SHELTER (Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient Shelter)

SHELTER

(Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient Shelter)

[Project sponsored by Karnataka State Council for Science and Technology, Bangalore under 40th Student Project Programme]

Project Report Submitted by

Ms. Soumya Sunilkumar Mesta Mr. Shubham Kumar Gupta

(4NM13CV107) (4NM13CV104) Mr. Shivam Kumar Mr. Vishal Lahkar (4NM13CV102) (4NM13CV122)

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

Dr. Radhakrishnan K.

Professor, Civil Engineering Department

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the Degree of

Bachelor of Engineering (Civil)

from

Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

N.M.A.M. INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (An Autonomous Institution under VTU, Belagavi)

(AICTE approved, NBA Accredited, ISO 9001:2008 Certified)

NITTE –574 110, Udupi District, KARNATAKA

April 2017

Karnataka State Council for Science and Technology sponsored

N.M.A.M. INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (An Autonomous Institution under VTU, Belagavi)

(AICTE approved, NBA Accredited, ISO 9001:2008 Certified)

NITTE –574 110, Udupi District, KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

CERTIFICATE

Certified that the project work entitled

“E3 shelter (Eco-Friendly, Economic, Energy-Efficient)”

is a bonafide work carried out by

Soumya Sunilkumar Mesta (4NM13CV107) , Shubham Kumar Gupta (4NM13CV104)

Shivam Kumar (4NM13CV102) , Vishal Lahkar (4NM13CV122)

in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of

Bachelor of Engineering Degree in Civil Engineering

prescribed by Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi

during the year 2016-2017.

It is certified that all corrections/suggestions indicated for Internal Assessment have been

incorporated in the report deposited in the departmental library.

The project report has been approved as it satisfies the academic requirements in respect of the

project work prescribed for the Bachelor of Engineering Degree.

Signature of Guide Signature of HOD Signature of Principal

Semester End Viva Voce Examination

Name of the Examiners Signature with Date

1. _______________________________ ________________________________

2. _______________________________ ________________________________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express, our most reverential gratitude to our guide, Professor

Dr. Radhakrishnan K., for his enduring support, constant encouragement and

unwavering guidance throughout the course of this project work.

We express our sincere gratitude to Karnataka State Council for Science and

Technology (KSCST), Bangalore and the Executive secretary and coordinator

of SPP for recognising our project and sponsoring our innovative idea under 40th

series of Student Project Programme (SPP).

We place our humble gratitude to Dr. Srinath Shetty (Resident Engineer),

Mr. Kiran and other staff for extending timely help during the construction

process of our project E3 shelter.

We are extremely grateful to Dr. Uday Kumar G, Professor and Head of

Department of Civil Engineering, for his invaluable support during the course of

this project. We also acknowledge the help rendered by all the Teaching and

Non-Teaching staff of Civil Engineering Department during our course in this

college.

We would also like to thank Dr. Niranjan N. Chiplunkar, Principal, NMAMIT,

Nitte for his encouragement and support.

We are thankful to all our friends Mr. Kumar Avinash, Mr. Prashant Kumar

Sharma, Mr. Md. Raju and Mr. Chandan Kumar Singh who were with us giving

inspiration and support throughout our stay and project work in this college.

Last but not the least, we thank all those who helped us in one way or the other in

the successful completion of our course and project in time.


Mr. Shivam Kumar Mr. Vishal Lahkar

ABSTRACT

E3 (ECO-FRIENDLY, ECONOMIC, ENERGY EFFICIENT) SHELTER


(4NM13CV107) (4NM13CV104)


(4NM13CV102) (4NM13CV122)

Guide: Dr. Radhakrishnan K. Professor, Department of Civil Engineering

Keywords: E3 Shelter, WOBO shelter (Waste of Bottles), Economic, Eco-friendly, Energy efficient shelters

Introduction: Shelter being the primary needs of all human beings, aesthetically designed hygienic

affordable houses with basic amenities for all sections of the society is the concern of the time. Waste

materials being generated at an alarming rate due to the use and throw concept of consumerism,

recycling the same for building purposes get importance. But the suitability and durability along with its

strength and local availability is more important for the cost effectiveness and the durability of the

structure erected. Locally available eco-friendly materials, innovative design and methods of

construction will drastically reduce the cost of the shelters other than enhancing the look and

improvement in the microclimatic conditions such as light and temperature inside the shelter. Arches

being the load bearing components various types of arched opening could be explored for the

construction to bear the load of the structures. Glass Bottles of beer and other beverages (WOBO-

Waste of Bottles) having enough strength and perfect dimensions can be utilised for the constructions

with minimal cost in an eco-friendly manner to give enough light, thermal insulation and eco-friendly

environment for the shelters. By doing this, it will not only benefit the low income people providing an

E3 - economical, energy efficient, eco-friendly shelter but also helps in keeping the environment clean

by reusing the materials.

Objectives: The primary objective of the project is to plan, design, estimate and construct an E3

(energy efficient, eco-friendly, economical) shell roofed shelter having various arched openings with

Waste of Bottles (WOBO) masonry and coconut shell concrete shell roof to understand the efficiency

and performance of the same.

Methodology: In order to achieve this objective, the layout, plan, design, 3D modelling and estimation

of 8’x8’x8’ shelter of empty beer bottles (understanding the various engineering properties from the

earlier studies) have been made on existing WOBO pillars erected by previous batch. Innovative

approach of using simple waste materials such as tyres, cardboards, gunny bags, coconut piths and a

lot of scrap materials has been adopted in the centring and mould for roof and various arches viz: Tre

foil arch, corbelled arch, lancet arch and segmental arch for windows and doors.

Results and Conclusion: The execution and experience of this construction project with empty glass

bottles and used coconut shells proved that these waste materials can be effectively utilised for

building shelters of utility without compromising on strength, durability, hygiene and aesthetic view.

Translucency and thermal insulation of empty glass bottle walls being the known factors are added

advantages to provide the required lighting and microclimatic control for the E3 shelter.

LIST OF TABLES

Sl. No. CONTENTS Page No.

Table 4.1 Showing test results on brick test 23

Table 4.2 Showing Impact test results on beer bottle 24

Table 5.1 Cost estimation using Empty Beer Bottles 49

Table 5.2 Cost estimation using Laterites Bricks 50

Table 5.3 Cost incurred using empty beer bottles 51

LIST OF FIGURES

Sl. No. CONTENTS Page No.

Fig 2.1 1905 Tom Kellys House 06

Fig 2.2 1960’s: Heineken WOBO 07

Fig 2.3 1981: Edouard’s Bottle Houses 07

Fig 2.4 2005: Pura Veda 08

Fig 2.5 The exterior bottle walls of two earth ships 09

Fig 2.6 Rhyolite bottle house 10

Fig 4.1 Cross sectional view of plan 16

Fig 4.2 Showing marking on ground 17

Fig 4.3 Square base using mould 17

Fig 4.4 Sectional elevation of the foundation 18

Fig 4.5 Top view of the column 19

Fig 4.6 Showing Pillar construction using bottles 19

Fig 4.7 showing various stages of construction of walls. 26

Fig 4.8 Corbeled Arch 28

Fig 4.9 Front view of the corbeled arch 29

Fig 4.10 Mould used for the corbeled arch 29

Fig 4.12 Trefoil arch 30

Fig 4.13 Front view of the trefoil arch 31

Fig 4.14 Making of the mould using auto rickshaw tyres 32

Fig 4.15 Constructional Method for Trefoil Arch 33

Fig 4.16 Lancet Arch 34

Fig 4.17 Front view of the lancet arch 35

Fig 4.18 Making up of the mould for lancet arch 35

Fig 4.19 Steps involved in the construction of lancet arch 36

Fig 4.20 Segmental arch 37

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhyolite

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 4.21 Two hinged arch 37

Fig 4.22 Load distribution of segmental arch 38

Fig 4.23 Front view of the segmental arch 38

Fig 4.24 Mould for the segmental 39

Fig 4.25 Steps involved in the construction of segmental arch 40

Fig 4.26 Funicular Shell Roof 41

Fig 4.27 Marking the dimensions on the plywood 44

Fig 4.28 Centering using planks and bamboo supports. 45

Fig 4.29 Filling up of the void spaces with waste material. 45

Fig 4.30 Details of roof construction 46

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS Page No

Title Page i

Certificate ii

Acknowledgement iii

Abstract iv

List of tables v

List of figures vi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1- 2

1.1 General Introduction 01

1.2 Aim of the study 01

1.3 Objectives 01

1.4 Methodology 02

1.5 Sources of information 02

1.6 Organization of the chapters 02

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 3-11

CHAPTER 3: PLANNING 12-14

3.1 General Introduction 12

3.2 Rural housing in Karnataka 12

3.3 Need for housing policy 13

3.4 Planning of E3 SHELTER 14

CHAPTER 4: DESIGNINIG 15-48

4.1 Introduction 15

4.2 Foundation work for the E3 SHELTER 15

4.3 Column designing and construction work 17

Table of Contents

4.4 Wall construction and its mix design 20

4.5 Arches 27

4.6 Funicular shell roof construction and its mix designing 40

CHAPTER 5: COST ESTIMATION OF E3 SHELTER 49-52

5.1 Cost estimation 49

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS 53-54

REFERENCES 55

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION:

Shelter being the primary needs of all human beings, aesthetically designed hygienic

affordable houses with basic amenities for all sections of the society is the concern of

the time. Waste materials being generated at an alarming rate due to the use and

throw concept of consumerism, recycling the same for building purposes get

importance. But the suitability and durability along with its strength and local

availability is more important for the cost effectiveness and the durability of the

structure erected. Locally available eco-friendly materials, innovative design and

methods of construction will drastically reduce the cost of the shelters other than

enhancing the look and improvement in the microclimatic conditions such as light and

temperature inside the shelter. Arches being the load bearing components various

types of arched opening could be explored for the construction to bear the load of the

structures. Glass Bottles of beer and other beverages (WOBO- Waste of Bottles)

having enough strength and perfect dimensions can be utilised for the constructions

with minimal cost in an eco-friendly manner to give enough light, thermal insulation

and eco-friendly environment for the shelters. By doing this, it will not only benefit the

low income people providing an E3 - economical, energy efficient, eco-friendly shelter

but also helps in keeping the environment clean by reusing the materials.

1.2 AIM OF PRESENT STUDY:

1. An E3 shelter for a small family.

2. An effective design and construction methods for a E3 shelter

3. Utilising the waste glass bottles for construction purposes to offer shelter

4. Educating the community about the eco-friendly construction

5. A live 8’x8’ glass bottle shelter erected

1.3 OBJECTIVES:

The primary objective of the project is to plan, design, estimate and construct an E3

(energy efficient, eco-friendly, economical) shell roofed shelter having various arched

Chapter 1 Introduction

2 E3 Shelter (Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient Shelter)

B.E. Project Report 2017, Department of Civil Engineering, N.M.A.M. Institute of Technology, Nitte

openings with Waste of Bottles (WOBO) masonry and coconut shell concrete shell

roof to understand the efficiency and performance of the same.

1.4 METHODOLOGY

In order to achieve this objective, the layout, plan, design, 3D modelling and estimation

of 8’x8’x8’ shelter of empty beer bottles (understanding the various engineering

properties from the earlier studies) have been made on existing WOBO pillars erected

by previous batch. Innovative approach of using simple waste materials such as tyres,

cardboards, gunny bags, coconut piths and a lot of scrap materials has been adopted

in the mould and centering for roof and various arches viz: Trefoil arch, corbelled arch,

lancet arch and segmental arch for windows and doors. Considering the limitation of

time, a miniscule live model has been planned and designed to build and test the

expected characteristics of such construction.

1.5 SOURCES OF INFORMATION:

1. www.google.com

2. www.youtube.com

3. To construct a 3D model of the structure Solid Edge software was used.

4. The tips where taken from a book written by Laurie Baker.

1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THE CHAPTERS: The project report has been

Organized under six chapters, which are as follows:

Chapter 1: introduces the main purpose of our project.

Chapter 2: deals with the literature review.

Chapter 3: deals with the planning of E3 SHELTER.

Chapter 4: deals with designing aspect.

Chapter 5: deals with cost estimation of E3 SHELTER.

Chapter 6: deals with the conclusions.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Mojtaba et al. [1] concluded that reusing the plastic bottles as the building materials

can have substantial effects on saving the building embodied energy by using them

instead of bricks in walls and reducing the CO2 emission in manufacturing the cement

by reducing the percentage of cement used. It is counted as one of the foundation’s

green project and has caught the attention of the architecture and construction

industry. Generally, the bottle houses are bioclimatic in design, which means that

when it is cold outside it is warm inside and vice versa. Constructing a house by

plastic bottles used for the walls, joist ceiling and concrete column offers us 45%

diminution in the final cost. Separation of various components of cost shows that the

use of local manpower in making bottle panels can lead to cost reduction up to 75%

compared to building the walls using the brick and concrete block.

Shilpi et al. [2] concluded that by utilizing PET bottles in construction recycled

materials, thermal comfort can be achieved in very low cost housing, benefit in

residents for those who cannot afford to buy and operate heating and cooling systems.

Plastic is non-biodegradable, toxic, highly resistant to heat and electricity (best

insulator) and not recyclable in true sense, plastic PET bottles use in bottle brick

technique. This gives relief for the poor people of India to provide cheap and best

houses for living.

Puttaraj et al. [3] examined that efficient usage of waste plastic in plastic-soil bricks

has resulted in effective usage of plastic waste and thereby can solve the problem of

safe disposal of plastics, also avoids its wide spread littering and the utilization of

quarry waste has reduced to some extent the problem of its disposal. Plastics are

produced from the oil that is considered as non-renewable resource. Because plastic

has the insolubility about 300 years in the nature, it is considered as a sustainable

waste and environmental pollutant. So reusing or recycling of it can be effectual in

mitigation of environmental impacts relating to it. It has been proven that the use of

CHAPTER 2 Literature Review

4

E3 Shelter (Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient)


plastic bottles as innovative materials for building can be a proper solution for

replacement of conventional materials.

Pratima et al. [4] revealed that plastic bottles wall have been less costly as compare

to bricks and also they provide greater strength than bricks. The PET bottles that are

not recycled end up in landfills or as litter, and they take approximately 1000 years to

biodegrade. This has resulted in plastic pollution problems in landfills, water ways and

on the roadside, and this problem continues to grow along with the plastic bottle

industry.

Arulmalar et al. [5] showed that the initial perception on the use of PET bottles in

construction is changing day by day. A paradigm which emerged as PET bottle bricks

in the construction of load bearing walls with steel trusses and prefabricated metal

sheet is at present witnessing flat roofs with nylon 6 replacing steel reinforcement and

intuitive vault construction. Even though research on the effective use PET in

developing new material as an option, solutions exploring the application of PET

bottles as structural members, foundation, retaining walls and secondary elements

like street furniture, road dividers, pavements and other landscape elements is to be

looked in to. The Governing bodies shall formulate policies to propagate this eco

centric approach via appropriate practices, research investigations on the properties

of the materials and construction techniques.

Vikram Pakrashi et al. [6] examined Eco-brick which is a viable resource for

construction purposes with a number of possible applications. The bricks are relatively

easily manufactured with controlled weight and packing. Eco bricks have relatively

good compressive strength, with values matching that of basic concrete cubes. The

weight of Eco-brick was observed to hold a nearly relationship with load at failure and

with specific strength. Eco-bricks have a relatively good specific strength. They are

lightweight but strong for the weight they bear.

Andreas Froese et al. [7] concluded that when the bottles are filled with soil or sand

they work as bricks and form a framework for walls or pillars. Different types of walls

varying in size and orientation of the bottles are built. The compression strength and


5



fracture behaviour of each wall are measured and compared. PET bottle walls can

bear up to 4.3 N/mm² when the bottles are filled with sand which is the weakest filling

material. The bottles bear one third of the load while the plaster bears two thirds.

Plaster made of clay or a cement mixture fills the space between all bottles while a

roof made of wood or corrugated metal completes the house. As only regional

products are used the houses are cheap and can be afforded even by poor families.

Additionally, the method has so far proven to be earthquake resistant and allows short

construction periods.

Yahaya Ahmade et al. [8] said that the structure has the added advantage of being

fire proof, bullet proof and earthquake resistant, with the interior maintaining a

constant temperature of 18 degrees C (64 degrees F) which is good for tropical

climate.

Seltzer et al. [9] revealed that the first example of known structures built with bottles

is the William F. Peck’s Bottle House located in Nevada (USA). It was built around

1902, and it required 10,000 beer bottles to be built. These buildings were primarily

made out of glass bottles used as masonry units and they were bound using mortar

made out of adobe, sand, cement, clay and plaster.

Job Bwire et al. [10] suggested that, baked bricks, tiles, concrete and rocks, among

other construction materials, have been essentials in construction. But did you know

that a house constructed using plastic bottles can save you more and be just as strong

as or even stronger than brick homes? Water bottle housing is an innovation aimed at

providing low cost housing, while contributing to environment management.

Aditya Raut et al.[11] implemented strategies and systems based on Eco-friendly

environment that could still be built at very low costs, with waste materials that is

plastic bottle, providing adequate thermal comfort while being sustainable. At the end,

it concluded that in different factors such as time of execution, load capacity, flexibility,

reducing waste, cost and energy efficiency, plastic bottles can be more effective

compared to some conventional building materials such as brick, concrete and

ceramic blocks.


6



Bottle houses from history

Fig 2.1:1905 Tom Kellys House

In 1905, at the age of 76, Mr Tom Kelly started the first beer bottle house in Rhyolite,

Nevada. He used over 30,000 bottles that were held together with adobe. Being that

Rhyolite was a Gold Rush town, he had no trouble collecting the beer bottles from the

local saloons. He completed the house in under 6 months but he never actually lived

in the home. Instead he raffled off tickets to win the home. About 20 year later, the

Gold Rush had settled down and the town was close to deserted. Paramount Studios

found the house and repaired it for one of their movies. The home still stands to this

day and volunteers care of it.

In the 1960s, Heineken proposed an idea that was ahead of its time. The idea was to

construct rectangular beer bottles that could double as bricks for affordable housing.

The idea actually came from the CEO of Heineken who was visiting an island in the

Caribbean and saw a large amount of trash in the streets including countless beer

bottles. He also noticed a lack of housing and put two and two together. His idea was

to create a bottle that could serve as a brick when finished. They called this bottle

the Heineken World Bottle, or WOBO for short. It was designed by the Dutch architect,

John Habraken. Heineken made about 100,000 WOBOs and even constructed a

prototype home. Unfortunately, the bottle never made it to the market. In the 60s,

https://www.rhyolitesite.com/bottle1.html

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1672684/heineken-s-lost-plan-to-build-houses-out-of-beer-bottles

https://www.buildabroad.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Tom-Kellys-Bottle-House1.jpg


7



people didn’t have the same environmental or social consciousness as they do today,

so the idea never stuck.

Fig. 2.2:1960’s: Heineken WOBO

Fig. 2.3: 1981: Edouard’s Bottle Houses

In the early 80s, a man by the name of Edouard Arsenault was inspired by a postcard

of a building created from bottles. The building was a bottle project completed by

George Plumb about 20 years prior. Edouard started collecting bottles and created

https://www.buildabroad.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/edouards.jpg


https://www.buildabroad.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/wobo2.jpg



8



his first Bottle Houses in 1981. In the next the next 3 years, he created 3 more

“fantasy. His property was turned into a tourist attraction, which is open to the public.

Fig. 2.4: 2005: Pura Vida

Pura Vida was the first since the WOBO to bring a humanitarian goal to bottle

construction. Pura Vida is not an association or even a non-profit; instead they

consider themselves an independent movement. Their mission is to promote an

environmental consciousness among the indigenous villages of Guatemala. They do

this in a number of ways, one of which is through bottles, which they refer to as an

“eco-block.” The Eco-block is an environmentally conscious way to handle the plastic

bottles that litter the streets of rural areas.

Detail of a bottle house in Azerbaijan

http://www.bottlehouses.com/about.cfm

https://www.buildabroad.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/pura_vida.jpg


http://puravidaatitlan.org/index_english.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijan



9



Fig 2.5: The exterior bottle walls of two earth ships

The use of empty vessels in construction dates back at least to ancient Rome, where

many structures used empty amphorae embedded in concrete. This was not done for

aesthetic reasons, but to lighten the load of upper levels of structures, and also to

reduce concrete usage. This technique was used for example in the Circus of

Maxentius. It is believed that the first bottle house was constructed in 1902 by William

F. Peck in Tonopah, Nevada. The house was built using 10,000 bottles of J.

Hostetter's Stomach Bitters which consisted of various herbs in a solution of 47%

alcohol. The Peck house was demolished in the early 1980s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphorae

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circus_of_Maxentius

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circus_of_Maxentius

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonopah,_Nevada

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bottle,_Tire_and_Brick_walls_of_Earthships.JPG


10



Fig 2.6:Rhyolite bottle house

Around 1905, Tom Kelly built his house in Rhyolite, Nevada, using 51,000 beer bottles

masoned with adobe. Kelly chose bottles because trees were scarce in the desert.

Most of the bottles were Busch beer bottles collected from the 50 bars in this Gold

Rush town. Rhyolite became a ghost town by 1920. In 1925, Paramount

Pictures discovered the Bottle House and had it restored for use in a movie. It then

became a museum, but tourism was slow, causing it to close. From 1936-1954, Lewis

Murphy took care of the house and hosted tourists. From 1954-1969, Tommy

Thompson occupied the house. He tried to make repairs to the house with concrete

which, when mixed with the desert heat, caused many bottles to crack (Kelly had used

adobe mud).

Knott's Berry Farm in Buena Park, California, has a bottle house, made from over

3,000 whiskey bottles that it uses as an "Indian Trader" store today. The house is a

remake of the Rhyolite Bottle House replicated from photos taken by Walter Knott in

the early 1950s.

Another famous bottle house site was built by the self-taught senior citizen Tressa

"Grandma " Prisbrey. Located in Simi Valley, California, Bottle Village is lauded by art

scholars, The State of California, The National Register of Historic Places and in

exhibitions, as a major artistic achievement. Beginning construction in 1956 at age

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhyolite

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhyolite,_Nevada

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Rush

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Rush

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhyolite,_Nevada

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramount_Pictures

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramount_Pictures

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knott%27s_Berry_Farm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buena_Park,_California

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simi_Valley,_California

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rhyolite_bottle_house_2009.jpg


11



60, and working until 1981, Tressa "Grandma" Prisbrey transformed her 1/3-acre lot

into Bottle Village, an otherworld of shrines, wishing wells, walkways, random

constructions, plus 15 life size structures all made from found objects placed in mortar.

The name "Bottle Village" comes from the structures themselves - made of tens of

thousands of bottles unearthed via daily visits to the dump.

The Washington Court Bottle House in Ohio was made with 9,963 bottles of all sizes

and colours. The builder was a bottle collector and, to display his collection, he had

them built into this house which was on display at Meyer's Modern Tourist Court.

In Alexandria, Louisiana, there is a bottle-house gift shop that still stands today. The

bottle house was constructed by Drew Bridges who used bottles from his drugstore.

There are about 3,000 bottles used as masonry units with railroad ties used as the

framing structure.

The Kaleva Bottle House in Kaleva, Michigan, was built by John J. Makinen, Sr.(1871-

1942) using over 60,000 bottles laid on their sides with the bottoms toward the exterior.

The bottles were mostly from his company, The North-western Bottling Works. The

house was completed in 1941, but he died before he could move in. The building was

purchased by the Kaleva Historical Museum in 1981 and is listed on the National

Register of Historical Places. Boston Hills Pet Memorial Park in Boston,

Massachusetts, has a bottle wall from 1942. It is part of a small building used for

storage. The Wimberley Bottle House in Wimberley, Texas, was constructed using

over 9,000 soda bottles. It was built in the early 1960s as part of a pioneer town, a

simulated Old West town set to be a tourist attraction/theme park. The house was

modelled after Knott's Berry Farm bottle house in California.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria,_Louisiana

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_J._Makinen_Bottle_House

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaleva,_Michigan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston,_Massachusetts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston,_Massachusetts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wimberley,_Texas

CHAPTER 3

PLANNING OF E3 SHELTER

3.1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION:

Shelter is the basic human requirement. Even after 70 years of independence, the

country is still grappling with the growing shelter problem, especially of the poor. The

problem has further been compounded by the rapid increase in population. Constant

migration of rural population to cities in search of jobs is causing unbearable strain on

urban housing and basic services.

In some small towns in India, the problem is not the lack of housing facilities but the

lack of adequate housing facilities. Here, there is a surplus of houses when compared

with households but these houses are unfit to reside.

The people who are most likely to become homeless are those who have least

resources as they belong to low income group. They cannot purchase houses nor can

they afford high rent, thus leading to the growth of slums.

In India, housing is essentially a private activity. The state intervention is also

necessary to meet the housing requirements of the vulnerable sections and to create

a positive environment in achieving the goal of ‘shelter for all’.

3.2 RURAL HOUSING IN KARNATAKA

In view of the above aim, the government introduced Housing and Habitat Policy in

1998, which aimed at ensuring the basic need ‘Shelter for all’ and better quality of life

to all citizens by harnessing the unused potentials in the public, private and household

sectors.

The Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO) also started functioning

with the financial support provided by the Government of India. HUDCO’s focus is on

providing housing facilities for economically weaker sections and for low income

Chapter 3 Planning of E3 Shelter



group. Housing Policy for the state of Karnataka is expected to serve the larger

overarching Housing has been recognized as a basic human need. The

proposed State goal of “Affordable Housing for All”.

Karnataka is the eighth largest state in India both in area and population. While nearly

69% of the population lives in rural areas, urbanization is rapidly increasing. At the

macro level, there is growing State wide demand for housing, housing finance, land

availability and supporting infrastructure. Karnataka Government therefore, has

adopted a definite and implementable Habitat Agenda offering a vision to achieve

sustainable development of rural areas with a healthy and safe environment.

“Affordable Housing for All” is the underlying theme of the Policy consistent with the

overreaching objective of the National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy adopted by

the Government of India in December 2007.

3.3 NEED FOR HOUSING POLICY

Need for Karnataka Housing and Habitat Policy emerges from the growing

requirements of shelter and related infrastructure both at rural and urban centers as

also due to the change in economic and social environment, growing urbanization,

mismatch in demand and supply of developed land and houses at affordable rates

and inability of poorer sections of the population to have access to formal land markets

and finances from financial institutions leading to a non-sustainable situation.

Adequate housing is not just the mere provision of four walls and a roof but implies

access to basic services such as water, sanitation, clean fuel, electricity, healthcare,

education and livelihood – all of which are essential for living in society. In view of the

distinctive social, geographic and climatic conditions, it is necessary to adopt efficient

land planning for its optimal use keeping in view the alternative requirements,

particularly for meeting the demand of land/housing for the lower income. Moreover,

the concerns of affordability, quality and sustainability need to be addressed by

harnessing appropriate technology.

Chapter 3 Planning of E3 Shelter



3.4 PLANNING OF E3 SHELTER

Waste materials being generated at an alarming rate due to the use and throw concept

of consumerism, recycling the same for building purposes get importance.

But the suitability and durability along with its strength and local availability is more

important for the cost effectiveness and the durability of the structure erected. Locally

available eco-friendly materials, innovative design and methods of construction will

drastically reduce the cost of the shelters other than enhancing the look and

improvement in the microclimatic conditions such as light and temperature inside the

shelter.

Glass Bottles of beer and other beverages (WOBO- Waste of Bottles) having enough

strength and perfect dimensions can be utilised for the constructions with minimal cost

in an eco-friendly manner to give enough light, thermal insulation and eco-friendly

environment for the shelters. By doing this, it will not only benefit the low income

people providing an E3 - economical, energy efficient, eco-friendly - shelter but also

helps in keeping the environment clean by reusing the materials.

The primary objective of the project is to plan, design, estimate and construct an E3

(energy efficient, eco-friendly, economical) shell roofed shelter having various arched

openings with Waste of Bottles (WOBO) masonry and coconut shell concrete shell

roof to understand the efficiency and performance of the same.

CHAPTER 4

DESIGNING OF E3 SHELTER

4.1 INTRODUCTION

For the designing of E3 SHELTER the design aspect can be taken separately for its

different component.

Following are the various components of E3 SHELTER for designing:

i) Foundation work for the E3 SHELTER

ii) Column Designing and construction work

iii) Wall construction and its mix design

iv) Arches construction

(a) Corbeled Arch

(b) Trefoil Arch

(c) Lancet Arch

(d) Segmental Arch

v) Funicular shell roof construction and Mix Designing

vi) Laying of Concrete Blocks for Flooring

4.2 FOUNDATION WORK FOR THE E3 SHELTER

4.2.1 Selection of Site: There is no specific criterion followed in the selection of the

site for construction. The available site with 10’ x 10’ dimension near the sand pit next

to the SADANANDA open air auditorium in NMAMIT Campus, Nitte has been

identified for the construction of WOBO shelter.

chapter 4 Design of E3 Shelter



Fig. 4.1 Cross sectional view of plan

4.2.2 Levelling: Before the excavation for the proposed foundation, the site has been

cleared of vegetation, brushwood, stumps of trees etc., up to 30 cm below the

foundation level. The pits formed due to roots of trees, old foundations etc. has been

filled up with soil and compacted ramming it.

4.2.3 Marking on ground: A reference bench mark has been established on the

existing boundary constructed at the site. The centre lines of the walls were marked

by stretching strings across wooden pegs driven at the ends. The centre lines of the

perpendicular walls were marked by setting out the right angle with steel tapes for

marking dimension of plan 8’ X 8’ square is marked on ground.

4.2.4 Excavation: The marking done for pillar is excavated up to two feet depth.

Excavation is carried out manually by means of pick axes, crow bars, spades etc.




Fig. 4.2 Showing marking on ground

4.3 COLUMN DESIGNING AND CONSTRUCTION WORK:

For the construction of Column, the following dimensions and specifications have

been designed:

Bottom Base size of column = Square mould of 40 cm x 40 cm

Height of base = 20 cm

Diameter of column = 9 inches

Height of column = 8 feet

Type of coarse aggregate used = 6mm jelly

Type of cement used = OPC

Grade of concrete = M25

4.3.1 Base: In order to distribute the load in the foundation the base has been

marked and laid.

Fig. 4.3 Square base using mould




4.3.2 construction of Column: The steps followed in the construction of the pillars

are given below.

Placed the circular mould enclosed by square mould on base.

Checked the straightness of mould using plumb bob.

Prepared concrete using cement, sand, aggregate in the ratio 1:1:2 and water

Upon this place seven grouted bottles and filled the space with concrete.

Each layer has been tamped with tamping rod very well to prevent

formation of honey combing

Then levelled the surface and placed seven bottles again and filled it with

concrete.

Same process has been continued up to 8 feet height.

After 24 hours de-moulded the concrete.

Proper curing for 28 days has been carried out to avoid cracking.

Fig: 4.4 Sectional elevation of the foundation




Fig: 4.5 Top view of the column

Fig. 4.6 Showing Pillar construction using bottles




4.4 WALL CONSTRUCTION AND ITS MIX DESIGN:

Walls have been erected keeping moulds on either side of the walls in order to avoid

the slipping of the bottles and maintain the verticality and proper dimension.

For the construction of wall the following details are made:

Length = 96 inch

Height = 96 inch

Width = 07 inch

Grade of concrete = M15

Type of cement used = OPC

Type of coarse aggregate used = 06mm jelly

4.4.1 Mix Design For M15 Concrete Used In Wall

Ratio taken for M15 CONCRETE =1:2:4

Concrete volume =1.58 m3

Mix calculation

a) Characteristic compressive strength required in the field at 28 days’ grade

designation : M15

b) Size of aggregate : 6mm

c) Shape : angular

d) Workability at site : 25 mm

e) Quality of concrete available at site as per IS 456:2000

f) Type of exposure : mild exposure

Test data of material from laboratory

a) Cement used :OPC

b) Specific gravity of cement : 3.15

c) Specific gravity of fine aggregate : 2.64

d) Specific gravity of coarse aggregate : 2.84




Procedure for concrete mix design of M15grade concrete

Step 1: Determination of target strength

Target = fck +1.65 x S

= 15 +1.65 x 3.5

= 20.78 N/mm2

Step 2: Selection of w/c ratio

From table 5 of IS456,

Max w/c ratio : 0.5

Based on experience : 0.5

0.5<0.55 hence ok

Step 3: Selection of water content

From table 2 of IS10262-2009

For 6mm

Max water content 208 litres

estimated water content =208+3/100x208

=214.24litres

Step 4: Selection of cement content

corrected water content : 220litres

from table 5 of IS 456

minimum cement content for mild exposure : 300kg/m3

w/c : 0.5

cement = 220/0.5 = 440kg/m3

Step 5: Estimation of coarse aggregate proportion

From table 3 of IS10262:2009

Nominal size of aggregate :6mm




Zone of fine aggregate : zone II

w/c :0.5

volume of coarse aggregate per unit volume of total aggregate : 0.62

volume of fine aggregate =1-0.62

=0.38

Step 6: Estimation of mix ingredient

a) Volume of concrete = 1m3

b) Volume of cement = (mass of cement/specific gravity) x 1/100

=440/3.15 x 1/100=0.139m3

c) Volume of water =220/1 x 1/100=0.22m3

d) Volume of aggregate = a - (b + c)

= 1-(0.139+0.22) = 0.641m3

e) Mass of coarse aggregate=0.641x0.62x2.84x1000

= 1081.13 kg

f) Mass of fine aggregate = 0.641x0.38x2.64x1000

= 643 kg

g) Mass of cement = 0.139x1440=200.16kg

= 4 bags

For 0.584m3 of concrete:

a) Cement : 200.16 x1.58 =316.25 kg

= 7 bags

b) Water : 0.22 x1.58 =0.3476 m3

c) Fine aggregate : 643x 1.58 = 1015.94 kg

d) Coarse aggregate : 1081.13 x1.58 = 1708.18 kg




Fig. 4.6 showing compression test of bottle brick

Table 4.1 showing test results on brick test

Particular Height Length Breadth Compressive Compressive

load strength

Brick 300 mm 140 mm 140 mm 57.6 X 103 N 2.89 N/mm2




Table 4.2 showing Impact test results on beer bottle

Characteristics Impact load

Beer bottle placed in horizontal 0.188 kg

direction

Beer bottle placed in vertical direction 2.0 kg

4.4.2 Estimation of Wall Construction:

No. of walls erected on site = 4

Dimension of each wall, Length = 243.84 cm, Width = 17.78 cm, Height = 228.6 cm

Volume of each wall = 243.84 x 228.6 x 17.78

=991089.63 cm3

Total Volume of all 4 side wall = 4 x 991089.63

=3964358.52 cm3

Openings required for 3 window arches and door

Dimension of window opening, Length = 101.6cm, Height = 76.2cm, Width =17.78

cm

Volume of 3 window opening = 3(101.6 x 76.2 x 17.78)

= 412900 cm3

Dimension of Door opening, Length = 88.9 cm, Height = 177.8 cm, Width =17.78 cm

Volume of door opening = 177.8 x 88.9 x 17.78

= 281038.14 cm3

Total volume of openings = 412900 + 281030

=693938 cm3

Total volume of wall excluding openings = 3964358.52 – 693938




=3270420.52 cm3

Volume of concrete (m3) = 3.27 m3

Now, No. of Bottles used in construction of one layer wall = 2 x 28

=56 Bottles

No. of layer of bottles in wall construction = 8 layer

No. of bottles required = 4 x 8 x 56

= 1792 Bottles

For each window openings = (3 x 8)2

= 48 Bottles

For 3 window openings = 3 x 48 =144 Bottles

For Door openings = (10x6) 2

=120 Bottles

No. of Bottles deducted for openings = 120 + 144

= 264 Bottles

Now, No. of Bottles required for construction

of wall excluding openings = (1792 – 264)

= 1528 Bottles

Therefore, Total no. of Bottles Required in construction of full structure = 224+1528

=1752Bottles

Volume of Bottles in wall = 1528 x 1105

= 1688440 cm3

Volume (m3 ) = 1.688 m3

Total Volume of concrete = (3.27 -1.688)

= 1.58 m3

4.4.3 Construction Methodology:




Construction of wall up to sill level

• 3 feet height mould of plywood sheets have been prepared for wall

construction.

• The concrete has been filled by laying the bottles vertically up.

• After two days the cast has been de-moulded.

• The same procedure is repeated for remaining sides of the shelter.

• After de-moulding the walls have been properly cured for 28 days to prevent

cracks.

•

Fig. 4.7 showing various stages of construction of walls.




4.5 ARCHES:

An arch is a mechanical arrangement of wedge shape blocks of stones or bricks

mutually supported each other and supported at the by piers or abutments. An arch is

structure which supports the structure and weight over it. Because of their shape, the

blocks support each other by the mutual presence of their own weight.

Working principle: An arch is a pure compression form. It can span a large area by

resolving forces in compression stresses and, in turn eliminating tensile stresses. This

is sometimes referred as arch action. As the forces in the arch carried to the, the arch

will push outward at the base, called thrust.

In order to maintain the arch action and prevent the arch from collapsing, the thrust

need to be restrained, either with the internal ties, external bracing, such as

abutments.

Factor affecting arches:

The thrust is proportional to the total load & to the span and inversely

proportional to the rise of the arch.

In arches RISE to SPAN ratio should not be less than 1\8

RISER minimum should be 1\8 of the span & 2\3 maximum

Lesser RISER takes compression but not tensile load.

4.5.1 Corbeled Arch:

A corbel arch is an arch-like construction method that uses the architectural technique

of corbeling to span a space or void in a structure. A corbel uses this technique to

support the superstructure of a building's roof. A corbel arch is constructed by

offsetting successive courses of stone (or brick) at the spring line of the walls so that

they project towards the archway's center from each supporting side, until the courses

meet at the apex of the archway (often, the last gap is bridged with a flat stone).




The load is transferred vertically by compression to piers below without any outward

thrust, thus enabling omission of buttresses on either side. Corbeled arches required

thick walls to counteract the effect of gravity.

Fig. 4.8 Corbeled Arch

Dimensions designed for the corbelled arch:

Total length = 32 inch

Total Height = 48 inch

Thickness of the formwork =7 inch

Rise = 5.78 inch

Thread = 5.78 inch




Fig: 4.9 Front view of the corbeled arch

Steps followed in the construction of corbeled arch:

• 3 feet height mould of plywood sheets have been prepared for the support on

the either side and placing of corbeled shaped formwork n between wall.


• After two days the cast has been de-moulded

• After de-moulding corbeled arch have been properly cured for 28 days to

prevent cracks.

Fig: 4.10 Mould used for the corbeled arch




Constructional Method adopted for Corbeled Arch:

Fig: 4.11 Constructional Method for the corbeled arch

4.5.2 Trefoil Arch:

Fig: 4.12 Trefoil arch

1 2

3

4

5




A trefoil arch or three-foiled arch is an arch incorporating the shape or outline of a

trefoil such as three overlapping rings. It has been widely used for its symbolic

significance in Christian architecture.

A round trefoil, which explains the name, frames the archway entrance in the Gothic

style with not one, but two focal points equidistant from the centre.

Dimensions of Trefoil arch: -

Radius =7.75 inch

Total height = 48 inch


Total width = 7 inch

Fig: 4.13 Front view of the trefoil arch

Steps followed in the construction of trefoil arch:


the either side and placing of 3 tyre shape mould between wall.






• After de-moulding arch have been properly cured for 28 days to prevent

cracks.

Fig: 4.14 Making of the mould using auto rickshaw tires




Constructional Method adopted for Trefoil Arch:

Fig: 4.15 Constructional Method for Trefoil Arch

.

.

.

.

1

2

3

4




4.5.3 Lancet Arch:

Fig: 4.16 Lancet Arch

A lancet window is a tall, narrow window with a pointed arch at its top. It acquired the

"lancet" name from its resemblance to a lance. Instances of this architectural are

typical of Gothic church of the earliest period. Lancet windows may occur singly, or

paired under a single mounding, or grouped in an odd number with the tallest

window at the centre.

Dimensions of Lancet arch:

Total height = 48 inch


Total thickness = 7 inch




Fig: 4.17 Front view of the lancet arch

Steps followed in the construction of lancet arch:


the either side and placing of lancet shape mould between wall.




cracks.

Fig: 4.18 Making up of the mould for lancet arch




Constructional Method adopted for Trefoil Arch:

Fig: 4.19 Steps involved in the construction of lancet arch

4.5.4 Segmental Arch:

The parabolic arch/segmental arch employs the principle that when weight is uniformly applied

to an arch, the internal compression resulting from that weight will follow a parabolic profile.

Of all arch types, the parabolic arch produces the most thrust at the base, but can span the

largest areas. It is commonly used in bridge design, where long spans are needed.

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabolic_arch




Fig: 4.20 Segmental arch

Load mechanism of segmental arch:

Fig: 4.21Two hinged arch




Fig: 4.22 Load distribution of segmental arch

Dimensions of the Segmental arch:

Total length =29 inch

Total height =72.5 inch

Total thickness=7 inch

Radius of arch=8.5inch

Fig: 4.23 Front view of the segmental arch

Steps followed in the construction of segmental arch:





the either side and placing of hemisphere tyre shape segmental mould

between wall.




cracks.

Fig:4.24 Mould for the segmental




Constructional Method adopted for Segmental Arch:

Fig:4.25 Steps involved in the construction of segmental arch

4.6 FUNICULAR SHELL ROOF CONSTRUCTION AND MIX DESIGNING:

Funicular Shell roof are made from structural ‘skins’ where the shell material is thin in

section relative to the other dimensions of the roof and undergoes relatively little

deformation under load.

They are commonly used where a building interior needs to be free from intermediate

walls or columns that might support a more conventional flat or pitched roof, such as;

libraries, theatres, leisure centres, airport and railway terminals, and so on.

Shell roofs can be ‘flat’, but are typically curved, assuming a cylindrical, domed,

paraboloid or ellipsoid shape. The curvature of shell structures benefits from the same

structural efficiency as arches, which are pure compression forms with no tensile

stresses. Because of their structural efficiency less material is generally needed

compared to more traditional roofs

1

2 3

4




Fig: 4.26 Funicular Shell Roof

The coordinate for finding funicular shell of square plan is obtained by this

approximate formula, also called LAKSHMIKANDAN FORMULA @ (2014).

Z=𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥

(𝑎2𝑏2)(𝑎2 − 𝑥2)(𝑏2 − 𝑦2)

Where,

Z = Vertical coordinate at x, y

𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥 = Maximum central rise which may be L/10 to L/20

a = 1/2 (length of the shell)

b = 1/2 (length of the shell)

x, y = the coordinates of the grid point from the origin

Funicular shell takes load by its shape instead of material of strength. It is mostly

subjected to pure compression only in most part of the of the shell.

4.6.1 Mix Design For M25 Concrete Used In Roofing




M25-1:1:2

Concrete volume=0.584m3

Mix calculation

a) Characteristic compressive strength required in the field at 28 days’ grade

designation : M25

b) Size of aggregate : 6mm

c) Shape : angular

d) Workability at site : 75 mm

e) Quality of concrete available at site as per IS 456:2000

f) Type of exposure : mild exposure

Test data of material from laboratory

e) Cement used : OPC

f) Specific gravity of cement : 3.15

g) Specific gravity of fine aggregate : 2.64

h) Specific gravity of coarse aggregate : 2.84

Procedure for concrete mix design of M25 grade concrete

Step 1: Determination of target strength

Target = fck +1.65 x S

= 25 +1.65 x 4

= 31.6 N/mm2

Step 2: Selection of w/c ratio

From table 5 of IS456,

Max w/c ratio : 0.5

Based on experience : 0.5

0.5<0.55 hence ok




Step 3: Selection of water content

From table 2 of IS10262-2009

For 6mm

Max water content 208 litres

estimated water content =208+3/100x208

=214.24litres

Step 4: Selection of cement content

corrected water content :220litres

from table 5 of IS 456

minimum cement content for mild exposure : 300kg/m3

w/c : 0.5

cement=220/0.5=440kg/m3

Step5: Estimation of coarse aggregate proportion

From table 3 of IS10262:2009

Nominal size of aggregate :10mm

Zone of fine aggregate : zone II

w/c :0.5

volume of coarse aggregate per unit volume of total aggregate : 0.62

volume of fine aggregate =1-0.62

=0.38

Step 6: Estimation of mix ingredient

h) Volume of concrete =1m3

i) Volume of cement = (mass of cement/specific gravity)x1/100




= 440/3.15x1/100=0.139m3

j) Volume of water =220/1x1/100=0.22m3

k) Volume of aggregate = a-(b + c)

=1-(0.139+0.22) = 0.641m3

l) Mass of coarse aggregate =0.641x0.62x2.84x1000

=1081.13kg

m) Mass of fine aggregate=0.641x0.38x2.64x1000

=643kg

n) Mass of cement =0.139x1440=200.16kg

=4 bags

For 0.584m3 of concrete:

e) Cement : 200.16 x 0.584 =116.89 kg

= 3 bags

f) Water : 0.22 x 0.584 = 0.128 m3

g) Fine aggregate : 643x 0.584 = 375.51 kg

h) Coarse aggregate : 1081.13 x 0.584 = 631.37 kg

Fig: 4.27 Marking the dimensions on the plywood and drawing the required shape

and curve by using thread and pen.




Fig: 4.28 Setting up of the horizontal base using planks and bamboo supports.

Fig: 4.29 Filling up of the void spaces with dried coconut shells, waste tires, gunny

bags, cardboards etc.

Fig: 4.30 (a,b,c,d)

a) Making a uniform surface

of the dome using red mud (b) Laying newspapers on the

top of the wet mud surface

and empty half-cut coconut

shells on the top of newspape




(c) Curing d) Curing dome using gunny bags

Fig:3.44 Finished roof

Dimension of Roof:

1) Area of the roof 2.667m x 2.667m

2) Height of the dome is 0.508m

3) Thickness of the dome roof= 0.1016m

4) Chejja projections =0.2032m

Steps involved in the construction of the dome roof are:

1) Measuring the diagonals and size of the base of roof.

2) Marking the dimensions on the plywood and drawing the required shape and

curve by using thread and pen.

3) Cutting of the measured shape of the formwork drawn.

4) Making the interlock pattern

5) Setting up of the horizontal base using planks and bamboo supports.

6) Fixing the formwork on the roof base using needle and interlocks.




7) Filling up of the void spaces with dried coconut shells, waste tires, gunny bags,

cardboards etc.

8) Making a uniform surface of the dome using red mud and giving it shape by

batting it with wooden planks.

9) Laying newspapers on the top of the wet mud surface

10) Placing of the empty half-cut coconut shells on the top of newspaper in

desired pattern and compacting them a little.

11) Laying a concrete layer of thickness 0.1016m over the coconut shells.

12) Curing the dome roof using wet gunny bags.

13) Setting up of formwork for laying of chejja.

14) Pouring the concrete layer into the formwork with wire mesh layed over it and

finishing the chejja.

15) Curing of the chejja.

16) Removal of the formwork and the supports after 7 days of good curing.

4.7 FLOORING

Floor is the bottom surface of a room. Floors may be stone, wood, bamboo, metal

or any other material the can support the expected load. Floors typically consist of

a subfloor for support and a floor covering used to give a good walking surface.

Floor should be such that it is does not permit the entry of water inside the structure

during rainy season and also should not be damaged by the attack by pests.

4.7.1 Details of floor constructed

(A) Material used for flooring purpose :-

1.Concrete block

2. Sand

(B) Dimension of flooring bed = 8 feet x 8 feet

4.7.2 Methodology

Interlocking Concrete Block Pavement (ICBP) has been extensively used in many

countries for quite sometime as a specialized problem solving technique for providing

pavement in areas where conventional type of construction are less durable due to

many operational and environmental constraints. ICBP technology has been




introduced in India in construction, a decade ago, for specific requirement viz.

footpaths, parking areas etc. but now being adopted extensively in different uses

where the conventional construction of pavement using hot bituminous mix or cement

concrete technology is not feasible or desirable.

The sequencing of operations for construction of block pavement should be as follows

:

1. Installation of sub-surface drainage structures

2. Leveling and compaction of subgrade

3. Provision and compaction of sub-base course (where needed)

4. Provision and compaction of base-course and checking for correct profile

5. Installation of edge restraints

6. Provision and compaction of coarse bedding sand

7. Laying of blocks and interlocking

8. Application of joint sealing sand and compaction

9. Cleaning of surface

10. Filling any remaining empty portions in the block layer especially near edge

restraint blocks with in situ concrete

Steps involved in the construction of floor

Fig: 4.31 Steps involved in the construction of floor

.

CHAPTER 5

COST ESTIMATION OF E3 SHELTER

5.1 COST ESTIMATION

Cost involved in a project is important in the success of any project since it should be

affordable to the client. Here we have estimated the cost of E3 SHELTER which we

have erected, and a comparison is made with the cost estimation of laterite brick

shelter of same dimension. The real cost incurred for the present project is also given

at the end as an example to show how we can reduce the cost by involving the

physical labour of the people who required the shelter and recycling the materials

discarded around us for the construction.

Table 5.1 Cost Estimation for 64 Sq. Feet shelter Construction with Empty Beer Bottles

SL. PARTICULARS QUANTITY RATE

(Rs.)

COST.

(Rs.)

1. WASTE BOTTLES 1750 No’s. 2/BOTTLE 3500

2. CEMENT 11 BAGS 350/BAG 3850

3. SAND 45 BAGS 57/BAG 2565

4. COARSE AGGREGATE 80 BAGS 44/BAG 3520

5. PLYWOOD FORMWORK LUMPSUM - 3000

6. NAILS,HAMMER,PLIER,PLUM BOB

LUMPSUM - 1000

7. CONCRETE BLOCKS FOR FLOOR

64 sq. feet 35/sq. feet 2240

8. CENTERING FOR ROOF LUMPSUM - 1000

9. LABOUR CHARGES LUMPSUM 25000

10. MISCELLANEOUS LUMPSUM - 3000

TOTAL 48,675

Chapter 5 Cost Estimation of E3 Shelter



Table 5.2 Cost Estimation for 64 Sq. Feet shelter Construction with Laterite Bricks

SL. PARTICULARS QUANTITY RATE (Rs.) COST. (Rs.)

1. LATERITE 168 No’s. 30/BRICK 5040




5. JUTE BAGS 20 No’s. 10/ BAG 200

6. BAMBOO 32 No’s. 25 800

7. TYRE 4 No’s. 25/ TYRE 100

8. PLYWOOD FORMWORK LUMPSUM - 3000

9. NAILS,HAMMER,PLIER,PLUM BOB

LUMPSUM - 4000

10. CONCRETE BLOCKS FOR FLOOR

64 sq. feet 46/sq. feet 2944

11. CENTERING FOR ROOF LUMPSUM - 1000

12. STEEL BARS 128 KG 45/KG 5760

13. TRANSPORTATION LUMPSUM - 1000

14. LABOUR CHARGES LUMPSUM - 25000

15. MISCELLANEOUS LUMPSUM - 3000

TOTAL 62,169




Table 5.3 Cost incurred for the construction of 64 Sq. ft. E3 Shelter using empty

Beer Bottles

The comparative analysis of the cost estimation with the shelter of laterite bricks of

same dimension revealed that up to 22% of the cost can be saved in empty beer bottle

construction. This shows the construction cost per sq.ft will be Rs. 760.54 whereas

those for laterite brick shelter will be Rs. 971.5 revealing that a saving of up to Rs.

Sl. PARTICULARS QUANTITY RATE

(Rs.)

COST

(Rs.)

1. BEER BOTTLES 1750 No’s. 2/BOTTLE 3500




5. COCONUT SHELLS 200 No’s. 4/ Re 1 50

6. JUTE BAGS 20 No’s. 10/ BAG 200

7. BAMBOO 6 No’s. 25 150

8. TYRE 4 No’s. 25/ TYRE 100

9. PLYWOOD FORMWORK LUMPSUM FREE

10. NAILS, HAMMER, PLIER, PLUM

BOB

LUMPSUM - 410

11. CONCRETE BLOCKS FOR

FLOOR

70 No’s. FREE -

12. REPORT 1 No’s. 500 500

13. MISCELLANEOUS - 1500 1500

TOTAL 16,345




3.29 per sq. feet. But by recycling the discarded materials around us and sparing the

labour of the client the cost can be reduced up to 26.3%. That means about three

fourth of the cost can be saved through the effective participation and recycling the

discarded materials in construction. The construction cost has been calculated as Rs.

255.39 per square feet indicating that the cost is highly affordable even for a low

income family.

Moreover, the translucent nature of the wall and the thermal insulation provided by the

air trapped walls save a lot of energy consumption in the houses used for cooling and

heating up. The funicular dome roof with coconut shell gives aesthetic look to the roof

and can be used for the lighting using LED bulbs energised by solar panels. In

addition to this the sound insulation can be achieved through this construction. The

construction will be easy since the bottles are of light weight compared to the heavy

laterite blocks.

CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSIONS

53 E3 Shelter (Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient)


6.1 CONCLUSIONS:

1. Although designing and building of E3 shelter is still an upcoming practice and

relatively new methodology of construction, it has enormous uncapped potential in

the construction sector.

2. The execution and experience of this construction project with empty glass bottles

and used coconut shells proved that these waste materials can be effectively utilized

for building eco-friendly, cost effective, energy efficient decent shelters of utility

without compromising on strength, durability, hygiene and aesthetic view.

3. Translucency and thermal insulation of empty glass bottle walls being the known

factors are added advantages to provide the required lighting and microclimatic

control for the E3 shelter. Generally the bottle houses are bio-climatic in design,

which means that when it is cold outside is warm inside and vice versa.

4. Re-using the glass bottles as the building materials can have substantial effects

on saving the building embodied energy by using them instead of bricks in walls and

reducing the CO2 emission in manufacturing the cement by reducing the percentage

of cement used.

5. Recycling coconut shells and constructing funicular dome roof can save a lot of

energy since they don’t use any steel bars for reinforcement without compromising

the stability of the structure. Moreover, these coconut shells or their dent will act as

concave lenses for illuminating the room with solar powered LEDs.

6. The construction found to be easy without any skilled labours since the bottles are

of light weight compared to the heavy laterite bricks which required additional

trimming and finishing.

Chapter 6 Conclusions

54 E3 Shelter (Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient)


7. The comparative analysis of the cost estimation with the laterite bricks shelter of

same dimension revealed that up to 22% of the cost can be saved in empty beer

bottle construction with coconut shell funicular dome roof.

8. Construction cost per square feet using empty beer bottles found to be Rs. 760.54

whereas those for laterite brick shelter is Rs. 971.5, demonstrating a saving of up to

Rs. 3.29 per sq. feet construction.

9. It is found that about three fourth of the cost can be saved through the effective

participation of the client or community and recycling the discarded materials in

construction.

10. The construction cost of E3 shelters of empty beer bottles and coconut shell

funicular dome roof with community participation found to be highly affordable to low

income family since the cost of construction worked out to be as low as Rs. 255.39

per square feet.

11. This kind of construction can be adopted for construction of Bus shelters, kiosks,

Traffic posts, Toll tax counter, small stationary shops, shelter for monuments, public

toilets, etc.

.

REFERENCES

Kshitija Nadgouda, (2014) “Coconut fiber reinforced concrete”, Proceeding of

thirteen IRF international Conference.

Olanipekum (2006) “Performance of coconut shell as coarse aggregate in concrete:

A review”, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) .

Pawley, Martin. Building for Tomorrow: Putting Waste to Work. San Francisco: Sierra

Club Books, 1982.

HEINEKEN WOBO: A Beer Bottle That Doubles as a Brick by Ali Kriscenski.

Retrieved 27 August 2012

KC. John, 'Laurie Baker's Houses for the Million’, Illustrated

Weekly of India, Bombay, 24 January 1982.

How-To Make a Bottle Brick www.earthbench.org

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Club_Books

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Club_Books

PROJECT TEAM

PROJECT GUIDE Dr. Radhakrishnan k.

Professor, Department of Civil Engineering

NMAMIT, Nitte

[email protected]

PROJECT ASSOCIATES:


USN: 4NM13CV107 USN: 4NM13CV104 [email protected] [email protected]


USN: 4NM13CV102 USN: 4NM13CV122

[email protected] [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]





SHELTER (Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient Shelter)

Documents

Transcript of SHELTER (Eco-friendly, Economic, Energy Efficient Shelter)