Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Ultimate bending capacity evaluation of laminated bamboo lumber

beams
Haitao Li a,b,⇑, Gang Wu b, Qisheng Zhang a, Andrew John Deeks c,⇑, Jingwen Su d
a
College of Civil Engineering, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
b
College of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
c
College of Engineering and Architecture, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
d
Nanjing Technical Vocational College, Nanjing 210019, China

h i g h l i g h t s

How the internal joints influence the bending direction was discussed.

The simplified strain-stress relationship was proposed.

The calculation approaches for the ultimate bending moment are proposed for three bending failure modes.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In order to evaluate the bending capacity of laminated bamboo lumber (LBL) beams, material perfor-
Received 10 February 2017 mance tests and beam tests have been carried out. A strain-stress relationship is proposed based on com-
Received in revised form 15 October 2017 pression and tensile tests conducted parallel to the grain. Two failure modes are identified based on the
Accepted 14 November 2017
locations of cracks in the beam specimens. Direction of bending and the location of internal joints are
shown to influence the mechanical properties of LBL beams. Internal joints have more influence on spec-
imens under tangential bending (where the culms are bent across their width) than that under radial
Keywords:
bending (where the culms are bent across their thickness). Irrespective of the bending direction, the
Laminated bamboo
Tangential bending direction
strain across the cross-section of the laminated bamboo beam is shown to be linear throughout the test
Radial bending direction process, following standard beam theory. Based on this theory and the proposed simplified strain–stress
Bending moment relationship for the beam, calculation approaches for the ultimate bending moment and ultimate bending
Deflection deflection are proposed for three bending failure modes which give a good agreement with the test
results.
Crown Copyright Ó 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
A relatively new type of engineered bamboo [1–8] building
material formed by laminating the thin flat bamboo culms together
with adhesive, known as laminated bamboo lumber (LBL), has been
attracting more and more attention from researchers [9–34]. The
mechanical properties of laminated bamboo compare favorably
with those of common wood, and so laminated bamboo rectangu-
lar structural members are competitive with commonly used
building materials, whilst also having renewable characteristics
[10–15]. Laminated bamboo lumber columns [16–22] and the
⇑ Corresponding authors at: College of Civil Engineering, Nanjing Forestry
University, Nanjing 210037, China (H. Li).
E-mail addresses: haitao1116@njfu.edu.cn (H. Li), andrew.deeks@ucd.ie
(A.J. Deeks).
effects that the layered structure, bamboo species, oil treatment,
and glue type on the mechanical properties of laminated bamboo
boarding have been investigated in literature [23–28].
Some researchers also have studied the bending performance of
laminated bamboo lumber. Lee et al. [29] examined the effect of
glue spread rate and moisture content on the bending properties
of 24 laboratory-manufactured LBL beams. Wei et al. [30] found
that the cross-sectional stiffness was the control condition for
design load after examining the failure of laminated bamboo
beams in detail. In order to look at the effect of orientation of the
laminate layers on the strength, Verma and Charier [14] performed
a number of bending tests on specimens of layered laminate bam-
boo composite (LLBC) with a cross-section of 16 mm  10 mm. Yeh
and Lin [31] examined the effect of growth height on bending
strength of LBL, and tested both un-jointed and jointed specimens
with the cross-section of 30 mm  30 mm and the length of

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.058
0950-0618/Crown Copyright Ó 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
366 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375
1000 mm. Considering the influencing factors of shear span ratio
and height to width ratio, Li et al. [32,33] have studied the bending
performance of laminated bamboo lumber beam considering the
size effect and shear span ratio. Bhavna et al. [15] have performed
tests on beams under two bending directions, and found 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. Sinha et al. [34] evaluated the lam-
inated bamboo lumber (LBL) and bamboo glulam beams (BGBs)’s
potential application as a structural material. They found that there
is potential to use LBL in framing applications. However, certain
issues need to be addressed and investigated before there will be
widespread acceptance of LBL and BGB in the construction market-
place. As a contribution to this process, this paper will investigate
how the bending direction and internal joints influence the bend-
ing properties of LBL beams. In addition, an approach to calculating
the ultimate bending capacity of laminated bamboo lumber beams
will be evaluated.
2. Materials performance
2.1. Manufacturing process
The source Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys pubescens, from
Fujian province) was harvested at the age of 3–6 years. Bamboo
strips from the lower growth portions of 2005 mm tall culms were
selected. The culms were then split into 22–24 mm wide strips,
and the outer skin (epidermal) and inner cavity layer (pith periph-
eral) were removed using a planer. All the culm strips were then
dried and charred. Final thicknesses of 7 mm were obtained for
the flat strips from the lower growth portions, and the final strip
widths were of 21 mm. Phenol glue was chosen with the density
of 300 g/m2. Finally the strips were transformed into laminated
bamboo lumbers. The manufacturing process can be seen from
Fig. 1.
2.2. Tensile and compressive tests parallel to grain
In order to investigate the tensile performance and compressive
performance parallel to grain of bamboo, 30 specimens were
designed [35] and tested correspondingly. Detailed size informa-
tion for the specimens can be seen from Fig. 2.
Table 1 shows the tensile and compressive test results. Here At
and Ac are the real measured cross-section areas for tensile speci-
mens and compressive specimens respectively; F tu and F cu are the
ultimate tensile load and compressive load respectively; f tu and f cu
are the ultimate tensile strength and compressive strength respec-
tively; the elastic modulus values Et and Ec are obtained from ten-
sile tests and compressive tests respectively, as are the Poisson’s
ratio values tt and tc . Besides the values mentioned above, the
mean values, the values for standard deviation (SDV), the values
(a) Bamboo tube (b) Bamboo strip
Fig. 1. Manufacturing process.
for coefficient of variation (SOV) and the characteristic values
(CHV) were calculated.
According to these 30 tensile specimens, the mean ultimate
strength is 84.53 MPa with a standard deviation of 9.59 MPa, giv-
ing a CHV (expected to be exceeded by 95% of specimens) of
68.77 MPa. Similarly, the mean Et is 7007 MPa with a standard
deviation of 549 MPa and the mean tt is 0.27 with a standard devi-
ation of 0.03. The characteristic values for Et and tt are 6104 MPa
and 0.23 respectively. The average ultimate compressive strength
of 30 specimens is 68.8 MPa, with a low standard deviation of
2.49 MPa, giving a CHV of 64.8 MPa. The mean Ec is 9393 MPa with
a standard deviation of 435.3 MPa and a CHV of 8677 MPa while
the mean tc is 0.29 with a standard deviation of 0.01 and a CHV
of 0.27. The moisture content of the specimens is 8.76%.
2.3. Strain stress relationship
Fig. 3 plots the strain stress relationship for the laminated bam-
boo lumbers under tensile and compressive condition parallel to
grain. Based on the test results (Fig. 3(a)), the strain stress relation-
ship model shown in Fig. 3(b) was proposed. The mean values for
ecy and ec0 are about 4150 me and 22749 me respectively.
The proposed model can be expressed as the following
equations,
8
> Et e ð0 6 e 6 etu Þ
>
>
< Ec e ðecy 6 e 6 0Þ
r¼ ð1Þ
> r
> cy þ k E ðe  e Þ ðec0 6 e 6 ecy Þ
>
:
cep c cy
rc0 ðecu 6 e 6 ec0 Þ
rc0  rcy rep  rcy
kcep ¼ ¼ ð2Þ
ðec0  ecy ÞEc ðeep  ecy ÞEc
Here r is the stress value of the laminated bamboo lumber; Et and
Ec are the modulus of elasticity under tensile condition and com-
pressive condition respectively; e is the strain value of the lami-
nated bamboo lumber; ecy is the strain for the yield point; etu is
the ultimate tensile strain value; eep is the elastic-to-plastic strain
value;rcy is the compression yield stress value; rep is the elastic-
to-plastic stress value; kcep is the ratio of the elastic-plastic slope;
ec0 is the compression peak strain value; rc0 is the compression
peak stress value; and ecu is the ultimate compression strain value.
3. Experimental study on beams
3.1. Design beam specimens
As can be seen from Table 2, 4 groups of LBL beams (20 speci-
mens in total) were designed with the cross-section of 56 mm 
110 mm. Fig. 4(a) and (b) plot the radial bending direction (RBD)
and tangential bending direction (TBD) respectively. In order to
make longer structural members, internal joints as shown in
Fig. 5 were always chosen for connecting the bamboo strips. The
(c) Laminated bamboo layer (d) LBL
 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375 367

50mm
50mm

200mm
R905 R905

15mm
5mm
21mm
100mm 95mm 63mm 95mm 100mm

(a) Tensile specimen (b) Compressive specimen

Fig. 2. Tensile specimen and compressive specimen.

Table 1
Tensile and compressive test results.

Specimen At /mm2 Ftu /kN ftu /MPa Et /MPa tt Specimen Ac /mm2 Fcu /kN fcu /MPa Ec /MPa tc
TS-1 117.7 11.1 94.03 7450 0.25 CS-1 2518.5 170.6 67.7 10022 0.33
TS-2 112.6 9.18 81.54 6337 0.27 CS-2 2513.5 173.2 68.9 9589 0.30
TS-3 115.8 12.3 106.1 6745 0.28 CS-3 2521.5 167.3 66.3 9281 0.29
TS-4 114.7 9.26 80.78 7657 0.32 CS-4 2516.5 169.2 67.2 9011 0.28
TS-5 119.0 10.4 87.48 6733 0.27 CS-5 2517.5 169.4 67.3 9683 0.29
TS-6 121.6 11.1 91.45 6449 0.25 CS-6 2531.6 183.6 72.5 10006 0.28
TS-7 117.2 9.0 76.77 7260 0.27 CS-7 2516.0 169.2 67.2 9110 0.28
TS-8 112.3 7.48 66.61 6919 0.35 CS-8 2519.0 184.2 73.1 10075 0.30
TS-9 116.5 11.2 95.77 7455 0.30 CS-9 2515.5 168.5 67.0 8805 0.31
TS-10 113.5 9.67 85.19 7074 0.19 CS-10 2514.5 178.0 70.8 9326 0.28
TS-11 107.0 9.47 88.54 6856 0.26 CS-11 2512 174.5 69.5 9880 0.29
TS-12 118.0 9.72 82.34 6949 0.22 CS-12 2527.6 167.6 66.3 8879 0.28
TS-13 113.4 10.9 96.55 8062 0.26 CS-13 2500.0 186.7 74.7 9023 0.30
TS-14 111.6 8.23 73.75 5751 0.27 CS-14 2505.5 176.2 70.3 9099 0.28
TS-15 114.7 8.8 76.71 7272 0.27 CS-15 2517.5 180.1 71.5 10112 0.30
TS-16 117.1 10.8 92.21 6772 0.28 CS-16 2509.0 173.5 69.1 8996 0.28
TS-17 105.4 8.23 78.06 6063 0.30 CS-17 2503.5 161.8 64.6 9856 0.28
TS-18 112.1 10.1 90.11 6580 0.27 CS-18 2526.6 171.7 68.0 9159 0.30
TS-19 111.4 9.95 89.35 6877 0.26 CS-19 2517.0 176.7 70.2 9230 0.29
TS-20 118.0 8.66 73.32 7693 0.24 CS-20 2488.0 166.5 66.9 9284 0.31
TS-21 118.0 10.7 90.6 7490 0.28 CS-21 2513.5 183.1 72.8 9376 0.29
TS-22 106.0 9.44 88.99 6329 0.28 CS-22 2516.0 168.0 66.8 9506 0.29
TS-23 105.0 8.21 78.21 6714 0.27 CS-23 2512.5 172.6 68.7 9081 0.28
TS-24 110.9 9.57 86.27 8014 0.29 CS-24 2517.5 167.4 66.5 9246 0.29
TS-25 114.5 7.05 61.52 6834 0.26 CS-25 2533.6 170.1 67.1 8537 0.26
TS-26 113.0 10.1 89.52 7571 0.28 CS-26 2539.1 173.4 68.3 10053 0.32
TS-27 115.9 10.4 89.51 7232 0.30 CS-27 2509.5 164.0 65.3 8917 0.29
TS-28 117.7 10.4 87.97 7428 0.28 CS-28 2507.0 176.1 70.2 9169 0.28
TS-29 110.2 7.75 70.31 6592 0.28 CS-29 2517.0 180.1 71.6 9676 0.30
TS-30 117.2 10.1 86.31 7057 0.30 CS-30 2530.6 173.4 68.5 9820 0.30
Mean 9.64 84.53 7007 0.27 Mean 173.2 68.8 9393 0.29
SDV 1.23 9.59 549.2 0.03 SDV 6.25 2.49 435.3 0.01
COV 0.13 0.113 0.078 0.11 COV 0.036 0.04 0.046 0.05
CHV 7.62 68.77 6104 0.23 CHV 162.9 64.8 8677 0.27

distance between the two internal joints along the length of the
specimens is 250 mm for the beams tested in this paper. Group
NNCH without internal joints (Fig. 5) and Group NH with internal
joints (Fig. 5) contain 4 identical specimens under radial bending
direction (RBD) for each. Group NNCV without internal joints
(Fig. 5) and Group NV with internal joints (Fig. 5) contain 6 identi-
cal specimens under tangential bending direction (TBD)
respectively.
placement Sensors (LDS), while the displacements of the two
supports were measured by two strain beam displacement sensors
(SBDS). The beams were strain gauged longitudinally at the middle
cross section, with five strain gauges pasted on one side face at
even spacing through the depth, and one strain gauge pasted on
each of the bottom and the top faces, as shown in Fig. 6a. The beam
test was performed using a microcomputer-controlled electro-
hydraulic servo universal testing machine (Fig. 6b) with a capacity
of 300 kN. A TDS Data Acquisition System was used for the tests.

3.2. Beam test methods

3.3. Failure modes and mechanism analysis
The four point bending test setup was chosen for the beam
specimens, as shown in Fig. 6. The mid-span deflection and dis- Based on the final failure photos for 20 beam specimens, two
placement of the loading points were measured by three Laser Dis- typical failure modes can be classified, as shown in Figs. 7and 8.
368 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375

tu

Et

- cu - c0 - ep - cy

Ec
tu

- cy
- ep
- c0

(a) Test results (b) Proposed model

Fig. 3. Strain stress relationship.

Table 2
Designed specimens.

Group Width/mm Height/mm Length/mm Span/mm Number Bending direction

NNCH 56 110 1950 1800 4 RBD
NH 56 110 1950 1800 4 RBD
NNCV 56 110 1950 1800 6 TBD
NV 56 110 1950 1800 6 TBD

(a) Radial bending direction (b) Tangential bending direction
Fig. 4. Bending direction.
The characteristic for failure mode 1 (Fig. 7) is that one main
crack appeared along the neutral axis and the beam split into
two main parts. Failure mode 1 occurred in three specimens:
NV-3, NV-4 and NNCV-5. This failure is a shear failure of the glue
along the neutral axis, which could not support the shear stress
caused by the ‘shear flow’ phenomenon. This is a quality control
problem in the construction of the specimens, perhaps due to
insufficient compression being applied while the glue dried. All
three specimens that failed in this way were loaded in the tangen-
tial bending direction (TBD), with two having internal joints and
one having no internal joints.
The remaining 17 specimens failed in failure mode 2 (Fig. 8).
These specimens fractured in tension at the bottom surface near
the mid-span, and split up through the depth of the beam, with
no evident failure occurring on the compressed face at the top of
the specimen. Natural bamboo joints and internal joints near the
bottom surface, as the weak points under tension, are the main ini-
tiators of failure mode 2. All these specimens behaved elastically at
the start of loading and then elasto-plastically (Fig. 9), with a final
sudden brittle tensile failure.
As can be seen from Fig. 8, more fractures appeared for the spec-
imens under the radial bending direction (RBD), as these speci-
mens have more bamboo strips layers. Considering the internal

7
200 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
60°
1950

(a) Internal joints (b) Internal joints distribution in laminated bamboo layer (unit: mm)
Fig. 5. Internal joint distribution in the laminated bamboo layers (Fig. 1c).
 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375
Load sensor
Actuator Distributing girder
SBDS SBDS
Strain gauge LDS
a a a
L
(a) Test scheme
Fig. 6. Beam test.
(a) Failure photo for NV-4
Fig. 7. Failure mode 1.
joints, the specimen from group NH has more fractured layers than
that from group NNCH, and similarly the specimen from group NV
has more fractured layers than that from group NNCV. This demon-
strates that internal joints are one of the main initiators of cracks
under ultimate loading conditions.
3.4. Load-displacement response
Fig. 9 plots the load-displacement curves for the four groups of
beam specimens. The three specimens for failure mode 1 are indi-
cated in the figures. As can be seen from these figures, the load
value for the initial yield point is about 16 kN. The ultimate load
values for NNCV-5 and NV-3 are 12.13 kN and 15.12 kN respec-
tively, which are smaller than 16 kN, indicating that these two
specimens behaved elastically from the beginning of loading until
the final brittle split. However, the maximum load for NV-4 is
25.28 kN, which is bigger than 16 kN (Fig. 9(d)). Even though the
final failure mode for NV-4 is different from other 17 specimens,
its load-displacement response is similar to the specimens for fail-
ure mode 2, which behaved elastically before the yield point, fol-
lowed by non-linear softening, and a brittle failure. This indicates
that the shear strength of the glue in this specimen was almost
strong enough to sustain the shear flow through to failure of the
bamboo.
These figures demonstrate consistency in the initial elastic
stage of loading for all four groups of specimens, irrespective of
which direction they are loaded or whether they have internal
joints. However, the load-displacement responses for the speci-
mens from the group NNCH and the group NV are not as consistent
as those for the specimens from the group NH and the group NNCV
after yield. There is no obvious reason for this. It is also interesting
that group NNCV gives best consistency for both the load-
displacement responses and the ultimate load, but again there is
no obvious reason for this superior performance.
369
(b) test photos
(b) Failure photo for NNCV-5
3.5. Test results
The test results for the beam specimens are presented in Table 3.
Mt and Mc are the test value and the calculation value of ultimate
bending moment for the beam, respectively; wt and wc are the test
value and the calculation value of ultimate middle bending deflec-
tions, respectively; Error1 (%) is calculated as 100  (Mt  Mc)/Mt,
and Error2 (%) is calculated as 100  (wt  wc)/wt. F max is the max-
imum bending load; fm is the bending strength; the modulus of
elasticity (MOE) and the bending strength of the beam were calcu-
lated by using the following Eqs. (3) and (4), respectively
aDF
MOE ¼ ð3L2  4a2 Þ ð3Þ
48IDw
3F max a
fm ¼ ð4Þ
2
bh
Here a is the distance between the loading support and the loading
points; DF is the load increment in the elastic stage; Dw is the
deflection of the middle span point under DF; L is the span of the
beam; I is the moment of inertia of the beam; f m is the bending
strength of the beam;F max is the maximum bending load; b is the
width; and h is the height of the beam cross-section.
As can be seen from Table 3, the presence of internal joints
increased the stiffness (as measured by the MOE) and reduced
the failure load for both bending directions. The increased stiffness
may be attributed to the additional glue along the bending axis
enhancing the stiffness, while the reduced failure load may be
due to the internal joints acting as crack initiators.
These effects were more prominent in the transverse bending
direction, where each individual internal joint spanned a greater
depth across the direction of bending. In this case the reduction
in the characteristic value of the failure load was almost 20% and
the increase in the mean MOE was 12.5%.
370 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375
(a) Side surface for NNCH-2
(c) Side surface for NH-1
(e) Side surface for NV-2
(g) Side surface for NNCV-4
Fig. 8. Failure mode 2.
Although for loading in the radial direction internal joints the
MOE increased by about 5% and the mean failure load reduced
by slightly less than 2%, from a design point of view these changes
are less significant. These tests suggest that the effect of internal
joints is far more significant for loading in the tangential bending
direction.
3.6. Strain analysis for the mid-span cross-section
Fig. 10 plots the typical strain profile through the loading for the
mid-span cross-section of the beams. No matter which direction
the bending occurs or whether or not internal joints are present,
all the strain profiles show the same form, as shown in Fig. 10.
The strain across the cross-section of the laminated bamboo beam
is basically linear throughout the loading process, following the
assumptions of standard beam theory. However, during the load-
ing process, the neutral axis moves downwards from the centre
of the beam, particularly during the latter part of the process,
which can be seen clearly from the figures. This indicates that
the fibres at the top of the beam have yielded in compression are
undergoing plastic deformation.
Fig. 11 plots the load against the top and bottom strain at the
mid-span cross-section for four typical specimens. The slope values
for both the elastic stage under tension and compression are equal
to each, other as shown by the marked black line. These figures
show that the initial elastic moduli for both compression and ten-
sion are equal.
(b) Bottom surface for NNCH-2
(d) Bottom surface for NH-1
(f) Bottom surface for NV-2
(h) Bottom surface for NNCV-4
3.7. Stress-strain model for laminated bamboo lumber beam
Although nonlinear behaviour appeared in the tension zone for
some specimens, as shown in Fig. 11, the amount of non-linearity
in tension was far less than that which occurred in compression,
and consequently it is not considered in the beam stress-strain
model shown in Fig. 3a. As the elastic moduli for compression
and tension of the LBL beam were equal as proved in Fig. 11, the
strain-stress model for LBL beams can be shown as in Fig. 12 which
can also be expressed through the following equations.
8
>
< Ee ðecy 6 e 6 etu Þ
r¼ rcy þ kcep Eðe  ecy Þ ðec0 6 e 6 ecy Þ ð5Þ
>
:
rc0 ðecu 6 e 6 ec0 Þ
Here E is the modulus of elasticity, and the other parameters have
the same meaning as in Eqs. (1) and (2).
4. Calculation formula for the ultimate state
Based on the strain-stress relationship for laminated bamboo,
three possible failure modes for laminated bamboo lumber beams
can be identified. Firstly, all bamboo fibres in compressive zone
may are still be in the elastic stage when the beam fails (Mode I).
Secondly, some bamboo fibres in compressive zone may be in
the plastic-elastic stage and some may be in the elastic stage
when the beam fails (Mode II). Thirdly, some bamboo fibres in
 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375 371

(a) Group NNCH (b) Group NH

(c) Group NNCV (d) Group NV

Fig. 9. Load-displacement responses for beam specimens.

compressive zone may be in the fully plastic stage, some in the ece
b¼ ð8Þ
elastic-plastic stage and some in the elastic stage when the beam ece þ et
fails (Mode III). The ultimate bending moment for the beam can then be calcu-
lated by the follow equation:
4.1. Ultimate bending moment Z ah
M¼b rðyÞydy ð9Þ
4.1.1. Mode I bh
All the bamboo fibres in both the compressive zone and the ten-
Here b is the width of the beam cross-section.
sile zone are in the elastic stage when the beam fails in Mode I.
Based on the above equations, the ultimate bending moment for
Although test specimens NNCV-5 and NV-3 were in this state when
the LBL beams can be failing under Mode I can be obtained as
they failed, they do not belong to this mode as they failed through
follows:
horizontal shear failure rather than through tensile failure at the
extreme tensile fibre. 2 a3 þ b3
Fig. 13 plots the strain-stress distribution at the ultimate failure M ¼ bh Eet ð10Þ
3a
state for Mode I. M is the bending moment of the beam; rce is the
compressive elastic stress value; rt is the tensile stress value; et is
4.1.2. Mode II
the tensile strain value; ece is the compressive elastic strain value;
The compressive zone for Mode II can be divided into two parts,
h is the cross-section height of the beam; a is the height coefficient
an elastic area and an elastic-plastic area. All the test specimens
for the tension zone in the beam cross-section; and b is the height
that failed in bending rather than horizontal shear failed in this
coefficient for the elastic compressive zone in the beam cross-
mode.
section. Based on the plane-section assumption, the strain and
Fig. 14 plots the strain-stress distribution at the ultimate failure
the curvature can be expressed as the following
state for Mode II. c is the height coefficient for the elastic-plastic
2
d w compressive zone in the beam cross-section. Based on the plane-
e ¼ y ¼ ky ð6Þ section assumption, the height coefficients a, b and c can be
dx2
expressed as follows:
Here k is the curvature and y is the distance between the strain et
point and neutral axis. a¼ ð11Þ
et þ eep
The following equations can be obtained from Fig. 13.
et ecy
a¼ ð7Þ b¼ ð12Þ
ece þ et et þ eep
372 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375

Table 3
Results for beams.

Specimen Fmax/kN fm/MPa wt /mm MOE /MPa Mode Mt/kN.m Mc/kN.m Error1 % wc /mm Error2 %
NNCH-1 29.97 79.61 69.0 8936 2 8.99 8.27 8.00 65.6 5.00
NNCH-2 34.95 92.84 70.5 10138 2 10.5 9.98 4.86 71.5 1.35
NNCH-3 31.74 84.32 68.3 9450 2 9.52 8.73 8.33 67.9 0.63
NNCH-4 35.46 94.2 81.0 9387 2 10.6 9.35 12.1 83.3 2.88
Mean 33.03 87.74 72.2 9478 – – – – – –
SDV 2.62 6.97 5.94 496 – – – – – –
COV 0.079 0.079 0.082 0.052 – – – – – –
CHV 28.72 76.29 62.43 8661 – – – – – –
NNCV-1 31.48 83.62 68.6 8146 2 9.44 8.78 7.06 61.0 11.1
NNCV-2 31.74 84.32 72.3 8764 2 9.52 8.94 6.09 62.4 13.7
NNCV-3 32.22 85.59 71.2 9008 2 9.67 8.87 8.22 72.3 1.52
NNCV-4 31.99 84.98 71.3 8476 2 9.6 10.2 5.83 64.2 9.94
NNCV-5 12.13 – 24.7 – 1 – – – – –
NNCV-6 33.97 90.24 75.9 9253 2 10.2 9.41 7.67 73.1 3.71
Mean 32.28 85.75 71.9 8730 – – – – – –
SDV 0.984 2.62 2.64 435.2 – – – – – –
COV 0.030 0.030 0.037 0.050 – – – – – –
CHV 30.66 81.45 67.56 8014 – – – – – –
NH-1 32.47 86.25 64.9 10107 2 9.74 9.53 2.16 63.3 2.52
NH-2 28.98 76.98 56.9 9736 2 8.69 8.12 6.66 63.0 10.79
NH-3 33.72 89.57 67.3 10052 2 10.1 10.20 1.20 68.8 2.25
NH-4 34.45 91.51 70.7 10142 2 10.3 8.93 13.6 70.4 0.38
Mean 32.41 86.08 64.9 10009 – – – – – –
SDV 2.43 6.44 5.87 185.9 – – – – – –
COV 0.075 0.075 0.090 0.019 – – – – – –
CHV 28.42 75.48 55.24 9703 – – – – – –
NV-1 27.74 73.69 52.4 9757 2 8.32 7.81 6.16 53.1 1.25
NV-2 29.73 78.98 61.9 9433 2 8.92 8.74 2.04 66.2 6.93
NV-3 15.12 – 25.6 – 1 – – – – –
NV-4 25.28 67.15 51.6 9494 1 – – – – –
NV-5 30.98 82.3 59.1 10331 2 9.29 8.97 3.46 55.4 6.21
NV-6 31.73 84.29 62.6 10088 2 9.52 9.48 0.39 64.7 3.32
Mean 29.09 77.28 57.52 9821 – – – – – –
SDV 2.61 6.94 5.21 385 – – – – – –
COV 0.090 0.090 0.091 0.039 – – – – – –
CHV 24.80 65.87 48.94 9187 – – – – – –

Note: Considering the failure mode, specimens NV-3 and NNCV-5 weren’t used when calculating the mean, SDV, COV, CHV values.

eep  ecy et
c¼ ð13Þ a¼ ð16Þ
et þ eep et þ ecu
The ultimate bending moment for the beam can be calculated
by the following equation: ecy
b¼ ð17Þ
Z ah et þ ecu
M¼b rðyÞydy ð14Þ
ðbhþchÞ
eep  ecy
c¼ ð18Þ
Based on the equations above, the ultimate bending moment for et þ ecu
the LBL beams failing in Mode II can be obtained as follows:

bh
2 ecu  eep
M¼ Eet ð2a3 þ 2b3  6b2 c  3bc2 þ 12kcep b2 c þ 9bkcep c2 d¼ ð19Þ
6a et þ ecu
þ 2kcep c3 Þ ð15Þ The ultimate bending moment for the beam can be calculated
by the following equation:
4.1.3. Mode III Z ah  
1
The compressive zone for Mode III can be divided into three M¼b rðyÞydy þ dbhrcu bh þ ch þ dh ð20Þ
parts, an elastic area, an elastic-plastic area and a plastic area. None ðbhþchÞ 2
specimens tested in this paper failed in this mode, but Mode III will
Based on the equations above, the ultimate bending moment for
occur in a certain situations. As before, the strain-stress relation-
the LBL beams failing in Mode III can be obtained as follows:
ship for the laminated bamboo is expressed by Eqs. (2) and (5).
Fig. 15 plots the strain-stress distribution at the ultimate failure 2
bh
state for Mode III. d is the height coefficient for the plastic compres- M¼ Eet ð2a3 þ 2b3  6b2 c  3bc2 þ 12kcep b2 c þ 9bkcep c2
6a
sion zone in the beam cross-section. Based on the plane-section  
assumption, the height coefficients a, b, c and d can be expressed 2 1
þ 2kcep c3 Þ þ dbh rcu b þ c þ d ð21Þ
as follows: 2
 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375 373

(a) Specimen NNCH-1 (b) Specimen NH-1

(c) Specimen NNCV-1 (d) Specimen NV-1

Fig. 10. Typical strain profile development for the mid-span cross-section.

(a) Specimen NNCH-2 (b) Specimen NH-1

(c) Specimen NNCV-1 (d) Specimen NV-1

Fig. 11. Typical load-strain curves for the mid-span cross-section.
374 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375

tural mechanics, calculating the curvature at each cross-section

from the bending moment and the stress-strain relationship, inte-
grating over the length of the beam and applying the boundary
tu conditions.
The comparison between the test results and calculation results
Et can be seen in Table 3. As this table showed, the calculations give
good agreement with the test results.

- cu - c0 - ep - cy 5. Conclusions

Ec
tu
In order to evaluate the bending capacity for laminated bamboo
lumber beams, both material performance tests and beam tests
- cy have been carried out. Based on the experimental results and the-
- ep oretical analysis of the specimens, the following conclusions can be
- c0 drawn.

(1) Based on the material performance test results, the mean

Fig. 12. Strain-stress model of laminated bamboo lumber under bending.
ultimate tensile strength is 84.53 MPa, giving a CHV
(expected to be exceeded by 95% of specimens) of 68.77
ce
MPa and the mean tensile modulus of elasticity is 7007
ce
Elastic compressive MPa, giving a characteristic value (CHV) of 104 MPa. The
area h mean tensile Position’s ratio is 0.27, giving a CHV of 0.23.
M Neutral axis 0 (2) The average ultimate compressive strength of 30 specimens
h is 68.8 MPa, giving a CHV of 64.8 MPa. The mean compres-
x sive modulus of elasticity is 9393 MPa giving a CHV of
Elastic tensile area h 8677 MPa while the mean compressive Position’s ratio is
0.29 giving a CHV of 0.27.
(3) A simplified tri-linear strain-stress relationship was pro-
t t
y posed based on the compression and tensile tests parallel
to the grain.
Fig. 13. Strain-stress distribution at the ultimate failure state for Mode I. (4) Two failure modes can be identified from the location of the
cracks occurring in the test beams. In one mode a horizontal
crack appeared along the neutral axis and the beam split
horizontally into two parts (a horizontal shear failure), and
ep ep in the other failure mode the specimens failed at the bottom
Elastic-plastic
compressive area
h surface near the mid-span, and split up through the depth of
cy cy
the beam with no evident failure occurring on the com-
M
Elastic compressive area h pressed face at the top of the specimen near the mid-span
Neutral axis 0 h (a tensile bending failure).
x (5) Bending direction and the presence of internal joints have

Elastic tensile area h some influence on the mechanical properties of the LBL
beams. Internal joints have more influence on specimens
t t under tangential bending (where the culms are bent across
y their width) than those under radial bending (where the
culms are bent across their thickness).
Fig. 14. Strain-stress distribution at the ultimate failure state for Mode II. (6) Irrespective of the bending directions, the strain across the
cross-section of the laminated bamboo beam is linear
throughout the test process, following standard beam the-
cu cu
ory. Based on the theory and the proposed simplified
Plastic compressive area
h strain-stress relationship for the beam, the calculation for-
Elastic-plastic
ep
compressive area
ep h mula for the ultimate bending moment and an approach
cy cy
for calculating the ultimate bending deflections were pro-
M Elastic compressive area h h posed for three bending failure modes which give good
Neutral axis 0
agreement with the test results.
x h
Elastic tensile area
tu tu
y Acknowledgments

Fig. 15. Strain-stress distribution at the ultimate failure state for Mode III.
4.2. Ultimate bending deflection
For each of the three failure modes the bending deflection at
ultimate load can be calculated by applying the principles of struc-
The material presented in this paper is based upon work sup-
ported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(51308301), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiang-su Province
(No. BK20130978), the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China
(2015 M580382), Jiangsu Postdoctoral Science Foundation Project
(1501037A), Open Fund Project from Key Laboratory of Concrete
and Pre-stressed Concrete Structure of Ministry of Education
 H. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 160 (2018) 365–375
(Southeast university) and a Project Funded by the Priority Aca-
demic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institu-
tions. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or
recommendations expressed in this material are those of the wri-
ter(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the foundations.
The writers gratefully acknowledge Nian-qiang ZHOU, Zhen CAO,
Zhongjin HAN, Yunfei Fu, Yulin Li and others from the Nanjing For-
estry University for helping with the tests.
References
[1] W.Q. Wu, Experimental analysis of bending resistance of bamboo composite I-
shaped beam, J. Bridge Eng. 19 (4) (2014) 04013014-1–04013014-13.
[2] Y. Xiao, B. Shan, Modern Bamboo Structures, China Architecture & Building
Press, Beijing, 2013.
[3] A. Porras, A. Maranon, Development and characterization of a laminate
composite material from polylactic acid (PLA) and woven bamboo fabric,
Compos. Part B-Eng. 43 (7) (2012) 2782–2788.
[4] S. Amada, Y. Ichikawa, T. Munekata, Y. Nagase, K. Shimizu, Fiber texture and
mechanical graded structure of bamboo, Compos. Part B-Eng. 28 (1997) 13–20.
[5] H.T. Li, Q.S. Zhang, X.H. Xiong, Review on laminated bamboo lumber, J. Forestry
Eng. 1 (6) (2016) 110–116.
[6] Y.J. Li, B. Xu, Q.S. Zhang, et al., Present situation and the countermeasure
analysis of bamboo timber processing industry in China, J. Forestry Eng. 1 (1)
(2016) 2–7.
[7] M.X. Huang, X.C. Zhang, W.J. Yu, et al., Mechanical properties and structure
characterization of bamboo softened by high temperature steam, J. Forestry
Eng. 1 (4) (2016) 64–68.
[8] G. Chen, H.T. Li, T. Zhou, LI C. L. Experimental evaluation on mechanical
performance of OSB webbed parallel strand bamboo I-Joist with holes in the
web, Constr. Build. Mater. 101 (2015) 91–98.
[9] G. Chen, T. Zhou, C.L. Li, Q.S. Zhang, H.T. Li, Experimental study on the OSB
webbed bamboo beams, J. Nanjing Forestry Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 40 (05) (2016)
121–125.
[10] M. Mahdavi, P.L. Clouston, S.R. Arwade, Development of laminated bamboo
lumber: Review of processing, performance, and economical considerations, J.
Mater. Civil Eng. 23 (7) (2011) 1036–1042.
[11] L.F. Lopez, J.F. Correal, Exploratory study of the glued laminated bamboo
Guadua angustifolia as a structural material, Maderas-Ciencia y Tecnologia 11
(3) (2009) 171–182.
[12] K. De Flander, R. Rovers, One laminated bamboo-frame house per hectare per
year, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (1) (2009) 210–218.
[13] N. Nugroho, N. Ando, Development of structural composite products made
from bamboo. II. Fundamental properties of laminated bamboo lumber, J.
Wood Sci. 47 (3) (2001) 237–242.
[14] C.S. Verma, V.M. Chariar, Development of layered laminate bamboo composite
and their mechanical properties, Compos. Part B-Eng. 43 (3) (2012) 1063–
1069.
[15] Bhavna Sharma, Ana Gatóo, Michael H. Ramage, Effect of processing methods
on the mechanical properties of engineered bamboo, Constr. Build. Mater. 83
(2015) 95–101.
375
[16] H.T. Li, Q.S. Zhang, D.S. Huang, A.J. Deeks, Compressive performance of
laminated bamboo, Compos. Part B: Eng. 54 (2013) 319–328.
[17] H.T. Li, J.W. Su, Q.S. Zhang, A.J. Deeks, D. Hui, Mechanical performance of
laminated bamboo column under axial compression, Compos. Part B: Eng. 79
(2015) 374–382.
[18] H.T. Li, G. Chen, Q.S. Zhang, M. Ashraf, B. Xu, Y.J. Li, Mechanical properties of
laminated bamboo lumber column under radial eccentric compression [J],
Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016) 644–652.
[19] H.T. Li, G. Wu, Q.S. Zhang, J.W. Su, Mechanical evaluation for laminated
bamboo lumber along two eccentric compression directions, J. Wood Sci. 62
(6) (2016) 503–517.
[20] J.W. Su, H.T. Li, P. Yang, Q.S. Zhang, G. Chen, Mechanical performance study on
laminated bamboo lumber column pier under axial compression, China
Forestry Sci. Technol. 29 (4) (2015) 45–49.
[21] H.T. Li, G. Wu, Q.S. Zhang, G. Chen, Experimental study on side pressure LBL
under tangential eccentric compression, J. Hunan Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 43 (5) (2016)
90–96.
[22] H.T. Li, Q.S. Zhang, G. Wu, Stress-strain model under compression for side
pressure laminated bamboo, J. Southeast Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 45 (6) (2015) 1130–
1134.
[23] I.M. Sulastiningsih, Nurwati, Physical and mechanical properties of laminated
bamboo board, J. Tropical Forest Sci. 21 (3) (2009) 246–251.
[24] C.H. Lee, M.J. Chung, C.H. Lin, T.H. Yang, Effects of layered structure on the
physical and mechanical properties of laminated moso bamboo (Phyllostachys
edulis) flooring, Constr. Build. Mater. 28 (1) (2012) 31–35.
[25] O. Sulaiman, R. Hashim, R. Wahab, Evaluation of shear strength of oil treated
laminated bamboo, Bioresour. Technol. 97 (18) (2006) 2466–2469.
[26] J.B. Paes, A.K. Freire de Oliveira, E. de Oliveira, Physical-mechanical
characterization of the glue laminated bamboo (Dendrocalamus giganteus),
Ciencia Florestal 19 (1–2) (2009) 41–51.
[27] J.F. Correal, F. Ramirez, Adhesive bond performance in glue line shear and
bending for glued laminated guadua bamboo, J. Tropical Forest Sci. 22 (4)
(2010) 433–439.
[28] K. Rassiah, M.M.H.M. Ahmad, A. Ali, Mechanical properties of laminated
bamboo strips from Gigantochloa scortechinii/polyester composites, Mater. Des.
57 (2014) 551–559.
[29] A.W.C. Lee, X.S. Bai, A.P. Bangi, Selected properties of laboratory-made
laminated-bamboo lumber, Holzforschung 52 (2) (1998) 207–210.
[30] Y. Wei, S.X. Jiang, Q.F. Lv, Q.S. Zhang, L.B. Wang, Z.T. Lv, Flexural performance of
glued laminated bamboo beams, Adv. Mater. Res. 168–170 (2011) 1700–1703.
[31] M.C. Yeh, Y.L. Lin, Finger joint performance of structural laminated bamboo
member, J. Wood Sci. 58 (2) (2012) 120–127.
[32] H.T. Li, J.W. Su, Q.S. Zhang, G. Chen, Experimental study on mechanical
performance of side pressure laminated bamboo beam, J. Build. Struct. 36 (3)
(2015) 121–126.
[33] H.T. Li, A.J. Deeks, Q.S. Zhang, G. Wu, Flexural performance of laminated
bamboo lumber Beam, BioResources. 11 (1) (2016) 929–943.
[34] A. Sinha, D. Way, S. Mlasko, Structural performance of glued laminated
bamboo beams, J. Struct. Eng. 140 (1) (2014) 04013021.
[35] ASTM D198, Standard test methods for static tests of lumber in structural
sizes, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010.