Neya, I., Yamegueu, D., Coulibaly, Y., Messan, A. and Ouedraogo, A.L.S.N. (2021) Impact of Insulation and Wall Thickness in Compressed Earth Buildings in Hot and Dry Tropical Regions. Journal of Building Engineering, 33, Article ID: 101612.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101612

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Optimisation of Thermal Comfort of Building in a Hot and Dry Tropical Climate: A Comparative Approach between Compressed Earth/Concrete Block Envelopes

  AUTHORS: Arnaud Louis Sountong-Noma Ouedraogo, Césaire Hema, Sjoerd Moustapha N’guiro, Philbert Nshimiyimana, Adamah Messan

  KEYWORDS: Compressed Earth Blocks, Hot and Dry Climate, Thermal Comfort, Architectural Optimization of Thermal Models, Cement Blocks, Empirical Validation

  JOURNAL NAME: Journal of Minerals and Materials Characterization and Engineering, Vol.12 No.1, January 29, 2024

  ABSTRACT: Compressed earth blocks (CEB) are an alternative to cement blocks in the construction of wall masonry. However, the optimal architectural construction methods for adequate thermal comfort for occupants in hot and arid environments are not mastered. This article evaluates the influence of architectural and constructive modes of buildings made of CEB walls and concrete block walls, to optimize and compare their thermal comfort in the hot and dry tropical climate of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Two identical pilot buildings whose envelopes are made of CEB and concrete blocks were monitored for this study. The thermal models of the pilot buildings were implemented in the SketchUp software using an extension of EnergyPlus. The models were empirically validated after calibration against measured thermal data from the buildings. The models were used to do a parametric analysis for optimization of the thermal performances by simulating plaster coatings on the exterior of walls, airtight openings and natural ventilation depending on external weather conditions. The results show that the CEB building displays 7016 hours of discomfort, equivalent to 80.1% of the time, and the concrete building displays 6948 hours of discomfort, equivalent to 79.3% of the time. The optimization by modifications reduced the discomfort to 2918 and 3125 hours respectively; i.e. equivalent to only 33.3% for the CEB building and 35.7% for the concrete building. More study should evaluate thermal optimizations in buildings in real time of usage such as residential buildings commonly used by the local middle class. The use of CEB as a construction material and passive means of improving thermal comfort is a suitable ecological and economical option to replace cementitious material.