See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320070649

Study of Bamboo Physical Properties and its Application as Reinforcement in

Adobe Structures

Article  in  International Review of Civil Engineering (IRECE) · July 2017

DOI: 10.15866/irece.v8i4.12380

CITATIONS READS

0 704

3 authors, including:

David Bonilla Diego Sosa

Escuela Politécnica Nacional Escuela Politécnica Nacional
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS    63 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Adobe Structures View project

VULNERABILITY AND EXPOSURE View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Diego Sosa on 04 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Review of Civil Engineering (I.RE.C.E.), Vol. 8, N. 4
ISSN 2036 - 9913 July 2017

Study of Bamboo Physical Properties and its Application

as Reinforcement in Adobe Structures

David Bonilla, Gabriel Merino, Diego Sosa

Abstract – This study is referred to the application of bamboo as a structural reinforcement in

constructions with adobe. The main focus is the need of searching and using economical, safe and
environment-friendly alternative construction materials because of the current environmental
situation. Two adobe walls were built; one reinforced with bamboo and the other without any
reinforcement. Those walls were essayed to cyclic lateral load in order to get capacity curves,
displacement ductility, Young Modulus, stress distribution, dissipated energy, secant stiffness, and
to compare between them. The results showed that the bamboo reinforced adobe wall has a
substantially better structural behavior because its lateral load capacity was highly increased;
also a higher absorption and better distribution of energy were achieved. Copyright © 2017
Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved.

Keywords: Bamboo, Adobe, Structural Reinforcement, Alternative Construction

Nomenclature I. Introduction
A Gross area of the element of analysis Adobe bricks have been used for millenniums. Dating
CIV Centro de Investigación de la Vivienda of as far as the 9th century B.C. [1], earth has been one of
Escuela Politécnica Nacional-Quito-Ecuador the first construction materials employed by humankind
E Young’s or elasticity modulus of the [2]. The first earth bricks used were probably coarse,
material mashed clay, air- dried, and hardened by the sun heat.
EPN Escuela Politécnica Nacional Earth has a fragile behavior, therefore the main focus
f Shear factor that depends on the shape of the has always been to reinforce it [3]. The Babylonians were
section being analysed the first civilization to use reed reinforcement in their
FEM Finite Element Method used for structural adobe constructions. It is known that the Babylonians
and other types of analyses moistened earth, added chopped straw, and mashed the
Fo Earth’s compressive stress earth in-situ with their feet. In order to obtain a better
Ft Earth’s tensile stress solidity and wall cohesion, the Babylonians used bitumen
G Shear modulus of the material or hot asphalt as mortar and reed reinforcement between
I Inertia bending moment rows [4].
Ks Secant stiffness It could be said that this was the first time that bamboo
L Length of the element of analysis was used as reinforcement in earth constructions.
M Function of the bending moment throughout Adobe was used in many cultures. It was used in
the element’s length Spain and in other Mediterranean areas. Also, in the 15th
m Function of the unitary bending moment Century, Spaniards found Native Americans already
throughout element’s length using it [5].
P Lateral load or lateral force New Mexico is another place where adobe
PUCP Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú constructions from the 18th century were found. [6]
RC Reinforced Concrete In the seventies, the professors of The Engineering
V Function of the shear force throughout the Department of PUCP (Pontificia Universidad Católica
element’s length del Perú) began their research about stability of earth
v Function of the unitary shear force constructions in seismic areas. The first investigations
throughout the element’s length were oriented to determine the mechanical characteristics
∆ Displacement ductility of adobe walls through static essays. Between 1973 and
∆μ Displacement at rupture point 1978, several housing modules were statically essayed.
∆y Displacement at yielding point These housing modules were of real size and with
μ Poisson’s ratio of the material different reinforcement materials such as reed, wood and
wire [7].
The most efficient reinforcement was achieved

Copyright © 2017 Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved https://doi.org/10.15866/irece.v8i4.12380

160
 David Bonilla, Gabriel Merino, Diego Sosa
through the collocation of complete vertical reeds inside
the walls and tying up horizontal crushed reeds every
four rows of mortar [7].
Another study on improved construction technologies
talks about the use of vertical and horizontal
reinforcements. This can be done with any ductile
material including reed, bamboo, rope, wood, chicken
coop, barbed wire, and steel bars. The vertical
reinforcement helps to maintain the walls integrity due to
its connection from the foundations to the sill. The
horizontal reinforcement helps to transmit inertial and
bending forces. Both reinforcements must be connected
among them and to other structural elements [8].
The main focus of this research is to look for
sustainable construction materials like bamboo and adobe
[9].
The main characteristic of this type of construction is
the lack of research due to culture. It is not considered
important to innovate but rather to base on foreign
researches and models.
In order to analyze this problem, it is necessary to
mention its causes. First, the unknowledge and
underestimation of alternative materials such as bamboo
and adobe [10]. Second, the increasing population and
the consequent demand of housing in which the
economic aspect is very important. However, safety,
comfort, and peace, which characterize an adequate
household, are not left aside.
This research was done because of the interest to
know and provide new alternative construction
technologies that fulfill the required earthquake
resistance criteria [11]; currently there is not enough
development in seismic design in Ecuador. In addition,
this investigation wanted to prove that it is possible to get
safe, economic and esthetic structures using bamboo and
adobe. These are great options to have in mind when
building [12].
The study was based on a bibliographic compilation
by taking in account those foreign countries where this
technology is more advanced. The information was
adapted to local conditions for testing and application.
This was done through a cyclic lateral load essay of
two adobe walls one with bamboo reinforcement and the
other without any reinforcement.
II. Material Properties and
Adobe Walls Design
The walls were designed according to the
specifications listed in the Peruvian code E080
“Construcción con Tierra” [6], common dimensions of
construction in Ecuador, and the conditions of the essay
area at CIV- EPN (Centro de Investigación de la
Vivienda - EscuelaPolitécnica Nacional) located in
Quito, Ecuador.
The earth used for construction had to fulfill certain
requirements specified in the Peruvian code. First,
enough clay content, which should be verified using the
“Cinta de Barro” test.
Copyright © 2017 Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved
161
Second, enough dry resistance, which should be
verified with the “Resistencia Seca” test [13].
In the event of not knowing the material mechanical
properties, some values of the Peruvian code [13] can be
considered. The ultimate stresses are shown in Table I.
TABLE I
EARTH ULTIMATE STRESSES
Parameter Value Units
Earth compressive stress , fo 1000,28 kPa
Earth tensile stress , ft 79,43 kPa
Earth shear stress 24,52 kPa
Mortar tensile stress 11,77 kPa
The admissible stresses are calculated dividing the
ultimate stresses by 2,5. This is done because of the
variation in material quality, execution quality and loads
evaluation [13].
The Young Modulus of adobe bricks is lower than
traditional masonry. The latter has an equivalent Young
Modulus of its admissible compression stress multiplied
by 400. For adobe, the multiplying value is 300 [14].
A lower Poisson’s Ratio value than concrete was
taken. This is justified by the fact that earth is more
anisotropic and heterogeneous than other materials. Earth
doesn’t have a ductile behavior. When earth suffers
longitudinal tension, there is little cross deformation
before a fragile failure occurs. Because of this, a value of
0,15 was assumed [14]. However, it will be subjected to
further investigation.
Based on the researches done by [7], [8], [12] and [13]
it was determined that the best reinforcement alternative
was bamboo. The vertical reinforcement was separated
1,5 times the width of the wall.
Three complete bamboo stems, with an exterior
diameter of approximately 10 centimeters and a thickness
of 8 millimeters, were used as vertical reinforcement. For
horizontal reinforcement, crushed specimens of the same
characteristics were collocated every three rows of adobe
bricks.
The vertical reinforcement was placed inside the
foundations at a depth of 25 centimeters and cast-in-place
together with the load transmission beam at the top of the
wall. All this was done to ensure a monolithic behavior
of the structure.
The cyclopean concrete foundations were anchored to
the reaction slab of the CIV-EPN. Moreover, two blocks
of reinforced concrete were left at the sides of the wall in
order to prevent bottom lateral displacement.
The adobe bricks used were 40 centimeters long, 20
centimeters wide, and 10 centimeters high. They were
placed using the English interlocking and stuck with a
mixture of earth mortar and straw.
The load transmission RC beams had 4 steel bars of 2
centimeters diameter for the anchoring of a hydraulic
jack, which was needed for the application of the lateral
load. The beams were connected to the walls with
concrete in the last two rows of the adobe walls.
The walls’ schemes are shown in Figures 1 and 2.
International Review of Civil Engineering, Vol. 8, N. 4
 David Bonilla,
Bonilla, Gabriel Merino
Merino,, Diego Sosa

Fig. 3.. Unreinforced adobe wall at the end of the essay

Fig. 1.
1 Unreinforced wall scheme

Fig. 2.. Reinforced wall scheme

III. Experimental Test Observations

After the preparation of the essay, the cyclic lateral
load was applied in increments of 2.45 kN. Between each
ea ch
cycle, the load value and lateral displacement were
registered and the cracks in the walls were marked.
The orientation of the cracks was diagonal in the
unreinforced adobe wall, as shown in Figure 3. The
failure lateral load bear was 7,306 kN with a Fig. 4.. Reinforced
Reinforced adobe wall at the end of the essay
corresp
rresponding displacement of 1,50 millimeters
rresponding millimeters.
The orientation of the cracks was mostly horizontal The displacement ductility was determined with the
and vertical in the reinforced adobe wall, as shown in use of an elastic-plastic
elastic plastic equivalence method, which
Figure 4. The failure lateral load bear was 28,44 kN with specifies a yield limit as 0,70 of the failure load [15]:
a corresponding displacement of 79,5 millimet
millimeters.
ers.
μ=∆u
= u/∆
∆y (1)
IV. Displacement Ductility
where μ is the displacement ductility, ∆u the
The displacement ductility can be calculated for displacement corresponding to the failure load, and ∆y
reinforced adobe walls, but not for unreinforced. This can the yielding displacement.
be explained
explained by its fragile behavior. The results showed that the displacement ductility in
bamboo reinforced adobe walls was 3,18 (for the pushing

Copyright © 2017
2017 Praise Worthy Pri
Prize
ze S.r.l. - All rights reserved International Review of Civil E
Engineering
ngineering,
ngineering, Vol. 88,, N. 4

162
 David Bonilla, Gabriel Merino, Diego Sosa

of the hydraulic jack phase) and 3,58 (for the pulling of
the hydraulic jack phase).
V. Young Modulus Determination
The Young Modulus was obtained using the mechanic
of materials theory. The lateral displacement considering
shear and bending effects is calculated as follows:
∙ ∙
∆= + (2)
∙ ∙
The parameters of the equation were calculated. Then,
the equation was simplified and the variable E was
isolated. The following expression was obtained:
The maximum shear stress for the failure load of
7,305 kN was 10,639kPa, which is approximately 1 kPa
higher compared to the value admitted by the code (9.807
kPa). This shows that the used material properties in the
mathematical model and the design for the unreinforced
wall were correct.
VII. Hysteretic Capacity Curves
A hysteretic capacity curve indicates the lateral load
force against the structure’s displacement. The bounded
area represents the dissipated energy of the system. Both
walls hysteretic curves are shown in Figures 6 and 7.
8

E = 0,0116479 P/∆ (3) 6

Lateral load (kN)

where E is the Young Modulus in [MPa], P is the lateral 4
applied force in [kN], and ∆ is the lateral displacement
corresponding to the force in [meters]. 2
The results were 144,14 MPa for the unreinforced
adobe wall and 143,08 MPa for the reinforced wall. 0
The Young Modulus are very similar, even though one
-0,8 -0,4 0 0,4 0,8 1,2 1,6
is constituted with additional bamboo elements. It could -2
be said that bamboo does not completely modify the
elastic behavior of the reinforced wall. -4

VI. Unreinforced Wall Resistance -6

The wall bears a load of 7,305 kN before failure. With -8

the assistance of a mathematical numerical program, a Displacement (mm)
model was established using the material properties
specified in Section 2.
The stresses in the wall were calculated and compared Fig. 6. Hysteretic Curve for Unreinforced Wall
with the admissible stresses specified in the Peruvian
code E080 “Construcción con Tierra” [13]. Finally, it 30
was determined that the critical condition was shear
25
stress.
The results of the mathematical numerical model 20
using the FEM (Finite Element Method) for the
unreinforced wall are shown in Figure 5. 15
Lateral load (kN)

10

0
-70 -55 -40 -25 -10
-5 5 20 35 50 65 80 95

-10

-15

-20

-25
Displacement (mm)

Fig. 5. Experimental Shear Stresses in the unreinforced adobe wall Fig. 7. Hysteretic Curve for Reinforced Wall

Copyright © 2017 Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved International Review of Civil Engineering, Vol. 8, N. 4

163
 David Bonilla, Gabriel Merino, Diego Sosa

An overlapping graphic was done in order to visually The dissipated energy of the reinforced wall was
compare both walls’ hysteretic curves. The result is approximately 308 times greater than in the unreinforced
shown in Figure 8. wall.

30 VII.2. Secant Stiffness

25 The Secant stiffness (Ks) is defined as the slope of the
20 line that connects the two edge points, maximum
15
displacement and corresponding load with minimum
displacement and corresponding load, in each cycle of
10 the hysteretic curve [16].
Lateral load (kN)

5 Under this concept, the secant stiffness in each load

cycle was calculated for both walls. The results are
0
shown in Figures 9 and 10.
-70 -55 -40 -25 -10
-5 5 20 35 50 65 80 95
-10 16000
-15
14000
-20
12000
-25
Displacement (mm) 10000
Ks (kN/m)
Reinforced wall Unreinforced wall 8000

Fig. 8. Overlapping Hysteretic Curves 6000

The unreinforced wall’s capacity curve is very small 4000

compared to the one of the reinforced wall. Therefore,
the use of the bamboo reinforcement completely changes 2000
an adobe wall’s behaviour under lateral load application.
0
1 2 3
VII.1. Dissipated Energy
Load cycle
As stated in Section 7, the bounded area of a hysteretic
curve represents the dissipated energy of the system. The
energy dissipated in each cycle for the unreinforced and Fig. 9. Secant Stiffness variation for Unreinforced Wall
the reinforced walls is shown in Tables II and III
respectively. 22500
TABLE II 20000
UNREINFORCED WALL DISSIPATED ENERGY
Cycle and Lateral Load Value Units 17500
Cycle 1: 2,45 kN 0,67 J
Cycle 2: 4,90 kN 3,71 J 15000
Ks (kN/m)

Cycle 3: 7,35 kN 10,80 J 12500

Total: 15,18 J
10000
TABLE III
REINFORCED WALL DISSIPATED ENERGY 7500
Lateral Load Value Units 5000
Cycle 1: 2,45 kN 0,81 J
Cycle 2: 4,90 kN 4,83 J 2500
Cycle 3: 7,35 kN 11,62 J
Cycle 4: 9,81 kN 34,39 J 0
Cycle 5: 12,26 kN 75,74 J
Cycle 6: 14,71 kN 150,94 J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Cycle 7: 17,16 kN 256,08 J
Cycle 8: 19,61 kN 426,45 J Load cycle
Cycle 9: 24,52 kN 1 249,93 J
Cycle 10: 29,42 kN 2 467,97 J
Total: 4 678,74 J Fig. 10. Secant Stiffness variation for Reinforced Wall

Copyright © 2017 Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved International Review of Civil Engineering, Vol. 8, N. 4

164
 David Bonilla, Gabriel Merino, Diego Sosa

The variation percentage in secant stiffness between The elastic ratio is slightly higher than 1, however, the
the first load cycle and the failure load cycle was 61,35% ultimate ratio is greater than 50. This shows that bamboo
for the unreinforced wall, and 98,29% for the reinforced provides adobe walls with a plastic behavior.
wall. The difference between both walls was 36,94%,
which indicates that the bamboo reinforcement
considerably increases stiffness degradation. IX. Conclusion
Geographic location, dry time, straw content, organic
content, construction technique, protection against
VIII. Bamboo Reinforced Adobe Walls
weather, and insects are multiple factors than can affect
Design Criteria an earth structure behavior. That is why the Peruvian
Three parameters were considered important for code recommends a safety factor of 2,5.
construction with bamboo reinforced adobe. The orientation of the cracks was different in each
adobe wall. Diagonal for the unreinforced wall, and
mostly horizontal and vertical for the reinforced wall.
VIII.1. Lateral Load Capacity The lateral load capacity of the reinforced adobe wall
It is proposed to increase the lateral load capacity of a was approximately four times the unreinforced.
bamboo reinforced adobe wall. Based on the results of The ductility displacement was in a range of 3,18 to
the wall’s lateral load capacity, a range of magnification 3,58 for the reinforced wall.
values from 3 to 4 was determined. Even though the Young Modulus of both walls was
For example, if an unreinforced adobe wall of defined very similar, the reinforced wall had approximately 300
geometry bears a lateral load of 10 kN, then a bamboo times more energy dissipation capacity than the
reinforced adobe wall with the same geometry could bear unreinforced wall.
a lateral load of approximately 30 to 40 kN. With the obtained results, it can be assured that the use
of alternative materials is able to create earthquake
resistant, cheap, and esthetic conditions for households.
VIII.2. Weight Percentage It is suggested to increase the lateral load capacity by
This parameter was calculated with the walls’ weight 3 to 4 times when using bamboo as reinforcement.
and the maximum lateral load each wall bears. The In order to predict the maximum lateral load in an
results are shown in Table IV. unreinforced adobe wall, it is advisable to use the one
that makes 50% of the wall surpass its admissible shear
TABLE IV stress.
BASE SHEAR WEIGHT PERCENTAGE
Failure Lateral Load / Weight
Wall Weight (kN)
Load (kN) Percentage (%) References
Unreinforced 7,31 43,48 16,80
Reinforced 28,44 43,31 65,66 [1] Taos Inn (April 5, 2012). “Step into History”. From
http://www.taosinn.com/history.html
[2] Adobe in Action (March 29, 2012). “Adobe in Action”. From
It is proposed to design bamboo reinforced adobe
http://www.adobeinaction.org.
walls with a base shear of approximately 50% of the [3] Sharma, M. V. (2016). Enhancing durability of adobe by natural
structure weight. reinforcement for propagating sustainable mud housing.
International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 141-155.
From
VIII.3. Drifts http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221260901530
0480
For this parameter, drift ratios were calculated. [4] Doat, H. H. (1990). Construir con tierra (Vol. 1). Bogotá,
The elastic limit was considered: Colombia: Fondo Rotatorio Nacional. 2016.
[5] Adobe Is Not Software (March 29, 2012), “Why Adobe”. From
- For the unreinforced wall, as the load point where it http://adobeisnotsoftware.com/
failed (7,35 kN). [6] Santa Fe Unlimited (April 4, 2012), “The Historic Adobe
- For the reinforced wall, as the load point where it did Architecture of Santa Fe, New Mexico”. From http://architecture-
not suffer substantial damage (6,86 kN). sf2.nm-unlimited.net/
[7] M. Blondet, J. V. (2011). Construcción sismoresistente en tierra:
The ultimate limit was considered as the load that La gran experiencia contemporánea de la Pontificia Universidad
made the walls fail. The results obtained are shown in Católica del Perú. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima.
Table V. 2017.
TABLE V [8] Blondet M., V. G. (2003). Construcciones de Adobe Resistentes a
DRIFTS RATIOS los Terremotos: Tutor. Lima, Perú: Marjorie Greene, EERI. 2017.
Drift Value [9] Janssen, J. J. (2000). Designing and Building with Bamboo. (A.
Unreinforced Wall in elastic range 0,00071 Kumar, Ed.) Eind Hovn Netherlands. 2017.
Reinforced wall in elastic range 0,00083 [10] Nolivos, Yacelga (2010). Estudio De Conexiones Entre Elementos
Unreinforced Wall ultimate drift 0,00071 De Caña Guadua Sometidos A Carga Axial (Bachelor Thesis).
Reinforced wall ultimate drift 0,0377 Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito.
Elastic Ratio: 1,17 [11] Chang, F.S. (October 25, 2012). “Rammed Earth: Construction
Ultimate Ratio: 53,03 Lessons from Experience”. ASCE, 1-6. Recovered April, 2017,
from http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29SC.1943-

Copyright © 2017 Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved International Review of Civil Engineering, Vol. 8, N. 4

165
 David Bonilla, Gabriel Merino, Diego Sosa

5576.0000152 Gabriel Merino was born in Quito, Ecuador on

[12] Blondet, Marcial and Gladys Villa Carcia, M (March 30, 2012),
“Adobe Construction.” Catholic University of Peru. From
http://www.world-housing.net/wp-
content/uploads/2011/06/Adobe_Blondet.pdf
[13] Ministerio de Vivienda, Construcción y Saneamiento, (November,
2013) NORMA Técnica E.080. CONSTRUCCIÓN CON
TIERRA, Lima, Perú.
[14] Ramos, Bonilla (2013). Investigación De Un Sistema Estructural
Alternativo Basado En El Reforzamiento De Paredes De Adobe
(Bachelor Thesis). Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito.
[15] Gallegos, H (1991), “Albañilería Estructural”. Second Edition,
Lima, Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del
Perú.
[16] Sullivan, C. P. (August, 2004). “Initial Stiffness versus Secant
Stiffness in DBD”. World Conference on Earthqueake
Engineering, 3.
From www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/13_2888.pdf
[17] H. Cruz Ríos, BAMBÚ GUADUA. Guadua angustifolia Kunth.
Bosques naturales en Colombia Plantaciones comerciales en
México, (Pereira-Colombia, 2009).
[18] J. A. Janssen, The mechanical properties of bamboo used in
construction, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands.
In: Proceeding: Bamboo Research in Asia IDRC-IUFRO: 173-
188, 1980.
[19] R. Ibáñez de Aldecoa, S22S Structures (AppStore, 2011).
[20] Instituto Colombiano de Normas Técnicas (ICONTEC), Métodos
de ensayo para determinar las propiedades físicas y mecánicas de
la Guadua angustifolia Kunth, (Icontec, Bogotá, 2007).
[21] W. Liese, The anatomy of bamboo culms, Technical Report,
International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (Pekín, Eindhoven,
Nueva Delhi, 1998).
January 6, 1994. He is a civil engineer
specialized in structures graduated from
EscuelaPolitécnica Nacional (EPN) in Quito –
Ecuador in 2017. He researched about
reinforced earth construction for his bachelor
thesis. He majorly studied adobe bricks as an
alternative construction material for economic
and earthquake-safe households in Ecuador. He has worked as a
structural plan drawer and designer in concrete buildings and wood
houses. He instructed construction workers about structural concepts in
a capacitation program coordinated by GAD Pichincha. He has
participated in the seminar “Seminar II: Innovation in construction”
developed by the Continuos Education Center of Universidad de las
Fuerzas Armadas (ESPE) in Quito – Ecuador with the topic adobe
reinforced with bamboo. He is currently researching about BIM and
construction engineering. Eng. Merino is subscribed to ACI and ASCE
with a student membership in both of them.
Diego Sosa Caiza Quito-Ecuador, April 16th
1987. Civil Engineer, Escuela Politécnica del
Ejército ESPE, Sangolquí, Ecuador, 2011.
Master in Structures, Escuela Politécnica
Nacional EPN, Quito, Ecuador, 2014. He
published some papers about the study of
nonlinear behavior of concrete structures. He is
interested in analysis design and computational
analysis of structures. Actually he is working with nonlinear structural
software like OpenSees and SeismoStruct to predict the behavior of the
models tested in laboratory. M.Sc. Sosa is member of ASCE and
advisor of the ASCE-EPN student chapter.

Author’s information
Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Facultad de Ingeniería Civil y Ambiental,
Centro de Investigación de la Vivienda (CIV-EPN) Quito, Ecuador.

David Bonilla was born in Quito, Ecuador on

June 8, 1994. He is a civil engineer specialized
in structures graduated from EscuelaPolitécnica
Nacional (EPN) in Quito – Ecuador. He
researched about reinforced earth construction
for his bachelor thesis. He majorly studied
adobe bricks as an alternative construction
material for economic and earthquake-safe
households in Ecuador. He instructed construction workers about
structural concepts with the coordination of GAD Pichincha. He has
reviewed BIM (Building Information Modeling) and its management in
programs such as Autodesk REVIT. He has worked as a structural plan
drawer in buildings and a raw water treatment plant. He has exposed
about adobe reinforced with bamboo in a seminar at Universidad de las
Fuerzas Armadas (ESPE) in Quito - Ecuador. He is currently
researching about project management and construction engineering.
Eng. Bonilla is subscribed to ACI and ASCE with a student
membership in both of them.

Copyright © 2017 Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved International Review of Civil Engineering, Vol. 8, N. 4

166

View publication stats