Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Influence of natural fiber dosage and length on adobe mixes

damage-mechanical behavior
G. Araya-Letelier a,⇑, J. Concha-Riedel b, F.C. Antico c,⇑, C. Valdés d, G. Cáceres b
a
Escuela de Construcción Civil, Facultad de Ingeniería, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Avenida Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago 7820436, Chile
b
Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Avenida Diagonal Las Torres 2640, Peñalolén, Santiago 7941169, Chile
c
Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Avenida Padre Hurtado 750, Viña del Mar, Viña del Mar 2581907, Chile
d
Escuela de Arquitectura, Facultad de Arquitectura, Diseño, y Estudios Urbanos, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, El Comendador 1916, Providencia, Santiago 7520245, Chile

h i g h l i g h t s g r a p h i c a l a b s t r a c t

Addition of pig hair to earthen

materials controlled drying shrinkage
cracking.

Impact strength increased as fiber
dosage and length increased.

High dosage of long fibers formed
clusters that reduced average flexural
and compressive strength.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study addresses the use of a natural fiber (pig hair), a massive food-industry waste, as reinforcement
Received 21 December 2017 in adobe mixes (a specific type of earthen material). The relevance of this work resides in the fact that
Received in revised form 16 April 2018 earthen materials are still widely used worldwide because of their low cost, availability, and low environ-
Accepted 18 April 2018
mental impact. Results show that adobe mixes’ mechanical-damage behavior is sensitive to both (i) fiber
dosage and (ii) fiber length. Impact strength and flexural toughness are increased, whereas shrinkage dis-
tributed crack width is reduced. Average values of compressive and flexural strengths are reduced as fiber
Keywords:
dosage and length increase, as a result of porosity generated by fiber clustering. Based on the results of
Adobe mixes
Animal fiber
this work a dosage of 0.5% by weight of dry soil using 7 mm fibers is optimal to improve crack control,
Mechanical properties flexural toughness and impact strength without statistically affecting flexural and compressive strengths.
Damage control Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Fiber-reinforced

1. Introduction
Earthen materials such as rammed earth, adobe, and cob have
been used worldwide in the construction of houses for thousands
of years, and currently approximately 30% of the global population
and 50% of the population of developing countries live in earthen
shelters [1]. The use of traditional earthen materials for construc-
⇑ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: gerardo.araya@uc.cl (G. Araya-Letelier), federico.antico@uai.cl
(F.C. Antico).
tion has resurged, and new earthen materials, such as earth bags
[2], have emerged over the last decades. Earthen materials are
sometimes preferred due to their availability [3], recyclability [4],
good thermal and acoustic properties [5], fire resistance [3], and
lower costs compared to other masonry materials [5]. In addition,
the main process of manufacturing earthen materials does not gen-
erate CO2 emissions [6].
Since the beginning of the 1970s, interest in earthen construc-
tion materials has grown in Latin America, with a focus on rural,
social, and heritage housing promoted by institutions such as
UNESCO [7]. Earthen construction is even present in seismic coun-

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.04.151
0950-0618/Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
646 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655

tries in Latin America, as approximately 40% of houses in Peru [8]
and 40% of the built heritage in Chile [9] are made of earthen mate-
rials. Despite the advantages and widespread use of earthen mate-
rials, their performance is worse than industrialized construction
materials in terms of toughness, tensile and flexural strength,
water erosion resistance, and volumetric instability [1,10–12].
The mitigation of some of the shortcomings of earthen materials,
like toughness, tensile strength, permeability and drying shrinkage
cracking, has been studied with the incorporation of natural fibers
(e.g., straw, sisal, jute, banana, hemp, palm, wool and coconut
fibers) [8,13–19] and industrialized fibers (e.g., polypropylene
and glass fibers) [20–23]. Since earthen materials are natural, eco-
friendly materials, particular interest has been placed in reinforc-
ing them using natural fibers over industrialized fibers. Studies
using natural fibers such as straw, coconut, and banana fibers,
properties of adobe mixes; and (ii) the fracture behavior of adobe
mixes. The work is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the
material characterization and experimental program. Section 3
presents the results and analysis of the experimental program.
Finally, Section 4 presents the conclusions of this work.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that this study did not evaluate
the long-term effects of the proposed natural fiber. Therefore, in
future studies the long-term effects on adobe reinforced with pig
hair should be explored knowing that protection methods were
successfully applied to other natural fibers to increase their dura-
bility in earthen matrices [32].
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials

which are the result of a waste valorization process, show promis-

2.1.1. Clayey soil
ing results. Ghavami et al. [14] studied the effect of sisal and coco- This study used a clayey soil obtained from Peñalolén, a district located in
nut fibers on the behavior of different soils, concluding that the southern Santiago (Chile). Fig. 1 shows the particle size distribution of the clayey
inclusion of 4% sisal or coconut fibers slightly increased the com- soil, which was determined by hydrometer and sieving analyses in accordance with
ASTM D7928 [33] and ASTM D6913 [34], respectively. The previous standards also
pressive strength (from 1.5 MPa to 2.0 MPa) as well as the so-
provide a particle-size definition of clay (material finer than 2 lm), silt (material
called ‘‘ductility” (i.e., in this work ‘‘toughness”) compared to plain between 2 lm and 75 lm), and sand (material between 75 lm and 4.75 mm).
soil. Yetgin et al. [6] addressed the incorporation of straw fibers on Fig. 1 shows that the clay, silt, and sand contents are approximately 11%, 69%,
the performance of adobe, and results showed that as fiber content and 20%, respectively. Since clayey soil is not an industrialized material, there are
increased the shrinkage rates decreased, but both the compressive different recommendations regarding the clay content. Catalan et al. [35] suggested
a 15–16% clay content to obtain good plasticity and workability of earthen materi-
strength decreased (in some cases from 3.5 MPa to 1 MPa, approx-
als, whereas Quagliarini and Lenci [19] recommended a 12–16% clay content, and
imately) and the tensile strength decreased (in some cases from Kouakou and Morel [36] concluded that soils for construction materials are recom-
0.7 MPa to 0.2 MPa) compared to plain adobe. Millogo et al. [24] mended to have less than 20% of clay content. The 11% clay content of the clayey
investigated the effect of Hibiscus cannabinus fibers (a vegetable soil used in this study produced adobe mixes with good workability and cohesion
to prepare laboratory samples.
fiber) on adobe blocks and results showed that in some cases the
The liquid and plastic Atterberg limits as well as the plasticity index of the soil
incorporation of these fibers increased the flexural strength (from were obtained in accordance with ASTM D4318 [37]. Table 1 provides a summary of
0.5 MPa to 1.1 MPa) and reduced the thermal conductivity (from the most important physical properties of the soil.
1.67 W/(m K) to 1.30 W/(m K)) compared to unreinforced adobe Based on the results of particle size distribution and physical properties of the
blocks. clayey soil as well as suggestions of previous studies [36,38], this material is consid-
ered appropriate for earthen construction.
Among natural fibers, the use of animal fibers in earthen mate-
rials has limited research compared to vegetable fibers. Galan-
2.1.2. Natural fibers
Marin and co-workers have studied the incorporation of wool Pig hair is used as a natural reinforcing fiber for adobe mixes. Araya-Letelier
fibers in earthen materials, reporting increments in flexural et al. [30] developed an extensive study on the morphological, physical, and
strength and toughness compared to plain earthen materials mechanical properties of pig hair obtained from a Chilean pork food company that
[25]. Yet, the results from their work showed that unfired bricks disposes approximately 2000 metric tons of pig hair per year in landfills. Table 2
summarizes some of the results of that study.
presented a lower compressive strength compared to traditional
fired clayed bricks [26]. Aymerich et al. extended the research on
incorporation of wool fibers in earthen materials, showing that
wool fiber reinforcement improved the residual strength, tough-
ness, and energy absorption of unreinforced soil [18].
To extend the use of natural fibers (specifically animal fibers) in
earthen materials this study proposes the use of pig hair, which is
a worldwide waste produced by the food industry. In Europe
890,000 metric tons of pig waste are produced each year, and related
management costs have reached EUR 20.7 million per year [27].
Therefore, the pork industry generates waste management prob-
lems worldwide, including Chile, and the use of pig hair as a natural
fiber reinforcement in earthen materials could promote the waste
valorization process of this fiber. To the best of the authors’ knowl-
edge, there have been only four studies addressing the waste val-
orization of pig hair as fiber reinforcement, but their focus has
been on characterizing the properties of pig hair and its incorpora-
tion into cement-based materials [28–31].
The novelty of this research resides in the incorporation of pig
hair, a natural animal fiber obtained from the pork industry waste,
into earthen materials, addressing some of the most relevant ben- Fig. 1. Particle size distribution of soil.
efits (e.g., shrinkage cracking control) and potential disadvantages
(e.g., compressive strength reduction). As earthen material is a Table 1
generic term, this study refers to the mix between clayey soil, Physical properties of soil.
water, and fibers as adobe mix since it might be used to produce
Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%) Plasticity index (%) Density (kg/m3)
adobe bricks. The objectives of this study are to assess the impacts
29.1 17.4 11.7 2,507
of different dosages and lengths of pig hair on: (i) the mechanical
 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655 647

Table 2
Morphological, physical, and mechanical properties of pig hair after Araya-Letelier et al. [30].

Mid-section diameter (mm) Length (mm) Aspect ratio Water absorption (%) Surface roughness (lm) Tensile strength (MPa)
Average 0.16 35.7 249 95 0.104 99.2
Max 0.23 60.2 350 155.1
Min 0.07 22.1 150 44.5
SD1 0.05 11.4 65 41.7
COV2 31% 32% 26% 42.1
1
Standard deviation.
2
Coefficient of variation.

2.3. Adobe mix specimen preparation

Fig. 2. Pig hair lengths used as natural fibers.
The pig hair used in this study was post processed to obtain three different
average lengths (7 mm, 15 mm and 30 mm) to perform a sensitivity analysis on
the impact of different lengths and dosages of fibers on the performance of adobe
mixes. Considering the average diameter of 0.16 mm reported by Araya-Letelier
et al. [30] and the three different lengths used in this study, the average aspect
ratios to be used are 43.8, 93.8, and 187.5 for fiber lengths of 7 mm, 15 mm, and
30 mm, respectively. Post processed fibers are shown in Fig. 2.
2.2. Adobe mix proportions
To assess the workability of the mix, oven-dry clayey soil was carefully mixed
by hand with different fractions of potable water until homogenous adobe mixes
were obtained. Based on these results, a water to soil ratio (defined as the weight
of water divided by the weight of oven-dry clayey soil) of 0.307 was chosen for
all the adobe mixes.
Seven different adobe mixes were prepared for this study: a plain adobe mix
was compared to six mixes incorporating two dosages of natural fiber (0.5% and
2% of weight of oven-dry fibers to oven-dry clayey soil) and three different fiber
lengths (7 mm, 15 mm and 30 mm). Table 3 presents the different material propor-
tions for each mix, using the following identification (ID) for each adobe mix: the
first number indicates the dosage in percentage of weight of pig hair and the second
number represents the length of the pig hair in millimeters. Consequently, adobe
mix ID 0-0 refers to 0% pig hair and 0 mm length, as this is just a plain adobe
mix. As pig hair has high water absorption, water adjustment was performed in
adobe mixes incorporating pig hair to compensate for the water absorbed by the
hair. Even though additional water was incorporated to compensate for the fiber
absorption in reinforced adobe mixes, the addition of pig hair reduced the worka-
bility of the reinforced mixes with respect to plain adobe. The latter occurred espe-
cially for higher dosages (2%) and longer lengths (15 and 30 mm) of pig hair,
requiring additional mixing and compaction energy. Fig. 3 presents clayey soil
and the corresponding natural fibers for each adobe mix prior to the mixing process.
The mixing of the materials and compaction of the specimens were executed
manually. Although the manual production process of the mixes and specimens
adds epistemic variability that can be reduced by implementing mechanical pro-
cesses, most of the construction projects using earthen materials in real practice
use manual processes. Therefore, this study aimed to replicate the impact of this
natural fiber in real construction conditions.
The mixing processes started with the adobe mixes incorporating natural fibers,
where the clayey soil and fibers were mixed before water incorporation. The natural
fibers were added gradually to the clayey soil to reduce the formation of fiber clus-
ters. Once the natural fibers were incorporated in the adobe mixes, water was
added in four steps, with manual mixing between each step. All the adobe mixes
were prepared in parallel, and after finishing the mixing, all the materials were cov-
ered by a plastic bag for two hours to promote favorable and uniform water
absorption.
Table 4 summarizes the type of specimens, the tests performed, and the number
of specimens used in each test for each adobe mix defined in Table 3. Fig. 4 shows
drawings of each specimen and a picture of the total number of specimens cast for
adobe mix ID 2.0-30, as an example.
After flexural testing of beam specimens to obtain flexural strength, toughness
indices and residual strength factors, ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) was measured
on each half of the beam. Later, the two pieces that were obtained from each beam
specimen were tested under compression.
Beam specimens and RILEM beam specimens were cast using plastic molds and
metallic molds, respectively, and each mold was previously moisturized to prevent
adherence of the specimens. The flat specimens were cast over a metallic plate with
a coating of sand and glue to increase the friction between the plate and the flat
sample of adobe in order to study damage caused by restrained drying shrinkage.
The casting of the specimens (except flat specimens) was developed in consec-
utive layers, and each layer was compacted with a tamper to reduce the void con-
tent of the mixture. After casting, beam specimens were demolded immediately,
and RILEM beam specimens were demolded after 48 hours of casting. Beam speci-
mens and RILEM beam specimens were kept at 22 °C for 28 days and rotated 90° to
the adjacent side every seven days until testing. The flat specimens were kept in the
molds for seven days at 22 °C to induce a restrained drying shrinkage condition.
Seven days after casting, developed cracking was measured (length and width).
2.4. Experimental testing
Since the preparation of the adobe mixes as well as their specimens involves
manual operations, significant variability might occur among experimental results.
Therefore, an outlying detection process, considering a single outlier detection with
a 5% level of significance, was implemented in accordance with ASTM E178 [39] for
each adobe mix specimen on the results of the following experimental tests.
2.4.1. Influence of animal fibers on mechanical behavior of adobe mixes
2.4.1.1. Flexural strength, toughness indices and residual strength factors. Flexural
strength of each adobe mix was assessed using a three-point bending configuration
over six beam specimens with a span of 270 mm between supports, using a dis-

Table 3
Adobe mix ID numbers and material proportions.

Adobe mix ID Soil1 (kg) Base water (kg) Fiber2 (%) Fiber (kg) Water to compensate fiber absorption (kg) Fiber length (mm)
0–0 1000 307 0 0 0 0
0.5–7 1000 307 0.5 5 4.75 7
0.5–15 1000 307 0.5 5 4.75 15
0.5–30 1000 307 0.5 5 4.75 30
2.0–7 1000 307 2.0 20 19 7
2.0–15 1000 307 2.0 20 19 15
2.0–30 1000 307 2.0 20 19 30
1
In oven-dry condition.
2
Percentage of weight of oven-dry fibers to oven-dry clayey soil.
648 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655

Fig. 3. Batch of dry constituents of adobe mixes (clayey soil and pig hair) used for this study ready for mixing.

Table 4
Types of specimens cast in this study.

Specimen’s type Dimensions (mm) Test

(Identification)
Purpose Number of specimens
per adobe mix
Beam 310  105  70 Flexural strength°, toughness indices, 6°
residual strength factors, ultrasonic 12*
pulse velocity (UPV) and compressive*
strength at 28 days
RILEM beam 160  40  40, Impact strength at 28 days 6
with a 5  3 notch
at midspan
Flat 180  5 (diameter Restrained drying shrinkage distributed 2
and height) cracking at 7 days

placement control testing protocol with a rate of 1 mm/minute to obtain a stable sent the average post-crack load retained over a deflection interval as a percentage
crack propagation and measurements of absorbed energy as suggested by Aymerich of the load at first crack, and they were calculated directly from the flexural tough-
et al. [18]. The applied load and corresponding deflection were recorded continu- ness indices using Eq. (2) and Eq. (3).
ously using the load cell of the testing machine as well as a linear variable differen-
tial transducer (LVDT) placed on the lower side of the beam specimen at the R5;10 ¼ 20ðI10 I5 Þ ð2Þ
midspan. To obtain reliable displacement at the midspan of the beam, a steel frame
was implemented as shown in Fig. 5, which is similar to the steel frame imple-
R10;20 ¼ 10ðI20  I10 Þ ð3Þ
mented by Aymerich et al. [18].
Flexural strength of each specimen was determined using Eq. (1), and average
and standard deviation values for each adobe mix were obtained from the individ- where R5;10 and R10;20 are the residual strength factors between the intervals of 5.5d
ual flexural strength results of six beam specimens. and 3d, and 10.5d and 5.5d, respectively.
Average and standard deviation values of toughness indices and residual
strength factors for each adobe mix were obtained from the individual flexural
3FL
rf ¼ 2
ð1Þ load-displacement curves of the six beam specimens.
2bd

where rf is the flexural strength, F is the maximum applied load, L is the span
between supports (270 mm), b is the average width of the specimen at the mid sec-
tion (70 mm), and d is the average depth of the specimen at the fracture section (105
mm).
The flexural toughness of materials is an indicator of the energy absorption
capability, which is expected to increase with the addition of fibers. This study cal-
culated the flexural toughness indices as well as residual strength factors according
to ASTM C1018 [40]. Generally, the flexural toughness indices are calculated as the
area under the load-deflection curve up to a specific deflection value divided by the
area under the load-deflection curve up to the deflection where the first crack
occurs (d). Flexural toughness indices I5, I10, and I 20 are the values obtained using
deflections of 3d, 5.5d and 10.5d, respectively. The residual strength factors repre-
2.4.1.2. Compressive strength. Compressive strength of each adobe mix was assessed
using the prismatic pieces obtained after flexural fracture of six beam specimens
and, therefore, 12 prismatic specimens for each adobe mix were tested in compres-
sion using a load control protocol with a rate of 200 N/s applied over a 75 mm  75
mm section of the specimens (stress rate of 0.04 MPa/s). Compressive strength was
determined using Eq. (4).
F
rc ¼ ð4Þ
A
where rc is the compressive strength, F is the maximum applied load, and A is the
loaded section (5625 mm2).
 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655 649

Fig. 4. Specimen preparation: (a) beam specimen, (b) RILEM beam specimen, (c) flat specimen, and total number of specimens prepared for adobe mix ID 2.0-30.

Fig. 5. Flexural test setup.

Average and standard deviation values of compressive strength of each adobe
mix were obtained considering the individual compressive strength results of the
12 prismatic specimens tested.
2.4.1.3. Ultrasonic pulse velocity. Addition of fibers in construction materials typi-
cally improves toughness and tensile strength [18,30]. Yet, fibers with low density
and high absorption might affect porosity and, therefore, strength. For this reason,
UPV measurements were performed on adobe specimens at 28 days after casting in
accordance with ASTM C597 [41] to address modifications to pore content that
could affect macroscopic strength.
2.4.2. Influence of animal fibers on the fracture behavior of adobe mixes
2.4.2.1. Restrained drying shrinkage distributed cracking. Fibers are expected to con-
trol crack widths in adobe mixes due to restrained drying shrinkage. Experimental
assessment of the drying shrinkage cracking behavior of earthen building materials
is limited, and there are few studies addressing this phenomenon qualitatively [42–
44]. To quantitatively study the cracking reduction effect of this animal fiber in
adobe mixes, the two flat specimens prepared for each adobe mix were kept at con-
trolled temperature and humidity (22 °C and 45%, respectively) for seven days. A
grid with 20 mm  20 mm cells put on top of the adobe flat specimens helped to
identify and measure the lengths and widths of the distributed cracks that formed
during this test. Specifically, widths and lengths were measured using a crack width
comparator and a caliper. Fig. 6 presents a scheme of the grid, the measurement set
up, and an example of the observed distributed cracking for this test.
For each adobe mix, the crack width average (CWA) was calculated using the
formula defined in Eq. (5).
P
lIDxy  wIDxy
CWAIDxy ¼ P ð5Þ
lIDxy
where CWAIDxy is the crack width average of adobe mix IDx  y, lIDxy and wIDxy are
the length and width, respectively, of each visible crack in the two flat specimens of
the adobe mix IDx  y.
Once CWAIDxy values were obtained, the crack width reduction ratio (CWRR)
for each fiber-reinforced adobe mix was calculated using Eq. (6).
650 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655

Fig. 6. Restrained drying shrinkage distributed cracking measurement procedure: (a) grid used to identify cracks in smaller areas, (b) drying shrinkage measurement setup,
and (c) flat specimen cracked at 7 days as a result of drying shrinkage.

 
CWAIDxy constant during the tests and, consequently, each blow accounted for an impact
CWRRIDxy ¼ 1   100 ð6Þ
CWAID00 energy of 0.22 J.
Average and standard deviation values of impact strengths for each adobe mix
where CWRRIDxy is the crack width reduction ratio (expressed as a percentage) of
were obtained from the individual impact strength results of the six RILEM beam
the adobe mix IDx  y with respect to the adobe mix ID0  0, CWAIDxy is the crack
specimens tested.
width average of the adobe mix IDx  y, and CWAID00 is the crack width average
of the adobe mix ID0  0 (plain adobe).

2.4.2.2. Impact strength. The impact strength was used as an indicator of the varia-
tion of fracture toughness due to the incorporation of animal fibers in adobe mixes.
The use of the impact test to assess impact strength was previously suggested for
cement-based materials [45,46]. In particular, Araya-Letelier et al. reported
improvements in impact strength caused by the addition of these fibers in mortars
[29,30]. Similar to Araya-Letelier et al., the impact strength of adobe mixes in this
work was calculated using a projectile thrown at the center of RILEM beam speci-
mens, which were supported by a steel frame as shown in Fig. 7 [29,30]. For this
test, RILEM beam specimens were used with a 5 mm (width)  3 mm (depth) notch
at the center. Each RILEM beam specimen was placed on its support points on a
layer of silicone attached to the frame to prevent rebounds (and possible damage
of the sample at the support points) after each blow. Six RILEM beam specimens
for each adobe mix were tested. For each specimen, the number of blows required
to fracture and collapse the specimen was recorded. The total energy at collapse
was calculated using Eq. (7).
Ec ¼ n  m  g  h
where Ec is the total energy at collapse, n is the total number of blows required to
collapse the specimen, m is the mass of the projectile (0.047 kg), g is the gravitational
constant (9.8 m/s2) and h is the height of the fall (0.496 m). These values were kept
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Influence of animal fibers on mechanical behavior of adobe mixes
3.1.1. Flexural strength, toughness indices and residual strength factors
Fig. 8 presents average values and error bars (one standard
deviation above and below the average) of the flexural strength
of each adobe mix tested 28 days after casting. The average values
of flexural strength ranged from 0.34 MPa to 0.49 MPa, and these
results correspond to a similar order of magnitude (0.47 MPa to
0.83 MPa) reported at 28 days for unreinforced earthen materials
[47] and mechanically compressed earthen blocks (expected to
have better performance than manually compacted specimens)
ð7Þ reinforced with polypropylene fibers [23]. Overall, the average
flexural strength of adobe mixes was reduced as pig hair dosage
increased. These reductions rangeg from 4% (ID 0.5-7) to 30% (ID
2.0-15). The standard deviation values varied from 0.06 MPa (ID
0-0) to 0.11 MPa (ID 2.0-30). These results are similar to those pre-
viously reported for compressed earthen blocks [23,47]. Results
obtained in this work showed a reduction of 20% to 30% in average
flexural strength for: (i) adobe mixes with 2% fiber dosages regard-
less of the fiber length, and (ii) adobe mixes with 0.5% fiber dosages

Fig. 8. Average values and error bars (one standard deviation above and below the
Fig. 7. Impact test setup. average) of the flexural strength of each adobe mix tested 28 days after casting.
 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655
with fiber lengths of 15 mm and 30 mm. If the error bars of Fig. 8
are analyzed, it can be observed that if one standard deviation is
subtracted from the average flexural strength of adobe mix ID 0-
0, the resulting value is: (i) still larger than the average flexural
strength plus one standard deviation of adobe mixes ID 2.0-7,
and ID 2.0-15, and (ii) smaller than the average flexural strength
plus one standard deviation of adobe mixes ID 0.5-7, ID 0.5-15,
ID 0.5-30, and ID 2.0-30.
Although the study from Aymerich et al. [18] and this present
work differ in the type of soil, animal fiber (Aymerich et al. used
wool), water to soil ratio, sample preparation and dimensions
(Aymerich et al. tested beams with a transversal section at mid-
span of b = 75 mm and d = 50 mm), the results of flexural strength
might be worthwhile to compare since the flexural test setups and
animal fiber dosages were similar in both studies. Considering in
both studies the specimens with 2% of fibers and fibers of 30
mm, the flexural peak load reported by Aymerich et al. increased
from approximately 400 N (unreinforced specimens) to 700 N
(reinforced specimens), whereas the average flexural peak load of
the present paper reduced from 934 N (unreinforced specimens)
to 648 N (reinforced specimens). On the other hand, studies evalu-
ating macro polypropylene fiber-reinforced earthen materials
using 1% (by weight of dry soil) fiber dosages have showed reduc-
tions (up to 31%) in average flexural strength compared to unrein-
forced earthen materials [23,48]. In the present work, the
reduction in average flexural strength and the increment in disper-
sion as pig hair dosage increased is explained by the generation of
fiber clusters, whose formation was more common in the largest
dosage (2%) of fiber and mixes with longer fiber lengths (15 and
30 mm). The relative size of these clusters with respect to the fiber
area that is in contact with the matrix caused low adhesion
between the fibers in the clusters and the matrix. From a macro-
scopic point of view, fiber clusters worked as porosity in the
matrix, affecting its average strength. The negative effects of fiber
clustering on strength of reinforced materials has been previously
reported [49]. It is worth mentioning that the average minimum
flexural strength of earthen masonry materials in the State of
New Mexico Earthen Building Materials Code is 0.35 MPa [50],
and only one adobe mix exhibited an average flexural strength
below this limit (i.e., ID 2.0-15, with an average flexural strength
of 0.34 MPa).
The typical load-midspan deflection curve for each adobe mix
beam specimens is illustrated in Fig. 9. Similar behavior was exhib-
(a)
Fig. 9. Typical load-midspan deflection curves: (a) plain and 0.5% fiber-reinforced beam specimens, and (b) plain and 2.0% fiber-reinforced beam specimens.
651
ited by the remaining five beam specimens tested for each adobe
mix. As shown in Fig. 9, the load initially increased at the same
load-deflection rate until a visible crack was observed growing
from the lower surface of the specimen (under tension), regardless
of the fiber dosage and length of the fiber. The latter indicates that
up to the peak load, the flexural response of the adobes mixes
depended mainly on the brittle behavior of the matrix. The peak
load of all the reinforced mixes was reduced by 20 to 30% with
respect to ID 0-0, except for ID 2.0-30, which showed quasi-
brittle behavior. There are two possible mechanisms that explain
the flexural peak load reduction: (i) length of natural fibers
increased adobe mix tortuosity, and (ii) fiber content increased
the density of discontinuities in the matrix. These two mechanisms
are expected to affect the mechanical response of adobe mixes
while still working as a brittle material, prior to the formation of
a macroscopic crack.
Natural fibers are expected to have a positive impact on post-
peak behavior [30]. Results from this work showed that flexural
toughness was proportional to both fiber dosage and fiber length.
Adobe mix ID 0-0 exhibited toughness indices (I5, I10, and I20) val-
ues of 1.0, consistent with the brittle mode of failure where its
maximum flexural load was followed by a sudden drop in load
caused by the formation of an unstable macroscopic crack. On
the contrary, all the fiber-reinforced adobe mixes exhibited a load
recovery after the first crack, followed by an increment of the mid-
span deflection before collapse. Table 5 presents average and stan-
dard deviation values of I5, I10, and I20 for each adobe mix and the
average residual strength factor values. It can be seen that tough-
ness indices increased proportional to both (i) fiber dosage and
(ii) fiber length. In particular, the effect of the fiber length on
toughness indices was greater than the effect of fiber dosage
(e.g., I20 increased 5.2 times, on average, as the fiber length
increased from 7 mm to 30 mm, whereas I20 only increased 2.4
times, on average, as dosage increased from 0.5% to 2%).
Results from this work showed that increments of both (i) fiber
dosage and (ii) fiber length increased (i) load recovery after post-
peak and (ii) toughness indices. Improvement of post-peak behav-
ior by adding natural fibers to adobe mixes was consistent with
what has been previously reported about the addition of animal
fibers to mortar [29–31]. A possible explanation for the behavior
described in this section can be related to the expected lower elas-
tic modulus of the pig hair with respect to the matrix (e.g., adobe
mix) [51]. Fibers with low elastic modulus are not expected to
(b)
652 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655

Table 5
Statistics of toughness indices and residual strength factors.

ID I5 I10 I20 R5,10 R10,20

1 2 1 2 1 2 1
Avg SD Avg SD Avg SD Avg Avg1
0–0 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.5–7 1.21 0.28 1.21 0.28 1.21 0.28 0.00 0.00
0.5–15 1.85 0.33 2.27 0.52 2.27 0.52 8.40 0.00
0.5–30 3.98 0.59 5.92 0.97 6.79 1.43 38.80 8.70
2.0–7 2.29 0.47 2.63 0.61 2.63 0.61 6.80 0.00
2.0–15 3.69 0.74 5.76 1.02 7.44 1.29 41.40 16.80
2.0–30 5.96 1.24 9.74 1.57 12.69 1.72 75.60 29.50
1
Average.
2
Standard deviation.

increase the strength of the composite and may actually reduce it
[51]. On the contrary, natural fibers are expected to improve
impact strength and reduce crack width [30].
3.1.2. Compressive strength
Fig. 10 presents the average values and error bars (one standard
deviation above and below the average) of the compressive
strength of each adobe mix tested 28 days after casting. The aver-
age values of compressive strength ranged from 1.20 MPa to 2.02
MPa, which are similar to previous results reported for earthen
materials with low compaction pressures and typical bulk densi-
ties for adobe [52,53]. There was a reduction in the average com-
pressive strength when pig hair was incorporated (compared to
adobe mix ID 0-0), with reductions ranging from 5% (ID 0.5-7) to
40% (ID 2.0-30). The standard deviations varied from 0.15 MPa
(ID 0-0) to 0.33 MPa (ID 2.0-30), and this range is similar to others
(0.12 MPa to 0.59 MPa) previously reported for compacted rein-
forced earthen materials [23]. From the average compressive
strength results, it might be stated that there was a reduction of
26% to 40% in compressive strength when pig hair was incorpo-
rated into adobe mixes ID 0.5-30, ID 2.0-15, and ID 2.0-30. Porosity
caused by formation of clusters, more common in the largest
dosage (2%) of fibers and mixes with longer fiber length (15 and
30 mm), is most likely the cause of the compressive strength
reduction described previously. If the error bars of Fig. 10 are ana-
lyzed, it can be observed that if one standard deviation is sub-
tracted from the average compressive strength of adobe mix ID
0-0, the resulting value is: (i) still larger than the average compres-
sive strength plus one standard deviation of adobe mixes ID 0.5-30,
ID 2.0-15, and ID 2.0-30, and (ii) smaller than the average compres-
sive strength plus one standard deviation of adobe mixes ID 0.5-7,
ID 0.5-15, and ID 2.0-7. It is worth noting that the average mini-
mum compressive strength of earthen masonry materials in the
State of New Mexico Earthen Building Materials Code is 2.07 MPa
[50] and, therefore, the reinforced adobe mixes of this study exhib-
ited compressive strengths below this limit. Adobe mixes ID 0.5-7,
ID 0.5-15, and ID 2.0-7 exhibited average compressive strengths of
1.92 MPa, 1.82 MPa, and 1.85 MPa, respectively, which are close to
the minimum of 2.07 MPa stated in the previously mentioned
code. Therefore, an enhanced manufacturing process (e.g., use of
hydraulic press) could most likely increase the compressive
strength of adobe mixes ID 0.5-7, ID 0.5-15, and ID 2.0-7 to the
minimum value of 2.07 MPa.
3.1.3. Ultrasonic pulse velocity
For adequately compacted specimens, the addition of fibers
should have little effect on the speed of elastic compressive waves
[6]. Fig. 11 presents the average values and error bars (one stan-
dard deviation above and below the average) of the UPV measure-
ments of each adobe mix. The results obtained in this work showed
that addition of fibers to adobe mixes had no significant effect on
the UPV measurements for all dosage (0.5% and 2%) and fiber
length (7, 15 and 30 mm) combinations. These values are similar
to those obtained by Slávka Andrejkovicová et al. [54] at late ages
for earth-based materials with lime additions, where the sample
with the largest percentage of lime had an UPV value of 1200 m/s.
The previously discussed reduction in compressive strength and
increment in dispersion of reinforced adobe mixes can be related
to the quality of the mixes via ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) mea-
surements [55]. Yet, the sensitivity of UPV measurements to micro-
scopic changes, like fiber clusters, can be limited. For example, it
has been reported that changes of 40% in the compressive strength
of concrete cubes represent approximately a variation of 8% in UPV

Fig. 10. Compressive strength test results. Fig. 11. UPV test results.
 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655 653

measurements [55]. The latter explains why UPV measurements in

this work were not sensitive to the reported changes and disper-
sion of compressive strength of adobe mixes.

3.2. Influence of animal fibers on the fracture behavior of adobe mixes

3.2.1. Restrained drying shrinkage distributed cracking

Fig. 12 shows one cracked specimen per type of adobe mix,
seven days after casting. Crack width reduction was observed as
both (i) fiber dosage and (ii) fiber length increased. Adobe mix ID
0-0 (plain adobe mix) exhibited crack widths up to 1.5 mm,
whereas adobe mix ID 2.0-30 exhibited crack widths up to 0.2 mm.
Fig. 13 shows the crack width average (CWA), defined in Eq. (5),
on the left axis as well as the crack width reduction ratio (CWRR),
defined in Eq. (6), on the right axis for each adobe mix. It can be
seen that both (i) fiber dosage and (ii) fiber length increment
reduced the CWA. The CWA presented by adobe mix ID 0-0 (1.3 Fig. 13. CWA and CWRR of different adobe mixes.
mm) was reduced to values that fluctuated between 0.46 mm (ID
0.5-7) and 0.15 mm (ID 2.0-30). These reductions corresponded
to CWRR values oscillating between 63% (ID 0.5-7) and 91% (ID length improves crack width control by preventing fiber pullout
2.0-30). In general, CWRR was larger for adobe mixes with 2% of after macroscopic cracks occur [51,56,57].
fibers than dosages of 0.5%. Fig. 12 also shows that the cracking
behavior was sensitive to the fiber length, where lengths of 30
mm showed larger CWRR than lengths of 7 mm. If the fiber dosage 3.2.2. Impact strength
is increased, the characteristic length between the material matrix There is little information about fracture behavior of manually
and the fiber would be statistically reduced. This would improve compacted earthen materials. Similar to fiber-reinforced mortars,
the chances to have crack width control after the matrix develops fiber-reinforced adobe mixes are expected to improve fracture
macroscopic distributed cracks. Additionally, increasing fiber toughness with respect to unreinforced materials [30,58]. Different

Fig. 12. Restrained drying shrinkage results.

654 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655
Fig. 14. Impact strength: cumulative impact energy at collapse.
types of tests have been developed to address the capacity of fiber-
reinforced construction materials to absorb damage [46]. The
impact strength is an effective test to measure the damage-
absorbing capacity of fiber-reinforced quasi-brittle materials [30].
The increase of impact energy is related to an increase of fracture
toughness due to the addition of fibers [59,60].
Fig. 14 shows the average values and the error bars (one stan-
dard deviation above and below the average) of the cumulative
energy at collapse for each adobe mix tested 28 days after casting.
A consistent increment in the energy required to generate collapse
of specimens can be observed when pig hair was added into adobe
mixes, and this increment was sensitive to both length and dosage
of pig hair. For adobe mixes ID 0.5-30 and ID 2.0-30, the impact
energy at collapse was eight and 47 times, respectively, the impact
energy that collapsed adobe mix ID 0-0 (plain adobe). Even the
smallest increment in impact energy at collapse, exhibited by
adobe mix ID 0.5-7, was approximately five times the impact
energy required to collapse adobe mix ID 0-0. The different levels
of sensitivity of impact strength to fiber length and fiber dosage
were in agreement with the sensitivity of reinforced adobe mixes
with respect to toughness indices and CWRR previously reported
in this work. Overall, higher fiber dosages exhibited a higher incre-
ment of impact strength with respect to plain adobe specimens,
regardless of the fiber length. Additionally, as fiber length
increased, impact strength increased exponentially, especially for
2% fiber adobe mixes. Unlike the mechanical results of flexural
and compression strengths, the variability of impact strength was
small compared to its exponential increment on the average values
as pig hair dosages increased. This might be explained by the fact
that the impact strength at collapse depends mainly on the post-
peak behavior of the materials, where fibers are expected to con-
tribute to the transfer of loads, while flexural and compressive
strength testing are ruled mainly by the behavior of the matrix
and the fibers acting as discontinuities.
The results presented in this section proved that addition of pig
hair was effective on manually compacted earthen materials in
terms of impact strength, as they controlled the formation and
propagation of a single macroscopic crack subjected to localized
external loading. Consequently, the incorporation of pig hair could
enhance the durability of the material.
4. Conclusions
This study assessed the effectiveness of incorporating pig hair
as an animal fiber reinforcement in adobe mixes. In this work,
the experimental damage-mechanical behavior of plain adobe
mixes was compared to pig hair reinforced adobe mix specimens
using two different dosages (0.5% and 2.0% of weight of oven-dry
fibers to oven-dry clayey soil) and three different fiber lengths (7
mm, 15 mm, and 30 mm). The experimental evaluation included
flexural toughness, flexural and compressive strength, ultrasonic
pulse velocity, drying shrinkage distributed cracking, and impact
strength tests. The main conclusions obtained by this study may
be summarized as follows:
Flexural and compressive strengths were reduced when pig hair
was incorporated into adobe mixes, and these reductions occurred
mainly for adobe mixes with high fiber dosage (2%) and long fiber
lengths (15 mm and 30 mm). The authors understand that the
reduction of strength in fiber-reinforced adobe mixes was mainly
related to two microscopic features: (i) porosity caused by cluster
formation and (ii) tortuosity (expected to be larger as fiber length
increased). Other features, such as pull out strength of fibers,
should be analyzed to understand in more detail the reduction of
flexural and compressive strengths.
Flexural toughness increased when incorporating pig hair in
adobe mixes, and this increment was sensitive to both fiber dosage
and fiber length. Unreinforced adobe mixes behaved as brittle
materials under flexural loading.
The restrained drying shrinkage distributed cracking was
reduced by the addition of pig hair, especially for high dosages of
fiber (i.e., 2%) and long fiber lengths (i.e., 30 mm). In other words,
the longer the fibers, the larger the expected maximum pullout
loads. As for the fiber dosage increment, more fibers are located
in the cross sections, increasing chances of reducing the crack den-
sity and/or crack widths. In particular, plain adobe exhibited a 1.3
mm CWA, whereas adobe mix ID 2.0-30 had a CWA of 0.15 mm
that corresponded to a CWRR of 91% compared to plain adobe.
The CWRR values ranged from 63% (ID 0.5-7) to 91% (ID 2.0-30)
for fiber-reinforced adobe mixes, which shows that even small
dosages of pig hair had a significant impact in mitigating the dry-
ing shrinkage distributed cracking of adobe mixes.
The impact strength was highly sensitive to both length and
dosage of pig hair. For adobe mixes ID 0.5-30 and ID 2.0-30, the
impact energy at collapse was eight and 47 times, respectively,
the impact energy that collapsed plain adobe. Even the smallest
increment in impact energy at collapse, exhibited by adobe mix
ID 0.5-7, was approximately five times the impact energy required
to collapse plain adobe.
Fiber-reinforced adobe mix ID 0.5-7 (0.5% fiber dosage and 7
mm fiber length) is recommended for adobe brick manufacturing
since it exhibited enhanced flexural toughness, drying shrinkage
cracking and impact strength performance without statistically
reducing the flexural and compressive strength compared to plain
adobe.
Conflict of interest
None.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Arnaldo Puebla, Andrés Glade,
Wladimir Vergara, Mauro Ortiz, Gian Piero Canevari, Matías Riv-
eros, Cristobal Vargas and Sabine Kunze, for the help provided
for the sample preparation, and Sika S.A. Chile, for the use of their
facilities for part of the experimental program presented.
References
[1] G. Minke, Building with Earth: Design and Technology of a Sustainable
Architecture, Walter de Gruyter, 2009.
 G. Araya-Letelier et al. / Construction and Building Materials 174 (2018) 645–655
[2] M. Cataldo-Born, G. Araya-Letelier, C. Pabón, Obstacles and motivations for
earthbag social housing in Chile: energy, environment, economic and codes
implications, Rev. la Construcción. J. Constr. 15 (3) (2016) 17–26.
[3] S. Deboucha, R. Hashim, A review on bricks and stabilized compressed earth
blocks, Sci. Res. Essays 6 (3) (2011) 499–506.
[4] G. Calatan, A. Hegyi, C. Dico, C. Mircea, Experimental research on the
recyclability of the clay material used in the fabrication of adobe bricks type
masonry units, Proc. Eng. 181 (2017) 363–369.
[5] M. Hall, Y. Djerbib, Rammed earth sample production: context,
recommendations and consistency, Constr. Build. Mater. 18 (4) (2004)
281–286.
[6] Sß. Yetgin, Ö. Çavdar, A. Çavdar, The effects of the fiber contents on the
mechanic properties of the adobes, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (3) (2008)
222–227.
[7] M. G. Viñuales, El Tema de la Tierra en Iberoámerica en el Siglo XX, in V
Seminario Iberoamericano de Construcción con Tierra, 2006.
[8] A. Vatani Oskouei, M. Afzali, M. Madadipour, Experimental investigation on
mud bricks reinforced with natural additives under compressive and tensile
tests, Constr. Build. Mater. 142 (2017) 137–147.
[9] S. C. Arancibia, M. B. Prieto, H. Saldías, J. Vargas, and N. Jorquera, La
Arquitectura en Tierra Frente al Sismo : Conclusiones y Reflexiones tras el
Sismo en Chile del 27 De Febrero De 2010,” Conserv. Rev. del Cent. Nac.
Conserv. y Restauración, vol. 16, pp. 39–54, 2011.
[10] H. Houben, H. Guillaud, Traité de Construction en Terre, 1989.
[11] G. Minke, Earth Construction Handbook: the Building Material Earth in
Modern Architecture, WIT Press, Southampton, 2000.
[12] E.C. Avrami, H. Guillaud, M. Hardy, Terra Literature Review: an Overview of
Research in Earthen Architecture Conservation, Getty Conservation Institute,
2008.
[13] H. Binici, O. Aksogan, T. Shah, Investigation of fibre reinforced mud brick as a
building material, Constr. Build. Mater. 19 (4) (2005) 313–318.
[14] K. Ghavami, R.D. Toledo Filho, N.P. Barbosa, Behaviour of composite soil
reinforced with natural fibres, Cem. Concr. Compos. 21 (1) (1999) 39–48.
[15] M. Mostafa, N. Uddin, Case studies in construction materials experimental
analysis of compressed earth block (CEB) with banana fibers resisting flexural
and compression forces, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 5 (2016) 53–63.
[16] Sß. Yetgin, Ö. Çavdar, A. Cavdar, The effects of the fiber contents on
the mechanic properties of the adobes, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (2008)
222–227.
[17] G. Calatan, A. Hegyi, C. Dico, C. Mircea, Determining the optimum addition of
vegetable materials in adobe bricks, Proc. Technol. 22 (2016) 259–265.
[18] F. Aymerich, L. Fenu, P. Meloni, Effect of reinforcing wool fibres on fracture and
energy absorption properties of an earthen material, Constr. Build. Mater. 27
(1) (2012) 66–72.
[19] E. Quagliarini, S. Lenci, The influence of natural stabilizers and natural fibres on
the mechanical properties of ancient roman adobe bricks, J. Cult. Herit. 11 (3)
(2010) 309–314.
[20] A. Pekrioglu Balkis, The effects of waste marble dust and polypropylene fiber
contents on mechanical properties of gypsum stabilized earthen, Constr. Build.
Mater. 134 (2017) 556–562.
[21] Y. Yilmaz, Experimental investigation of the strength properties of sand-clay
mixtures reinforced with randomly distributed discrete polypropylene fibers,
Geosynth. Int. 16 (5) (2009) 354–363.
[22] E. Bernat-Maso, L. Gil, C. Escrig, Textile-reinforced rammed earth:
experimental characterisation of flexural strength and thoughness, Constr.
Build. Mater. 106 (2016) 470–479.
[23] P. Donkor, E. Obonyo, Earthen construction materials: assessing the feasibility
of improving strength and deformability of compressed earth blocks using
polypropylene fibers, Mater. Des. 83 (2015) 813–819.
[24] Y. Millogo, J.C. Morel, J.E. Aubert, K. Ghavami, Experimental analysis of pressed
adobe blocks reinforced with hibiscus cannabinus fibers, Constr. Build. Mater.
52 (2014) 71–78.
[25] C. Galán-Marín, C. Rivera-Gómez, J. Petric, Clay-based composite stabilized
with natural polymer and fibre, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (8) (2010) 1462–1468.
[26] C.H. Weng, D.F. Lin, P.C. Chiang, Utilization of sludge as brick materials, Adv.
Environ. Res. 7 (3) (2003) 679–685.
[27] Iberwaste, Disposal and Valorization of Iberian Pig Wastes from
Slaughterhouses, LIFE11 ENV/ES/000562, 2015.
[28] J. Gagan, B. Lejano, Evaluation of the effects of combining pig-hair fiber as fiber
reinforcement and green mussel shells as partial cement substitute to the
properties of concrete, in DLSU Research Congress, 2016, pp. 5–10.
[29] G. Araya-Letelier, F.C. Antico, P. Parra, M. Carrasco, Fiber-reinforced mortar
incorporating pig hair, Adv. Eng. Forum 21 (2017) 219–225.
[30] G. Araya-Letelier, F.C. Antico, M. Carrasco, P. Rojas, C.M. García-Herrera,
Effectiveness of new natural fibers on damage-mechanical performance of
mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 152 (2017) 672–682.
655
[31] G. Araya-Letelier, F. C. Antico, J. Urzua, R. Bravo, Physical-mechanical
characterization of fiber-reinforced mortar incorporating pig hair, in 2nd
International Conference on Bio-based Building Materials & 1st Conference on
ECOlogical valorisation of GRAnular and FIbrous materials, 2017.
[32] B. Gaw, S. Zamora, Soil Reinforcement with Natural Fibers for Low-Income
Housing Communities, A Major Qualifying Project LDA-1006 and MT-1003,
Faculty of Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
[33] ASTM International, ASTM D7928 – 17 Standard Test Method for Particle-Size
Distribution (Gradation) of Fine-Grained Soils Using the Sedimentation
(Hydrometer) Analysis 1, USA, 2017.
[34] ASTM International, ASTM D 6913/D6913M – 17 Standard Test Methods for
Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve, USA, 2017.
[35] M. Grabisch, M. Roubens, Application of the Choquet Integral in Multicriteria
Decision Making, Fuzzy Meas. Integr., pp. 348–374, 2000.
[36] C.H. Kouakou, J.C. Morel, Strength and elasto-plastic properties of non-
industrial building materials manufactured with clay as a natural binder,
Appl. Clay Sci. 44 (1–2) (2009) 27–34.
[37] ASTM International, ASTM D4318 – 17 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit,
Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils, USA, 2017.
[38] L. Schroder, V. Ogletree, Adobe Homes for all Climates Simple, Affordable, and
Earthquake-Resistant Natural Building Techniques, 2010.
[39] ASTM International, ASTM E178-16A Dealing with outlying observations,
2016.
[40] ASTM International, ASTM C1018 – 97 Standard Test Method for Flexural
Toughness and First-Crack Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (Using Beam
With Third-Point Loading), USA, 1997.
[41] ASTM International, ASTM C597 – 16 Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity
Through Concrete, USA, 2016.
[42] E. Hamard, J.C. Morel, F. Salgado, A. Marcom, N. Meunier, A procedure to assess
the suitability of plaster to protect vernacular earthen architecture, J. Cult.
Heritag 14 (2) (2013) 109–115.
[43] T. Ashour, W. Wu, An experimental study on shrinkage of earth plaster with
natural fibres for straw bale buildings, Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 3 (4) (2010) 299–
304.
[44] H. Danso, D.B. Martinson, M. Ali, J.B. Williams, Physical, mechanical and
durability properties of soil building blocks reinforced with natural fibres,
Constr. Build. Mater. 101 (2015) 797–809.
[45] J.I. Daniel, S.H. Ahmad, M. Arockiasamy, H.P. et al., State of the Art Report on
Fiber Reinforced Concrete Reported by ACI Committee 544, Farmington Hills,
MI, 2002.
[46] G. Ramakrishna, T. Sundararajan, Impact strength of a few natural fibre
reinforced cement mortar slabs: a comparative study, Cem. Concr. Compos. 27
(5) (2005) 547–553.
[47] M.C.N. Villamizar, V.S. Araque, C.A.R. Reyes, R.S. Silva, Effect of the addition of
coal-ash and cassava peels on the engineering properties of compressed earth
blocks, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012) 276–286.
[48] P. Donkor, E. Obonyo, Compressed soil blocks: influence of fibers on flexural
properties and failure mechanism, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 25–33.
[49] F.J. Baeza, O. Galao, E. Zornoza, P. Garcés, Effect of aspect ratio on strain sensing
capacity of carbon fiber reinforced cement composites, Mater. Des. 51 (2013)
1085–1094.
[50] New Mexico Construction Bureau, New Mexico Adobe and Rammed Earth
Building Code, 2009.
[51] S. Mindess, J.F. Young, D. Darwin, Concrete (2nd Edition), Prentice Hall, 2002.
[52] M. Ben Mansour, A. Jelidi, A.S. Cherif, S. Ben Jabrallah, Optimizing thermal and
mechanical performance of compressed earth blocks (CEB), Constr. Build.
Mater. 104 (2016) 44–51.
[53] B. Taallah, A. Guettala, S. Guettala, A. Kriker, Mechanical properties and
hygroscopicity behavior of compressed earth block filled by date palm fibers,
Constr. Build. Mater. 59 (2014) 161–168.
[54] S. Andrejkovičová, A.L. Velosa, F. Rocha, Air lime-metakaolin-sepiolite mortars
for earth based walls, Constr. Build. Mater. 44 (2013) 133–141.
[55] V. Malhotra, N. Carino, Handbook on Nondestructive Testing of Concrete, 2004.
[56] F.C. Antico, P.D. Zavattieri, L.G. Hector Jr, A. Mance, W.R. Rodgers, D.A. Okonski,
Adhesion of nickel-titanium shape memory alloy wires to thermoplastic
materials: theory and experiments, Smart Mater. Struct. 21 (3) (Mar. 2012)
35022.
[57] F.C. Antico, P.D. Zavattieri, L.G. Hector Jr., Adhesion of Nickel-Titanium Shape
Memory Alloy Wires to Polymeric Materials: Theory and Experiment, in TMS
Annual Meeting, vol. 2, 2012.
[58] A.P. Fantilli, S. Sicardi, F. Dotti, The use of wool as fiber-reinforcement in
cement-based mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 139 (2017) 562–569.
[59] ACI Committee 544 et al., ‘‘State of the Art Report on Fiber Reinforced Concrete
Reported by ACI Committee 544,” ACI Struct. J., vol. 96, no. Reapproved, 2002.
[60] N. Banthia, S. Mindess, A. Bentur, Impact behaviour of concrete beams, Mater.
Struct./Matériaux Constr. 20 (4) (1987) 293–302.