International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 12, December 2015)
Mud House Technology
Gokila Chandran1, Gladis Thomas2, Jenny Rose P.J3, Merrin Paul4, Rigy Thomas5, Silpa Jose6
1
Assistant Professor, 2,3,4,5,6Degree Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Sahrdaya College of Engineering and
Technology, Kodakara, Thrissur-680684
Abstract Objective of the work is test mud blocks by
conducting compression test and to study the various tests on
mud to know whether the selected soil is suitable for the
building works. Different methods for construction are also
discussed in this paper.
KeywordsWattle and daub, cob, mud.
I. INTRODUCTION
The bombarding rate at which the graph of construction
industry is shooting up in Kerala is alarmingly a massive
threat on the environment. In the economically rich and
middle class world building construction is becoming a
non-essential luxury. The Gods own greenery of Kerala is
giving way to concrete sky scrapers. The demand for more
buildings is only increasing forgetting the fact that the
exploitation of our precious resources costs us the earth.
The exploitation can be attributed to the sudden and
strange surge toward the expensive concrete and
flamboyant structures. Here is only on solution which is the
wise and skilful use of eco-friendly materials. Here come
the advantage of mud as a building material.
Earth or Mud is perhaps the only traditional material
used by man ever since he started building his shelter; for
protection against natural vagaries of weather. Earth is also
one of the materials very easy to use .Widely accessible
and most economical. Mud as a cooking stoves, chimneys,
and more than all, several forms of decoration is possible.
There is however a need to improve and adopt the
techniques of usage of mud as a building material in the
present sophisticated context.
Mud has been the most essential of building material
since the dawn of the man. Approximately 58% of all
building in India are mud brick and a growing construction
boom in India. Mud is a building material which has
already being tested and tried for thousands of years. It is
used in modern day construction and the method of using it
is very different. Mud has its own limitation which can be
overcome. The main advantage of mud is we do not need
lot of energy to manufacture it unlike brick cement, steel,
concrete, etc. Mud construction is mainly found in places
which are relatively dry and have mud in abundance. The
mud house uses minimal energy is comfortable year
round.
84
The mud house construction uses only simple natural
materials, which are digging soil from the earth mixed with
water and added up with paddy or hay or any dried fibre or
even recycling garbage. Mud house construction is durable
and can be easily recycled. Mud construction also provide
air conditioning system which provide cool air from the
massive walls.
II. METHODLOGY
2.1 Cob Method
The first, simplest and almost certainly the oldest system
is called COB. With only a little water to form a very
stiff mud, a large lump of it - as much as you can hold
together between two hands - is roughly moulded into the
shape of a huge elongated egg. The usual size is anything
between 12 to 18-inches, (30 to 40-cm) long and about 6-
inches (15-cm) in diameter. A row of these cobs of mud are
laid neatly side-by-side - preferably somewhat pressed
together. Then another row of cobs is laid on top. This
second layer obviously lies in the depressions between the
lower rows of cobs. When three or four courses have been
laid, one above the other, the sides are smoothed over so
that the holes and cracks disappear. With care and
experience - and perhaps the use of a sharp knife - like
instrument, a very smooth flat surface can be acquired. So
far, I have used the word laid for putting the cobs
together but in practice, the experienced cobber literally
throws the cobs with accuracy and force so that the cracks
and holes between the cobs are almost non-existent. If there
is too much water the wall as it grows, bulges or slumps
and is likely to fall down or subside into a heap of mud. In
any case the wall building is better done slowly. After
laying two or three courses of cobs all-round the house wait
until it has hardened and set a little before carrying on with
the next two or three rows. Another cob problem is to keep
the walls straight and vertical. The easiest way to overcome
this problem is to stand aside the wall while you are
working. The surface of the walls will be somewhat rough
if only the hands are used to smooth over the holes and
crevices. Soon after completing the wall, one can smooth
its surface by using a mammaty or an adze or a sharp knife
or trowel. Such instruments will slice off bumps and give
lumps a clean smooth surface.
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 12, December 2015)
Openings for doors, and windows area problem, which
can be solved by using temporary vertical planks or
shuttering. Another very simple shuttering for openings is
to use empty kerosene tins. The main and very big
advantage of cob is that anyone and everyone can have a
bash at it and no special tools or moulds or other equipment
is required.
Fig. 3.1 Cob of mud
Fig. 3.2 Cob arrangement
2.2 Rammed Earth Method
The second method has developed from the cob wall so
as to standardize or regularize the thickness of the wall. It
is also an attempt to increase the strength of the wall by
ramming it. It is known as the Rammed Earth method.
Basically, two parallel planks are held firmly apart by
metal rods and clips or bolts, or by-small crosspieces of
wood.
85
Stiff mud is thrown in between these two planks and
rammed down with either a wooden or metal ramrod.
When one section is completed and hard, the two boards
are moved along and the process is until the whole plan is
completed. The two planks are then raised up and a second
course of rammed earth is repeated over the first - and it
goes on until the whole wall is completed. It is best to
follow a bonding pattern as used in brickwork, so that the
vertical joints between one rammed section and next are
not vertically one above the other. Otherwise, these vertical
joints can later turn into a large vertical crack. The two
planks can become quite elaborate frames to refine and
improve method of - holding, them rigidly part, and then to
be able to move them along or above the already rammed
surfaces. Other refinements are adjustable baffle boards so
that wall ends, as at corners, or where door and window
holes occur, can be dealt with more easily, while the cob
wall can be done by almost anyone, the rammed earth wall
calls for a small measure of expertise - though the Handy
Man can soon master the system. However, there is no
doubt at all that the life of rammed earth walls is usually
very long and they can carry heavy floors and roofs and be
used for two and even three storey buildings.
Fig. 3.3 Rammed earth mould on top end
Fig. 3.4 Rammed earth construction
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 12, December 2015)
2.3 Adobe or Sun Dried Bricks
This is probably the most popular form of mud
walling because the mud blocks or brick can be made
by anyone and after drying. They can be stored until
there are enough of them and the right time to build
has come. A small box or mould of wood of metal is
used and the stiff clay is squashed into the mould and
then turned out to cure and slowly dry. After that a
mason can use them in much the same way as he
would use burnt bricks or cement blocks. The adobe
bricks can be made to any size. They can be the same as
an ordinary burnt brick (about 9 41/2 3) or they
can be bigger (12 6 4) if a thicker wall is
preferred or indicated. (The smaller brick is likely to crack
less). If care is taken to dry the bricks slowly (about a
minimum of a month ) and the walls are built in the
normal proper way. Strong crack free walls are normal
and can be used for 2 or even 3 storey houses. The
usual care must be taken to protect them from wet
and to use standard bounding patterns. There is
nothing new or risky or even rural about this system
of building mud walls and it is an obvious answer to
the need for millions of small houses for the homeless
without using any fuel or energy for their
manufacture.
For example in many parts of the country small
rough stones are found but it is quite difficult to build
a wall of any size or height with such small pieces .
So the stones are often used as fillers to either Cob,
Rammed earth or Adobe walls. In many hill and
mountain areas the stone is deliberately and carefully
added at the external base of the wall and this deals
with the splashing of rain water quite effectively. A
lime ,or lime and cement ,or cement mortar is usually
used so that the wall will not be weakened by driving
rain, but if the wall is protected by sunshades or roof
overhangs, these pointings are not necessary.
III. MUD TESTS
3.1 Colour Test
The colour of the soil is observed. Deep yellow, orange
and red, ranging to deep browns indicate iron content
which is good as building mud. Greyish or dull brown,
ranging to dirty white indicates more clay. Dull brown with
slightly greenish colour indicates organic soil.
3.2 Touch and smell
A small quantity of dry soil is rubbed on palm to feel its
texture. The soil is moistened and rubbed again. Soil that
feels course when dry but sticky when wet contains lumps
of clay. Soil that feels course when dry but gritty when wet
contains sand. Soil that feels course when dry but little
gritty when wet contains silt. If the wet soil gives off musty
smell then it contains organic matter.

Figure: 3.3.1 Sun dried brick

3.4 Wattle And Daub Method

Wattle and daub method is an old and common method
of building mud structures. Bamboo and cane frame
structure that supports the roof. Mud is plastered over this
mesh of bamboo cane and straws. Due to excessive rainfall
the Wattle and Daub structures gets washed off. However,
the mesh of cane or split bamboo remains intact and after
Fig.2.4 Wattle method of construction
the heavy rain is over the mud is plastered on again. There
are various other local system where some mud is
used in one way or another to assist other materials
to stick together.
86
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 12, December 2015)
3.3 Biscuit Test
A smooth paste from the soil removing all gravels is
made. It is moulded into a biscuit of 3cm diameter and 1cm
height. Leave it to dry and observed for shrinkages or
cracks. Break the biscuit to noting how hard it is. If biscuit
cracks or leaves gap from the mould then it contains more
clay. If its very hard to break then soil contains more clay.
If it breaks easily and can be crumpled between fingers
then it has good sand-clay proportion. If breaks and reduce
to powder then the soil has more sand or silt.
3.4 Cake Test
Moisten mud to a consistency that holds together. Take a
good one or more hand full of mud and shape into a circle
about 1 cm thick like a cake. Place this on a plate or board.
Cut this cake in half with a knife. Pick up and shake the
plate or board. If the cake joins itself together again it is
suitable for brick making.
3.5 Hand Wash Test
Play with wet soil till the hands get thoroughly dirty.
Wash the hands to see how difficult it is to clean. If hands
get cleaned quickly, then soil contains more sand. If it takes
little time to clean and feels like flour then soil contains
more silt. If it feels soapy or slippery and takes time to
clean then soil contains more clay.
3.6 Cigar Test
Make a smooth paste from the soil removing all gravels.
Roll it on palm to make a cigar. Slowly push it outside your
palm. Measure the length at which it breaks. Length below
5cm - too much sand. Length above 15cm - too much clay.
Length between 5cm to 15cm - good mixture of sand and
clay.
3.7 Adhesion Test
Make ball out of wet soil. Pierce a knife into it and
remove. Observer the knife after removing. If little soil
sticks on the knife then it has more silt. If lot of soil sticks
on the knife then it has more clay. If the knife is clean after
removal than the soil has more sand.
3.8 Sieve Test
Pass soil from series of standard sieves set on top of on
another with finest sieve at bottom. Observer the soil
collected in each sieve. Silt will be collected in lowermost
sieve. Gravels will be collected on top. Sand and lumps of
clay will be collected in intermediate sieves.
87
3.9 Sedimentation Test
Take a transparent cylindrical bottle or jar of 1Lt.
Capacity. Fill it with soil and water. Shake well and
allow it to settle for 30 minutes. Coarse gravels will be
settled at bottom, followed by sand, silt and clay on top.
Measuring the layers will give us the approximate
proportions of each content.
3.10 Compression Test
Make tennis ball size balls using the cob method and
allow to cure, as above. A ball has a point and you are
testing the point load. Remember to mark the balls. Place
the ball on a hard and flat surface. Stand on the ball with
your heal and slowly increase your weight on the ball until
all your weight is suspended on it.
3.11 Tensile Test
Make a brick using the cob method (that is using sand,
clay and straw) and a 2 litre ice-cream tub as mould.
Number each mix and mark your bricks and balls. Allow
the bricks to cure for 3 weeks minimum in the sun. A brick
is considered cured after 3 months, but I have found that 3
weeks gives you a really good idea, after all it will only get
stronger. Drop the brick from waist height, onto a very hard
and flat surface and observe how it breaks up. If it shatters
it is no good; breaking into a few large pieces is acceptable.
Often enough it does not break at all, which is fantastic. A
failed tensile strength test after being dropped on hard
surface; the brick should not disintegrate.
Fig. 3.1 Tensile strength test
IV. COMPRESSIVE TEST ON SOIL
The compressive strength of mud blocks were
determined by conducting compression test. The procedure
is as follow:
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 12, December 2015)
About 15kg of soil was taken .The soil was collected by Table 4.2
removing in the top soil up to a depth of one f.t 2% of Compressive strength of brick
cement by weight of soil was mixed with it. 1% of water Sl. Average compressive strength not less than
was added and mixed thoroughly. The above mixture was Class
No. (N/mm)
filled in the cube of size 150mm*150mm in three layers, 1 35 35
each layer was compacted by means of rammer weighing 2 30 30
4.86kg. After two hour it was demoulded. The mud blocks 3 25 25
were sprinkled by water for 12 days to attain strength. 4 20 20
The quantity of water was increased to 2% in the second 5 17.5 17.5
mix and the above procedure was repeated. In the third mix 6 15 15
an additional ingredient, Lime of 5% by weight of soil and
7 12.5 12.5
8% of water was used. The compressive strength of these
8 10 10
mud block were tested in the Compression testing machine
9 7.5 7.5
after 12 days. The values of compressive strength of
various mix are tabulated in table 4.1. 10 5 5
The compressive strength of the first mix of mud block 11 3.5 3.5
was found to be 1.5N/mm and thst of the second mix was
2N/mm and 2.2 N/mm for the third mix with the addition
of lime the compressive strength increased considerably.
Therefore the mud is the one of the major constructive
material. For the compression test result the mud is used
to construct a house. Because the compression value
range is 1.4 Mpa to 1.9 Mpa In our testing value is 1.5
to 2.0 Mpa and using mixture of mud ,cement, lime and
water the value is 2.22 N/mm2 . Therefore the mud is
also used in the mud house construction and compare
other construction methods the mud house construction
is low cost and more healthful construction technology,
eco-friendly construction technology.
Table 4.1
Result of compression test

Weight
Water Compressive
Samp of soil Cement Lime
content strength Fig. 4.1 Cracks on mud cubes
le no. taken (%) (%)
(%) (N/mm2)
(kg)
V. CONCLUSIONS
1 15 2 - 1 1.5
2 15 2 - 1 1.5 The strength of mud blocks gradually increases with the
3 15 2 - 2 2 addition of water. Also the addition of lime increases the
4 15 2 - 2 2 strength. The results of the test conducted shows that the
5 15 2 5 8 2.22 value ranges between 1.5 to 2.2 N/mm2. In comparison
6 15 2 5 8 2.22 with the brick it has moderate properties, but the
compressive strength of mud wall is attributed to the
increased thickness of the wall.

88
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 12, December 2015)
REFERENCES [4] Emmanuel E. Oshike (Mnia), Building With Earth In Nigeria: A
Review Of The Past And Present Efforts To Enhance Future
[1] Sruthi G S, Mud Architecture, International Journal of Innovative Housing Developments, International Journal Of Science,
Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, Volume 2, Environment And Technology, Vol. 4, No 1, 2015.
Special Issue 1, December 2013.
[5] Mohammed El-Gohary, The Contrivance Of New Mud Bricks For
[2] Nabil Ibrahim El-Sawalhi, Hamed E. Abu Ajwa, Mud Building Restoring And Preserving The Edfa Ancient Granary - Sohag,
Practices in Construction Projects in the Gaza Strip, International Egypt, International Journal Of Conservation Science, Volume 3,
Journal of Construction Management, Volume 13, Issue 2, 2013 Issue 2, April-June 2012.
[3] A Madhumathi, J.Vishnupriya, S Vignesh Sustainability of [6] Abu-Hammad, N.O., Architectural Mud Brick Prototypes As
traditional rural mud houses in Tamilnadu, India: An analysis related Efficient and Sustainable Shelters for the Low-Income Group in
to thermal comfort, Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Jordan, Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 5, No. 1, 2011
Science and Technology (JMEST), Vol. 1 Issue 5, December 2014

89