Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 250–256

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Incorporation of bamboo particles and ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’

in adobes
Andréa Aparecida Ribeiro Corrêa a,⇑, Lourival Marin Mendes a, Normando Perazzo Barbosa b,
Thiago de Paula Protásio c, Nathalia de Aguiar Campos a, Gustavo Henrique Denzin Tonoli a
a
Department of Forest Science, Universidade Federal de Lavras Campus Universitário, Caixa Postal 3037, CEP 37200-000 Lavras, MG, Brazil
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Centro de Tecnologia, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, Cidade Universitária, 58051-900 Joao Pessoa, PB, Brazil
c
Department of Forest Science, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Regional Jataí – Campus Jatobá-BR-364, km 192, Parque Industrial, 75801-615 Jataí, GO, Brazil

h i g h l i g h t s

 Adobes performance was improved when using bamboo particles and chemical stabilizer.
 Chemical stabilizer reduced water absorption in adobes with bamboo particles.
 Adobes shrinkage was reduced with the use of chemical stabilizer and bamboo particles.
 Chemical stabilizer reduced capillarity in adobes with bamboo particles.
 Compressive strength increased up to 90% with bamboo particles and stabilizer.

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

Article history: Adobes have been used in construction since the first civilizations in the world, and to adapt this product
Received 6 December 2013 to modern requirements, it is necessary to improve their mechanic resistance and to reduce water absorp-
Received in revised form 5 June 2015 tion. This paper contributes to the better understanding of the stabilization mechanisms of adobes with
Accepted 7 June 2015
‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ and Bambusa vulgaris vittata particles as reinforcement. The chemical composi-
tion, density and aspect ratio of the bamboo particles were determined. ‘‘Synthetic termite saliva’’ and
bamboo particles improved physical properties of adobes, reducing linear shrinkage, water absorption,
Keywords:
and the loss of mass in water. The agglomeration of the particles promoted by the ‘‘synthetic termite
Adobe
Bamboo
saliva’’ improved the packing of the soil particles, decreasing capillarity, and forming a more cohesive
Chemical stabilization microstructure. The use of chemical stabilization and reinforcement with 6% of bamboo particles
Vegetable fibers increased the compressive strength up to 90%.
Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction conservation state are examples of durable earth construction [7–

Non-conventional materials and technologies (NOCMATs) are
considered in current construction practice due environmental
and economic issues. Advantages like energy savings, thermal
and acoustic insulation, use of renewable materials and carbon
sequestration are some reasons that attract interest in NOCMATs
worldwide [1–4]. Noteworthy are materials such as soil, bamboo,
vegetable fibers, and agro-industrial wastes [5]. It is estimated that
30% of the houses in the world are built with earth; in emerging
countries this percentage can reach 50%, especially in rural areas
[6]. Some millenarian constructions and world patrimonies in good
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: deiacor@uaigiga.com.br (A.A.R. Corrêa).
9]. Several researches have been done concerning mechanical
strength and physical properties of raw earth including ancient
and new products aimed at improving properties and developing
new composites [10–20]. Nowadays, adobes are considered to be
non-conventional materials and have been employed in housing,
rural constructions and modern ecological buildings. Advantages
compared with industrial materials include low cost, thermal and
acoustic comfort, minimum water and energy consumption and
waste reduction [21]. Adobe properties depend on physical, chem-
ical and mineralogical soil characteristics, water content, produc-
tion procedures, drying, and type of stabilization [22]. The
suitable water content for adobe production is an important
parameter that is poorly studied [23–25]. Furthermore, water
absorption and low compressive strength of adobes, are important
issues that require further investigation.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.06.009
0950-0618/Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
 A.A.R. Corrêa et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 250–256
Lignocellulosic particles/fibers may be used as reinforcement
for brittle matrices due to their availability from wood and annual
plants as well as from the residues from various industrial applica-
tions (cordage, textiles and paper), their low density, energy sav-
ings and other environmental issues [26,27]. Several Brazilian
lignocellulosic particles/fibers (e.g. sisal, ramie, curauá, jute, bam-
boo, coir, piassava and buriti), including their market exploration,
extraction methods, morphology, intrinsic properties and their
present applications are important in the context of adobe rein-
forcements [28,29]. Promising opportunities and challenges for
Brazil and other developing countries are possible with the grow-
ing importance of these fibers [30,31]. The presence of lignocellu-
losic particles/fibers in adobes provides ductility, reduces
shrinkage, preserves the adobe form, and prevents transverse
expansion (due to Poisson effect) [32]. An increase of fiber content
reduces the compressive strength but increases ductility [33,34],
while particles with a high aspect ratio (length/diameter) increase
mechanical performance [35].
Bamboo culms are formed by approximately 50% of fiber tissue,
which are responsible for the mechanical strength of the culms
[36]. Bamboo particles have been studied for production of com-
posites [37], chipboards [38], oriented strand boards – OSB [39],
glued laminated bamboo – GLB [40], bamboo-cement [41] and
wavy tiles [42], however there is a lack of research about their
use as reinforcement in adobes.
The wide availability of bamboo plants, their rapid growth and
lightness are favorable characteristics for use in construction.
However, contact with water may increase bamboo fiber volume,
due to its hygroscopic characteristics, and accelerate biodegrada-
tion. Bambusa vulgaris vittata is common in Brazil and presents a
high concentration of starch in its composition, attracting insects
that reduce its durability for structural applications. When bamboo
particles are incorporated in the soil matrix as adobe reinforce-
ment, insects do not have access to the particles.
‘‘Synthetic termite saliva’’ is a chemical product derived from
vegetable oils (castor beans and others) that is widely used in pav-
ing as a soil stabilizer in rural roads. This product is called in such a
way because it works similar to the glue-like secretion produced by
the termites for sculpture of their earth aboveground mounds. It is a
green liquid, with a minimum density of 1035 kg/m3 at 25 °C, and
pH = 10.5 at 1% solution. It is completely soluble in water, and prac-
tically insoluble in ethyl alcohol (1% maximum), with no turbidity,
Fig. 1. XRD pattern obtained from the soil sample of red latosol cambisol containing: Fld (feldspar), Qtz (quartz), Gtt (goethite), Gbs (gibbsite) and Cln (kaolinite).
251
no precipitation, and no change in physical state. It acts as stable
and permanent waterproofing in the fine fraction of the soil
(colloidal particles as clay and oxides) protecting them against
water leaching. The aim of using it is to break the electrochemical
link formed by the action of negative charges on the surfaces of clay
minerals. These charges create an electric field around the clay min-
erals that attracts bi-polar water molecules and cations adsorbed
on it. The neutralization of the electrostatic charge by permanently
stable cations prevents adsorbed water formation and increases the
spacing between the surfaces of the particles. The chemical stabi-
lizer reduces the thickness of the water adsorbed layer, flocculates
and agglutinates soil fine particles, reduces water absorption,
decreases soil expansion and shrinkage, as possibly increments soil
compressive and shear strength [43–48].
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of incorpora-
tion of bamboo particles and ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ on physical
properties and compressive strength of adobes.
2. Materials and experimental procedures
2.1. Soil and bamboo particles
The soil was collected at approximately one meter deep at the BC horizon layer
in the city of Lavras, Minas Gerais state, Brazil. Field and laboratory tests were used
to characterize the soil. The preliminary characterization included visual and tactile
identification [21,49], linear shrinkage [25], and soil washing [50]. Hardness, color,
odor, dirt left in the hands, mobility of interstitial water, breakdown of soil sub-
merged in water, brightness, minerals and organic matter were observed by appro-
priate means of identification [21,25,49,50]. The linear shrinkage test indicates
dimensional changes and fissures or cracks from moisture loss. The test procedure
of soil washing consists of water washing the soil until fine particles were extracted,
leaving only sand particles.
X-ray diffraction (XRD) [51], particle size analysis [52] and textural classifica-
tion by Atterberg triangular diagram [53] were performed. The Liquid Limit (LL),
Plasticity Index (PI), Plastic Limit (PL) and Shrinkage Limit (SL) are the moisture
contents necessary to obtain each of these rheology conditions, and were deter-
mined based on appropriate standard recommendations [54]. Grain size distribu-
tion indicated that the original soil was composed of 40% clay, 45% silt and 15%
sand. This soil exhibited LL = 56.8%, PI = 14.2%, PL = 42.6% and SL = 26.6%.
Australian Standard AS 3700: 2001 [55] proposes that the ideal soil for fiber stabi-
lization must have LL between 30% and 50% and PI between 15% and 35%. In this
case, the soil was mixed with sand, in order to decrease LL and increase PI. So,
the final composition of the soil was 23% clay, 27% silt and 50% sand. This corrected
soil presents LL = 55.4%, PI = 20.9%, PL = 34.6% and SL = 21.7%. X-ray diffraction
(Fig. 1) identified the presence of feldspar (Fld), quartz (Qtz), goethite (Gtt), gibbsite
(Gbs) and kaolinite (Cln). Soil bulk density, particle density and total pore volume
were 1420 kg/m3, 2620 kg/m3 and 45.8%, respectively. The soil was classified as
252 A.A.R. Corrêa et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 250–256

red latosol cambisol, clayey silt [54]. Red latosols are very representative of Table 2
Brazilian soil, occupying approximately 39% of the total area and distributed Suitable water content (estimated by the ‘‘Falling Ball’’ and ‘‘Prueba de Vicat’’ tests)
throughout the country [56]. for each formulation compared with Plastic Limit (PL) and Liquid Limit (LL) of the
Culms of Bambusa vulgaris vittata having an age at approximately 12 years were corrected soil.
collected at the Federal University of Lavras (UFLA, Brazil). The culms were smashed
in an agricultural machine crusher (Pinheiro, TP 300), and then ground in a hammer Treatments Suitable water content (%) Atterberg limits
mill, with a sieve having a 2.78 mm mesh. Bamboo particles were extensively (%)
washed in water at 45 °C and air-dried. The particle size measurement was per- PL LL
formed in a stereoscopic microscope (Meiji Techno RZ) and using Image J software
[57], with a representative sample of around 100 particles. The bamboo density was S (control) 34.9 34.6 55.4
determined by the water displacement method by direct measurement of volume S-STS 31.8
in a graduated cylinder [58] using six specimens. The chemical characterization S-B2 34.6
of the bamboo particles was performed in three replicates using the following S-B4 37.5
appropriate standards: total extractives content [59], insoluble lignin content S-B6 42.2
[60], ashes [61], holocellulose [62], and cellulose [63]. S-STS-B2 36.9
The density of the washed bamboo particles was 298 kg/m3. The particles were S-STS-B4 36.6
composed of approximately 4.1% extractives, 24.1% lignin, 52.8% cellulose, 29.0% S-STS-B6 38.0
hemicellulose and 1.3% ashes. The bamboo particle length ranged from 0.2 to
30 mm, with 34% of particles shorter than 5 mm, 50% of particles between 5 and The adobe wood formwork used provides the nominal dimensions of
10 mm, and 16% of particles longer than 10 mm. The diameter ranged from 0.2 to 30 cm  15 cm  8 cm [67]. The mixture was made by mechanical stirring, followed
3.1 mm, with 13% of particles having a diameter smaller than 0.5 mm, 47% of par- by casting manually into the wood molds. The adobes were produced in a con-
ticles between 0.5 and 1.0 mm, and 40% of particles larger than 1.0 mm. The aspect trolled environment at around 21 °C, and 72% relative humidity (RH) and main-
ratio (length/diameter) was approximately 10. tained in these conditions until complete drying (Fig. 3).

2.2. Experimental plan 2.4. Physical properties

The ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’/soil ratio was 1:1500 by mass. Aluminum sulfate,
Al2(SO4), was used as activator. This is an anhydrous crystalline compound soluble
in water, normally used as flocculent in sewage treatment, purification of drinking
water [64,65], in the paper industry and in the textile dyeing [66]. The minimum
ratio of Al2(SO4)/soil used was 1:5000 by mass [43–48]. Several mix-designs were
tested, as shown in Table 1.
2.3. Adobe production
As stated before the Plastic Limit (PL) of 34.6% was obtained for the corrected
soil, and used as a target moisture parameter for all formulations. The suitable
water content was estimated according to the ‘‘Falling Ball’’ [23] and ‘‘Prueba de
Vicat’’ [25] tests (Fig. 2). The suitable amount of water estimated in these tests
for each formulation is presented in Table 2 and must fall between PL and LL
(Table 2). Water content lower than PL is acceptable and relates to improvement
in the rheology of the formulation.
Part of the adobe mass was used to perform linear shrinkage tests [25] in
10 cm  2 cm  2 cm bottomed wooden forms, using five specimens for each
mix-design. Longitudinal linear contraction was measured after seven days.
Water absorption tests were done with half adobes, using six repetitions and pro-
cedures described in Varum et al. [68]. Six dried specimens for each mix-design
were weighed and placed in a pan (47 cm  32 cm  9 cm). Then 3.6 L of water
was added to complete immersion. After 6 h, the samples were removed from the
pan and weighed again. Water absorption was calculated as a percentage consider-
ing the mass loss. Mass loss was calculated from the material deposited at the bot-
tom of the pan after 6 h, and dry mass was determined following heating in an oven
at 103 ± 2 °C. The capillarity test was based on procedures of Varum et al. [68] using
three specimens. Adobes of each mixture were placed in a tray, and water was
poured in the tray, creating a contact area with the bottom surface of the adobe.
The amount of water used was 400 mL/tray which corresponded to 0.6 cm height
of the adobe. After 1 h, the height reached by the water in the adobes was measured
on all sides in four replicates. The material deposited on the bottom of the tray was
removed after 1 h and dried in an oven at 103 ± 2 °C to determine the mass loss.

Table 1
2.5. Compressive strength
Mix-designs used for production of the adobes.

Adobe Mass Volume Compressive tests were performed in a 100 kN capacity hydraulic press at a load
treatments speed of 1.2 mm/min [23,67]. Adobes were cut in half with a circular saw and the
Bamboo Soil Bamboo Bamboo Soil Bamboo
parts were joined with mortar comprised of soil:lime (1:4). The same mortar was
particles particles particles particles
used to provide a uniform top and bottom surface of the sample. Once the first uni-
(kg) (kg) (%) (cm3) (cm3) (%)
form layer was dried, two new coats with 1:2 soil:lime mortar was applied. The lay-
S (control) 0 5.112 0 0 3600 0 ers totaled 3 mm height. Six specimens were used for each formulation. Before
S-STS* 0 5.112 0 0 3600 0 testing an 8 mm thick steel plate was placed on the bottom and top of the specimens.
S-B2 0.102 5.010 2 350 3250 9.7
S-B4 0.204 4.908 4 720 2880 20.0
S-B6 0.306 4.806 6 1080 1080 30.0 3. Results and discussion
S-STS-B2* 0.102 5.010 2 350 3250 9.7
S-STS-B4* 0.204 4.908 4 720 2880 20.0 3.1. Water content for adobes
S-STS-B6* 0.306 4.806 6 1080 1080 30.0
*
‘‘Synthetic termite saliva’’ with Al2(SO4). Incorporation of ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ reduced the need for
mixing water (suitable water content) of the adobes reinforced

Fig. 2. Techniques for estimation of suitable water content: (a) and (b) measurement of the width and high of the ball after falling – ‘‘Falling Ball’’ test; and (c) ‘‘Prueba de
Vicat’’ test.
 A.A.R. Corrêa et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 250–256 253

Fig. 3. Sequence for adobe production: (a) dry component mixture; (b) water and ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ addition; (c) and (d) mechanical stirring; (e) wood molds for
production of two adobe blocks; (f) drying in controlled environment.

unreinforced adobes without ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ (formula-

tion S) than for a formulation with ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’
(S-STS, suitable water content = 32%). The same behavior was
observed for S-B6 (suitable water content = 42%) that required
more water than STS-B6 (suitable water content = 38%), showing
the importance of the chemical stabilizer in the soil.

3.2. Effect of chemical stabilization and reinforcement on the physical

properties of the adobes

Fig. 4 indicates the density of the adobes made using different

Fig. 4. Average and standard deviation values of apparent density of the adobes.
with bamboo particles. Catalyst action of the chemical stabilizer
promotes ion exchange and allows greater cohesion between the
fine particles of soil. This strong binding action causes greater
attraction between the surfaces of the clay particles, with its con-
sequent flocculation and sedimentation. The reaction of the chem-
ical stabilizer with clay absorbs the free water and increases the
soil stability. Table 2 showed that the water content required for
acceptable performance in the ‘‘Falling Ball’’ and ‘‘Prueba de
Vicat’’ tests was higher (suitable water content = 35%) for
mixtures. The presence of bamboo particles reduces the density.
Fiber dimensional variation in the presence of water increased
the porosity and decreased the density during the drying process.
The interaction between soil, ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ and bam-
boo particles increased the adobe apparent density when com-
pared with formulations without ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ (Fig. 4).
There is an interaction between soil, ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’
and bamboo particles, which contributed to the reduction of linear
shrinkage, as can be seen in Fig. 5. The explanation for S-B4
formulation has presented higher shrinkage than S-B2 and S-B6
is still unknown. This maybe attributed to fiber agglomeration in

Fig. 5. Average and standard deviation values of the linear shrinkage (left) and typical shrinkage behavior of samples and the frame used for shrinkage test (right).
254 A.A.R. Corrêa et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 250–256

Fig. 6. Average and standard deviation values of water absorption after 6 h. Images at right show the control – S (bellow), S-STS (middle) and S-STS-B6 (upper) treatments,
showing the great water absorption and loss of mass (and total disintegration) for the control (S) specimen (bellow). S-STS = soil + chemical stabilizer; S-STS-
B6 = soil + chemical stabilizer + 6% bamboo particles.

the specimens that caused heterogeneous fiber distribution. The

scaffolding created by the higher content of bamboo particles
(6%) and the cohesive characteristics of the chemical stabilizer
(‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’) reduced the linear shrinkage up to
54% in comparison to the control sample (S).
Fig. 6 presents the results of water absorption of adobes made
with the different mixtures. The incorporation of ‘‘synthetic ter-
mite saliva’’ (S-STS) reduced the water absorption to around 15%.
The S-B6 (17.2%), S-STS-B2 (15.0%), S-STS-B4 (15.9%) and
S-STS-B6 (16.0%) treatments met the NBR 8492 (1984) standard
for soil–cement blocks, whose recommendation is that absorption
remain below 18% [69]. However the control (S), S-B2 and S-B4 for-
mulations disintegrated with the presence of water, showing that Fig. 8. Average results of loss of mass after water absorption and capillarity tests for
stabilization with just bamboo particles alone was not sufficient. the adobes. The S, S-B2 and S-B4 formulations presented 100% of mass loss.
Varum et al. [68] found results of weight increases from 17% to
26% after 6 h of immersion for adobes used for constructions in
Camabatela, Angola. Faria [70] reported results ranging between
25% and 32% for adobes reinforced with different amounts of aqua-
tic macrophytes [69].
The inclusion of bamboo particles increased the capillarity of
the adobes, due to the net of interconnected pores created by the
particles, while the ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ led to lower capillar-
ity due to the higher agglomeration of soil particles (Fig. 7). Varum
et al. [68] reported higher values of capillarity (around 6 cm) for
unreinforced adobes using similar analysis.
The loss of mass during the water absorption test varied from
2% to 100% after 6 h, and during the capillarity test varied from
0.31% to 0.95%, after 1 h for all treatments (Fig. 8). Therefore, the
stability of the adobes depends highly on the chemical stabilizer,
and it shows that just bamboo particles alone were not sufficient Fig. 9. Average and standard deviation values of compressive strength for adobe.
to maintain the integrity of the adobe after contact with water.
3.3. Effect of chemical stabilization and reinforcement on compressive
strength

Compressive strength is the main property for quality control of

Fig. 7. Average and standard deviation values of capillarity of the adobes.
adobes. The increasing trend seen in Fig. 9 shows the efficiency of
stabilization. The mixtures with chemical stabilizer and higher
content of bamboo particles (S-STS-B6) showed the higher com-
pressive strength. The fracture surface of the adobe fragments
visualized by stereoscopic microscope shows good interaction
between the bamboo particles and the stabilized soil (Fig. 10).
Lower content of pores was observed in the S-B6 (Fig. 10a),
S-STS-B4 (Fig. 10b) and S-STS-B6 (Fig. 10c) mixtures, which corrob-
orate the findings for the values of compressive strength (Fig. 9).
Those results are higher than the compression strength limit of
0.7 MPa recommended by NTE E.080 standard [67]. Therefore,
 A.A.R. Corrêa et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 250–256
Bamboo particles
5 mm Few pores 5 mm
Fig. 10. Stereoscopic images of the fracture surface of the adobes: (a) S-B6; (b) S-STS-B4; and (c) S-STS-B6 treatments. S-B6 = soil + 6% bamboo particles; S-STS-
B4 = soil + chemical stabilizer + 4% bamboo particles; S-STS-B6 = soil + chemical stabilizer + 6% bamboo particles.
bamboo particles (in contents higher than 2%) seem to be effective
in interrupting of the cracks that occur during the compressive
test, increasing the mechanical strength of the adobes.
Additionally, the improved binding of the particles promoted by
the synthetic termite saliva improved the packing of the soil parti-
cles, making the structure more cohesive and resistant to compres-
sive loads. Faria et al. [71] reported a considerable increase of
compressive strength with ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ at 0.1%
(1:1000 ratio) of dry soil mass. Some stabilizers such as surfactants
and emulsified asphalt also have been reported to increase com-
pressive strength [72].
4. Conclusions
This work showed that it is possible to improve the physical and
mechanical performance of adobes using chemical stabilization
with ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ and bamboo particles as reinforce-
ment. The use of ‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ and bamboo particles
reduced linear shrinkage, water absorption, and the loss of mass
of adobes exposed to water. Bamboo particles (in contents higher
than 2%) increased the compressive strength, being effective in
interrupting the cracks that form during the compressive test of
the adobes. The agglomeration of the particles promoted by the
‘‘synthetic termite saliva’’ improved the packing of the soil parti-
cles, decreasing capillarity, forming a more cohesive microstruc-
ture and consequently greater resistance to compressive stress
(up to 90% higher). These results contribute to the better under-
standing of the stabilization mechanisms of adobes and wide-
spread use of this kind of block for rural or urban housing.
Acknowledgments
Thanks to Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e
Tecnológico (CNPq), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado
de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de
Pessoal de Nível Superior (Capes), Unidade Experimental em
Paineis de Madeira (UEPAM) and Rede Brasileira de Compósitos e
Nanocompósitos Lignocelulósicos (RELIGAR), in Brazil. The materi-
als were kindly furnished by UFLA and FISTEC Ltda., Brazil.
References
[1] Bufalino L, Corrêa AAR, Sá VA, Mendes LM, Almeida NA, Pizzol VD. Alternative
compositions of oriented strand boards (OSB) made with commercial woods
produced in Brazil. Maderas Ciencia y Tecnol 2014;27.
[2] Berge B. The ecology of building materials. Oxford: Architectural press; 2000.
[3] Binici H, Aksogan O, Nuri Bodur M, Akca E, Kapur S. Thermal isolation and
mechanical properties of fibre reinforced mud bricks as wall materials. Constr
Build Mater 2007;21:901–6.
[4] Binici H, Aksogan O, Bakbak D, Kaplan H, Isik B. Sound insulation of fibre
reinforced mud brick walls. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:1035–41.
[5] Galán-Marín C, Rivera-Gómez C, Petric J. Effect of animal fibres reinforcement
on stabilized earth mechanical properties. J Biobased Mater Bioenergy
2010;4(2):121–8.
255
Bamboo particles Bamboo particles
1 mm
[6] Houben H, Guillard H. Traité de construction en terre CRATerre. In:
L’Encyclopédie de la construction en terre, vol. 1. Paris: Parenthèses; 1989. p.
300.
[7] Minke G. Building with earth. Design and technology of a sustainable
architecture. Basel: Birkhäuser; 2006.
[8] Jiménez Delgado MC, Cañas Guerrero I. Earth building in Spain. Constr Build
Mater 2006;20:679–90.
[9] Walker P, Keable R, Martin J, Maniatidis V. Rammed earth: design and
construction guidelines. Bracknell (UK): BRE Bookshop; 2005.
[10] Quagliarini E, Lenci S. The influence of natural stabilizers and natural fibres on
the mechanical properties of ancient Roman adobe bricks. J Cultural Heritage
2010;11:309–14.
[11] Avrami E, Guillaud H, Hardy M, editors. Terra literature review. An overview of
research in earthen architecture conservation. Los Angeles: The Getty
Conservation Institute; 2008.
[12] Fratini F et al. The earth in the architecture of the historical centre of Lamezia
Terme (Italy): characterization for restoration. Appl Clay Sci, Amsterdam
2011;53:509–16.
[13] Sequeira ST. Arquitectura contemporânea em terra no sw de Portugal.
significados de um património. 13 SIACOT-Seminário Iberoamericano de
Arquitectura y Construcción em Tierra Valparaíso 28 a 30 de agosto de 2013.
[14] Varum H, Martins T, Velosa A (2005). Caracterização do adobe em construções
existentes na região de Aveiro – Terra em Seminário – ISBN 972-8479-37-9,
ARGUMENTUM - October 2005.
[15] Carvalho R, Varum H, Bertini A (2010). Terra crua como sistema construtivo no
estado do Ceará-levantamento das construções em adobe na região norte do
estado – Terra em Seminário 2010 – Tema 3: Técnicas, Construção,
Investigação e Desenvolvimento – ARGUMENTUM – February 2010.
[16] Velosa A, Varum H, Sáez M (2010). Characterization of adobe blocks from
Burgos – Terra em Seminário 2010 – Tema 2: Património e Conservação –
ARGUMENTUM – February 2010.
[17] Piattoni Q, Quagliarini E, Lenci S. Experimental analysis and modelling of the
mechanical behaviour of earthen bricks. Constr Build Mater 2011;25:2067–75.
[18] Varum H, Costa A, Pereira H, Almeida J, Rodrigues H. Caracterização do
comportamento estrutural de paredes de alvenaria de adobe. Rev Assoc Port
Análise Exp de Tensões 2008;15:23–32. ISSN 1646-7078 Mecânica
Experimental.
[19] Bouhicha M, Aouissi F, Kenai S. Performance of composite soil reinforced with
barley straw. Cem Concr Compos 2005;27:617–21.
[20] Galán-Marín C, Rivera-Gómez C, Petric J. Clay-based composite stabilized with
natural polymer and fibre. Constr Build Mater 2010;24:1462–8.
[21] Corrêa AAR, Teixeira VH, Lopes SP, Oliveira MS. Avaliação das propriedades
físicas e mecânicas do adobe (tijolo de terra crua). In: Ciência e Agrotecnologia.
v. 3. n. 3. Lavras: Editora da UFLA; 2006. p. 503–15.
[22] Corrêa AAR, Mendes LM, Tonoli GHD. Caracterização de solo de Lavras-MG
para produção de adobe. In: TerraBrasil-IV Congresso de arquitetura e
construção com terra no Brasil. Fortaleza Ceará; 2012.
[23] Barbosa NP, Ghavami K. Terra Crua para Edificações. In: Isaia GC, editor.
Materiais de construção civil e princípios de ciência e engenharia de materiais,
vol. 2. São Paulo: Ibracon; 2007. p. 1505–57.
[24] Pacheco AARC, Dias Junior MS. Estudo comparativo de métodos de campo e
laboratório aplicados à confecção de blocos em adobe. Rev Ciênc e Prática
1990:14.
[25] Ruiz LEH, Luna JAM. Cartilha de pruebas de campo para selección de tierras en
la fabricación de adobes. México: Conescal; 1983. 72p.
[26] Callister Jr WD. Ciência e engenharia de materiais: uma introdução. 5 ed. Rio
de Janeiro: LTC; 2002.
[27] Toledo Filho RD, England GL, Ghavami K. Comportamento e compressão de
argamassas reforçadas com fibras naturais: relação tensão-deformação
experimental e processo de fratura. Rev Bras Engenharia Agrícola e
Ambiental, Campina Grande 1997;1(1):79–88.
[28] Ghavami K, Toledo Filho RD, Barbosa NP. Behaviour of composite soil
reinforced with natural fibres. Cem Concr Compos 1999;21:39–48.
[29] Savastano Jr H, Pimentel LL. Viabilidade do aproveitamento de resíduos de
fibra vegetal para fins de obtenção de material de construção. Rev Bras
Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, Campina Grande, PB 2000;4(1):103–10.
[30] Achenza M, Fenu L. On earth stabilization with natural polymers for earth
masonry construction. Mater Struct 2006;39:21–7.
256 A.A.R. Corrêa et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 250–256
[31] Satyanarayana KG, Guimarães JL, Wypych FA. Studies on lignocellulosic fibers
of Brazil. Part I: Source, production, morphology, properties and applications.
Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 2007;38(7):1694–709.
[32] Monteiro SN, Satyanarayana KG, Ferreira AS, Nascimento DCO, Lopes FPD, Silva
ILA, Bevitori AB, Bravo Neto IWPJ, Portela TG. Selection of high strength natural
fibers. Matéria (Rio J.) 2010;15(4).
[33] Binici H, Aksogan O, Shah T. Investigation of fibre reinforced mud brick as a
building material. Constr Build Mater 2005;19:313–8.
[34] Yetgin S, Çavdar O, Çavdar A. The effects of the fibre contents on the mechanic
properties of the adobes. Constr Build Mater 2008;22:222–7.
[35] Eldin HKS, Mohamed HA, Khater M, Ahmed S. Mechanical properties of ultra-
high performance fiber reinforced concrete. Int J Eng Innovative Technol
2014;4(4):4–10.
[36] Berndsen RS. Caracterização Anatômica, Física e Mecânica de Lâminas de
Bambu (Phyllostachys pubescens). Dissertação (Mestrado em Engenharia) –
Programa de Pós-graduação em Engenharia Mecânica e de Materiais, Curitiba.
Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, p. 98, 2008.
[37] Lopes WGR, Beraldo AL, Freire WJ, 2012. O uso de partículas do bambu
Dendrocalamus giganteus em compósitos de biomassa vegetal-cimento.
[38] Jose FJ, 2006. Chapas de partículas homogêneas de bambu aglomeradas com
resinas poliuretana bi-componente a base de óleo de mamona.
[39] Miskalo EP. Avaliação do potencial de utilização de bambu (Dendrocalamus
giganteus) na produção de painéis de partículas orientadas. Dissertação
Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná – PPGEM 2009.
[40] Guimarães Jr M, Botaro VR, Novack KM. Dimensional stability of Bambusa
vulgaris for the production of GLB and furniture. J Indian Acad Wood Sci 2013.
[41] Beraldo AL. Bambu-cimento: alternativa para construções rurais. I Encontro
Nacional sobre edificações e comunidades sustentáveis. Canela, RS, 18 a 21 de
novembro de 1997.
[42] Pereira MAR, Beraldo AL. Bambu de corpo e alma. Canal, Bauru p. 23 2007.
[43] Dynasolo. DS-328Ò A tecnologia da Baba de CupimÒ na Construção Civilhttp://
www.dynasolo.com.br/ds328s.htm.2014.
[44] Solos siltosos. http://www.trabalhosfeitos.com/ensaios/Solos-Siltosos/567069.
html. 01/2013.
[45] Silva CC. Comportamento de solos siltosos quando reforçados com fibras e
melhorados com aditivos químicos e orgânicos Dissertação Construção Civil,
April/2007.
[46] Corrêa AAR, Souza RM, Grillo MP, Silva DW, Protásio TP, Mendes LM. Avaliação
das propriedades físicas e mecânicas do adobe com incorporação de ‘‘baba de
cupim sintética’’ 13 SIACOT-Seminário Iberoamericano de Arquitectura y
Construcción em Tierra Valparaíso 28 a 30 de agosto de 2013.
[47] Corrêa AAR, Protásio TP, Lima JT, Tonoli GHD, Mendes LM. Mechanical
properties of adobe made with sugar cane bagasse and ‘‘synthetic termite
saliva’’ incorporation Key Engineering Materials 01/2015; 634:351–356.
[48] Serafini HB, Vieira HR. Estabilizacion quimica de suelos. Realidad de un nuevo
concepto en la pavimentación.
[49] Neves CMM, Faria OF, Rotandaro R, Salas PC, CYTED. Seleção de Solos e
Métodos de Controle em Construção com Terra – Práticas de Campo, 2005.
[50] Milanez A. Casa de terra: as técnicas de estabilização do solo a serviço do
homem do campo. Santa Catarina, SESP. p. 122, 1958.
[51] Resende M, Curi N, Ker JC, Rezende SB. Mineralogia de solos brasileiros:
interpretação e aplicações. Lavras: Editora UFLA; 2005. 192p.
[52] Day PR. Particle fractionation and particle size analysis. In: Black CA, editor.
Methods of soils analysis; physical and mineralogical properties including
statistics of measurement and sampling. Madison American society of
agronomy; 1965. p. 546–67.
[53] Caputo HP. Mecânica dos solos e suas aplicações. Livros Técnicos e Científicos
Editora. p. 312, 1998.
[54] EMBRAPA. Manual de métodos de análise de solo. 2nd ed. p. 212, 1997.
[55] Standards Australia. AS 3700: masonry structures. Sydney, 2001.AS 3700:2001
Masonry structures is the current Australian standard for the design of
unreinforced and reinforced masonry structures of all kinds.
[56] Manzatto CV, Freitas Jr E, Peres JR. Uso agrícola dos solos brasileiros (ed.). – Rio
de Janeiro: Embrapa Solos, 2002.174 p. ISBN 85-85864-10-9.
[57] Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of
image analysis. Nat Methods 2012;9:671–5.
[58] Protásio TP, Bufalino L, Tonoli GHD, Guimarães Júnior M, Trugilho PF, Mendes
LM. Brazilian lignocellulosic wastes for bioenergy production: characterization
and comparison with fossil fuels. Bioresources (Raleigh, N.C) 2013;8:1166–85.
[59] Associação brasileira de normas técnicas ABNT. ⁄NBR 14853⁄: Madeira:
determinação do material solúvel em etanol-tolueno em diclorometano e em
acetona. Rio de Janeiro, p. 3, 2010.
[60] Associação brasileira de normas técnicas ABNT. ⁄NBR 7989⁄: Pasta celulósica e
madeira: determinação de lignina insolúvel em ácido. Rio de Janeiro, p. 6,
2010.
[61] Associação brasileira de normas técnicas ABNT. ⁄NBR 13999⁄: papel, cartão,
pastas celulósicas e madeira: determinação do resíduo (cinza) após a
incineração a 525°C. Rio de Janeiro, p. 4, 2003.
[62] Browning BL. The chemistry of wood. Interscience Publisher; 1963.
[63] Kennedy F, Phillips GO, Williams EPA. Wood and cellulosics: industrial
utilization, biotechnology, structure and properties,
ellishorwood. Chichester: E. Horwood; 1987. 1130p.
[64] Global Health and Education Foundation. Coagulation Flocculation
Technologies, 2007.
[65] Kvech S, Edwards M. Solubility controls on aluminum in drinking water at
relatively low and high pH. Water Res 2002;36.
[66] Constantino VRL, Koiti A, Silva DO, Oliveira W. Preparação de compostos de
alumínio a partir da bauxita: considerações sobre alguns aspectos envolvidos
em um experimento didático Print version ISSN 0100–4042 Química Nova, vol.
25 no. 3 São Paulo May 2002. doi: 10.1590/S010040422002000300024.
[67] NTE E.080 – Norma Técnica de Edificación. Reglamento nacional de
construcciones, Lima, Peru, p. 17, 2000.
[68] Varum H, Costa A, Silveira D, Carvalho G, Silva L. Caracterização dos solos e
adobes usados na construção em Camabatela, Angola. Terra em Seminário
2007, p. 94–96, ISBN 978-972-8479-49-7, Argumentum – October 2007.
[69] Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. NBR 8492. Tijolo maciço de solo
cimento: determinação da resistência à compressão e da absorção de água –
método de ensaio. Rio de Janeiro, p. 6, 1984.
[70] Faria OB. Utilização de macrófitas aquáticas na produção de adobe: Um estudo
de caso no Reservatório de Salto Grande (Americana-SP). Tese (Doutorado em
Ciências da Engenharia Ambiental) – Escola de Engenharia de São Carlos, São
Carlos, p. 199, 2002.
[71] Faria OB, Battistelle GRA, Neves C. Avaliação preliminar da influência da adição
de ‘‘baba-de-cupim’’ em características físicas e mecânicas de solo-cimento
compactado. In: TerraBrasil-IV Congresso de arquitetura e construção com
terra no Brasil. Fortaleza Ceará, p. 11, 2012.
[72] Piñón JP, Durán JTV, Ramírez AM, Robles JFP, Ramírez HB, Landaverde MAH.
Enhancement of mechanical and hydrophobic properties of adobes for
building industry by the addition of polymeric agents. Build Environ
2007;42:877–83.