Optimizing bending strength of laminated bamboo using confined bamboo with softwoods

Alfonso Cruz; Caori Takeuchi

doi:10.1515/secm-2022-0215

Article Open Access

Optimizing bending strength of laminated bamboo using confined bamboo with softwoods

Alfonso Cruz and Caori Takeuchi

Published/Copyright: July 4, 2023

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information

From the journal Science and Engineering of Composite Materials Volume 30 Issue 1

Abstract

The objective of the study was to improve the stiffness and bending strength of laminated bamboo through confinement with softwood. A total of 144 beams were tested, divided into 6 groups of 24 specimens each. The tests were conducted on specimens of laminated bamboo, wood, and composite sections with different levels of confined bamboo laminate (20, 40, 60, and 80%). The results indicated that the composite exhibited optimal behavior when the ratio of bamboo to wood was between 46 and 54%. Furthermore, the composite demonstrated a bending modulus of elasticity that was 16.6% higher and a modulus of rupture that was 18.3% higher than the values predicted by the mixing rule. A mathematical model was developed to predict the design mechanical properties based on composite thickness. This model was validated through 18 additional bending tests. This new material is an environmentally sustainable alternative that has the potential to be used as beams in buildings, providing improved mechanical performance, reduced weight, and lower manufacturing cost compared to bamboo laminates.

Keywords: wood; bamboo; composite material; modulus of elasticity; strain; stress; confined materials

1 Introduction

Wood and bamboo laminates have been shown to exhibit lower coefficients of variation in their mechanical properties compared to natural materials, such as raw bamboo and sawn timber [1,2,3]. Laminated materials have several advantages, such as larger cross-sections, defect elimination, and increased homogeneity [4,5,6,7]. In addition, vertical wood laminates offer a technical advantage by distributing the strength of external fibers among all the constituent elements [8].

To determine the mechanical properties of composite materials, the mixing rule is a commonly used method [2]. However, this methodology may not be suitable for materials with significant differences between constituent materials, as observed in the case of confined concrete [9,10], wood tubes reinforced and confined with fibers [11,12], or the confinement effectiveness of bamboo scrimber-filled steel tube [13,14]. Therefore, a deeper understanding of the mechanical behavior, loading conditions, distribution, size, and orientation of reinforcing fibers is necessary for composite materials [15].

Despite numerous studies on the structural use of wood and bamboo in construction [16,17,18,19], limited research has been conducted on the use of confined bamboo [11,20,21]. A preliminary study on compression tests parallel to the grain of confined bamboo laminates with softwoods with a bamboo thickness of 19.48% presented a 45% increase in stiffness and a 4% increase in resistance [20]. Conversely, inverting the materials resulted in stiffness and strength values lower than those predicted theoretically [22].

Bamboo scrimber and laminates under flexural loading commonly fail due to shear failure parallel to the grain [23,24]. The maximum bending stress of bamboo laminates for short beams was found to be approximately 50% lower than that in long beam tests [25], indicating that low parallel shear strength affects bending performance [26]. Therefore, research has been conducted with glass fibers [27] and carbon fibers [28,29] to enhance the performance of laminated bamboo beams. A study on the bending of confined bamboo laminates with softwoods found that the resistance of a bamboo laminate could be matched by a composite of equivalent dimensions using only 36.89% bamboo [30], resulting in optimal synergy [31].

The use of materials from reforestation processes in construction offers numerous technical advantages, including lower weight, reduced seismic risk, and reduced load on foundations [24]. Softwoods and bamboo from reforestation processes have a positive environmental impact by capturing greenhouse gases, generating no waste, and providing an unlimited resource as they are materials of the circular economy [24,32].

2 Materials and methods

The purpose of this research was to improve the mechanical characteristics of bamboo laminates under bending through confinement with softwoods. These composite laminates consisted of a central layer of Guadua angustifolia Kunth bamboo laminated with horizontal fibers and two layers of softwood surrounding it (as illustrated in Figure 1).

Figure 1

Cross section of confined Guadua bamboo laminates with softwoods. Source: Authors.

The wood and bamboo used in the experimental tests were sourced from areas that had undergone reforestation to compensate for the biomass extracted from them. These reforestation efforts were carried out by accredited companies in Colombia (Table 1).

Table 1

Materials used

Material	Name
Bamboo	Guadua angustifolia Kunth
Wood	Radiata pine
Adhesive	Melamine formaldehyde urea (MUF 1242)

Source: Author.

In Colombia, bamboo strips are available in commercial sizes of up to 2.70 m, as they are used for manufacturing bamboo laminate panels of size 1.20 m × 2.60 m. In contrast, wood planks were obtained with dimensions of 4 m in length, 8 inches in width, and 1 inch in thickness. To ensure proper bonding of the components, both the wood planks and bamboo strips were brushed on all their faces. The laminates were then arranged in their final configuration, glued, and compressed for 24 h at a constant pressure of 0.8 MPa and room temperature (20°C). A 400 g/m² adhesive was applied to all surfaces in contact with each other, with a composition of 80% adhesive and 20% catalyst. A metal frame and a hydraulic press of 20 t were used to manufacture all laminates. After curing for five days, the laminates were brushed and cut to the desired dimensions.

The materials for the laminates were selected through a randomized process, followed by a visual inspection for any defects. The laminates had dimensions of 98 cm × 18.5 cm × 5 cm (Figure 2). Three bending samples were obtained from each block. The sample size was estimated based on preliminary studies, considering a 5% error. This led to the production of 24 samples for each material (i.e., wood laminate, bamboo laminate, and 4 types of confined bamboo laminate), totaling 144 test specimens for analysis [21]. The composite laminates were constructed using different ratios of softwood and bamboo, approximately 20, 40, 60, and 80% of confined bamboo.

Figure 2

General dimensions of the bending specimens. Source: Authors.

For the bending test, equipment with a load capacity of 300 kN, a variable resolution of 0.01 N, and a test speed of 6 mm/min was used. The cross section of the samples had a width (w) and height (h) of 5 cm, and a free span of 90 cm, resulting in an L/h ratio of approximately 18. The test loads were applied at 30 cm from each support [33,34]. The elastic modulus of tension, compression, and shear were measured using strain gauges. Additionally, a deflectometer (Model Epsilon 3540-012M-ST) was installed at the middle of the span (Figure 3).

Figure 3

General dimensions in cm and instrumentation for bending specimens. (a) General dimensions of specimens. (b) Laboratory equipment. Source: Authors.

The laboratory collected a substantial amount of data, including specimen dimensions and measurement instrument records. To adequately represent the statistical summary of the processed data, box and whisker plots were constructed, following the convention shown in Figure 4d.

Figure 4

Control of variables in bending tests. (a) Moisture content. (b) Confined bamboo thickness (e _B%). (c) Density. (d) The general convention for box and whisker plots. Source: Author.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Control of variables and outliers

The test results were adjusted to account for variations in moisture content in order to obtain representative results of conditions where the moisture content is 12% [35,36]. Additionally, the thickness and density of the materials were controlled to ensure that the samples were representative of each group (Figure 4). The material thickness and density were controlled by ensuring that the coefficient of variation (CV) does not exceed 5%.

3.2 Modulus of elasticity (MOE) results

The study analyzed the MOE measurements and identified outliers by applying a factor of 1.5 times the interquartile range, as depicted in Figure 5. To ensure the data’s normal distribution, the researchers employed the Shapiro–Wilk normality test. Furthermore, Levene’s test was performed to determine homoscedasticity; the results showed that the variances were not homogeneous, as presented in Table 2.

Figure 5

Box and whisker diagram for MOE. Source: Author.

Table 2

Shapiro–Wilk normality test (α = 0.05) for MOE and Levene’s test

	Wood	20% bamboo	40% bamboo	60% bamboo	80% bamboo	Bamboo
n	19	18	19	24	21	19
W-stat	0.936	0.929	0.978	0.938	0.929	0.972
p-value	0.222	0.185	0.922	0.151	0.133	0.818
Normal	ok	ok	ok	ok	ok	ok
Levene’s test	6.86 × 10⁻⁶ < 0.05 = α

n = 24 samples for each material – outliers. Source: Author.

A statistical test was conducted to compare the mean values of data groups and validate the increase in resistance of the confined bamboo laminate. The non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis test with a significance level of α = 0.05 was used. The null hypothesis, which stated that the mean values were equivalent to one another, was rejected (p = 7.96 × 10⁻⁹ < α = 0.05). This result indicates that the averages are statistically different.

To visually illustrate the variations in average MOE values, the bending strength (f _b) was plotted against unit strain (ε) in Figure 6. The graph compares the primary materials, wood (represented by the color red), and bamboo (represented by the color black). The behavior of composite materials depends on the constituent percentages, as dictated by the mixing rule. Nevertheless, when bamboo is confined by 60 and 80%, the bending stiffness of the specimens significantly exceeds that of specimens made solely of bamboo with the same dimensions and configuration. The bamboo specimen confined to 40% exhibits behavior similar to that of the bamboo-only specimen, while the specimen with 20% confined bamboo approximates its behavior. Additionally, the confined bamboo laminates with softwood demonstrate a substantial improvement compared to an equivalent wood specimen.

Figure 6

General graph of bending stress (f _b) vs unit strain (ε) to represent both flexural stiffness and ultimate stress. Source: Author.

The mathematical model to determine the MOE with the thickness of the core of the confined bamboo laminate obtained in this study based on the experimental measurements, is presented in Figure 7. The figure also compares the actual MOE values of this type of laminate to their theoretical values obtained using the mixing rule [2]. The results indicate that the optimal bamboo-softwood ratio is 46% bamboo and 54% softwood, resulting in an MOE that is 16.6% higher than the value predicted by the mixing rule.

Figure 7

Second degree polynomial regression for MOE. Source: Author.

3.3 Modulus of rupture (MOR) and maximum shear results

To identify any unusual data points in the MOR and maximum shear measurements, the interquartile range was multiplied by a factor of 1.5. This analysis showed that there were no outliers present in the data (Figure 8). Subsequently, to ensure that the data followed a normal distribution, a Shapiro–Wilk test was carried out, Levene’s test was used to determine homoscedasticity, and ANOVA test was used to compare the averages of different data groups, and the results are tabulated in Table 3.

Figure 8

Box and whisker diagram for (a) MOR. (b) Maximum shear τ _max. Source: Author.

Table 3

Shapiro–Wilk normality test (α = 0.05) for (a) MOR and (b) maximum shear τ _max

		Wood	20% bamboo	40% bamboo	60% bamboo	80% bamboo	Bamboo
(a)	n	19	18	19	24	21	19
	W-stat	0.971	0.951	0.939	0.937	0.954	0.968
	p-value	0.798	0.436	0.255	0.136	0.396	0.741
	Normal	ok	ok	ok	ok	ok	ok
	Levene’s test	0.596 > 0.05 = α
	ANOVA test	F = 11.03		p value = 5.91 × 10⁻⁹
(b)	n	19	18	19	24	21	19
	W-stat	0.973	0.946	0.940	0.929	0.946	0.971
	p-value	0.826	0.372	0.259	0.091	0.290	0.790
	Normal	ok	ok	ok	ok	ok	ok
	Levene’s tests	0.654 > 0.05 = α
	ANOVA test	F = 11.89		p value = 1.42 × 10⁻⁹

n = 24 samples for each material – outliers. Source: Author.

The mathematical model to determine the MOR and maximum shear (τ _max) is presented in Figure 9. The figure depicts the relationship between the thickness of the confined bamboo laminate and the MOR and maximum shear. Additionally, it compares the experimental MOR and τ _max values to their theoretical values. The optimal bamboo-softwood ratio was determined to be 48% bamboo and 52% softwood, resulting in a MOR that is 18.32% higher and a maximum shear (τ _max) that is 19.10% higher than their theoretical values (as shown in Figure 9).

Figure 9

Results obtained from bending tests, second degree polynomial regression for (a) MOR. (b) Maximum shear τ _max. Source: Author.

Figure 10 presents the load and resistance factor design (LRFD) design values for the confined bamboo laminate that was tested, including the deterministic coefficient of the design curves. These values are influenced by several factors, such as the quality of the materials, the adhesives utilized, and the pressing techniques employed. It is noteworthy that the design values were established by the standard guarantee that 95% of the tested material will be within the appropriate range, except for the MOE, which will be calculated as the average [37,38,39]. According to technical standards, these materials display normal behavior and may have a 5% margin of error in their design values [40].

Figure 10

Design values for LRFD. (a) Strength in bending F _b. (b) MOE. (c) G (shear modulus). Source: Author.

3.4 Bending mechanical characterization

The design values of the confined laminates under study were determined as a function of the thickness of their core. These values, except for the MOE, were obtained at the fifth percentile, since the design value of the MOE corresponds to the data average, which naturally has a high variance. Therefore, to establish the design value of the MOE for these materials with a high degree of reliability, an alternative method is needed.

To account for the natural variation in density and fiber distribution of wood and bamboo, which are both natural products, a statistical predictive mathematical model was proposed in this study. Due to the heterogeneous nature of plants, it is inevitable that the material’s properties will vary from sample to sample. Thus, a minimum of three specimens for each test is proposed to ensure statistical control. Additionally, a t-student hypothesis test was performed between the population averages and the sample average to estimate the MOE of a confined bamboo laminate as a function of core thickness at a significance level of α = 5%. The inference of the design value was formulated statistically in equations (1) and (2).

H 0 : μ ≤ X ̅

(1) H 1 : μ > X ̅ ∴ n = 3 ∴ α = 0 . 05 ∴ gl = 2 ,

(2) t = X ̅ − μ S n ∴ X ̅ = t × S n + μ ∴ t = − 2 . 92 ∴ S = CV × μ .

In this case, the CV is equal to the average of the experimental values measured in the laboratory (Table 4).

Table 4

Average CV (MOE)

Confined bamboo	20%	40%	60%	80%	Average
CV	5.50%	11.60%	12.90%	12.20%	10.55%

Source: Author.

The results demonstrate that the relationship between the MOE and the core thickness of a confined bamboo laminate can be graphically represented as shown in Figure 11. The average MOE (μ) of the total population is represented by the blue curve, while the sample average MOE ( X ̅ ) is represented by the red curve. The segmented orange line represents the theoretical MOE values. Both curves are modeled using a second-degree polynomial and meet the statistical requirements specified in equations (1) and (2).

$Figure 11 Statistical inference of the MOE ( X ̅ \bar{X} ) based on the percentage of confined bamboo with radiata pine. Source: Author.$

Figure 11

Statistical inference of the MOE ( X ̅ ) based on the percentage of confined bamboo with radiata pine. Source: Author.

The proposed method for characterizing confined bamboo laminates involves several steps, as summarized below: First, appropriate wood and bamboo materials are selected for the study. Next mechanical characterization of these materials is conducted, including a composite section consisting of a 50–50% ratio of wood and bamboo. It should be noted that the observed improvements in the resistance of confined bamboo laminates over sole bamboo laminates can be extrapolated to other cases, provided the manufacturing processes and materials used are similar to those used in this study. However, it is important to periodically update the calibration curves as materials of natural origin exhibit high coefficients of variation.

The MOE of the materials is parameterized, and the design values are calculated at the fifth percentile. To verify the results of the study, additional experimental tests of the materials are performed using a minimum of three specimens. Finally, the design values of the laminates are correlated with their MOE and the thickness of their confined bamboo core.

3.5 Model validation

The proposed model was validated through the manufacturing of additional laminates using two types of wood: Radiata Pine and Caribbean Pine. To assess whether the mathematical model accurately predicts the design values, groups of three specimens with similar thicknesses of confined bamboo were tested using the same manufacturing processes. The results of these tests are presented in Figures 12–15, which serve to confirm the initial findings.

Figure 12

MOE validation test (radiata pine). Source: Author.

Figure 13

Validation test of strength in bending F _b and design values for LRFD (Radiata pine). Source: Author.

Figure 14

MOE validation test (Caribbean pine). Source: Author.

Figure 15

Validation test of bending resistance (F _b) and design values calculated through the LRFD method (Caribbean pine). Source: Author.

3.5.1 Radiata pine

This section validates the hypothesis of this study by presenting the MOE experimental values of three radiata pine specimens and three specimens of confined bamboo laminate, as depicted by the purple and green dots, respectively, in Figure 12. The design values of these materials are represented by the red curve, and the design value of the confined bamboo specimens at 34% is indicated by the green square.

Figure 13 shows the experimental values of the bending resistance of three new wood specimens and three confined bamboo laminate specimens used to validate the hypothesis of this study, as shown by the purple and green dots, respectively. The red curve in Figure 13 represents the design values of the LRFD method for measuring bending resistance at the fifth percentile.

3.5.2 Caribbean pine

Additionally, the proposed hypothesis was also validated with Caribbean pine. To achieve this objective, an additional twelve tests were conducted in groups of three specimens for wood laminate and confined bamboo laminate with cores of varying thicknesses (33, 34, and 54%). The results of these tests are shown in Figures 14 and 15. The colored dots in the figures represent the experimental data, while the red curve indicates the design values for the materials in terms of MOE and bending resistance (F _b), respectively.

3.6 Uses and limitations

The objective of the described composite material is to provide a viable alternative to laminated and sawn wooden beams in construction. However, a limitation arises when the spans exceed 2.70 m because the overlapping of bamboo strips can compromise their rigidity and strength. Other researchers have noticed that in beams, large dimensions introduce additional variables that affect the bending performance of composite laminates made of wood and bamboo [24]. Therefore, further investigation is needed to address this topic.

The numerical model developed to predict the mechanical properties of the design has certain limitations, and its accuracy depends on the materials used and the manufacturing process of the laminates. Therefore, if any procedure varies from one manufacturer to another, the design values will differ, and as a result, the calibration curves will be unique for each manufacturer. The mechanical properties of wood and bamboo laminates depend on the selection of raw materials, brushing, gluing, pressing, curing, and additives. Processes with stricter quality controls and standardized procedures yield better results and lower CV.

4 Conclusion

This study characterized the bending mechanical properties, including MOE and MOR, of confined laminated bamboo using softwood. The composite materials exhibited improved properties compared to those estimated using the rule of mixtures. An optimal composite ratio of 46–54% bamboo-wood resulted in a 16.6% increase in MOE and an 18.3% increase in MOR, surpassing theoretical analysis.

A statistical model was developed to obtain design values for MOE, F _b, and G based on the thickness of confined bamboo. Validation using 18 additional beams confirmed compliance with normative standards. This model provides an effective alternative to visual and mechanical classification systems.

Confined bamboo laminates, when combined with softwoods, exhibit improved stiffness and resistance to bending and parallel shear, making them viable and environmentally sustainable options for beam construction. However, the commercial limitation regarding the length of bamboo strips requires further research to explore techniques for overlapping strips and evaluate their performance on longer span beams.

Funding information: This work is partially support by the Colombian Ministry of Science and Technology through the scholarship COLCIENCIAS 779-2017.
Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.
Data availability statement: The datasets generated and analyzed in the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

[1] Alquicira IM, Castellanos JRS. Density, ultrasound speed and dynamic modulus of solid and laminated wood of Pinus pseudostrobus. Madera y Bosques. 2021;27(3):1–14. 10.21829/myb.2021.2732235.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Askeland DR, Wright WJ, Bhattacharya DK, Chhabra RP. Ciencia e Ingeniería de los Materiales. México D.F.: CENGAGE Learning; 2016.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Arriaga F, Monton J, Segues E, Íñiguez-Gonzalez G. Determination of the mechanical properties of Radiata pine timber by means of longitudinal and transverse vibration methods. Holzforschung. 2014;68:299–305. 10.1515/hf-2013-0087.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Breyer DE, Fridley KJ, Pollock DG, Cobeen K. Design of wood structures-ASD/LRFD. New York: McGraw Hill LLC; 2014.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Ramage MH, Burridge H, Busse-Wicher M, Fereday G, Reynolds T, Shah DU, et al. The wood from the trees: The use of timber in construction. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;68:333–59. 10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.107.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Afshari Z, Malek S. Moisture transport in laminated wood and bamboo composites bonded with thin adhesive layers – A numerical study. Constr Build Mater. 2022;340:127597. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127597.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Chen S, Wei Y, Wang G, Zhao K, Ding M. Mechanical behavior of laminated bamboo–timber composite columns under axial compression. Arch Civ Mech Eng. 2023;23(2):72. 10.1007/s43452-023-00612-y.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Basterra LA, Acuña L, Casado M, López G, Bueno A. Strength testing of Poplar duo beams, Populus x euramericana (Dode) Guinier cv. I-214, with fibre reinforcement. Constr Build Mater. 2012;36:90–6. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.05.001.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Kar P, Borsaikia AC, Singh KD. Experimental investigation of partially confined concrete-filled steel tubular square columns under lateral cyclic loading. J Constr Steel Res. 2023;201:107751. 10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107751.Search in Google Scholar

[10] Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoritical stress-strain model for confined concrete. J Struct Eng. 1988 Aug;114(8):1804–26.10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)Search in Google Scholar

[11] Heiduschke A, Haller P. Fiber-reinforced plastic-confined wood profiles under axial compression. Struct Eng Int: J International Assoc Bridge Struct Eng (IABSE). 2010;20:246–53. 10.2749/101686610792016772.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Haller P. Concepts for textile reinforcements for timber structures. Mater Structures/Materiaux et Constr. 2007;40:107–18. 10.1617/s11527-006-9153-5.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Wu F, Wei Y, Lin Y, Wang G, Ding M. Confinement effectiveness of bamboo scrimber-filled steel tube columns under axial compression. J Build Eng. 2023;68:106157. 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.106157.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Wu F, Wei Y, Lin Y, Zhao K, Huang L. Experimental study of bamboo scrimber-filled steel tube columns under axial compression. Eng Struct. 2023;280:1–17. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.115669.Search in Google Scholar

[15] Verma A, Singh Chauhan S, Prakash Dwivedi S. Review paper on thermal expansion and tribological behavior of composite materials. Mater Today Proc. 2023;79:235–46. 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.11.073.Search in Google Scholar

[16] Sun X, He M, Li Z. Novel engineered wood and bamboo composites for structural applications: State-of-art of manufacturing technology and mechanical performance evaluation. Constr Build Mater. 2020;249:118751. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118751.Search in Google Scholar

[17] Wang M, Zhao Y, Xu Q, Harries KA, Li X, Leng Y. Experimental research on wood beams strengthened with engineered bamboo laminates attached with self-tapping screws. J Build Eng. 2022;53:104560. 10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104560.Search in Google Scholar

[18] Zhang Z, Qiu Z. Experimental study on bending properties of bamboo-wood composite beams with different tectonic patterns. Polym Test. 2023;118:107907. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2022.107907.Search in Google Scholar

[19] Verma CS, Sharma NK, Chariar VM, Maheshwari S, Hada MK. Comparative study of mechanical properties of bamboo laminae and their laminates with woods and wood based composites. Compos B Eng. 2014;60:523–30. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.061.Search in Google Scholar

[20] Cruz A, Takeuchi CP. Confined bamboo Guadua laminate – CBGL. Ic-Nocmat. 2017;7:9.Search in Google Scholar

[21] Cruz Guzmán A. Modelo esfuerzo deformación de laminados de bambú-guadua confinados con maderas blandas. Bogotá: Universidad Nacional de Colombia; 2022.Search in Google Scholar

[22] Cruz A. Determinación del módulo de elasticidad a compresión de un material compuesto de madera en su núcleo y guadua laminada pegada en el exterior PhD thesis. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad Nacional de Colombia; 2017.Search in Google Scholar

[23] Chen S, Wei Y, Zhu J, Lin Y, Du H. Experimental investigation of the shear performance of bamboo scrimber beams reinforced with bamboo pins. Constr Build Mater. 2023;365:130044. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.130044.Search in Google Scholar

[24] Chen S, Wei Y, Ding M, Zhao K, Zheng K. Combinatorial design and flexural behavior of laminated bamboo–timber composite beams. Thin-Walled Struct. 2022;181:109993. 10.1016/j.tws.2022.109993.Search in Google Scholar

[25] Takeuchi CP. Caracterización mecánica del bambú guadua Laminado para uso estructural. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad Nacional de Colombia; 2014.Search in Google Scholar

[26] Luna Tamayo P. Mechanical behavior of a composite material using a polyester matrix reinforced with Guadua angustifolia bamboo fibers. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad Nacional de Colombia; 2020.Search in Google Scholar

[27] Yang Y, Qiu Z, Hu W, Tao Y, Jiang R, Lin J, et al. Braided GFRP sleeving reinforced curved laminated bamboo beams: An efficient way to attenuate delamination. Compos Struct. 2022;300:116141. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.116141.Search in Google Scholar

[28] Bora M, Kumari P, Sahoo N. Mechanical properties of Assam’s bamboo-epoxy composite laminates – An experimental investigation. Ind Crop Prod. 2022;188:115556. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115556.Search in Google Scholar

[29] Wei Y, Chen S, Tang S, Peng D, Zhao K. Mechanical response of timber beams strengthened with variable amounts of CFRP and bamboo scrimber layers. J Compos Constr. 2022;26(4):04022038. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0001228.Search in Google Scholar

[30] Cruz A, Takeuchi CP, Kandia V, Pabón O. Experimental study on bending performance of confined Guadua bamboo lamante (CGBL) with Radiata Pine. The 11th World Bamboo Congress. 2018:15.Search in Google Scholar

[31] Bhadane GS, Patil SB. Mathematical modeling of multilayered composite material to obtain in plane elastic constants. Mater Today Proc. 2023;72:794–801. 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.09.035.Search in Google Scholar

[32] Dwivedi P, Khanna M, Sharma A, Susaeta A. Efficacy of carbon and bioenergy markets in mitigating carbon emissions on reforested lands: A case study from Southern United States. Policy Econ. 2016;67:1–9. 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.03.002.Search in Google Scholar

[33] ICONTEC Instituto Colombiano de Normas Técnicas y Certificación. NTC 5950 Estructura de madera. Madera Aserrada y Madera Laminada para uso estructural. Determinación de Algunas Propiedades Físicas y Mecánicas. 2012:44.Search in Google Scholar

[34] AENOR. Timber structures - Structural timber and glued laminated timber - Determination of some physical and mechanical properties. UNE-EN 408:2011+A1; 2012.Search in Google Scholar

[35] ICONTEC. Medición directa del contenido de humedad en la madera y materiales a base de madera. NTC 206-2:2018.Search in Google Scholar

[36] ASTM International. Standard Test Methods for Direct Moisture Content Measurement of Wood and Wood-Based Materials. ASTM D4442:2016.Search in Google Scholar

[37] AIS Asociación Colombiana de Ingeniería Sísmica. NSR-10 2010:530–827.Search in Google Scholar

[38] AWC. National Design Specification for Wood Construction. 2018th ed.; 2018.Search in Google Scholar

[39] Hassan KTS, Horáček P, Tippnera J. Evaluation of stiffness and strength of scots pine wood using resonance frequency and ultrasonic techniques. Bioresources. 2013;8:1634–45. 10.15376/biores.8.2.1634-1645.Search in Google Scholar

[40] ICONTEC. Requisitos de las probetas pequeñas para los ensayos físicos y mecánicos de la madera. NTC 301 2007:11.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-03-28

Revised: 2023-05-30

Accepted: 2023-06-11

Published Online: 2023-07-04

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/secm-2022-0215

Keywords for this article

wood; bamboo; composite material; modulus of elasticity; strain; stress; confined materials

Creative Commons

BY 4.0