Journal of Building Engineering 25 (2019) 100786

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

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

Natural fiber-reinforced mortars T

a a,∗
Fotini Kesikidou , Maria Stefanidou
a
Laboratory of Building Materials, School of Civil Engineering Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Using recycling materials in construction is a safe way for achieving sustainability. Although European policy,
Bio-fibers through directives given, supports their use and coherent research results derive from the scientific society, their
Cement use in practice is limited. It is generally accepted that the use of alternative construction materials with low
Lime environmental impact and of low cost is an important issue. As a part of the integration in sustainable devel-
Mortars
opment approach, the eco-friendly materials present a great interest in building construction manufacturing.
Sustainability
Towards this direction, many studies have been focused on the exploitation of natural fibers as reinforcements in
building materials. This study is an attempt to add more experimental results by the use of bio-fibers to building
materials in order to ensure the performance of recycled materials such as bio-fibers in the construction sector.
Three types of natural fibers jute, coconut and kelp were used as additives in 1.5% by mortar volume. Their role
in cement and lime mortars was recorded by testing mechanical, physical and microstructure properties. The
results indicate that natural fibers act in favor of strength and durability. Nevertheless, bio-fibers work differ-
ently in strong cement mortars in relation to the “soft” lime-based materials. Advantages can be gained in both
cases but certain aspects should be taken into account such as the adhesion to the mortar matrix and the water
content of the mixture.

1. Introduction the mechanical properties of SFRC, both summarizing that compressive

In traditional mortars, the use of natural fibers was a common
technique. In Ancient Greece, wood and straw fibers were particularly
used to increase volume stability [1]. Jute and straw were also used in
Indo-Muslim architecture to enhance bonding and reduce cracks [2].
Fibers are usually used to control cracking due to plastic and drying
shrinkage, increase tensile strength, toughness and durability. Their
functionality depends on their geometry (length, diameter and shape),
their percentage, the interaction with the binder and their orientation
and dispersion inside the mixture [3]. Overtime, with the evolution of
technology, natural fibers were replaced by modern materials like
polypropylene, steel, glass and carbon fibers. According to the Amer-
ican Concrete Institute Committee 544, Fiber Reinforced Concrete
(FRC) is separated in four categories based on the fiber material type.
These are SFRC, for steel fiber FRC; GFRC, for glass fiber FRC; SNFRC,
for synthetic fiber FRC including carbon fibers; and NFRC, for natural
fiber FRC [4].
A lot of research has been devoted to the role of fibers in concrete.
Among others, Khaloo and Kim [5] indicated that compressive, flexural
and tensile strength were increased when steel fibers were added in a
percentage less than 5%. Song and Hwang [6] and Alsadey [7] studied
strength is improved when fiber content is up to 1–1.5% of concrete
volume. Tzileroglou et al. [8] investigated the addition of carbon na-
nofibers in cement pastes. The research has shown that the addition of
nanocomposites increased the compressive but not the flexural strength
of the cement pastes, resulting that this increase in compression was
related to the decrease of porosity. Sim et al. [9] focused on the role of
basalt fibers in concrete structures compared to carbon and glass fibers.
The increase in strength was lower in basalt-reinforced concrete;
however, basalt fibers presented volume stability when exposed to
temperature over 600 °C, opposed to the carbon and glass fibers. Pa-
payianni et al. [10] studied the addition of synthetic fibers in lime-
based mortars in different percentages (0.5 and 2% by volume of the
binder), concluding that the fibers generally increased the fracture
energy of the samples. However, the addition of 0.5% showed better
dispersion in the mortar matrix.
Nowadays, the need to turn to alternatives with low environmental
footprint brings again natural fibers to the foreground. Positive were
the results deriving from the use of bio-fibers in reinforcing clay-based
mortars in the work of Gomez et al. [11] and Karozou and Stefanidou
[12]. The role of bio-fibers in restricting cracking in cement mortars
was indicated in the work of Tong et al. [13]. The reduced workability

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: stefan@civil.auth.gr (M. Stefanidou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100786
Received 12 March 2019; Received in revised form 24 April 2019; Accepted 24 April 2019
Available online 28 April 2019
2352-7102/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F. Kesikidou and M. Stefanidou
introduced was commented by Comak et al. [14], while the increased
mechanical properties were reported by Sellami et al. [15]. Barth et al.
[16] conducted Life Cycle Assessment on the most used fibers, which
are flax, hemp, jute and kenaf. The carbon footprint of these fibers was
calculated much lower than glass and mineral fibers. The production of
1 tone of glass fibers showed a carbon footprint of about 1.7–2.2 tones
CO2-eq, whereas natural fibers only had about 0.5–0.7 tones CO2-eq per
ton of natural fibers. In addition, research has shown that in lime
mortars hemp fibers could achieve the same strength in compression
and flexure with polypropylene reinforced mortars [17]. All of the
above conclude that combined with the available contemporary mate-
rials, natural fibers ensure sustainability, mechanical resistance and
endurance [18,19].
Nonetheless, with the use of natural fibers some parameters must be
taken into account like their type, age, geometry, way of harvest,
process and their ability to absorb water [20]. In addition, their che-
mical composition plays an important part in their behavior, while their
consistency in cellulose and lignin has an impact on the hydration
process and eventually on strength development [21]. However, nat-
ural fibers are easy to find, have a low cost, low weight and are energy-
efficient. Some of the types that are commonly known are made from
hemp, jute, coconut, bamboo, sisal, rice husk, palm, flax, cotton and
sugarcane.
In this paper, three types of natural fibers (jute, coconut and kelp)
were investigated. Their role in cement and lime mortars was tested and
compared in order to identify their use based on their origin and their
physical characteristics.
2. Materials and methods
The aim of this paper is to investigate the behavior of natural fibers
in cement (Ce) and lime (L-) mortars. For this purpose, three cement
(type CEM II32.5) (EN 196-2 [22]), and three air lime (type CL80)
(EN459-1 [23]) mortars were produced, reinforced with different fibers
such as jute, coconut and kelp. Each group was compared with an un-
reinforced reference mortar (C-R and L-R). The properties of cement
and lime are presented in Table 1a and Table1b. The chemical com-
position of cement was analyzed by Atomic Absorption Spectrometry
(AAS). The Ca(OH)2 content of lime was calculated by Thermogravi-
metric Analysis (DTA-TG). Malvern Mastersizer 2000, dry phase, was
used for the determination of the average particle size. The composition
of the mortars and the characteristics of the fibers are shown in Table 2
and Table 3 respectively. Natural sand river origin, (0–4) mm, was used
as aggregates in a ratio 2.5 of binder by weight.
Fibers were cut by hand with a length approximately 1 cm and they
were added in a 1.5% w/v of the mortar (weight of fibers per volume of
mortar in each batch produced in the mixer) (Fig. 1). In order to avoid
extra absorption of water during mixing, all fibers after shaping were
kept into water for 24 h. The absorbed water of each type of fibers was
calculated by the difference of weights before and after immersion into
water. Water solubility of the fibers (tannins, gums, sugars and coloring
Table 1a
Properties of cement.
% CEM II32.5
SiO2 21.64
Al2O3 6.54
FeO3 1.01
CaO 59.19
MgO 3.30
Na2O 2.10
K2O 1.90
L.I. 4.32
Specific Gravity 2.810 g/cm3
Particle size volume 10–25 μm 5–6%
2
Journal of Building Engineering 25 (2019) 100786
Table 1b
Properties of lime.
Lime powder
Density 2.471 g/ml
Avg. particle size 10.8 μm
Ca(OH)2 content 75%
matter) was conducted according to ASTM D1110-84 [24]. The results
are presented in Table 2.
From Table 2 it can be easily concluded that Jute fibers absorb the
highest amount of water while coconut fibers present the lower water
absorption. Additionally, kelp fibres present high amount of soluble
content in contraindication to coconut, which have the lowest water
soluble content. In the present study, the water-soluble content does not
affect the properties of the compositions as the fibres were treated in
water for 24 h and then they were used saturated but surface dried.
In cement mortars, 1% of a superplasticizer of carboxylic basis
(aqueous solution of modified polymers) was used to retain the water/
binder ratio around 0.40, whereas in lime mortars 1.5% of the super-
plasticizer was added. The need for water was 0.70 up to 0.95 in the
case of lime mortars for 15 ± 1 cm workability based on EN1015-3
[25]. Mortars with coconut fibers as shown in Table 1 require small
quantity of extra water (W/B = 0.74) while kelp and jute fibers needed
extra water for the same workability. In each composition, the fibers
were carefully added to ensure homogeneous dispersion in the mixture.
Jute reinforced cement and lime mixtures (C-JUTE, L-JUTE) absorbed
the largest amount of water while reference mortars had the smallest
need of water.
Prismatic specimens (40 × 40 × 160) mm were produced and
tested at 28 days. Until testing, cement mortars were kept in a climate
chamber with 20 °C and RH95%, whereas air-lime mortars were ma-
tured in a chamber with 20 °C and RH60%.
All specimens were tested under flexural and compressive strength
at 28 days, according to EN 1015-11 [26], with a hydraulic universal
testing machine (max testing load 300 kN and displacement resolution
0.001 mm). Fracture energy Gf was calculated at the age of 90 days,
according to JCI-S-001 (2003) [27], by recording the values of Load-
Crack Mouth Opening Displacement (CMOD) during the test and by the
following equations:
GF = (0.75*W0 + W1 )/Alig. (1)
W1 = 0.75*[(S/L)m1 + 2m2 ]*g*CMODc (2)
2
Where:GF = fracture energy (N/mm )W0 = area below CMOD
curve up to rupture of specimen (N mm)W1 = work done by dead-
weight of specimen and loading jig (N mm)Alig = area of broken liga-
ment (b h) (mm2)m1 = mass of specimen (kg)S = loading span (mm)
L = total length of specimen (mm)m2 = mass of jig not attached to the
machine but placed on specimen until rupture (kg)g = gravitational
acceleration (9807 m/s2)CMODc = crack mouth opening displacement
at the time of rupture (mm)
After the test, stereoscopic images of the broken samples were taken
in order to identify the interaction between the mortar and the fibers.
Open porosity, according to RILEM CPC 11.3 [28], and capillary ab-
sorption, according to EN1015-18 [29] were tested in all mixtures at
the age of 28 days. Volume stability of the mortars was also determined
with a digital vernier by measuring the dimensions of a prismatic
sample for 28 days. During the test the specimens were kept in a climate
chamber with stable conditions (20 °C and RH60%).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Mechanical characteristics
The addition of the fibers in mortars seems to improve their flexural
F. Kesikidou and M. Stefanidou Journal of Building Engineering 25 (2019) 100786

Table 2
Fiber characteristics.
Fiber Type Cellulose (%) Lignin (%) Water absorption (%) Water soluble content (%) Width (average) (mm)

Jute 72 13 84 6.0 0.08

Coconut 43 45 73 5.5 0.19
Kelp 61.8 29.8 80 18.0 3.26

Table 3
Composition of cement and lime mortars (by weight).
Mixture Binder Aggregates Fibers (%) w/v W/B

C-R 1 2.5 – 0.40

C-JUTE 1 2.5 1.5 0.44
CeCOCO 1 2.5 1.5 0.42
C-KELP 1 2.5 1.5 0.42
L-R 1 2.5 – 0.70
L-JUTE 1 2.5 1.5 0.95
L-COCO 1 2.5 1.5 0.74
L-KELP 1 2.5 1.5 0.85

strength compared to the references (Fig. 2). In cement mortars, kelp Fig. 2. Flexural strength of mortars at 28 days.
fibers (C-KELP) present an increase of 28%, followed by the mixture
with coconut fibers (CeCOCO) which was 24%. Jute fibers (C-JUTE)
enhance strength in cement mortars around 16%. On the other hand, in
lime mortars jute fibers (L-JUTE) seem to triple the strength, whereas
kelp (L-KELP) and coconut (L-COCO) give an increase of 77% and 90%
respectively.
Testing of compression showed that in all reinforced cement mor-
tars there is a decrease of strength from 3% (for the mixture with co-
conut fibers) to 6.8% (for the kelp fibers) (Fig. 3). This is probably due
to the extra water addition, which leaves higher porosity after eva-
poration.
On the contrary, in lime mortars, an increase of almost four times up
was observed in jute and kelp reinforced mortars, while coconut fibers
had an upturn of 63% of strength indicating the positive role of the
fibers despite the water excess. Fig. 3. Compressive strength of mortars at 28 days.
Comparing the results, it is obvious that natural fibers cooperate
better with lime in favor of strength development and have a very
the cracking tendency that lime mortars have. In Fig. 4 the images
different behavior with cement. Based on literature, the chemical
during fracture are showing that the lime mortar with jute fibers after
consistency of the fibers in lignin, cellulose and hemicelluloses could
cracking does not collapse but retains the stability and shape.
have a negative effect in the hydration process of cement, caused by
The results of the fracture energy test are displayed in Fig. 5. In
their dissolution in water. Moreover, hydrogen bonds between fibers
cement based mortars, fracture energy was improved in all reinforced
and matrix are destroyed by water absorption from the wet curing of
mixtures, with the best results achieved by the coconut fibers (1.31 N/
cement, heading to the reduction of strength [30,31]. It seems that the
mm2). Jute and kelp present similar behavior, giving a result at least 6
chemical consistency of the natural fibers is of vital importance re-
times higher compared to the reference mortar (C-R). Coconut and jute
garding compression. As it is seen, jute and kelp, which are rich in
fibers in lime mortars gave an upturn in fracture energy around 60%.
cellulose, had the lowest compressive strength in cement mortars. In
However, L-KELP mixture had similar results with the reference, al-
adverse, coconut, rich in lignin, had a minor decrease of strength. These
though it must be noted that, in this mixture, extrusion of the fibers was
results are opposite from those of lime mortars, as cellulose-rich fibers
observed during the test.
(jute and kelp) had the biggest increase of strength. In this case, the
In both cases, coconut fibers seem to increase the fracture energy of
strength increase is mainly due to carbonation mechanisms [32] and
the mortars. This is also confirmed by other researchers [33,34] and
the role of fibers is beneficial in all cases. In this case, the wet fibers
maybe due to the higher ductility of the coconut fibers. It has, also,
seem to give back some of the reduced humidity over drying, blocking

Fig. 1. Fibres of coconut (left), jute (center) and kelp (right) after shaping.

3
F. Kesikidou and M. Stefanidou Journal of Building Engineering 25 (2019) 100786

Fig. 4. Fracture of the lime mortars under flexure (left) and under compression (right).

Fig. 5. Fracture energy of mortars. Fig. 7. Open porosity of cement and lime mortars.

been established that fracture energy could increase even in cases
where flexure has a low benefit from the reinforcement [35]. This could
be seen in lime mortar mixtures, where coconut fibers had the lowest
flexural and compressive strength although having the best results in
fracture energy test.
3.2. Stereoscopic observation
Stereoscopic analysis in Fig. 6 proves the above measured results.
Coconut fibers seem to have a good adhesion with the paste in lime and
cement mortars, while in mixture L-KELP, the pull out of the fiber is
obvious as only the trace of the fibers are seen.
3.3. Physical characteristics
Compared to the reference mortar, mixtures with jute fibers have a
slight increase of porosity, while coconut and kelp reinforced mortars
retain or even reduce their porosity values (Fig. 7). These results agree
with the extra amount of water needed to produce the mortars, while in
both lime and cement, mortars with jute fibers had the highest ab-
sorption which is in agreement with the highest amount of water that
jute has absorbed in the first state of the research. Specimens with kelp
seem to reduce the porosity values in both systems. The reduction was
more important in cement systems, which reached 13% in relation to
the reference mortar.

Fig. 6. Stereoscopic observation mortars: (a) L-COCO, (b) L-JUTE, (c) L-KELP, (d) CeCOCO, (e) C-JUTE, (f) C-KELP (scale 1000 μm).

4
F. Kesikidou and M. Stefanidou
Fig. 8. Capillary absorption of mortars at the age of 28 days.
Fig. 9. Volume deformations of mortars.
Capillary absorption in cement mortars does not show significant
change when fibers were added, indicating that the adhesion of the
fibers was strong and no capillary voids were created around the fibers.
In lime mortars, there was a differentiation, as mortars with kelp fibers
seem to have higher water absorption capacity due to capillarity com-
paring to mortars with coconut and jute fibers (Fig. 8).
Regarding volume stability of the mortars, different results were
observed (Fig. 9). In cement mixtures, the reference mortar presented
the lowest volume deformations. Results from other studies have shown
that in cement mortars the addition of sisal and coconut fibers could
increase shrinkage as they let moisture intrude into the matrix [36]. In
this case also kelp coconut and jute presented some variation.
Lime mortars with the addition of kelp fibers appear to have a more
stable behavior even in relation to the reference mortar. The highest
variation was observed with jute fibers. These specimens had the
highest water addition in the fresh mixture and it seems that the sta-
bilization of the volume lasts long. On the contrary, kelp had a stable
behavior after 10 days of testing. Water absorption plays an important
role in shrinkage and the way that the fibers attribute moisture back to
the paste needs further investigation. From the results it seems that jute
and coconut fibers have the tendency to change their volume depending
on the absorbed water, leading eventually to volume changes of the
mortar.
4. Conclusions
Research was focused in the behavior of natural fibers of the same
length (jute, coconut and kelp) in cement and lime mortars.
Summarizing the results, it seems that there is a clear increase of
flexural strength and fracture energy of the reinforced mortars, re-
gardless the type of the fiber but with respect to their percentage in the
mortar. The shape stability of the samples is retained even after fracture
and crack formation. However, in fracture energy test coconut fibers
5
Journal of Building Engineering 25 (2019) 100786
appear to work better than the others. Flexure increase was significant
in lime mortars, where, for example, strength of jute reinforced mortar
was three times higher than the reference mortar.
The behavior of the mixtures under compression was very different.
Cement mortars, had a decrease of strength up to 15%. On the contrary,
lime reinforced mortars presented an increase of 250% even though the
tests performed at the age of 28days of age, which is quite short to
assure deep mortar samples carbonation. Comparing the results, it
seems that cellulose-rich fibers, like jute and kelp, reduce the com-
pressive strength of cement mortars but increase it in lime mortars. On
the other hand, coconut fibers, which are rich in lignin, work better
with cement but they do not favor lime.
Porosity values where quite similar, while capillary absorption test
presented differences only in lime reinforced mixtures. The addition of
natural fibers in cement mortars led to an increase of shrinkage, al-
though in lime mortars kelp fibers presented the lowest volume de-
formations.
To conclude, the benefits of natural fibers in favor of strength,
durability, economic and environmental issues are obvious. For
economy and ecology reasons natural fibers could be used in mortars in
favor of basic properties, such as flexure. Their role is important in
“soft” nature mortars such as those based on lime. However, further
investigation is needed to improve their behavior considering their
shape, consistency, tensile strength and adhesion to the mortar matrix.
From the study, it seems that bio-fibers are technically advantageous
recycled materials that could be promoted in the construction sector.
References
[1] V. Pachta, M. Stefanidou, S. Konopisi, I. Papayianni, Technological evolution of
historic structural mortars, J. Civil Eng. Arch. 8 (7) (2014) 846–854 July.
[2] P. Thiroumalini, S.K. Sekar, Review on herbs used as admixture in lime mortar used
in ancient structures, Indian J. Appl. Res. 3 (8) (2013) 298-298.
[3] P.K. Mehta, P.J.M. Monteiro, Concrete, Microstructure, Properties and Materials,
McGraw-Hill, New Jersey, 2006.
F. Kesikidou and M. Stefanidou
[4] R.F. Zollo, Fiber-reinforced concrete: an overview after 30 Years of development,
Cement Concr. Compos. 19 (1997) 107–122.
[5] A. Khaloo, N. Kim, Mechanical properties of normal to high-strength steel fiber-
reinforced concrete, Cem. Concr. Aggregates 18 (2) (1996) 92–97.
[6] P.S. Song, S. Hwang, Mechanical properties of high-strength steel fiber-reinforced
concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 18 (2004) 669–673.
[7] S. Alsadey, Effect of polypropylene fiber on properties of mortar, Int. J. Energy Sci.
Eng. 2 (2) (2016) 8–12.
[8] C. Tzileroglou, M. Stefanidou, S. Kassavetis, S. Logothetidis, Nanocarbon materials
for nanocomposite cement mortars, Materials Today: Proceedings of 13th
International Conference on Nanosciences & Nanotechnologies & 9th International
Symposium on Flexible Organic Electronics, 2017, pp. 6938–6947.
[9] J. Sim, C. Park, D.Y. Moon, Characteristics of basalt fiber as a strengthening ma-
terial for concrete structures, Composites Part B 36 (2005) 504–512.
[10] I. Papayianni, M. Stefanidou, E. Anastasiou, Use of synthetic fibers in lime-based
mortars, Proc. Of 1st National Congress on Building Materials and Components,
2008, pp. 1885–1892.
[11] M.I. Gomes, P. Faria, T.D. Gonçalves, Earth-based mortars for repair and protection
of rammed earth walls. Stabilization with mineral binders and fibers, J. Clean. Prod.
172 (2018) 2401–2414.
[12] A. Karozou, M. Stefanidou, Ιnfluence of bio and nano fibers in clay mortars, Proc. of
4th WTA International PhD Symposium, September 2017, pp. 13–16 Delft,
Netherlands.
[13] Y. Tong, S. Zhao, J. Ma, L. Wang, Y. Zhang, Y. Gao, Y.M. Xie, Improving cracking
and drying shrinkage properties of cement mortar by adding chemically treated
luffa fibres, Constr. Build. Mater. 71 (2014) 327–333.
[14] B. Çomak, A. Bideci, Ö. Salli, Bide Effects of hemp fibers on characteristics of ce-
ment based mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 169 (2018) 794–799.
[15] A. Sellami, M. Merzoud, S. Amziane, Improvement of mechanical properties of
green concrete by treatment of the vegetals fibers, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013)
1117–1124.
[16] M. Barth, M. Carus, Carbon Footprint and Sustainability, Nova Institut, 2015.
[17] M. Stefanidou, M. Papachristoforou, F. Kesikidou, Fiber reinforced lime mortars,
Proc. of 4th Historic Mortars Conference (October 10-12 2016) Santorini, Greece.
[18] M. Ramesh, K. Palanikumar, K. Hemachandra, Plant fibre base bio-composites:
sustainable and renewable green materials, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 79 (2017)
558–584.
[19] O. Fedaoui-Akmoussia, L. Molezb, S. Kacia, R. Jauberthieb, Mechanical behavior
and durability of fibre reinforced mortar in an, Procedia Eng. 114 (2015) 445–452.
[20] K. Pickering, G. Beckerman, S. Alam, N. Foreman, Optimizing industrial hemp fibre
Journal of Building Engineering 25 (2019) 100786
for composites, Composites Part A - Appl. Sci. Manufact. 38 (2007) 461–468.
[21] L. Mwaikambo, M.P. Ansell, Chemical modification of hemp, sisal, jute and kapok
fibers by alkalization, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 84 (2002) 2222–2234.
[22] EN 196-2:1995, Methods of Testing Cement - Part 2: Chemical Analysis of Cement,
European Committee, 1995.
[23] EN 459-1:2001, Building Lime - Part 1: Definitions, Specifications Andconformity
Criteria, European Committee, 2001.
[24] ASTM D1110-84, Standard Test Methods for Water Solubility of Wood, ASTM
International.
[25] EN 1015-3: 1999, Methods of Test for Mortar for Masonry - Part 3: Determination of
Consistence of Fresh Mortar, European Committee, 1999 (by flow table).
[26] EN 1015-11: 1999, Methods of Test for Mortar for Masonry - Part 11: Determination
of Flexural and Compressive Strength of Hardened Mortar, European Committee,
1999.
[27] JCI-S-002-2003,Method of Test for Load-CMOD Curves of Fiber-Reinforced
Concrete Using Notched Beams, Japan Concrete Institute, JCI-TC992.
[28] RILEM CPC 11, 3, Absorption of Water by Concrete by Immersion under Vacuum,
RILEM TC, 1994.
[29] BS EN 1015-18, Methods of Test for Mortar for Masonry - Part 18: Determination of
Water Absorption Coefficient Due to Capillary Action of Hardened Mortar,
European Committee, 2002 2002.
[30] K. Bilba, M.A. Arsene, A. Ouensanga, Sugar cane bagasse fibre reinforced cement
composites. Part. I. Influence of the botanical components of bagasse on the setting
of bagasse/cement composite, Cement Concr. Compos. 25 (2003) 91–96.
[31] R.D. Toledo Filho, K. Skcrivener, G.L. England, K. Ghavami, Durability of alkali-
sensitive sisal and coconut fibres in cement mortar composites, Cement Concr.
Compos. 22 (2000) 127–143.
[32] M. Stefanidou, I. Papayianni, The role of aggregates on the structure and properties
of lime mortars, Cement Concr. Compos. 27 (9–10) (2005) 914–919.
[33] G. Ramakrishna, T. Sundararajan, Impact strength of a few natural fibre reinforced
cement mortar slabs: a comparative study, Cement Concr. Compos. 27 (2005)
547–553.
[34] V. Srivastava, P.K. Mehta, S. Nath, Natural fiber in cement and concrete matrices - a
review, J. Environ. Nanotechnol. 2 (3) (2013) 63–66.
[35] C.D. Johnston, Fiber-reinforced cements and concretes, [ed.], in: V.M. Malhotra
(Ed.), 3 Taylor & Francis, New York, 2001.
[36] R.D. Toledo Filho, K. Ghavami, M.A. Sanjuan, G.L. England, Free, restrained and
drying shrinkage of cement mortar composites reinforced with vegetable fibres,
Cement Concr. Compos. 27 (2005) 537–546.