Engineered bamboo for structural applications

Abstract

Bamboo is a rapidly renewable material that has many applications in construction. Engineered bamboo products result from processing the raw bamboo culm into a laminated composite, similar to glue-laminated timber products. These products allow the material to be used in standardised sections and have less inherent variability than the natural material. The present work investigates the mechanical properties of two types of commercially available products – bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo sheets – and compares these to timber and engineered timber products. It is shown that engineered bamboo products have properties that are comparable to or surpass that of timber and timber-based products. Potential limitations to use in structural design are also discussed. The study contributes to a growing body of research on engineered bamboo and presents areas in which further investigation is needed.

Full text

Engineered bamboo for structural applications
Bhavna Sharma
⇑
, Ana Gatóo, Maximilian Bock, Michael Ramage
Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
highlights

Relevance of engineered bamboo products to construction and industry.

Mechanical characterisation of bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo is presented.

Bamboo scrimber is shown to have similar strength to laminated bamboo.

Engineered bamboo products have properties that are equal to or surpass that of timber.
article info
Article history:
Received 24 September 2014
Received in revised form 27 January 2015
Accepted 29 January 2015
Available online 23 February 2015
Keywords:
Bamboo scrimber
Engineered composites
Laminated bamboo
Construction
abstract
Bamboo is a rapidly renewable material that has many applications in construction. Engineered bamboo
products result from processing the raw bamboo culm into a laminated composite, similar to glue-
laminated timber products. These products allow the material to be used in standardised sections and
have less inherent variability than the natural material. The present work investigates the mechanical
properties of two types of commercially available products – bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo
sheets – and compares these to timber and engineered timber products. It is shown that engineered bam-
boo products have properties that are comparable to or surpass that of timber and timber-based products.
Potential limitations to use in structural design are also discussed. The study contributes to a growing
body of research on engineered bamboo and presents areas in which further investigation is needed.
Ó2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open accessarticle under the CC BY license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
1. Introduction
Bamboo has many advantages as a construction material: it is a
rapidly renewable sustainable resource and has mechanical
properties similar to timber. Worldwide, there is a growing inter-
est in the development of bamboo products as a sustainable, cost-
effective and ecologically responsible alternative construction
material [1]. Partially due to the faster growth rate, and therefore
harvest cycle, bamboo forests have up to four times the carbon
density per hectare of spruce forests over the long term [2]. Bam-
boo is found in rapidly developing areas of the world where often
timber resources are limited [2]. While the potential of bamboo is
promising, more widespread development and use of bamboo is
hampered by the lack of engineering data for mechanical proper-
ties and appropriate building codes [3,4].
Bamboo is an anisotropic material, having mechanical proper-
ties that vary in the longitudinal, radial and transverse directions.
The raw material is a giant grass consisting of a hollow culm
having longitudinal fibres aligned within a lignin matrix, divided
by nodes (solid diaphragms) along the culm length (Fig. 1). The
thickness of the culm wall tapers from the base of the culm to
the top. As a functionally graded material, the bamboo fibres also
vary within the culm wall decreasing in density from the exterior
to the interior (Fig. 1).
While there are more than 1200 species worldwide, full culm
bamboo construction is limited by the variation in geometric and
mechanical properties. The difficulty in making connections and
joints suitable for round (and variable) sections is also prohibitive
for mainstream construction; however increasing research
demonstrates a growing industry and demand for sustainable
building products. Studies vary from the use of full culm bamboo
in construction and scaffolding (e.g., [5–10] to engineered
bamboo composites (e.g., [11–21]. Engineered bamboo compos-
ites are of particular interest due to the standardisation of
shape and the relatively low variability in material properties
[22].
Two examples of engineered bamboo are bamboo scrimber and
laminated bamboo [22]. Bamboo scrimber, also referred to as
strand woven or parallel strand bamboo, consists of crushed fibre
bundles saturated in resin and compressed into a dense block
(Fig. 2). The process is materially efficient, utilising approximately
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.01.077
0950-0618/Ó2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
⇑
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 (0)1223 760124.
E-mail address: bs521@cam.ac.uk (B. Sharma).
Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Construction and Building Materials
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

80% of raw inputs [23], and produces a product with a Janka
hardness that is acceptable for external applications such as deck
flooring. The process maintains the longitudinal direction of the
bamboo fibres and utilises the resin matrix to connect the fibre
bundles. In contrast, laminated bamboo maintains both the longitu-
dinal fibres as well as a portion of the original culm matrix. The
bamboo culm is split, planed, processed (bleached or caramelised),
laminated and pressed to form the board product (Fig. 3). The orien-
tation of the strip within the board, and therefore the direction of
the radial fibre density, is randomly placed within in the board
(Fig. 3). The final products use only approximately 30% of raw mate-
rial input due to large losses of material when the strips are planed
to form the rectangular section [23]. The sheet product is primarily
used indoors for surface applications or furniture. While both mate-
rials are currently used for surface applications, both maintain the
inherent strength of bamboo by maintaining the longitudinal fibre
orientation and the engineered product creates a uniform section
for connections and joints in structural applications.
The present work investigates the mechanical properties of
bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo to assess the potential
for structural applications. A comparison with timber and engi-
neered timber products is also presented.
2. Materials and methods
Two commercially produced products from China were used in the study. The
bamboo scrimber product is comprised of Phyllostachys pubescens (Moso) with a
phenol formaldehyde resin. The final product is a 140 140 mm section available
in varying lengths. As shown in Fig. 2 and discussed in the previous section, the pro-
cess of manufacturing bamboo scrimber uses the bamboo culm with minimal pro-
cessing. The resulting commercial product is tested as a final product with no
additional modifications. The average density of the bamboo scrimber is 1160 kg/
m
3
with a moisture content of 7%. In comparison, Moso as a raw material has a rela-
tive density of approximately 0.5–1.0.
Laminated bamboo sheets are also manufactured from Moso bamboo strips
using a soy-based resin as shown in Fig. 3 and discussed in the previous section.
The structural specimens are built up from a commercial sheet
(2440 1220 19 mm). The sheet was cut and the section laminated into the
desired dimensions using polyurethane adhesive (Purbond HB S309). The adhesive
was applied manually with a glue proportion of approximately 180 g/m
2
(final pro-
duct) and the lamina pressed using manual clamps to apply the required pressure of
0.6 MPa for 4 hours (Fig. 4). Two orientations were tested: radial horizontal and
radial vertical, which refer to the orientation of the original strip within the beam,
Fig. 1. Details of a bamboo culm.
Fig. 2. Bamboo scrimber general manufacturing process in China.
Fig. 3. Laminated bamboo general manufacturing process in China.
B. Sharma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73 67

as shown in Fig. 3. The industry terminologies for the equivalent orientations are
edgewise and flatwise respectively, which refer to the orientation of the strips with-
in a board, however this terminology is not well-defined for beam sections. There-
fore the two orientations are herein described as radial horizontal and radial
vertical and are shown in Fig. 4. The laminated bamboo has an average density of
686 kg/m
3
with a moisture content of 6%. All specimens are conditioned in a con-
stant temperature of 23 °C and a relative humidity of 55% for 2 weeks before
testing.
2.1. Standard test methods used
To obtain the material and mechanical properties, tension, compression, shear
and flexural tests were conducted based on BS 373 Methods of testing small clear spe-
cimens of timber [24], ASTM D143 Standard Test Methods for Small Clear Specimens of
Timber [25] and BS EN 408 Timber structures – Structural timber and glue-laminated
timber [26]. BS 373:1957 cross references ASTM D143–09 and both are based on
small clear specimens, whereas BS EN 408:2010 focuses on dimensional lumber
samples. The standards, test methods, and test parameters used are summarised
in Table 1.
Both materials were tested using the same method with the exception of the
bending test. BS EN 408:2010 for four-point bending defines the specimen length
and loading rate as a function of the cross-sectional size. Due to the size limitations
of the bamboo scrimber, it was necessary to test different dimensions and loading
rate as given in Table 1. For all other mechanical tests, the small clear specimens
were obtained from the beams at random and cut to the specified size [24,25].
For the tension parallel to grain, the specimens have two profiles specified in ASTM
D143 [25]. They were initially cut with a water-jet and then routed to complete the
second profile. Tension, compression and shear tests were conducted in a universal
testing machine. All displacements are measured from the crosshead travel of test
frame and the compliance of the frame was taken into account.
3. Experimental results
A summary of the test results is presented in Table 2 with addi-
tional observations for each mechanical property presented in the
sections below. All of the mechanical properties were calculated in
the linear elastic region at the limit of proportionality as required
by the standards. Table 2 lists the average (
x) and the coefficient
of variation (COV); ten specimens were tested in every case (i.e.,
n= 10).
3.1. Tension
Fig. 5 shows a comparison of representative failures for both par-
allel to grain and perpendicular to grain tests. In tension parallel to
grain (f
tk
), both the bamboo scrimber and the laminated bamboo
exhibited linear behaviour prior to failure. The tension perpen-
dicular to grain (f
t?
) results emphasises the low strength of the bam-
boo scrimber and the laminated bamboo perpendicular to the fibre
direction. The majority of the failures occurred at various locations
within the anvil (Fig. 5) and through the bamboo rather than within
the adhesive for both materials. The parallel tensile strength was
more than forty times the perpendicular strength.
3.2. Compression
The compression parallel to grain (f
ck
) results for both materials
are shown in Fig. 6a and in Table 2. The failure mode of the bamboo
scrimber was overall section buckling of the specimen (Fig. 6). A
similar failure was noted by Huang et al. [14] in larger
(105 105 315 mm) bamboo scrimber specimens. All of the
laminated bamboo specimens failed in overall section buckling
with no shear failures observed. Li et al. [33] also noted the
buckling failure in larger samples (100 100 300 mm) in
compression parallel to grain specimens that were manufactured
Fig. 4. Laminated bamboo manufacturing process: (a) single lamina, (b) application of glue, (c) clamped specimen, (d) radial horizontal orientation, and (e) radial vertical
orientation.
Table 1
Experimental test methods for bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo.
Standard Test method Test schematic Direction nSpecimen size (mm) Loading rate (mm/min)
ASTM D143 [25] Tension a Parallel to grain 10 25 25 460 1.0
b Perpendicular to grain 10 62 50 50 2.5
BS 373 [24] Compression c Parallel to grain 10 20 20 60 0.635
d Perpendicular to grain 10 50 50 50 0.635
BS 373 [24] Shear e Parallel to grain 10 50 50 50 0.635
BS EN 408 [26] Four-point bending f Bamboo scrimber 10 40 40 800 6.35
Laminated bamboo 60 120 2400 10
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
68 B. Sharma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73

from the upper portion of the bamboo with laminates of
approximately 4 mm in thickness, similar to the specimens tested
here (4–6 mm). The representative curves show that both mate-
rials exhibit bilinear behaviour, which has also been observed in
other studies [14,33]. Because specimen buckling dominates beha-
viour, the compressive strength is determined at the proportional
limit in all cases (the knee in the bilinear curve). Thus this value
must be interpreted as the strength for the sample dimension used
rather than the compressive capacity of the material.
The materials had a reduced strength in compression perpen-
dicular to grain (f
t?
), in comparison to the parallel to grain
direction (see Table 2). Both displayed bilinear behaviour and
the bamboo scrimber achieved twice the load at similar dis-
placements before failure (Fig. 6b). The failure mode for both
materials was fracture of the matrix and bamboo fibres. For
bamboo scrimber, the material demonstrated a slight influence
of the direction of the glue line (i.e. the direction of the initial
manufacturing compression), showing a 5% increase in stress
Table 2
Material properties for structural bamboo and comparable natural bamboo and timber products.
Density Compression Tension Shear Flexural
E
b
q
q
f
ck
f
c?
f
tk
f
t?
s
k
f
b
E
b
kg/m
3
MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa GPa 10
6
(m
2
s
2
)
Laminated bamboo
a

x686 77 22 90 2 16 77–83 11–13 16–19
COV 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.26 0.13 0.05 0.06–0.08 0.05–0.06
Bamboo scrimber
a

x1163 86 37 120 3 15 119 13 11
COV 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.04
Raw Bamboo Phyllostachys
pubescens
b,c

x666 53 – 153 – 16 135 9 14
Sitka spruce
d,e

x383 36 – 59 – 9 67 8 21
Douglas-fir LVL
f,g

x520 57 – 49 – 11 68 13 25
a
Present study.
b
Ghavami and Marinho [27].
c
de Vos [28].
d
Lavers [29].
e
Kretschmann [30].
f
Kretschmann et al. [31].
g
Clouston et al. [32].
Fig. 5. Tension parallel to grain (a) results; specimen failures in (b) laminated bamboo and (c) bamboo scrimber. Tension perpendicular to grain (d) results; specimen failures
in (e) laminated bamboo and (f) bamboo scrimber.
B. Sharma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73 69

parallel to the glue line. In comparison, the laminated bamboo
showed no influence of the direction of the glue line (Table 2).
3.3. Shear
In shear parallel to grain (
s
k
), the behaviour of the two materials
is quite similar, however the laminated bamboo is able to with-
stand increased load and displacement before failure. The laminat-
ed bamboo is noted to have a higher compressibility before the
shear failure occurred within the fibres. The failure surface of the
bamboo scrimber was much rougher (see Fig. 7). The average shear
strength, however, was comparable with the laminated bamboo,
slightly higher (16 MPa) than the bamboo scrimber (15 MPa).
3.4. Bending
Bending results for the bamboo scrimber are shown in Fig. 8a.
The results indicated that a large displacement was achieved in
the specimens before failure. Failure occurred at the tension faces
of the specimens at mid-span. Similarly, the laminated bamboo
failures occurred near mid-span, although these were charac-
terised as longitudinal shear failures (i.e. VQ/I failures) within the
Fig. 6. Compression parallel to grain (a) results, specimen failures in (b) laminated bamboo and (c) bamboo scrimber. Compression perpendicular to grain (d) results;
specimen failures in (e) laminated bamboo and (f) bamboo scrimber.
Fig. 7. Shear Parallel to Grain (a) results; specimen failures in (b) laminated bamboo and (c) bamboo scrimber.
70 B. Sharma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73

depth of the beam for both the edgewise and flatwise oriented spe-
cimens (Fig. 8b). All of the laminated bamboo specimens demon-
strated brittle failure. Although micro-cracks within the material
were audible and are also observed in small drops along the load–
displacement curve (Fig. 8b), no cracks were visible before failure.
Comparison of the two orientations indicates that while achieving
similar maximum loads, the flatwise orientation had an increased
modulus of elasticity with a gain of approximately 18% over the
edgewise orientation (Table 2).
4. Discussion
Both engineered bamboo materials, scrimber and laminated
bamboo, exhibit the anisotropic behaviour typical of natural bam-
boo, and similar to that of fibre reinforced composites [34]. The
mechanical behaviour of bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo
are very similar in tension, compression and shear parallel to grain.
The laminated bamboo, however, has increased post-peak load
deformation capacity, which is attributed to the compressibility
Fig. 8. Four point bending (a) results and (b) specimen failure for bamboo scrimber. Laminated bamboo (c) results and specimen failures for (d) radial horizontal and (e)
radial vertical orientations.
Fig. 9. Bending modulus vs. bending strength for various construction materials [35].
B. Sharma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73 71

of the matrix. Perpendicular to the fibre direction, the materials are
also very similar, with the exception of compression where the
bamboo scrimber has approximately twice the compressive
strength of the laminated bamboo (Table 2). Overall, bamboo
scrimber has slightly higher strengths in all properties with the
exception of shear parallel to grain. The increased capacity is
attributed to the densified fibres within the phenol formaldehyde
resin. In flexure, engineered bamboo has the capacity to resist large
amounts of compression at the top of the beam, with failure occur-
ring near the tension face at mid-span.
4.1. Comparison to timber
The results of the study indicate that engineered bamboo has
comparable mechanical properties to other structural materials
like timber and raw bamboo. Table 2 provides a comparison of
the presented results to mechanical properties from different
experimental studies on timber, laminated veneer lumber (LVL)
and raw bamboo. Due to the longitudinal strength of the bamboo
fibres, both bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo have
increased strength in properties parallel to grain, with the excep-
tion of tension parallel to grain. Similar to timber, the strength per-
pendicular to grain is significantly lower than the strength parallel
to grain.
An advantage of laminated bamboo is its flexural strength to
density ratio. The specific bending modulus (E
b
/
q
) is shown in
Table 2. Laminated bamboo has a similar specific modulus (16–
19 (10
6
m
2
s
2
)) to Sitka spruce (21 (10
6
m
2
s
2
)) and Douglas-fir
LVL (25 (10
6
m
2
s
2
)) and surpasses that of bamboo scrimber (11
(10
6
m
2
s
2
)). Further comparison of the bending properties for
various construction materials to engineered bamboo composites
is shown in Fig. 9. The graph illustrates that the flexural strength
of engineered bamboo is on the higher end of the natural compos-
ite envelope and lower than fibre reinforced polymers composites.
The failure mode of engineered bamboo must also be considered in
comparison to other materials. Additional research is needed to
understand the failure mode of the material and in particular the
shear strength proportional to longitudinal capacity.
4.2. Timber test methods
Timber standards are increasingly used in bamboo research and
industry to characterise the material. While the observed failure
modes and strengths appear to be similar to timber, further
research is needed to understand the influences and applicability
of the timber-based test methods for full-culm or engineered bam-
boo. For example, the BS EN 384: Structural timber – Determination
of characteristic values of mechanical properties and density [36],
applies factors to determine characteristic values for structural
timber. The standard mechanical properties are defined for 12%
moisture content with factors applied to the different properties
to adjust for differences. A Chinese standard, Testing methods for
physical and mechanical properties of bamboo used in building, also
adjusts for 12% moisture content in full culm bamboo [37]. Engi-
neered bamboo is at equilibrium at about 6% moisture content,
well below 12% typical in timber and full-culm bamboo, and the
impact on the mechanical properties has yet to be fully estab-
lished. With increased moisture content above the material satura-
tion point (MSP), timber demonstrates dimensional instability and
decreases in strength. For example, the compressive strength
increases rapidly as the moisture content decreases from the
MSP [38]. Similarly, Wang et al. [39] and Xu et al. [40] explored
the effect of moisture content and density on the compressive
strength parallel to grain of bamboo elements and found that the
compressive strength decreases rapidly until the material reached
the saturation point. As natural materials, the impact of the uncer-
tainty in the material is reflected in design factors, which can
reduce the allowable strength properties significantly and affect
the comparison to conventional materials.
Another example is the buckling failure observed in compres-
sion parallel to grain tests in this and other studies [12,33,14].
The buckled shape is not an acceptable failure mode in timber spe-
cimens [24] and as discussed previously, does not represent the
compressive strength of the material. The failure mode of the fibres
within the matrix need to be further investigated to determine the
mechanism at which failure in compression occurs and the rela-
tionship to the flexural buckling strength of the material.
To fully standardise engineered bamboo products, the test
methods used to characterise the material must be evaluated to
determine any influences or effects on the results. For example,
bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo in bending have similar
properties to timber and glulam, however additional testing is
needed to determine whether there are any bamboo-based factors
that need to be applied to calculate appropriate characteristic
values.
5. Summary
The present work characterises the mechanical properties of
two types of commercial products: bamboo scrimber and laminat-
ed bamboo. The study utilised timber standards for characterisa-
tion, which allows for comparison to timber and engineered
timber products. The results of the study indicate that both prod-
ucts have properties that compare with or surpass that of timber.
Bamboo scrimber and laminated bamboo are heavily processed
before testing. Future work includes investigating the influence of
processing on the material properties. In particular, the impact of
heat treatment performed on the material to achieve a caramel col-
our. A comparison study on natural coloured bamboo will provide
better understanding of the effects of heat treatment on the
strength of the material. The beam section can be optimised to take
advantage of the high flexural strength to density ratio. Research
on the influence of the orientation of the original board on the stiff-
ness will also allow for further optimisation. Further investigation
of the influence of moisture and the density on the mechanical
properties is needed to provide a foundation from which to devel-
op design characterisation factors for engineered bamboo. Addi-
tional testing of full-scale specimens would also elucidate any
effects in comparison to small clear specimens, as well as allow
further comparison to timber and provide an additional step for-
ward towards construction.
Acknowledgements
The presented work is supported by EPRSC Grant EP/K023403/1
and the Newton Trust, and forms part of a collaboration between the
University of Cambridge, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(MIT) and University of British Columbia (UBC).
References
[1] De Flander K. The role of bamboo in global modernity: from traditional to
innovative construction material. Thesis: Wageningen University, Wageningen
Netherlands; 2005.
[2] Yiping L et al. Technical Report 32: Bamboo and Climate Change
Mitigation. Beijing, China: INBAR; 2010.
[3] Harries KA, Sharma B, Richard MJ. Structural use of full culm bamboo: the path
to standardization. Int J Archit Eng Constr 2012;1(2):66–75.
[4] Gatóo A, Sharma B, Bock M, Mulligan H, Ramage M. Sustainable structures:
bamboo standards and building codes. Proc ICE Eng Sustainability
2014;167(5):189–96.
[5] Chung KF, Yu WK. Mechanical properties of structural bamboo for bamboo
Scaffoldings. Eng Struct 2002;24:429–42.
[6] Kaminsky S. Engineered bamboo houses for low-income communities. Struct
Eng 2013;91(10):14–23.
72 B. Sharma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73

[7] Muthukaruppan R. Hong Kong – bastion of bamboo scaffolding. Proc ICE Civ
Eng 2008;161(4):177–83.
[8] Trujillo DJA, Ramage M, Change W. Lightly modified bamboo for structural
applications. Proc Inst Civ Eng Constr Mater 2013;166(4):238–47.
[9] Yu WK, Chung KF, Chan SL. Column buckling of structural bamboo. Eng Struct
2003;25:755–68.
[10] Yu WK, Chung KF, Chan SL. Axial buckling of bamboo columns in bamboo
scaffolds. Eng Struct 2005;27:61–73.
[11] Bansal AK, Prasad TRN. Manufacturing laminates from sympodial bamboo – an
Indian experience. J Bamboo Rattan 2004;3(1):13–22.
[12] Correal JF, Lopez LF. Mechanical properties of Colombian glued laminated
bamboo. In: Mod Bamboo Struct. London, UK: CRC Press Taylor & Francis
Group; 2008. p. 121–8.
[13] Correal J, Ramirez F, Gonzalez S, Camacho J. Structural Behavior of Glued
Laminated Guadua Bamboo as a Construction Material. In: Proceedings of the
11th World Conference on Timber Engineering. Italy: Trentino; 2010.
[14] Huang D, Zhou A, Bian Y. Experimental and analytical study on the nonlinear
bending of parallel strand bamboo beams. Constr Build Mater 2013;44:592–5.
[15] Lee AWC, Bai X, Bangi AP. Selected properties of laboratory-made laminated-
bamboo lumber. Holzforschung 1998;52:207–10.
[16] Mahdavi M, Clouston PL, Arwade SR. A low-technology approach toward
fabrication of laminated bamboo lumber. Constr Build Mater 2012;
29(4):257–62.
[17] Pereira MA, Faria OB. Bambu Project: Mechanical Characteristics of the Glued
Laminated Bamboo. Thailand: In Proceedings from the VIII World Bamboo
Congress; 2009. pp. 135–150.
[18] Sinha A, Way D, Mlasko S. Structural performance of glued laminated bamboo
beams. J Struct Eng 2014;140(1).
[19] Sulastiningsih IM, Nurwati. Physical and mechanical properties of laminated
bamboo board. J Trop For Sci 2009;21(3):246–51.
[20] Xiao Y, Yang RZ, Shan B. Production, environmental impact and mechanical
properties of glubam. Constr Build Mater 2013;44:765–73.
[21] Zhou A, Bian Y. Experimental study on the flexural performance of parallel
strand bamboo beams. Sci World J 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/
181627.
[22] Sharma B, Gatoo A, Bock M, Mulligan H, Ramage M. Engineered bamboo: state
of the art. Proc ICE Constr Mater 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/coma.
14.00020.
[23] van der Lugt P. Design Interventions for Stimulating Bamboo
Commercialization: Dutch Design meets Bamboo as a Replicable
Model. Delft, Netherlands: VSSD; 2008.
[24] BS. British Standard 373–1957: methods of testing small clear specimens of
timber. London, UK: British Standards Institution; 1957.
[25] ASTM. ASTM D143–09: standard test methods for small clear specimens of
timber. West Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM International; 2009.
[26] BS. British standard EN 408–2010: timber structures – structural timber and
glue-laminated timber. London, UK: British Standards Institution; 2010.
[27] Ghavami K and AB Marinho (2001). Determinição das propriedades mecanicas
dos bambus das especies: moso, matake, Guadua angustifolia, guadua tagoara
e Dendrocalamus giganteus, para utilização na engenharia. Rio de Janeiro:
PUC-Rio, Publicação RMNC-1 Bambu 01/2001 (in Portuguese).
[28] de Vos V. Bamboo for exterior joinery: a research in material properties and
market perspectives. Thesis: Larenstein University, Leeuwarden, Netherlands;
2010.
[29] Lavers GM (2002) The strength properties of timber, 3rd edition. Building
Research Establishment (BRE) Report Series, London, UK.
[30] Kretschmann, DE (2010) Mechanical Properties of Wood. In Wood Handbook,
General Technical Report FPL-GTR-190. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI, Chapter 5, pp. 5–1 - 5–46.
[31] Kretschmann DE, Moody RC, Pellerin RF, et al. (1993) Effect of various
proportions of juvenile wood on laminated veneer lumber. Technical Report
FPL-RP-521. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products
Laboratory, Madison, WI.
[32] Clouston P, Lam F, Barret JD. Incorporating size effects in the Tasi-Wu strength
theory for Douglas-fir laminated veneer. Wood Sci Technol 1998;
32(3):215–26.
[33] Li H, Zhang Q, Huang D, Deeks AJ. Compressive performance of laminated
bamboo. Compos B 2013;54:319–28.
[34] Amada S, Untao S. Fracture properties of bamboo. Compos B Eng 2001;
32(5):451–9.
[35] CES. Cambridge engineering selector edupack software. Cambridge,
UK: Granta Design Limited; 2013.
[36] BS. British standard EN 384–2010: structural timber – determination of
characteristic values of mechanical properties and density. London, UK: British
Standards Institution; 2010.
[37] CSA. Chinese Standards Agency JG/T199: testing methods for physical and
mechanical properties of bamboo used in building. Beijing, China: Chinese
Standards Agency; 2007.
[38] Dinwoodie JM. Timber – a review of the structure – mechanical property
relationship. J Microsc 1975;104(1):3–32.
[39] Wang H, Li W, Ren D. A two-variable model for predicting the effects of moisture
content and density on compressive strength parallel to the grain for moso
bamboo. J Wood Sci 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10086-014-1419-x.
[40] Xu Q, Harries KA, Li X, Lui Q, Gottron J. Mechanical properties of structural
bamboo following immersion in water. Eng Struct 2014;81:230–9.
B. Sharma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 81 (2015) 66–73 73