Exploring Unconventional Structural Alternatives Incorporating Waste and Recycled Materials for Low-Cost and Low Carbon Emissions Housing

Funding Sponsor

Misr El Kheir Foundation

Author's Department

Construction Engineering Department

Second Author's Department

Construction Engineering Department

Third Author's Department

Construction Engineering Department

Fourth Author's Department

Construction Engineering Department

Fifth Author's Department

Construction Engineering Department

Find in your Library

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-8345-8_27

All Authors

Mohamed Elnakeb Marina Moawad Mohamed Ashmawy Marwan Shawki Mohamed Atef Ehab Abdelhamid Mohamed Darwish May Haggag Donia Eldwib Khaled Nassar Maram Saudy Safwan Khedr Minas Guirguis Mohamed Naguib Abouzeid

Document Type

Research Article

Publication Title

Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering

Publication Date

1-1-2025

doi

10.1007/978-981-97-8345-8_27

Abstract

Reinforced concrete skeleton is the most commonly used structural system for construction worldwide. However, it is not the most eco-friendly alternative; therefore, finding innovative green alternatives is a necessity amidst the climate change effects the world is currently facing. In addition, construction costs are increasing making it a challenging to fund housing projects for the lowincome. Accordingly, four building alternatives were examined for constructing a single-story building of a small room to determine the most eco-friendly and costeffective construction materials. Alternative 1 is cement bricks masonry parabolic vault, alternative 2 is cement masonry units for walls and structurally insulated panels (SIPs) for roof, alternative 3 is SIPs for the walls and the roof, and alternative 4 is the typical reinforced concrete skeleton with cement bricks for masonry. Each alternative is investigated for its structural integrity and soundness, carbon emissions per unit area, estimated construction cost and building envelope conductance. It was determined that alternative 3 is the most environmentally friendly as it only emits 66.29 kgCO2e/m2, while alternative 1 was the least, emitting 753.49 kgCO2e/m2. However, alternative 1 is shown to have the least construction cost of 1730.78 EGP/m2,while alternative 3 has the highest cost of 6150 EGP/m2. Finally, in terms of thermal conductance, alternative 1 had the highest of 12.35 W/K.m2 while alternative 3 had the lowest of only 0.59 W/K.m2

First Page

215

Last Page

223

Link to Full Text
Find this item online

Share

COinS