and domes for the living rooms. These vaults and domes were built with the
spanning" technique (without formwork). They were levelled flat with stone slabs that provided a cavity whic
used for ventilation.
Training centre of Auroville Building Centre

Since its inception in 1989, the Auroville Building Centre / Earth Unit has been focusing its research & develo
entirely on building with stabilised raw earth for complete structures. Over the years, various technique
equipment have been researched, developed and implemented: presses for CEB with 15 different m
stabilised rammed earth foundations, composite beams (RCC with U shape CEB), composite pillars (RC
round hollow CEB), alternative soil stabilisation with homeopathic milk of lime & alum and cement, etc.

The research conducted over the past few years has given interesting results with this alternative stabil
(combination of lime, alum and cement). The last experiment in this field dealt with waterproofing roofs, an
implemented for the new premises of the training centre.

This Training Centre has been built entirely with stabilised raw earth, from foundation to roof, and even
waterproofing. It has stabilised rammed earth foundations and walls, plinths with CEB, flooring with CEB
composite beams and pillars, paints and plasters with stabilised earth, vaults with CEB and waterproofin
alternative stabilised earth. A recent and exceptional rainfall, in February 2000, showed the effectiveness
stabilised earth waterproofing: 402mm rainfall in five days, and no leakage and no dampness inside the vaults

The
moisture
measured with
an
electronic
hygrometer
gave
these
results.

MOISTURE

After
402mm
rainfall in 5 days

Outside

Vault

Window sill

Inside

2 weeks after
rainfall, under
sun

Outside

Inside

100 %

31. 6 %

19. 4%

22 %

59. 8 %

27. 8 %

20 %

21. 8%

6. Comparison of building materials in Auroville

It's sometimes said that building with earth is more expensive than building with conventional fired bricks. Pr
people are confusing the cost of masonry with the final cost of building, which implies so many variations in d
and finish, and which includes the quality of the site management as well as the skill of the builders.
The following tables give interesting information on this issue.

Size of brick (cm) + Volume

Weight of brick

Stabilisation

Cost per unit on site

Wastage

Units per m (raw material)

Mortar used

Qty. of Mortar / m of Wall

Units per m of wall

Daily output per team

Pointing output (m / day)

Cost of 1 m of raw material

(Including the waste )

Cost of mortar per m

Cost of wall per m

Cost of wall per m

Pollution emission (CO)*

Energy consumption (wall)*

Dry Crushing Strength

Water absorption

Notes
* Source: Development alternatives, New Delhi 1998

Country fired brick is also called village brick

The material cost includes the delivery on site.

Value October 2000: 1

Wire cut brick is also cal

The CEB price is the production cost on site. All costs ar

DATA

Sand
lorry

= 700 Rs./ 4.5m3

Mason

= 120 Rs./ day

Team for bricklaying

= 1 mason

 200 Rs./ m sieved

Male helper

65 Rs./ day

Team
earth

for

rammed

= 5 labour

Soil
= 50 m dug &
sieved

Female helper

40 Rs./ day

Team for CEB making

= 9 block

Cement = 155 Rs./ bag

Labourer

67 Rs./ day

Team for pointing

= 1 male h

RE labourer

75 Rs./ day

Block maker

75 Rs./ day

(L & T 53 grades)

SUMMARY

MONETARY COST

STRENGTH

Per m3, a finished CEB wall is

CEB and rammed earth are:

28.5 % cheaper than country fired

bricks.

42 % stronger than country bricks.

20 % cheaper than wire cut bricks.

52 % weaker than wire cut bricks.

Per m3, a rammed earth wall is

33.3 % cheaper than a CEB wall.
52.3 % cheaper than country fired
bricks.
46.7 % cheaper than wire cut bricks.

ENVIRONME

CEB and ramme

Pollution

2.4 times less tha

7.8 times less th

bric

Energy con

5 times less than

15 times less th
bric

7. A material for the future

Building with earth is definitely an appropriate and cost & energy efficient technology that has a great
However, one has to master the disadvantages of the material. These are usually caused by variations in th
quality, and hence the block quality may suffer. Bad quality soil can give relatively poor characteristics
compared to concrete) and shrinkage cracks may occur.
Among the advantages of earth as a building material, one observes:
Earth is a local material, contributing to sustainable development.

 Production of the building components utilises a lot of semi-skilled manpower.

The technology is easily adaptable and transferable.
The energy & monetary costs are much lower than with most other materials.
The thermal comfort and 'vibratory' atmosphere are very positive.
Obviously, one has to master the materials and techniques so as to obtain the optimum possibilities
harmonious, durable, agreeable and efficient architecture!
Nevertheless, the following drawbacks have to be considered:
Mechanical qualities less regular.
Sensible building details.
Constraint to organise and manage the production of one's own building material on the site.
Challenge

Building with earth has a great past, but also a promising future, especially in Auroville. It is a true challe
realise an architecture full of light, suppleness, simplicity, imagination and beauty with a dark, heavy and fo
mud. In Auroville we're working on it.
For further details, please contact:
the Auroville Earth Institute, eamil: mailto:earthinstitute@auroville.org.in
Website: http://earth-auroville.com/