Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 110 views

    Comparison Between Aac and CLC

    Uploaded by

    Harsh Sharma
    This document compares autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks, cellular lightweight concrete (CLC) blocks, and burnt clay bricks. Some key points of comparison include: - AAC and CLC use cement, fly ash, lime, gypsum and aggregates as raw materials while burnt clay bricks use top soil and energy. - CLC and AAC have lower dry densities than burnt clay bricks, ranging from 600-800kg/m3 vs 1900kg/m3 for bricks. - AAC and CLC have comparable compressive strengths to bricks but provide benefits like lighter weight, better insulation, ease of cutting/drilling, and precast elements. - CLC gains strength

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Comparison Between Aac and CLC

    Uploaded by

    Harsh Sharma
    110 views3 pages
    This document compares autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks, cellular lightweight concrete (CLC) blocks, and burnt clay bricks. Some key points of comparison include: - AAC and CLC use cement, fly ash, lime, gypsum and aggregates as raw materials while burnt clay bricks use top soil and energy. - CLC and AAC have lower dry densities than burnt clay bricks, ranging from 600-800kg/m3 vs 1900kg/m3 for bricks. - AAC and CLC have comparable compressive strengths to bricks but provide benefits like lighter weight, better insulation, ease of cutting/drilling, and precast elements. - CLC gains strength

    Original Description:

    AAC and CLC

    Original Title

    Comparison Between Aac and Clc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document compares autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks, cellular lightweight concrete (CLC) blocks, and burnt clay bricks. Some key points of comparison include: - AAC and CLC use cement, fly ash, lime, gypsum and aggregates as raw materials while burnt clay bricks use top soil and energy. - CLC and AAC have lower dry densities than burnt clay bricks, ranging from 600-800kg/m3 vs 1900kg/m3 for bricks. - AAC and CLC have comparable compressive strengths to bricks but provide benefits like lighter weight, better insulation, ease of cutting/drilling, and precast elements. - CLC gains strength

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    110 views3 pages

    Comparison Between Aac and CLC

    Uploaded by

    Harsh Sharma
    This document compares autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks, cellular lightweight concrete (CLC) blocks, and burnt clay bricks. Some key points of comparison include: - AAC and CLC use cement, fly ash, lime, gypsum and aggregates as raw materials while burnt clay bricks use top soil and energy. - CLC and AAC have lower dry densities than burnt clay bricks, ranging from 600-800kg/m3 vs 1900kg/m3 for bricks. - AAC and CLC have comparable compressive strengths to bricks but provide benefits like lighter weight, better insulation, ease of cutting/drilling, and precast elements. - CLC gains strength

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    COMPARISON BETWEEN AAC AND CLC

    S.
    No.
    1.

    Basic raw
    materials &
    other inputs

    2.

    General
    Properties

    3.

    Autoclaved Aerated
    Concrete Blocks

    Parameters

    Cement, Fly Ash, Lime


    and Gypsum

    Cellular Lightweight
    Concrete Blocks

    Burnt Clay
    Bricks

    Cement, Aggregate, Fly


    Top Soil &
    Ash, Water & Foaming
    Energy
    Compound

    Dry Density kg/m3 600

    750 800

    1900

    Compressive
    Strength in
    kg/cm3

    40

    25 30

    40-75

    Range of
    applications /
    utility

    Non-load bearing blocks

    Partition

    Load-bearing &
    non-load bearing

    Aging

    No gain in strength with


    age

    Gains strength with age

    No gain in
    strength with age

    Thermal
    Conductivity
    (W/m.k.)

    0.132-0.151 for 600 kg/m3

    0.132-0.151 for 800


    kg/m3

    0.184

    Sound Insulation

    Superior than burnt clay & Superior than burnt clay


    Normal
    hollow concrete
    & hollow concrete

    Ease of Working

    Can be cut, nailed &


    drilled

    Can be cut, nailed &


    drilled

    Normal

    Shape & Form


    Pre-cast Brick
    size

    600 x 200 x 100/150/200 600 x 200 x 100/150/200 230 x 100 x 70


    mm
    mm
    mm

    Pre-cast
    elements

    Any size of elements

    Any size of elements

    Cast in shape

    Not feasible

    Any shape & size in any


    Not feasible
    density

    Not feasible

    4.

    Water
    Absorption % by 45% by volume
    weight

    12% for 800 kg/m3


    density (by volume)

    20% by volume

    5.

    Drying
    Shrinkage
    mm/meter

    Shrinkage after
    maturing0.011 (for 600
    kg/m3) 0.058 (for kg/m3)

    0.10

    No shrinkage

    6.

    Productivity

    Output 100% more than


    brick work

    Output 100% more than


    Normal
    brick work

    7.

    Eco
    Friendliness

    Pollution free, High


    Pollution free, Least
    energy requirement, Open energy requriement,
    process uses fly ash
    Can consume fly ash

    Creates smoke,
    Uses high
    energy, Wastes

    S.
    No.

    Parameters

    Autoclaved Aerated
    Concrete Blocks

    Cellular Lightweight
    Concrete Blocks

    Burnt Clay
    Bricks

    around 33%

    8.

    Structural
    saving due to
    dead weight
    reduction

    agricultural land

    55% reduction in weight of 55% reduction in weight


    walls. Tremendous
    of walls. Tremendous
    structural saving for high structural saving for high No additional
    rise buildings in
    rise buildings in
    saving
    Earthquake / Poor soil
    Earthquake / Poor soil
    area
    area

    Detailed comparison of Bricks Vs our Sri Sai CLC Bricks


    Aspect

    Brick Wall

    CLC wall

    Remarks

    External

    230 mm

    200/150 mm

    Saving of 13 to 35%

    Partition

    115 mm

    100 mm

    Saving of 13%

    External

    0.051 m/m

    0.011 m/m

    Saving of 78%

    Partition

    0.02 m/m

    0.005 m/m

    Saving of 75%

    Plastering

    12 + 15 mm

    8 + 10 mm

    Saving of 33%

    External

    601 kg / m

    256 / 206 kg / m

    Reduction of 60%

    Partition

    319 kg / m

    148 kg / m

    Reduction of 48%

    Labour for work

    100%

    60%

    Reduction of 40%

    Quality

    Normal

    Superior

    Satisfied Client

    Chase cutting

    Difficult

    Easy

    Faster Laying Service

    Driving nail

    Difficult

    Easy

    Happy Client

    Longevity

    May deteriorate with


    time

    Gains strength with


    times as ordinary
    concrete

    Better Durability

    Thickness

    Mortar Masonry

    Dead Load

    Ease of Working

    Properties and Paramsters of our CLC Bricks


    Property

    Unit

    Value

    Advantage

    Size

    mmxmmxmm

    600 x 200 x 200


    600 x 200 x 150
    600 x 200 x 100

    Dry Density

    kg/m3

    900 (approx)

    Dry Weight

    kg

    200mm- 20(+or-1kg)
    150mm- 15(+or-1kg)
    100mm- 10(+or-1kg)

    Light weight

    Compressive Strength

    kg/cm2

    20 -25 @ 28 days.
    Increase with age

    Adequate strength

    Water Absorption

    <20

    Very low water


    absorption

    Thermal Conductivity

    W/m-K

    0.21

    Good thermal
    insulation

    Red brick-4 / piece


    CLC- 45/piece 2040 MPA
    AAC (Aerocon)- 3000/cumec
    Flyash- 4/piece

    Thinner walls

    You might also like