Next Article in Journal
Land Cover Changes in Ghana over the Past 24 Years
Next Article in Special Issue
SIRen: An Applied Framework for a Sustainable Renovation Process
Previous Article in Journal
Electric Vehicle Charging Facility Planning Based on Flow Demand—A Case Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Preliminary Proposal for an Alternative Wall Lining Panel Based on Molded Recycled Cellulose and Designed for Home Wiring Refurbishment of Building Interior Partitions
Article

Evaluation of Reinforced Adobe Techniques for Sustainable Reconstruction in Andean Seismic Zones

1
Facultad de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad Nacional de San Agustín de Arequipa, Arequipa 04001, Peru
2
Department of Architectural Technology, Barcelona School of Building Construction (EPSEB), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 08028 Barcelona, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Oriol Pons-Valladares and Jelena Nikolic
Sustainability 2021, 13(9), 4955; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094955
Received: 12 March 2021 / Revised: 15 April 2021 / Accepted: 23 April 2021 / Published: 28 April 2021
This research presents a methodological process for selecting the most appropriate construction technique for the reconstruction of housing after a seismic disaster in a rural and heritage context. This process, which is applicable to a large part of the Andean region, incorporates sustainability criteria to guarantee the economic, social and environmental balance of the intervention. The methodology was developed on a case study: the Colca Valley in Arequipa, Peru. In 2016 an earthquake affected this zone, where traditional unreinforced earthen buildings suffered serious damage. The objective of this research focuses on comparing six traditional building techniques strongly related to self-building: four techniques for adobe housing—reinforced with cane (CRA), wire mesh (WMRA), geogrid (GRA) and halyard ropes (HRRA)—and two techniques for masonry buildings— confined (CM) and reinforced (RM). For this purpose the authors used the Integrated Value Model for Sustainable Assessment (MIVES), a Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) model used to compare alternatives by assigning a “sustainability index” to each evaluated construction technique. This research study includes two types of variables: quantitative, such as economy ($/m2) and environmental impact (kgCO2/m2), among others, and qualitative, such as perception of safety, respect for the urban image and popular knowledge. The research results show that reinforced adobe techniques are a viable and competitive option, highlighting the cane reinforced adobe technique (CRA), with a value of 0.714 in relation to industrialized materials such as masonry. This technique has the same safety characteristics, but at almost half the price, with the additional advantage of using traditional materials and construction methods, having less environmental impact and showing better thermal performance in cold climates. View Full-Text
Keywords: evaluation; MCDA (Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis); MIVES (The Spanish Integrated Value Model for Sustainable Assessment); reconstruction; index; sustainability evaluation; MCDA (Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis); MIVES (The Spanish Integrated Value Model for Sustainable Assessment); reconstruction; index; sustainability
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Cárdenas-Gómez, J.C.; Bosch Gonzales, M.; Damiani Lazo, C.A. Evaluation of Reinforced Adobe Techniques for Sustainable Reconstruction in Andean Seismic Zones. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4955. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094955

AMA Style

Cárdenas-Gómez JC, Bosch Gonzales M, Damiani Lazo CA. Evaluation of Reinforced Adobe Techniques for Sustainable Reconstruction in Andean Seismic Zones. Sustainability. 2021; 13(9):4955. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094955

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cárdenas-Gómez, José C., Montserrat Bosch Gonzales, and Carlos A. Damiani Lazo 2021. "Evaluation of Reinforced Adobe Techniques for Sustainable Reconstruction in Andean Seismic Zones" Sustainability 13, no. 9: 4955. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094955

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop