Binder1 PDF

ISSN(Online): 2319-8753
ISSN (Print): 2347-6710
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Engineering and Technology
(A High Impact Factor, Monthly, Peer Reviewed Journal)
Visit: www.ijirset.com
Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017
Cost and Design Analysis of Steel and Bamboo

Reinforcement
Swapnil Dange, Smita V. Pataskar
M. E Student, Department of Civil Engineering, D.Y Patil College of Engineering Akurdi Pune, India
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, D.Y Patil College of Engineering Akurdi Pune, India
ABSTRACT: To study the effect of replacement of steel reinforcement by bamboo reinforcement, designs have been
conducted on one way slab of size 3000 x 7000 sq-mm with providing beam of 7000 mm length and 250 x 250 sq-mm.
In this paper the designs are done on the basis of shearing and bending. Based on this study of cost vs strength
provided results have been discussed in the paper. Housing shortage in Urban India due to the rising unaffordability
makes it logical to consider alternative technologies for their application. The intention of the research is, to evolve a
design using bamboo as one of the chief structural materials, for a safe and durable house, affordable by the urban
poor. In this project we will work on to design manually g+1 residential building by replacing steel reinforcement with
bamboo reinforcement. Which should be checked or verified by structural designer then we calculate cost of that
building and to show the difference between steel reinforcement building and bamboo reinforcement building as well
as l life period of structure It is targeted at those Urban Poor living close to bamboo growing regions. The design thus
evolved shall clearly indicate the cost reduction, of the superstructure where steel reinforced concrete, is replaced by
bamboo reinforced concrete, in key structural elements. A higher cost reduction ratio could help in creating affordable
housing markets in most growing cities in India. Proven technologies from all over the world have been examined
closely to arrive at the one that would minimize the consumption of steel, which constitutes a large share of the cost of
a dwelling unit. This Paper shall project some breakthrough findings on which the overall research has based itself.
KEYWORDS: Bamboo, Flexural Strength, Cost Estimation, Economical.
I. INTRODUCTION
The world timber demand is increasing at a rapid rate but the timber supply is depleting. It‟s been found through
research that bamboo can suitably replace timber and other materials in construction and other works. Industrially
treated bamboo has shown great potential for production of composite materials and components which are cost-
effective and can be successfully utilized for structural and non-structural applications in construction. Bamboo is one
of the oldest traditional building materials used by mankind.
The bamboo culm, or stem, has been made into an extended diversity of products ranging from domestic household
products to industrial applications. Bamboo is quite common for bridges, scaffolding and housing, but it is usually used
as a temporary exterior structural material. In many overly populated regions of the tropics, certain bamboos supply the
one suitable material that is sufficiently cheap and plentiful to meet the extensive need for economical housing.
With the advancement of science and technology and the tight supply of timber, new methods are needed for
the processing of bamboo to make it more durable and more usable in terms of building materials. Studies have been
carried out on the basic properties and on processing of bamboo into various kinds of composite products. Bamboo has
several unique advantages like ability to grow fast with a high yield and also it matures quickly. Additionally bamboo
can be grown abundantly and that too at a lower cost which makes it more economical.
Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22464

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

II. BAMBOO AS CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL
Through research it has been found that some species of bamboo have ultimate tensile strength same as that of
mild steel at yield point. Experimentally it has been found that the ultimate tensile strength of some species of bamboo
is comparable to that of mild steel and it varies from 140N/mm2- 280N/mm2. Bamboo is a versatile material because
of its high strength-to-weight ratio, easy workability and availability. Bamboo needs to be chemically treated due to
their low natural durability. It can be used as Bamboo Trusses, Bamboo Roofs Skeleton, Bamboo walling/ceiling,
Bamboo Doors and Windows, Bamboo Flooring, Reed Boards, Scaffolding. It has also been found that bamboo acts
very well in buckling but due to low stresses than compared to steel and due to it not being straight it may not be very
good. Further, it has been established that in seismic zones the failure of bamboo is very less as the maximum
absorption of the energy is at the joints. Cellulose is the main component present in bamboo which is the main source
of mechanical properties of bamboo.
Some specific properties of Bamboo are as given below:

1. Specific gravity - 0.575 to 0.655
2. Average weight - 0.625kg/m
3. Modulus of rupture - 610 to 1600kg/cm2
4. Modulus of Elasticity - 1.5 to 2.0 x105kg/cm2
5. Ultimate compressive stress- 794 to 864kg/cm2
6. Safe working stress in compression - 105kg/cm2
Safe working stress in tension It has also been found that bamboo acts very well in buckling but due to low
stresses than compared to steel and due to it not being straight it may not be very good.
Further, it has been established that in seismic zones the failure of bamboo is very less as the maximum absorption of
the energy is at the joints. Cellulose is the main component present in bamboo which is the main source of mechanical
properties of bamboo.
Some specific properties of Bamboo are as given below:
1. Specific gravity - 0.575 to 0.655

2. Average weight - 0.625kg/m
3. Modulus of rupture - 610 to 1600kg/cm2
4. Modulus of Elasticity - 1.5 to 2.0 x105kg/cm2
5. Ultimate compressive stress- 794 to 864kg/cm2
6. Safe working stress in compression - 105kg/cm2
7. Safe working stress in tension - 160 to 350 kg/cm2
8. Safe working stress in shear- 115 to 180 kg/cm2
9. Bond stress - 5.6kg/cm2
III. SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF BAMBOO SELECTION
The following factors should be considered in the selection of bamboo culms (whole plants) for use as
reinforcement in concrete structures:
1. Use only bamboo showing a pronounced brown colour. This will insure that the plant is at least three years old.
2. Select the longest large diameter culms available.
3. Do not use whole culms of green, unseasoned bamboo.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

4. Avoid bamboo cut in spring or early summer. These culms are generally weaker due to increased fibre moisture
content.
Preparation
1. Sizing- Splints are generally more desirable than whole culms as reinforcement. Larger culms should be
2. split into splints approximately 3/4 inch wide. Whole culms less than 3/4 inch in diameter can be used without
splitting.
3. Splitting the bamboo can he done by separating the base with a sharp knife and then pulling a dulled blade
through the stem. The dull blade will force the stem to split open; this is more desirable than cutting the
bamboo since splitting will result in continuous fibres and a nearly straight section
4. Seasoning- When possible, the bamboo should be cut and allowed to dry and season for three to four weeks
before using. The culms must be supported at regular spacing‟s to reduce warping.
5. Waterproof Coatings- When seasoned bamboo, either split or whole is used as reinforcement; it should
receive a waterproof coating to reduce swelling when in contact with concrete. Without some type of coating,
bamboo will swell before the concrete has developed sufficient strength to prevent cracking and the member
may be damaged, especially if more than 4 percent bamboo is used.
IV. CONSTRUCTION PRINCIPLES
In general, techniques used in conventional reinforced concrete construction need not he changed when bamboo is to
be used for reinforcement.
Concrete Mix Proportions - The same mix designs can be used as would normally be used with steel reinforced
concrete. Concrete slump should be as low as workability will allow. Excess water causes swelling of the bamboo.
High early-strength cement is preferred to minimize cracks caused by swelling of bamboo when seasoned bamboo
cannot be waterproofed.
Placement of bamboo- Bamboo reinforcement should not be placed less than 1.5 inches from the face of the concrete
surface. When using whole culms, the top and bottom of the stems should be alternated in every row and the nodes or
collars, should be staggered. This will insure a fairly uniform cross section of the bamboo. Throughout the length of the
member, and the wedging effect obtained at the nodes will materially increase the bond between concrete and bamboo.
The clear spacing between bamboo rods or splints should not be less than the maximum size aggregate plus 1/4 inch.
Reinforcement should be evenly spaced and lashed together on short sticks placed at right angles to the main
reinforcement. When more than one layer is required, the layers should also be tied together. Ties should preferably be
made with wire in important members. For secondary members, ties can be made with vegetation strips.
Bamboo must be securely tied down before placing the concrete. It should be fixed at regular intervals of 3 to
4 feet to prevent it from floating up in the concrete during placement and vibration. In flexural members continuous,
one-half to two-thirds of the bottom longitudinal reinforcement should be bent up near the supports. This is especially
recommended in members continuous over several supports.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

V. TABLES & GRAPHS
a. Properties of bamboo and steel reinforcing bars Bamboo
Whole Culms
Diameter (in.) Area (sq. in.)
3/8 0.008
½ 0.136
5/8 0.239
¾ 0.322
1 0.548
2 1.92
3/4 Inch Wide Splints

Thickness (in.) Area (sq. in.)
1/8 0.094
¼ 0.188
3/8 0.282
½ 0.375
5/8 0.469
¾ 0.563
Steel Reinforcement
Nominal Dimensions - Round
Sections
Cross Sectional. Area (sq.
Bar Designation No. Nominal Diameter (in.) in.)
2 0.250 0.05
3 0.375 0.11
4 0.500 0.20
5 0.625 0.31
6 0.750 0.44
7 0.875 0.60
8 1.000 0.79
9 1.128 1.00
10 1.270 1.27
11 1.410 1.56

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

Steel Wire
AS&W Wire Gauge Numbers Diameter (in) Area (sq. in.) Weight (lb/ft)
0000 0.3938 0.12180 0.4l36
000 0.3625 0.10321 0.3505
00 0.3310 0.086049 0.2922
0 0.3065 0.073782 0.2506
1 0.2830 0.062902 0.2136
2 0.2625 0.054119 0.1838
3 0.2437 0.046645 0.1584
4 0.2253 0.039867 0.1354
5 0.2070 0.033654 0.1143
Figure 1- Resistance coefficients for bamboo reinforced concrete beams and their flexural
Member.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

Figure 2- Bamboo substitute beams and reinforcement.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

Figure 3- Size and spacing of bamboo reinforcement in slabs and walls.
VI. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
To show the advantage of bamboo reinforcement in place of steel, building components are designed using
steel and bamboo as a reinforcement. Further estimation of reinforcement is done.
1. In this project we have opted advanced bamboo reinforcement technique instead of traditional steel reinforcement.
2. This is a good idea for low cost economical structure.
3. Bamboo reinforcement technique is used for both main and distribution reinforcement as it was same earlier done
for steel reinforcement.
4. It is three times cheaper than steel reinforcement technique.
5. Design principal and calculation done for bamboo reinforcement are taken from US NAVAL CORPS guidelines
and references.
6. It is clear from results that this bamboo reinforcement technique is absolutely cheaper then steel reinforcement
technique especially for single story structure.
7. In future it has a great wide scope for designing multi-story structure using bamboo reinforcement.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

VII. DESIGN OF BUILDING
Design of Slab
1. Effective span -In case of continuous slab, if the width of the support less than 1/12 of the clear span, the effective
span shall be the distance between center of supports or the clear distance between supports plus the effective
depth of the slab, whichever is smaller.
2. Limiting stiffness -The ratio of span to effective depth should not exceed 26. Modifications factor for tension
reinforcement will be extra.
3. Moment and shear coefficient -Same rules as for continuous beams given in clause A-10
4. Reinforcement and its arrangement -The rules for main reinforcement and transverse/ distribution
reinforcement re the same as discussed for simply supported one way slab. However the code IS456:2000 makes
the following recommendations.
1. Positive moment reinforcement
At least 1/3rd positive movement reinforcement in simple members and 1/4th in continuous member shall
extend along the same phase of the member into the member to a length = Ld/3.
2. Negative moment reinforcement
At least 1/3rd of the total reinforcement provided for negative movement at the support shall extend beyond the
point of inflexion for a distance not less than the effective depth of the member.
VIII. DESIGN OF BEAM
1. Calculation of constants. -For the given set of stresses, determine KC, JC and RC.
2. Kc= M~cbc/M~cbc+~st
3. Jc= 1-(Kc/3)
4. Rc= 0.5*L*Kc Jc
5. Calculation of bending moment. Assume suitable values of overall depth and breadth of beam, and
determine the effective span. Calculate self-weight and total U.D.L. and maximum bending moment in the
beam.
6. Design of the section. Calculate the effective depth of the beam by the expression:
7. d= [(M)/ (RC*b)] 0.5
8. Reinforcement. Calculate the area by the formula.
9. Shear Reinforcement. Calculate the maximum shear force in the beam.
10. Check for Development length at the end.

11. Ld<= (M1/V) +L0.
Design of column
1. Determine the Permissible stresses in concrete, longitudinal bars and ties.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

2. Find super impose load the column is required to carry.

3. Determine the area from the following expression - P= ~cc *Ac+~sc*Asc.
4. After having known the area, determine the dimensions of column. If it is a square of side b, then b=Ag.
5. For the given end conditions determine effective length of column. Calculate lef/b ratio to find whether it is a
short or long column.
6. If lef/b ratio<12 it will be designed as short column otherwise as long column determine the area of steel Asc.
7. Find the diameters of bars used as ties and determine its pitch as per rules.
IX. DESIGN OF FOOTING
The width B of the footing will evidently be equal to [W+W‟]/qo. The thickness is calculated both from the
considerations of bending moment as well as punching shear.
1. Depth for bending moment.

d= [M/B*Rc] 0.5
2. Depth for shear.

3. tv=V/B*d
4. Steel Reinforcement. Ast=M/tjcd
Check for development length.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

L1 = 3.9 – 2* .025 +.42 *.080

= 3.9 - .05 + .0336
= 3.88
L2 = 7-2* .025 + .42 * .080

= 6.98
No. of bars = (7 /spacing) + 1

= (7 /215) +1
= 34
No of distribution bars = (12 m/ spacing) + 1

Cost = 50 Rs / Kg
= 50* 407.42
= 20371 Rs
Lengt Numbe
RCC Beam Description of Shape of bending h r Total Weight
bar length
1.5
Main straight bar 6.95 2 13.9 8 *13.9
1.5
Main bent up bar 7.496 1 7.496 8 *
7.496
1.5
Stirrups 1.764 25 42 8 * 42
Total = Total
= 63 .396 = 100.16
Kg
Length L1 = 7-2*.25
= 6.95
L2 = 6.95 + .42 D * 2
= 7.496
Calculation of stirrups
A1 = ^ - 2 * side cover - ϕ
= .7- 2*.025-0.016 = .634 m
A2 = .25- 2*.025-.016

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

= .184 m, Therefore: 2 *(.634+.184) +8*ϕ = 1.764 Cost =

Rs 50 per Kg, Total = 50 * 100.16 =5008 Rs
Length L1 = 3-2*.025 = 2.95

L2 = 2.95 + .42 D * 2 = 3.496
Calculation of stirrups
A1 = ^ - 2* side cover -ϕ = .242
A2 = .25-2*.025-.08 = .192, Therefore = (A1+A2) 2+8ϕ = .932, Cost =83.25* 50 = 4162.984 Rs
X. FOOTING WITH COLUMN STEEL REINFORCING BAR INCLUDING BENDING
1. 8 mm dia bar ϕ .39 Kg in Base Footing
L = 1200 – 2* cover, 1200 – 2* 25= 1.15 M, No. of bars (1200/250) +1 =5.8 σ= σ 6 bars
Weight of steel in base footing = 2* 6 * 1.15*0.39 = 5.38 Kg, 2. 20 mm dia bar ϕ 2.47 Kg in column above
Ground level
L = 3m, No. of bar = (3000/250) +1 =13
13 *3 *2.47=96.33 Kg, Below Ground Level = L = 0.2m, 0.2 * 2.47 * 1= 0.494 Kg Total
steel = 5.38 + 96.33 + .494 = 102.204 Kg Abstract of cost
Quantity of steel reinforcement bars = 102.204, Cost Per Kg of steel = 50 Rs/Kg

Amount = 102.204 * 50 = 5110.2 Rs
Calculation
L1 = 3.9 – 2* .025 +.42 *.080 = 3.9 - .05 + .0336 = 3.88
L2 = 7-2* .025 + .42 * .080 = 6.98 „
No. of bars = (7 /spacing) + 1

= (7 /215) +1 = 34
No of distribution bars = (12 m/ spacing) + 1, Cost = 914.66 * 10 Rs/m = 9146.6 Rs
A1 = ^ - 2* side cover -ϕ = .3-2*.025-.015 = .235
A2 = .25-2*.025-.015 = .185
Therefore: (A1+A2) 2+8ϕ = .96, Rate 10 Rs, Cost = 45 .359 * 10 = 453.59 Rs
XI. BAMBOO REINFORCEMENT IN COLUMN AND FOOTING
9.525 Dia Bars in base footing, Length = 1200 – 2 * cover 1200 – 2 * 25 = 1.15 m
No. of bars = (1200 / 250) +1 = 6 Bars, 20 mm dia bars in columns above ground level L = 3m

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

No. of bars (3000/250) +1 = 1, below ground level length = .2 m, No of bars = 1
Total cost = 2*6* 1.15 *10 +3*13*10+.2*1*10 =Rs 530
XII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Final analysis on estimation of both steel and bamboo Reinforcement:-
Item Steel (Rs) Bamboo (Rs)
Slab 20371 9146
Beam 1 5008 640
Beam 2 4162 454
Column & Footing 5110 530
TOTAL Rs 33,072 Rs 10,770
Comparison between Cost of steel and Bamboo reinforcement concludes with the result that Structures
reinforced with bamboo as reinforcement is found cheaper than that of with Steel reinforcement
XIII. ANALYTICAL STUDIES AND RESEARCH
Tjerk Reijenga “Role of Bamboo in Green Building Design”. In this project we are comparing steel
reinforcement with bamboo reinforcement, its structural and constructional cost and techniques of replacement of steel
with bamboo while reinforcing.
Ghavami (1995) discussed the mechanical properties of Bamboo, specifically pertaining to Bamboo in
concrete. This study showed that the ultimate load of a concrete beam reinforced with Bamboo increased 400% as
compared to un-reinforced concrete. It was found that, compared to steel, there was lower bonding between the
bamboo and concrete, and the Bamboo had a Modulus of elasticity 1/15 of steel. Bamboo‟s compressive strength was
much lower than its tensile strength, and there was high strength along the fibres, but a low strength transverse to the
fibres. Stated is the need for the development of a simple design code for the application of Bamboo as a construction
material.
The United States Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory (1966, 2000) reported a study providing a set of
instructions on how to properly construct a variety of structures and structural elements using Bamboo. This study
suggested not to use green, unseasoned Bamboo for general construction, nor to use un-waterproofed Bamboo in
concrete. Concerning Bamboo reinforced concrete, it was found that the concrete mix designs may be the same as that
used with steel, with a slump as low as workability will allow. It was recommended that the amount of Bamboo
reinforcement in concrete be 3- 4% of the concrete‟s cross-sectional area as the optimum amount. It concludes that
Bamboo reinforced concrete is a potential alternative light construction method at a low cost.
Amada et al. (1997) investigated the mechanical and physical properties of Bamboo. They conducted a
thorough investigation into the structure and purposes of the nodes, which they found to strengthen the Bamboo Culm.
They also commented on the advantage Bamboo has over other natural building materials with its fast growth rate.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

Masani (1977) conducted an in-depth study outlining the proper ways to utilize Bamboo in construction. A
listing of the positive aspects of Bamboo is given, citing examples pertaining to its economical, mechanical, and
environmental properties. When used as reinforcement in concrete, directions are given to insure a better performance,
including discussions on waterproofing, pressure-treating, concrete design, and beam design. This study found that the
Bamboo reinforcement area should be 5 times the typical steel reinforcement area, and that even when fine cracks
develop on the surface of Bamboo, the load carrying capacity of the member is not reduced. The only negative
properties of Bamboo given are its susceptibility to attack by insects, fungi and dried bamboo is prone to catch fire.
Amada and Untao (2001) studied the fracture properties of Bamboo. In contradiction to other studies, this
study states that the tensile strength of Bamboo fibres almost corresponds to that of steel. The main discovery is that the
fracture properties of Bamboo depend upon the origin of fracture. In the nodes, it is found that the average fracture
toughness is lower than the minimum value of the entire Culm, suggesting that the fibres in the nodes do not contribute
any fracture resistance.
Power (2004) tells of a study conducted by the U.K. Department of International Development in response to
a devastating earthquake that killed 40,000 people in Iran. The engineers were looking for cheap earthquake-proof
housing to take the place of mud brick. They constructed a prototype Bamboo reinforced concrete house and used an
earthquake simulator to find that the house stood sound during a 7.8 (on the Richter scale) earthquake. They found no
cracking in the concrete, the Bamboo to be extremely resilient to earthquakes, and the cost to be split in half compared
to mud-and-brick construction.
Seinfeld (2001) researched the remarkable current uses of Bamboo around the world. In the United States, it is
almost completely used as decoration. A discussion is presented on the astonishing feature Bamboo brings to the table
as mentioned in other articles. Another special feature about Bamboo is that harvesting Bamboo does not harm the
plant, producing more of its timbers. Bamboo buildings are definitely a prospect of the future in the US; however in
Asia, the Pacific islands, and South & Central America, they are quite traditional. The main prevention of Bamboo
structures in America are building codes. There are not standardized codes for buildings of Bamboo though there are
attempts towards them. Bamboo is also still being looked at as a way to clean environmental pollution. It is a consumer
of Nitrogen, which could soon be part of a huge effort to prevent air pollution.
The American Bamboo Society (2005) provided a very intricate collection of specialized terms followed by
their definitions relating to Bamboo. It also has a glossary of questions and answers common to someone new to the
topic. These questions ranged from identifying Bamboo, preserving Bamboo, finding help with your Bamboo, to other
topics not as closing connected to the research of this project.
A study reported in International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR) (2002) considered the advantages
and disadvantages of Bamboo used as a structural material. The advantages found in their study concluded to be areas
of: ecological value, good mechanical properties, social and economic value, and energy consumption. They found
disadvantages to be: preservation, fire risk, and natural growth.
XIV. CONCLUSIONS AND SCOPE FOR FUTURE WORK
In this project we have opted advanced bamboo reinforcement technique instead of traditional steel
reinforcement. This is a good idea for low cost economical structure. Bamboo reinforcement technique is used for both
main and distribution reinforcement as it was same earlier done for steel reinforcement. It is three times cheaper then
steel reinforcement technique. It is clear from results that this bamboo reinforcement technique is absolutely cheaper
then steel reinforcement technique especially for single story structure.

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

XV. SCOPE FOR FUTURE WORK
Bamboo is a versatile material because of its high strength-to-weight ratio, easy workability and availability.
The Analysis of the replacement of steel with bamboo as reinforcement shows that reinforcement with bamboo is quite
cheaper than that of steel reinforcement. The positive attributes of Bamboo are listed, supporting its environment-
friendly nature. But there are some negative attributes of Bamboo were also given, focusing on its tendency to absorb
water. Of those, the bonding between the Bamboo and concrete is considered the biggest problem due to absorption of
water and smooth wall of the Bamboo Culm. Also there is a need for the development of a simple design code for the
application of Bamboo as a Construction material. Several Researches are ongoing to overcome these problems. Many
new techniques are being developed which may make bamboo the best constructional material in future. It has wide
scope in Low Cost Constructions.
REFERENCES
[1] Bhalla , S., Janssen J.A.J “ Design Bamboo As Green Alterative To Concrete And Steel For Moder Structures.”
[2] Chariar.V.M., “Fabrication and Testing of Jute Reinforced Engineered Bamboo Structural Elements.”
[3] Dutta, B.N. “Estimate & Costing in Civil Engineering.”
[4] Francis E. Brink and Paul J. Rush “Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Construction.”
[5] Jules.,J. “Designing and Building with Bamboo.”
[6] Punamia,B C., Jain, A., Jain,A.K. “ RCC Designs (Reinforced Concrete Structure)”
[7] Reijenga,I,T. “The Role of Bamboo in Green Building Design.”
[8] Varghese,P.C, “Design of Reinforce Concrete Structure.”
[9] H. E. Glenn. "Bamboo reinforcement in portland cement concrete,"
[10] E. F. Smith and K. L. Saucier. Vicksburg, Mississippi, "Precast concrete elements with bamboo reinforcement,"
[11] S. R. Mehra and R. G. Ghosh. "Bamboo-reinforced soil-cement," Civil Engineering and Public Works Review, Vol. 60, no. 711, October
1965; vol. 60, no. 712. November 1965.
[12] "Concrete floors on ground," Portland Cement Association Concrete Information, ST-51.
[13] American Concrete Institute. "Building code requirements for reinforced concrete," (ACI 318 -56). May 1956.
[14] Department of the Navy, Bureau of Yards and Docks. Design Manual NAVDOCKS DM-2, Structural Engineering. October 1964.

Construction and Building Materials 188 (2018) 1092–1100
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat
Experimental evaluation of bamboo reinforced concrete slab panels

Pankaj R. Mali ⇑, D. Datta
Department of Applied Mechanics, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur 440010, India
h i g h l i g h t s
Enhancement of bond strength at bamboo concrete interface.

Application of newly developed bamboo reinforcement in RC slab panels.
Improvement in flexural performance of slab panels with proposed bamboo reinforcement.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Reinforced concrete structural members are primarily subjected to static gravity loads. The conventional
Received 10 May 2018 steel reinforcement is used to provide additional tensile strength and energy absorption capacity to con-
Received in revised form 11 August 2018 crete members. But conventional M.S. (Mild steel) or HYSD (High Yielding Strength Deformed) bars are
Accepted 25 August 2018
heavy in weight, costly, nonrenewable and un-ecofriendly material. Aiming to mitigate this concern a
Available online 3 September 2018
sustainable, renewable, ecofriendly material like bamboo has been used as substitute to steel in the pre-
sent work. Bamboo-concrete Bond behaviour was first studied through a series of pull-out tests. Bond
Keywords:
strength investigation has resulted in a unique bamboo strip profile along with a surface treatment the
Bamboo reinforced concrete
Flexural test
combination of which exhibited maximum bond strength under uniaxial loading. This new bamboo strip
Bamboo reinforcement is further used as main reinforcement in concrete slab panels. Feasibility and effectiveness of this unique
Bond strength bamboo profile used as reinforcement was investigated through experimental testing of concrete slab
Semicircular groove panels. A total 15 concrete slab panels were fabricated and tested as per Eurocode EN-1448-5 (2006).
Mechanical strength The effect of total replacement of main steel reinforcement by bamboo on the flexural behaviour of slabs
in terms of load-deformation characteristics, energy absorption capacity, crack patterns and failure
modes have been studied. Test results show that there is improvement in the load carrying and deforma-
tion capacity when proposed bamboo strip is used as reinforcement in concrete slab panels as compared
to that of PCC (Plain Cement Concrete) and RCC (Reinforced Cement Concrete) slabs. Interestingly the
structural behaviour of slabs using newly developed bamboo reinforcement has shown significant
improvement in flexural performance and it was marginally better than the RC slabs having M.S. bars
as main reinforcement.
Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction material. Considering the limitations of these synthetic fibers the

focus has been to use renewable and sustainable material. These
The reinforcing of concrete structures has been studied by using are natural fibers which contains lignocellulosic materials in their
fibrous reinforcement materials. These fibrous reinforcements composition. There are many such materials exist in the nature
include synthetic and natural fiber. Besides synthetic fibers other which have the potential to be used in concrete and make concrete
materials such as steel, glass and carbon in fibrous form have been structures more sustainable and ecofriendly. One such fiber which
used as concrete reinforcement along with concrete. Although belongs to Grass family is bamboo [1].
these conventional materials provide significant improvement in Conventional RC structures are made up of steel and concrete.
properties of concrete they are obtained from nonrenewable and This form of structures is built because of their ability to withstand
unsustainable sources which makes them a costly building high loads, ease in construction, durability, etc. Over the period of
time especially, in last two decades, there is a tremendous increase
⇑ Corresponding author. in demand for housing and infrastructure and the majority of them
E-mail addresses: pankaj04.m@gmail.com (P.R. Mali), debaratidatta@apm.vnit.
is RC structures. To meet this requirement, the production rate of
ac.in (D. Datta). cement and steel are boosted and now reaching to the point of
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.08.162
0950-0618/Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P.R. Mali, D. Datta / Construction and Building Materials 188 (2018) 1092–1100 1093
saturation. The scenario in developing countries is not so favorable with Styrofoam as infill panel which is a type of expanded poly-
as the demand for this conventional material kept on increasing styrene (EPS). EPS is a recyclable and ecofriendly material. It was
but the amount of material is limited. Moreover, the level of reported that slabs casted with the combination of bamboo rein-
destruction caused to the atmosphere is enormous. The amount forcement and EPS infill panel becomes light in weight by 27%,
of CO2 released in the atmosphere is about 50 times higher in steel with 6% decrease in load carrying capacity. The bond slip strength
and cement production compared to bamboo which consumes of the bamboo reinforcement could have been improved more by
1-tonne of CO2 during its growth [2,3]. Being the fastest growing incorporating additional mechanical action at bamboo concrete
renewable, eco-friendly material, it could be a proper and a interface. This might have helped in enhancing load-deformation
sustainable alternative to conventional steel reinforcement. behaviour of BRC slabs. [8] in 2016 has investigated the flexural
There are more than 1200 species of bamboo currently noted behaviour of bamboo based ferrocement slab panels. They have
around the globe [3]. The availability of bamboo species depends used bamboo strip skeletal as reinforcement in one-way slabs
upon the locality, type of soil, climatic condition, water, etc. Inter- along with chicken wire mesh. The effect of replacement of cement
estingly the availability of bamboo is very high in regions adjacent by fly ash and with variation in thickness of slab has been studied.
to developing countries. Also, in small villages of these countries The results of slabs tested under monotonically increasing uni-
bamboo is being used extensively as a building material from long formly distributed flexural load show that the first crack load
past. and ultimate loads were similar in both type of slabs. The contribu-
The traditional method of selecting engineering materials is no tion of bamboo strips with respect to mortar and wire mesh of the
longer solely based on strength, efficiency and cost, but additional theoretical ultimate capacity of slab was about three times higher
consideration must be given to the performance of the material, corresponding to the experimental ultimate load capacity. [9] in
not only in terms of structural capacity but also in terms of the 2001 used babudua bamboo bars (Thalia Geniculata) as main rein-
environment. Bamboo in its natural form is a highly efficient mate- forcement in one-way slabs. There was significant improvement
rial. With these additional parameters under consideration, bam- in both flexural and shear strength of slabs relative to the theoret-
boo quickly becomes a potential reinforcing material for ically predicted results. These slabs have exhibited high ductile
structural use [3]. behaviour and produced large deflections prior to failure. [10] in
From technical perspective bamboo is a fast-growing grass. It 2003 also used babudua T. Geniculata bamboo bars as main rein-
has high strength to weight ratio (about six times higher compared forcement in two-way slabs which are supported on all four sides.
to steel) compared to reinforcing steel; it reaches its optimum This time this author has tested the slabs under monotonic as well
strength in 3–4 years and attains complete maturity in 5 years. as cyclic loading and it was observed that there was significant
Like a steel bar it can support both tension and compression paral- improvement in flexural strength and punching shear strength of
lel to fibers, whereas many other materials cannot withstand these slabs than those of theoretically predicted values under both
against compression loading. However, being an organic material, type of loading conditions. Babudua bamboo reinforcement in con-
durability of the material is a drawback for bamboo [4]. crete slab has provided adequate stiffness against deflection. [11]
Many researchers have carried out their experimentation on the in 2015 have investigated the effect of bamboo reinforcement on
feasibility of using bamboo as alternative reinforcement in struc- flexural behaviour of slab panels under centrally uniformly dis-
tural concrete. The use of raw bamboo either full culm or in the tributed load. They reported that the slabs have performed better
form of splints (A strip of bamboo culm) has three major disadvan- when bamboo and steel reinforcement are used together, com-
tages. The first one is the durability of bamboo strips over a consid- pared to steel reinforcement samples (control specimens) as well
erable period of time inside structural concrete leading to as bamboo reinforcement samples (bamboo alone). [12] in 2014
weakening and splitting of bamboo fibers due to water absorption. tested BRC slabs under concentrated uniformly distributed load.
The second is chemical decomposition of bamboo due to alkaline The design moment was found less than the experimental ultimate
nature of aqueous concrete. The third is the loss of bonding moment. It is reported that this behaviour of BRC slabs was very
between bamboo and concrete due to inadequate chemical and similar to the conventional RCC slabs and hence working stress
mechanical action at the interface. The above issues have been method can be used to design BRC elements. [13] in 2013 have
addressed by many researchers. A few important works have been used bamboo splints as reinforcing material in bamboo reinforced
discussed below to study the structural behavior of bamboo rein- concrete wall panels (BRCWP). The bamboo reinforcement cage
forced concrete (BRC) members. In 2016, [5] have investigated was prepared as per the guidelines of NBC India (2016), part-6.
impact behaviour of BRC simply supported one-way slabs The bamboo splints of width 20 mm and thickness around 8–
(300 mm x 300 mm) under impact loading. The concrete used for 15 mm have been used with simple varnish coating and sand blast-
casting slab panels consist of rice husk in 5% and 10% proportion ing. The wall panels are then tested under uniformly distributed
(with respect to Ordinary Portland Cement complying to ASTM eccentric loading from top and bottom ends resembling a two
type I). The effect of bamboo diameter and slab thickness on action of load. The effect of aspect ratio (AR: 1.6–2) and thickness
impact strength of slab panels were studied during the experimen- ratio (TR: 12.5–15) on ultimate load and deformations at prede-
tation. It is reported that there exists a linear relationship for first fined locations have been observed during the experimentation.
and ultimate crack strength with respect to bamboo diameter and While slenderness ratio and grade of concrete were kept constant.
slab thickness in both type of concrete mix. The impact strength of It was reported that ultimate load of BRCWP increases with
these BRC slabs compared to conventional RCC slabs (control spec- increase in TR and it decreases with increase in AR. An equation
imens) needs further investigation. [6] in 2013 investigated the was proposed based on the observation to predict the ultimate
performance of BRC slab panels subjected to impact loading. In this load of BRCWP. The previous research work shows that bamboo
work, they have used oil palm shells (OPS) as substitute to conven- has the required potential to be used as main reinforcement in
tional aggregate inside concrete mix with OPS to cement ratio as structural concrete. Such BRC members can be more durable if
0.45 and 0.6. The impact strength for first crack was mainly influ- the bamboo concrete bond behaviour is taken care. The efficiency
enced by bamboo diameter but it is even more sensitive to slab of the proposed bamboo strip profile along with the surface treat-
thickness. ment has been explored experimentally in the present study.
Several researches had been carried out specifically on use of In the present work, feasibility and performance of slab panels
bamboo strip as main reinforcement in slab panels. For instance, using bamboo strips as main reinforcement has been investigated
[7] in 2017 have examined the flexural performance of BRC slabs experimentally. Fifteen slabs were tested which include three
1094 P.R. Mali, D. Datta / Construction and Building Materials 188 (2018) 1092–1100
major categories i.e. PCC (Plain cement concrete), RCC (Reinforced

cement concrete), and BRC (bamboo reinforced concrete). The
experimentation included a series of flexure tests performed using b
Flexural testing machine (FTM). The flexural performance of each
slab panel under concentrated loading was investigated
experimentally. L
2. Experimental programme Fig. 1. Regular plain rectangular bamboo strip.
The experimentation has been carried out in the following steps:
General Characteristics of Bamboo Reinforcement 10 10

Bamboo Surface Treatment and procedure mm mm
Casting and Curing Concrete slab panels
Testing Methodology a/2
Ø=10mm b
2.1. General characteristics of bamboo reinforcement
Selection of bamboo from many available species was difficult. There is a huge
variation in bamboo species from the site and culm position. There were many spe-
cies of bamboo available in the local region. So, only one has to be shortlisted. This
L
is done with the help of literature related to the cultivation and harvesting of bam-
boo along with field experts in the local bamboo industry. It was decided, to use Fig. 2. Semicircular grooved rectangular bamboo strip.
Bambusa arundinacea (Katang) as it is found suitable than other species in terms
of its mechanical and physical properties. National Building code of India (NBC)
when a 10 mm diameter semicircular groove created at a spacing of 20 mm c/c in a
[14] have mentioned its use for construction purposes.
zigzag manner.
The bamboo samples chosen for study were between 4 and 5 years of age. At
In the present work for bamboo surface treatment a total of six chemical coat-
this age, this species shows the highest performance in terms of its mechanical
ings were explored. Among the treatments Bond tite chemical was found most
and physical characteristics [2,15]. The density is very high because bamboo sam-
effective in improving bond strength. The surface treatment was carried out in
ples used in the present work are mainly from the bottom region of a well grown
two-steps. In the first step, solution of Bond Tite chemical was prepared, this consist
up bamboo culm. The average density value obtained for the chosen bamboo sam-
mixing of two parts, part A and part B as per the standard proportion mentioned by
ples was 1125 kg/m3 While harvesting bamboo culm, it is ensured that the overall
the manufacturer, i.e. 100:100 by volume or 100:80 by weight, it was then applied
geometry is straight enough and free from fungus or damage, so the final samples
to the bamboo strips prepared for making slab panel specimens. This coating will
represent well distributed fibers (the fiber concentration of bamboo culm was max-
ensure that the bamboo strips remains water repellent. Immediately after the coat-
imum at the outside region of the culm compared to the inside region). This exer-
ing of chemical mixture, the bamboo strips are helically wrapped with a single layer
cise helped to select good samples representing good physical and mechanical
of plain steel wire with uniform diameter of 1 mm and yield strength of 400 MPa.
properties [16].
Finally, the coated specimens are subjected to sand blasting process; sand particles
The raw bamboo culm was first processed in the laboratory. After procuring
used in the process were of size 1 mm to 2 mm. Both types of bamboo strip rein-
bamboo samples they are first cleaned manually to remove any natural substances
forcement (plain and grooved) develops initial friction with a combined effect of
attached to its exterior surface, then these samples are kept in a 6% boric acid solu-
sand particles and wrapped steel wire at bamboo concrete interface. The grooved
tion with normal water for 72 h. This exercise is done to protect bamboo from ter-
and plain bamboo reinforcement post surface treatment are shown in Figs. 3 and
mites and insects to prevent borers attack before the application of bamboo as
4, respectively.
reinforcement. After 72 h bamboo culms are air dried in mild temperature for
In the present work Bond Tite chemical adhesive was used to coat exterior sur-
5 days. Then these well processed samples are used for making splints (Size:
face of the bamboo strip. The quantity (weight based) of this mixture required to
600 mm x 20 mm 10 mm) used as reinforcement. These specimens were having
form a uniform thin coating on the plain bamboo strip is about 10 gm, which cost
moisture content of 25% with density of 1125 kg/m3 [16–18].
8/-. Apart from this, on an average 1.5/- per meter was required to procure raw
To find out the physical and mechanical properties of the chosen bamboo spe-
bamboo strip. The treatment also included fine sand particles (20 gm) and wrapped
cies, guidelines provided by IS: 6874 [19] and ISO 22157 [20] have been followed.
thin steel wire (2 m), which together cost around 2/- per meter length of the bam-
Table 1, shows results of various mechanical properties. Finally, these selected bam-
boo strip. Therefore, total cost of complete treatment for one-meter bamboo strip is
boo specimens are further subjected to surface treatment to eliminate shrinkage of
11.5/- nearly same amount is required for grooved bamboo strip also. Therefore,
bamboo inside concrete.
the ratio of the cost of steel reinforcement to the cost of treated bamboo strip per
meter length is 1.3, 2.08, 3.2 for 6 mm; 8 mm and 10 mm diameter bar and this cost
2.2. Bamboo surface treatment and procedure increases even more as the diameter of reinforcing bar increases. Hence cost wise
treated bamboo strips are economical than that of the conventional steel
In order to study and improve bamboo-concrete bond behaviour a series of pull- reinforcement.
out tests were carried out. During these tests, the effect of chemical action due to Unlike conventional steel, the manufacturing of bond tite chemical adhesive
surface treatment and effect of mechanical action due to grooves on bamboo profile does not have any hazardous impact on the surrounding atmosphere in the form
was studied extensively. Many groove profile patterns for bamboo along with var-
ious surface coatings were studied together, to arrive at most effective surface treat-
ment and groove pattern.
It is ensured that the conventional bamboo strip is plain along the length and
possesses a rectangular cross section approximately as shown in Fig. 1
(20 mm 10 mm). The newly developed bamboo profile consist of semicircular
grooves along the thickness of same (plain) bamboo as shown in Fig. 2 The groove
pattern is designed such that maximum pull-out strength is developed at the bam-
boo - concrete interface through the groove concrete interlocking. This is achieved
Table 1
Mechanical properties of B. arundinacea.
S.N. Type of test Parameter Bambusa arundinacea

1 Tension Young’s Modulus (MPa) 7560
Stress at peak (MPa) 200
Peak displacement (mm) 2.71
2 Compression Compressive strength (MPa) 65.10
3 Static bending Flexural strength (MPa) 90.42
4 Shear Shear strength (MPa) 7.20
Fig. 3. Preparation of grooved bamboo reinforcement.
2.3. Casting and curing of concrete samples
2.3.1. Selection of type of concrete

Only one grade of concrete (M20) was used as concrete is a common part in this
work. The mix design and testing of concrete specimens (cube) was carried out as
per the guidelines of IS 10262 and IS 456 [21,22]. Final mix proportion along with
other important properties are shown in Table 2. In the mixed design, the coarse
aggregate quantity was used as a combination of 20 mm and 10 mm size aggregate
in the ratio of 70:30 in order to easily accommodate concrete mass with 10 mm size
aggregate into the semicircular groove thereby establishing bamboo-concrete inter-
locking. The cement used is Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) 53 grade complying to
IS 12,269 [23]. After casting and 28 days curing of concrete specimens these were
tested for determining important properties, as reported at Table 2.
The slab test specimens were divided into five categories; each category con-
sisting of three specimens each. Amongst the five categories two were control cat-
egory which were identified as PCC (Plain cement concrete) and RCC (Reinforced
cement concrete). The remaining three categories were basically of BRC slab panels.
These samples were given identification based on the type of bamboo reinforce-
ment used. They were: UTBRC i.e. Untreated (plain) BRC slab panels, PTBRC i.e. Plain
treated BRC slab panels, GTBRC i.e. Grooved treated BRC slab panels.
Fig. 4. Preparation of plain bamboo reinforcement.

2.3.2. Casting of slab panel test specimens
As per the guidelines of European standard EN 14488-5 [24] the casting of all
of harmful gas emissions as reported in technical and material safety data sheet. slab specimens was done. A square type PCC, RCC, and BRC slab panels were casted.
Being a versatile adhesive, it is easy to use and can function in any weather condi- Fig. 5 shows schematic representation of slab panel specimen and its test setup.
tions. Also, this chemical possesses excellent thermal properties as well as extre- The main reinforcement cage prepared for BRC as well as RCC types of slabs are
mely low water absorption. shown in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively. This reinforcement cage was placed inside the
Table 2
Properties of the concrete.
Mix Proportion C: S: A Compression (MPa) Tensile Flexural Specific Slump (mm)

strength (MPa) strength (MPa) weight (kg/m3)
1:2.46:4.07 at water to cement ratio of 0.55 Strength Elastic modulus Design strength 2.35 4.7 2400 45
28 24,000 20
600 mm
500 mm 600 mm
500 mm
P (kN)
100 mm 25 mm
25 mm
20mm x10mm 10 mm
@100mm C/C 16 mm 50 mm
diameter steel
10 mm
150 mm bar
100 mm
Fig. 5. Schematic representation of slab panels and supporting frame used during test.
Fig. 9. Slab panel subjected to central concentrated load.

Fig. 6. Casting of PTBRC and GTBRC slab panels.
2.4. Testing Methodology
The experimental setup consisted of a FTM confirming to 4.2 and 4.3 of EN

12390-4 (2000) of 100 kN capacity [25]. The load cell was used to apply concen-
trated loading as shown in Fig. 8. Digital LVDT (Linear Variable Displacement Trans-
ducer) was used to measure the deformation placed at the centre of slab, as shown
in Fig. 9.
Specimen was placed inside the set up prepared for flexure test as shown in
Fig. 8. It was ensured that loading head, central cross section of specimen and fixed
bottom support lies in one vertical plane. The load was gradually applied at the
interval of 100 N/S. The readings of load and deformation were recorded by a cali-
brated electronic control system attached with a host PC. The specimens were
loaded till the failure. The results of slab panels obtained from FTM are summarized
in Table 3. The load and deflections at instant of first crack and at ultimate stage
were recorded.
Fig. 7. Casting of UTBRC and RCC slab panels.

3. Test results and discussions
mould uniformly at an effective cover of 25 mm from bottom and all four side The calculation of ductility and energy absorption capacity
edges. parameters for slab samples was carried out with the help of these
In RCC slabs the steel rebars used were of 6 mm diameter and a yield strength of
250 MPa (IS Fe-250 grade) placed at 110 mm c/c (0.3%). The casting of all 15 slabs
results. The PCC slabs have showed linear elastic behaviour up to
was carried out in batches. Each batch consists of three slab samples and three cube first crack load of 35 kN at an average displacement of 2.2 mm as
specimens to ascertain concrete compressive strength. The average cube strength of shown in Fig. 10.
each batch at the age of 7 days and 28 days was 19 MPa and 28 MPa, respectively. After the first crack, the slabs failed suddenly showing a brittle
The slab panels after casting kept for initial setting of fresh concrete remained at
mode of failure as seen by the crack pattern in Fig. 11. The maxi-
room temperature of 280c and humidity of 50% in laboratory. These specimens were
demoulded after 24 h. and kept inside curing tank under normal temperature for mum load supported by PCC slabs was 37 kN at an average dis-
28 days. Overall size of each slab was 600 mm 600 mm 100 mm; the cross sec- placement of 2.35 mm. The brittle mode of failure is mainly
tion of bamboo strip used was 20 mm 10 mm, approximately. The spacing of because of absence of any reinforcing material in concrete. Results
bamboo reinforcement was 100 mm c/c (2%) with a total length of 550 mm in each in Table 3, shows that PCC slabs have least ductility and energy
principal direction. The slab specimen was resting on a solid circular rod of 16 mm
absorption capacity.
diameter which was attached to a square shape supporting frame made of hard
steel material using I-section as shown in cross section of Fig. 5. The solid circular Table 3 shows that conventional RCC slabs having 6 mm diam-
cross section rod acts like a continuous roller support along all the four sides. The eter steel bars in both principal directions have supported higher
span of slab was considered as c/c distance between two opposite rods -500 mm. average ultimate load of 70.9 kN at an average displacement of
7.8 mm. RCC slabs showed linear elastic behaviour as observed in
Fig. 12 till the point where load nearly reaches to a constant value
at the occurrence of first crack. The failure of RCC slabs was
because of diagonal tension cracks as can be seen from the crack
patterns at tension face (bottom side) of the slab panel shown in
Fig. 13. The deformation ductility and energy absorption capacity
were found to be maximum in this category among all of the slabs
considered.
From Table 3, it was observed that UTBRC slabs have sustained
ultimate load of 60.6 kN at average displacement of 5.48 mm
before failure. This ultimate load was 51% higher than ultimate
load of PCC slabs. Similarly, there was improvement in the ductility
and energy absorption capacity of UTBRC slabs compared to PCC
slabs. This confirms the effect of bamboo strip reinforcement, even
though it was untreated, it increased the slab strength compared to
PCC.
Fig. 14 shows that initially slabs behave in a linear elastic man-
ner till the ultimate load was reached, then the curve starts drop-
Fig. 8. FTM used during slab testing. ping rapidly from the point of failure. In the crack pattern observed
Table 3
Experimental Results of Loads and Deflections.
Slab series Load at First Deflection at First Ultimate Deflection at Ultimate Ratio of Ultimate load Ratio of Deflection at Ultimate Energy Absorption
Crack (kN) Crack load (mm) Load (kN) load (mm) to first crack load load to first crack load (Joules)
PCC-1 35 2.1 41.0 2.5 1.2 1.171 61.0
PCC-2 34 2.3 38.9 2.4 1.1 1.040 53.4
PCC-3 37 2.3 40.0 2.4 1.0 1.045 57.2
Average 35 ± 1.5 2.26 ± 0.1 40.03 ± 1 2.45 ± 0.06 1.134 1.085 57.19 ± 3
RCC-1 55 3.0 71.6 8.4 1.3 2.789 535.5
RCC-2 53 2.9 70.5 7.6 1.3 2.545 466.0
RCC-3 50 2.8 70.6 7.7 1.4 2.745 407.8
Average 53 ± 2.5 2.92 ± 0.1 70.92 ± 0.6 7.87 ± 0.42 1.349 2.693 469.83 ± 63
UTBRC-1 40 2.8 58.3 6.1 1.4 2.183 289.2
UTBRC-2 41 2.9 62.7 5.9 1.5 2.024 281.5
UTBRC-3 42 3.2 60.9 5.5 1.4 1.706 211.5
Average 41 ± 1 2.98 ± 0.2 60.61 ± 2 5.84 ± 0.34 1.478 1.971 260.79 ± 42
PTBRC-1 45 3.0 71.3 6.7 1.6 2.299 289.1
PTBRC-2 44 2.7 69.4 7.3 1.6 2.692 338.3
PTBRC-3 48 2.4 69.4 7.0 1.4 2.922 337.8
Average 46 ± 2 2.70 ± 0.3 70.11 ± 1 7.05 ± 0.19 1.538 2.637 321.74 ± 28
GTBRC-1 58 2.6 79.4 9.6 1.4 3.678 411.6
GTBRC-2 55 2.3 75.5 9.2 1.4 3.980 506.6
GTBRC-3 60 2.4 76.3 9.1 1.3 3.794 379.6
Average 58 ± 5.5 2.43 ± 0.1 77.09 ± 2 9.27 ± 0.25 1.338 3.817 432.63 ± 66
Fig. 12. Load-deflection response of RCC slab.

Fig. 10. Load-deflection response of PCC slab.
Fig. 11. Crack pattern in PCC slab.

Fig. 13. Crack pattern in RCC slab.
at Fig. 15 reported diagonal tension crack except few which moves load by 75% and 51% compared to PCC and UTBRC slabs, respec-
normal towards the four sides of the slab. tively. The ultimate load of PTBRC slab has reached very close to
Fig. 16 shows linear elastic behaviour of PTBRC slabs till the that of RCC slabs. The average maximum deformation of PTBRC
ultimate load was reached and then the curve drops suddenly. slabs was relatively less than those of RCC slabs. It can be seen that
The results of PTBRC slabs have showed an increase in ultimate the crack on the bottom face has initiated from centre of slab and
Fig. 14. Load-deflection response of UTBRC slab.
Fig. 17. Crack pattern in PTBRC slab.
Fig. 18. Load-deflection response of GTBRC slab.

Fig. 15. Crack pattern in UTBRC slab.
was higher than other BRC slabs and it was very close (8.6% less) to
RCC slabs. The additional increase in load carrying capacity was
primarily because of adequate bonding between bamboo and
concrete.
The enhancement in bamboo-concrete bond has significantly
improved the bamboo concrete composite action. The chemical
action of surface treatment and mechanical action of groove-
concrete interlocking simultaneously were responsible for provid-
ing the additional bond strength. This resulted in increased flexural
strength of slab panels having bamboo reinforcement which were
Fig. 16. Load-deflection response of PTBRC slab.
propagated towards four sides of slabs as shown in Fig. 17. Energy

absorbed by PTBRC slabs is 23% more than UTBRC slabs
This indicates that the proposed surface treatment improved
the bamboo concrete composite action, by enhancing bond
strength at the bamboo-concrete interface. Further these treated
plain bamboos are grooved and used in slab panels (GTBRC).
GTBRC slabs showed increase in ultimate load by 92.5%, 8.7%,
27.2% and 10% as compared to PCC, RCC, UTBRC and PTBRC slab
panels, respectively, as showed in Table 3.
Fig. 18 shows that these slabs had linear elastic behaviour
before failure takes place. Energy absorption capacity of these slabs Fig. 19. Crack pattern in GTBRC slab.
Fig. 20. Comparison of Load-deflection response of all slabs.
treated and grooved as per the proposed procedure. The failure of Acknowledgement
GTBRC slab specimen was assessed by the crack pattern shown in
Fig. 19. In this case, the cracks have originated on the tension side, This research was financially supported by Technical Education
at the periphery of rectangular loading plunger and radiated diag- Quality improvement Programme -II (TEQIP-II) An initiative of
onally towards each corner indicating ductile mode of failure. Ministry of Human Resource and Development (MHRD), Govern-
Fig. 20 compares the behaviour of all of the 5 types of slab pan- ment of India.
els under concentrated flexural loading. The effect of reinforcing
material on flexural strength of slabs can be observed from the
curves shown in Fig. 20. Flexural strength increases from PCC to References
GTBRC slab panels. This is because of the contribution of tensile
[1] A. Anandamurthy, V. Guna, M. Ilangovan, N. Reddy, A review of fibrous
strength and energy absorption capacity of bamboo strip reinforce- reinforcements of concrete, J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 36 (7) (2017) 519–552.
ment used in untreated, treated and grooved treated forms. [2] Y. Xiao, R.Z. Yang, B. Shan, Production, environmental impact and mechanical
properties of glubam, Constr. Build. Mater. 1 (44) (2013) 765–773.
[3] B. Sharma, A. Gatoo, M. Bock, H. Mulligan, M. Ramage, Engineered bamboo:
4. Observations and conclusions state of the art, Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng,-Constr. Mater. 168 (2) (2014) 57–67.
[4] S.R. Imadi, I. Mahmood, A.G. Kazi, Bamboo fiber processing, properties, and
applications, in: Biomass and Bioenergy, Springer, Cham, 2014, pp. 27–46.
The present research investigated the flexural performance of [5] Z.C. Muda, S. Beddu, A. Syamsir, J.S. Ating, N.L. Kamal, K.N. Mustapha, S.
BRC slab panels under concentrated loading. The contribution of Thiruchelvam, F. Usman, M.A. Alam, A.H. Birima, O.S. Zaroog, Impact resistance
behaviour of light weight rice husk concrete with bamboo reinforcement, IOP
bamboo strips of B. arundinacea which are used as main reinforce- Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, IOP Publishing, 2016. 1,
ment in concrete slab panels was investigated experimentally. The 012020.
experimental investigation showed that the first crack load of slabs [6] Z.C. Muda, F. Usman, S. Beddu, M.A. Alam, S. Thiruchelvam, L.M. Sidek, H. Basri,
S. Saadi, Impact resistance performance of green construction material using
increases in the order of ‘PCC’, ‘UTBRC’, ‘PTBRC’, ‘RCC’; ‘GTBRC’. In light weight oil palm shells reinforced bamboo concrete slab, IOP Conference
the other hand the increase in ultimate load carrying capacity Series: Earth and Environmental Science, IOP Publishing, 2013. 1, 012063.
alters in the sequence of ‘PCC’(minimum), ‘UTBRC’, ‘RCC’ ‘PTBRC’, [7] A. Wibowo, I. Wijatmiko, C.R. Nainggola, Structural behavior of lightweight
bamboo reinforced concrete slab with EPS infill panel, AIP Conf. Proc., AIP
‘GTBRC’. The contribution of bamboo strips with respect to PCC
Publishing, 2017. 1, 020024.
in each of the BRC slab was around 1.5–2 times higher in increasing [8] S.J. Chithambaram, S. Kumar, Flexural behaviour of bamboo based ferrocement
flexural strength at limited deflections and it was similar to those slab panels with flyash, Constr. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 641–648.
of conventional RCC slabs. The energy absorption capacity of [9] C.K. Kankam, B. Odum-Ewuakye, Flexural behaviour of babadua reinforced
one-way slabs subjected to third-point loading, Constr. Build. Mater. 15 (1)
GTBRC slabs under the same deflections was relatively higher by (2001) 27–33.
48%, 21% and 9% than PCC, UTBRC and PTBRC slabs respectively. [10] C.K. Kankam, B. Odum-Ewuakye, Babadua reinforced concrete two-way slabs
The overall research showed that instead of using treated plain subjected to concentrated loading, Constr. Build. Mater. 20 (5) (2006) 279–
285.
bamboo strip, the proposed grooved bamboo strip (2%) used in [11] P.M. Perera and C.S. Lewangamage. Experimental investigation on flexural
concrete slab panels, improved flexural strength, energy absorp- behaviour of bamboo reinforced concrete slab panels. <https://www.
tion capacity, ductility and mode of failure (ductile) compared to researchgate.net/profile/Jude_Perera/publication/.pdf>.
[12] D. Bhonde, P.B. Nagarnaik, D.K. Parbat, U.P. Waghe, Experimental investigation
that of PTBRC and RCC (0.3%) slab panels. However, the durability of bamboo reinforced concrete slab, Am. J. Eng. Res. 3 (1) (2014) 128–131.
of such BRC members against the extreme atmospheric conditions [13] N. Ganesan, P.V. Indira, P.R. Himasree, Strength and behaviour of bamboo
needs further investigation. Finally, it can be concluded that bam- reinforced concrete wall panels under two way in-plane action, Adv. Concr.
Constr. 6 (1) (2018) 1–13.
boo strips of B. arundinacea if treated with this proposed technique [14] National Building Code of India, Group-2, Part 6 Section 3B, Bureau of Indian
can be used as reinforcing material in concrete slab panels. And Standards, New Delhi, 2005.
such type of BRC structural members can be used in low cost hous- [15] H.C. Lima, F.L. Willrich, N.P. Barbosa, M.A. Rosa, B.S. Cunha, Durability analysis
of bamboo as concrete reinforcement, Mater. Struct. 41 (5) (2008) 981–989.
ing as roofing member under a limited gravity loading situation.
[16] B. Sharma, A. Gatóo, M.H. Ramage, Effect of processing methods on the
This type of BRC slabs may prove to be very economical and eco- mechanical properties of engineered bamboo, Constr. Build. Mater. 15 (83)
friendly solution, compared to conventional RCC slabs. (2015) 95–101.
[17] Y.M. Zhang, Y.L. Yu, W.J. Yu, Effect of thermal treatment on the physical and
mechanical properties of Phyllostachys pubescens bamboo, Eur. J. Wood Wood
5. Conflict of interest Prod. 71 (1) (2013) 61–67.
[18] T. Tan, N. Rahbar, S.M. Allameh, S. Kwofie, D. Dissmore, K. Ghavami, W.O.
Soboyejo, Mechanical properties of functionally graded hierarchical bamboo
The authors declared that there are no conflict of interest. structures, Acta Biomater. 7 (10) (2011) 3796–3803.
Materials and Structures (2018) 51:102
https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1228-6 (0123456789().,-volV)
(0123456789().,-volV)
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Bamboo reinforced concrete: a critical review

Hector Archila . Sebastian Kaminski . David Trujillo . Edwin Zea Escamilla .
Kent A. Harries
Received: 20 January 2018 / Accepted: 16 July 2018 / Published online: 19 July 2018
Ó The Author(s) 2018
Abstract The use of small diameter whole-culm prototype three bay portal frame, that would not be
(bars) and/or split bamboo (a.k.a. splints or round uncommon in regions of the world where bamboo-
strips) has often been proposed as an alternative to reinforced concrete may be considered, is used to
relatively expensive reinforcing steel in reinforced illustrate bamboo reinforced concrete design and as a
concrete. The motivation for such replacement is basis for a life cycle assessment of the same. The
typically cost—bamboo is readily available in many authors conclude that, although bamboo is a material
tropical and sub-tropical locations, whereas steel with extraordinary mechanical properties, its use in
reinforcement is relatively more expensive—and bamboo-reinforced concrete is an ill-considered con-
more recently, the drive to find more sustainable cept, having significant durability, strength and stiff-
alternatives in the construction industry. This review ness issues, and does not meet the environmentally
addresses such ‘bamboo-reinforced concrete’ and friendly credentials often attributed to it.
assesses its structural and environmental performance
as an alternative to steel reinforced concrete. A Keywords Bamboo Bamboo reinforcement
Bamboo-reinforced concrete Concrete Durability
Life cycle assessment
H. Archila K. A. Harries
University of Bath, Bath, UK
H. Archila
Amphibia BASE, Bath, UK 1 Introduction
S. Kaminski The mechanical properties of bamboo and its avail-

Arup, London, UK
ability in developing regions has led to its empirical
D. Trujillo use as reinforcement in concrete structures. The
Coventry University, Coventry, UK proposition of its widespread use as a sustainable
alternative to steel in reinforced concrete structures,
E. Zea Escamilla
Head of Sustainable Building Research, Center for poses key questions to builders, engineers and
Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability, University of researchers with regards to its structural capacity and
Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland compatibility, as well as constructability and sustain-
ability issues. This paper discusses these issues,
K. A. Harries (&)
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA providing a holistic review of the literature in the
e-mail: kharries@pitt.edu field and a structural comparison between steel
102 Page 2 of 18 Materials and Structures (2018) 51:102
reinforcement and bamboo reinforcement in a typical values of strength and specific modulus. Some tests of
concrete structure. The principle scope of this review small ‘clear’ (i.e., defect free) specimens of bamboo
is intentionally limited to the use of small diameter have reported ultimate tensile strengths on the order of
whole-culm (bars) and/or split (a.k.a. splints or round 250 MPa (e.g., Zhou et al. [6] and Lu et al. [7]).
strips) bamboo. Recent advances in bamboo-compos- However, such results are not representative of the
ite materials may represent a viable bamboo-based strength that can be mobilised in a full or partial culm:
concrete reinforcing product that will be only briefly characteristic strength on the order of 40 MPa and safe
discussed in this paper. Other applications of bamboo- working stress for design on the order of 16 MPa—
derived materials in concrete structures such as similar to hardwood timber [1]. The tensile modulus of
bahareque construction, bamboo fibre reinforcement bamboo is on the order of 20 GPa [8], about 10% of
and bamboo ash admixtures are beyond the scope of that of steel. The specific modulus—the ratio of elastic
this discussion. modulus per unit density—for bamboo in the longi-
Bamboo is frequently referred as a highly renew- tudinal direction is approximately 25 9 106 m2/s2; a
able and high-strength alternative material to timber value comparable to both steel and Douglas Fir.
and, occasionally as a ‘strong-as-steel’ reinforcement However, unlike steel, the highly anisotropic nature of
for concrete. The high rate of biomass production and bamboo results in a specific modulus in the transverse
renewability of sustainably managed bamboo planta- or tangential directions barely a tenth of the longitu-
tions are undeniably key benefits of bamboo. Nonethe- dinal value; values comparable to nylon and poly-
less, favourable comparison with steel, in terms of styrene. Thus, the mechanical properties of bamboo
strength, is not valid. In a dry state, bamboo charac- and its appropriateness for structural applications are
teristic strengths are, at best, comparable to that of often misunderstood. On the other hand, when com-
high-grade hardwood—between 30 MPa (Oak) and paring embodied energy and CO2 footprint during
50 MPa (American White Oak) [1]. Bamboo is a manufacturing of bamboo and steel, a strong argument
typically hollow, anisotropic, natural material with can be made in favour of bamboo. The embodied
high variability of physical and mechanical properties energy of medium carbon steel is about 29–35 MJ/kg,
across the section and along the culm. The density of while for bamboo culms this value is about 4–6 MJ/kg
bamboo varies through the cross section (from the [9]. Similarly, the carbon footprint of steel is signif-
inner culm wall to the outer), with typical values icantly greater than that of bamboo, with
ranging from 500 to 800 kg/m3. In longitudinal 2.2–2.8 kgCO2/kg (equivalent kg of CO2 per kg of
tension-dominated failure modes, bamboo typically material) for medium carbon steel [9] and
exhibits a brittle behaviour. The variability of longi- 0.25 kgCO2/kg for bamboo [10].
tudinal mechanical properties of bamboo are similar to
those of wood, having coefficients of variance
between 10 and 30% [2–4]. Due to the absence of 2 Mechanics and behaviour of reinforced concrete
radial fibres, however, bamboo is particularly weak in
the direction perpendicular to the fibres, making it Reinforced concrete is a composite material. Design of
especially susceptible to longitudinal shear and trans- simple concrete cross sections is based on Bernoulli
verse tension and compression failures. Steel, on the beam theory simultaneously satisfying conditions of
other hand, is a man-made, isotropic and ductile equilibrium and strain compatibility. Equilibrium
material having a density of 7800 kg/m3 and a tensile requires only knowledge of the concrete and reinforc-
yield strength of conventional reinforcing bars ing material constituent behaviours (modulus and
between 400 and 550 MPa. Additionally, steel is strength). Strain compatibility requires bond between
easily shaped to optimise its mechanical efficiency, the concrete and reinforcing material to be maintained.
requiring relatively little material to resist loads in a Bond of non-prestressed reinforcing elements (bars) to
predictable manner. Such optimisation is not easily concrete is primarily mechanical (through interlock
accomplished with bamboo without substantial pro- with the surrounding concrete). Plain (undeformed)
cessing, altering its properties and nature (e.g., Hebel bars exhibit limited friction-induced bond. Any
et al. [5]). The oft-repeated claim that bamboo is ‘the chemical bond between bar and concrete is rapidly
green steel’ is founded in comparable-to-mild-steel
Materials and Structures (2018) 51:102 Page 3 of 18 102
overcome and not considered to contribute to bond brittle an elastic distribution of stresses must be
capacity/behaviour. adopted, therefore adding additional layers of bamboo
reinforcement provides progressively less benefit as
2.1 Strength the stress level in each layer closer to the neutral axis is
progressively less.
In conventional steel-reinforced concrete design,
members are designed to be ‘under reinforced’ such 2.2 Serviceability and minimum reinforcement
that the reinforcing steel yields prior to concrete
crushing. This ensures a ductile member response by Serviceability of concrete is typically considered in
engaging the inherent ductility of the steel. This terms of member deflections and concrete crack
behaviour also results in an inherent overstrength or control. Both are affected by the axial stiffness (AE)
reserve capacity above the design requirement by of the reinforcing material. Assuming concrete is
permitting plastic behaviour and redistribution of cracked (if it is not, it may be considered to be
internal stress to occur. Such behaviour allows mul- unreinforced), crack width, and therefore curvature
tiple layers of steel reinforcement to be efficiently and deflection, is a function of the axial stiffness of the
engaged. For a brittle reinforcing material such as reinforcing bar bridging the crack. Once again, bar
bamboo or glass fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP), area of a softer reinforcing material must be increased
reinforcement failure is unacceptable (resulting in based on the modular ratio to achieve designs com-
catastrophic failure of the member) and thus an ‘over- parable to steel-reinforced concrete.
reinforced’ design is prescribed by which limited Minimum reinforcement is required for reinforced
ductility is achieved through concrete crushing [11]. In concrete members to ensure that they do not fail in a
order to simultaneously satisfy equilibrium and strain brittle manner immediately upon cracking. Conceptu-
compatibility requires providing a force in the rein- ally, steel-reinforced concrete is designed to ensure
forcing element, T, at a strain that is ultimately limited that the nominal moment capacity exceeds 120% of
by concrete crushing strains. The force in the the cracking capacity: Mn C 1.2Mcr (ACI 318-14).
reinforcing element is typically given as the product Additionally, minimum reinforcement is intended to
of reinforcing bar area and stress in the bar, provide crack control; that is, once a section is
T = A 9 f. While correct, this equation is more cracked, there is sufficient reinforcement to permit
accurately written T = A 9 eE where the stress in the development of additional cracks rather than all
the bar is in fact, the product of bar strain (e) and deformation being concentrated at a single initial
modulus (E). Therefore, to achieve comparable crack. For steel-reinforced concrete, adequate crack
strength designs in steel and bamboo using only the control is achieved providing a reinforcing ratio of
nominal tensile capacity, considerably more bamboo least 0.33% (ACI 318-14). Based on a typical nominal
area is required. The average tensile modulus of modular ratio (serviceability requirements will typi-
Guadua angustifolia bamboo is on the order 20 GPa cally consider mean, rather than characteristic mod-
[8], resulting in a modular ratio Esteel/Ebamboo = 10. uli), this implies requiring more than 3.5% bonded
Since the tension resisted by the reinforcing material is bamboo reinforcement to provide adequate crack
an issue of strength, a more conservative characteristic control. Furthermore, this assumption assumes that
value1 of tensile modulus falling between 7.5 and the bond characteristics between reinforcing material
13 GPa at 12% moisture content should be used in and concrete are similar. If bond behaviour is poor or
design, resulting in a modular ratio as great as 27 [1]. limited, considerably more bamboo reinforcing mate-
Alternatively, larger strains may be developed to rial is required.
achieve a comparable bar force; this leads to consid- It is informative to consider the case of GFRP-
erations of serviceability: concrete crack control and reinforced concrete [11]. GFRP bars have a modular
member deflection. In addition, because bamboo is ratio Esteel/EGFRP on the order of 5. Design of such
members is most often governed by serviceability
1 considerations. Furthermore, to result in ‘practical’
For bamboo culms, characteristic values are most often cited
as the 5th percentile value determined with 75% confidence designs, serviceability requirements for GFRP-rein-
[12]. forced concrete are often relaxed from those for steel-
reinforced concrete. In particular, achieving accept- Much early interest in bamboo-reinforced concrete
able crack control in GFRP-reinforced members often is attributed to the US Navy and their interest in rapid
requires more reinforcement than is required for [re-]construction in Southeast Asia following the
strength. These issues would be exacerbated using Second World War. Research conducted by Glenn
bamboo whose modular ratio is greater than 10. In [16] on bamboo-reinforced concrete, financed by the
fact, crack control using bamboo may be even more US War Production Board, included mechanical tests
inefficient since the modulus of the bamboo will and the construction of experimental buildings. Glenn
typically be less than that of the surrounding concrete. produced a set of conclusions from the test results
obtained, as well as design and construction principles
2.3 Bond and development for the use of bamboo canes and splints as reinforce-
ment in concrete. Glen highlighted issues such as
Integral to the foregoing discussion is the assumption (a) high deflection, low ductility and early brittle
of ‘perfect bond’ permitting force transfer between the failure of the bamboo reinforced concrete beams under
reinforcing material and the surrounding concrete. To load; (b) their reduced ultimate load capacity when
transfer force adequately, there must be a sufficient compared to steel-reinforced elements; (c) bonding
length of bar, known as the development length, over issues associated with excessive cracking and swelling
which the force is transferred from the concrete to the of bamboo; and, (d) the need for using asphalt
reinforcing bar. Bond force is developed by chemical emulsions. Glenn advises use of a bamboo tensile
adhesion, friction, and mechanical interlock between stress of 34–41 MPa based on maximum stress values
bar deformations and the surrounding concrete. of 55–69 MPa for concrete beams with 3–4% bamboo
Chemical adhesion is small, rapidly overcome and reinforcement. Finally, an allowable bamboo tensile
therefore neglected. The remaining components form stress between 20 and 28 MPa for reinforced elements
a resultant stress that can be further broken into is recommended by Glenn in order to keep the
longitudinal (friction) and radial components. For deflection of the beam below 1/360 of the span.
deformed bars, mechanical interlock is the primary Two later studies that report ‘design methodolo-
method of bond force transfer. For anisotropic mate- gies’ stand out. Brink and Rush [19] promulgate an
rials, the radial component is reduced due to the allowable stress approach for designing bamboo-
greater compliance of the bar in the transverse reinforced concrete comparable to the contemporary
direction. This may also lead to a second-order ACI 318 [20] approach for steel-reinforced concrete.
reduction in friction. If round bamboo or splints are Brink and Rush recommend an allowable bamboo
used, there is little in the way of deformations to tensile stress of 28 MPa based on an ultimate capacity
provide mechanical interlock. Thus, bond behaviour of 124 MPa and a bond strength of 0.34 MPa. For
of bamboo reinforcement is anticipated to be more serviceability requirements, they recommend a bam-
analogous to smooth bar than deformed bar develop- boo modulus of elasticity of 17.2 GPa.
ment; relying mostly on friction to affect bond. Geymayer and Cox [21], on the other hand,
recommend a hybrid design approach in which a
bamboo-reinforced concrete flexural element is
3 Bamboo-reinforced concrete designed as an unreinforced concrete member with a
p
maximum tensile stress of 0:67 fc0 (MPa units). To
Published accounts indicate that the use of bamboo to this, 3–4% bamboo reinforcement is added resulting
reinforce concrete structures dates back a century in in, they claim, a factor of safety on the order of 2–2.5.
Southeast Asia. Early experimental studies of bam- A more refined analysis may be conducted using a
boo-reinforced concrete were conducted at MIT by recommended allowable bamboo stress of 34 MPa
Chow [13], in Germany [14], Italy [15], the United and modulus of 13.8 GPa for tension reinforcement
States [16], Smith and Saucier [17] and Colombia and 8.6 GPa for flexural reinforcement. Geymayer and
[18]. These studies used either bamboo bars (whole- Cox recognise the unique and limited bond behaviour
culms of small diameter) or splints (semi-round of bamboo and recommend that bond strength be
strips). 44 N/mm of reinforcing ‘bar’ circumference and that
the embedment provided must exceed 305 mm. This is Two studies, Terai and Minami [33] and Leela-
a maximum bond stress of about 0.15 MPa. Geymayer tanon et al. [34], considered bamboo reinforcement for
and Cox based their study on Arundinaria tecta, a axial compression carrying members. These studies
species of bamboo native to the Southeast United tested concentrically loaded column stubs having
States. height to breadth ratios of 2 and 2.5, respectively. As
Using either allowable stress-based approach, bond should be expected from such short specimens, axial
capacity will always control design. As a basis of capacity may be approximated using transformed
comparison, a 25 mm diameter bamboo reinforcing sections analysis and is improved in the presence of
bar embedded 305 mm can develop only between transverse confinement. No distinct difference
3.5 kN [21] and 8.4 kN [19]. By contrast, a 9.5 mm between steel or bamboo-reinforced behaviour was
diameter steel reinforcing bar in the same conditions evident in either experimental programme. Due to the
can develop 29.4 kN. short test specimen geometry, these tests have no
A number of research papers describing bamboo- reliance on bond to the concrete.
reinforced flexural members confirm the basic premise Ghavami [29] carried out an exploratory study on
of the design methodology proposed by Geymayer and 2 m high concrete columns having 200 mm square
Cox [21]. Optimal ratios of longitudinal bamboo cross-sections. These were reinforced with longitudi-
reinforcement range from 3 to 5% from which the nally-oriented bamboo splints having bond-enhancing
capacity of an otherwise unreinforced concrete beam surface treatment and were confined with steel
is increased at least 2.5 times [22–27]. It is recom- stirrups. Ghavami remarks that 3% bamboo reinforce-
mended that design capacity be limited to the unre- ment in concrete columns was an ideal ratio to comply
inforced section cracking moment, Mcr, which, for a with Brazilian building regulations, but does not
bamboo-reinforced section, should lead to a ‘factor of provide any values of ultimate strength or further
safety’ against cracking of 2 and against failure of 7 details.
[23]. Although specific investigation of bond was not
included in these studies, recommendations for the use 3.1 Bond and development
of bamboo splint reinforcement include the require-
ment for two coats of bituminous paint with sand Agarwal et al. [30] showed the significant beneficial
broadcast onto the top coat [23]. This is a procedure effects of ‘treating’ bamboo splints with commercial
similar to that applied to bamboo splints by Ghavami epoxy-based adhesives in order to enhance bond. They
[28], in which the author roughened the surface of reported average bond stresses (from pull-out tests) on
bamboo before applying an initial coat of bituminous the order of 0.13 MPa for plain bamboo splints (a
paint with sand and subsequently wrapped a 1.5 mm value echoing the recommendation of Geymayer and
wire around the splints before applying a second coat. Cox [21]) and values as high as 0.59 MPa (350%
In unrelated studies, Ghavami [29], Agarwal et al. increase) when Sikadur 32 adhesive was used to coat
[30] and Sevalia et al. [31] demonstrate the importance the splints. This behaviour translated to improved
of providing at least minimum bamboo reinforcement flexural response. Similarly, Ghavami [28] reports a
and appropriate surface treatment to enhance bond. 430% increase in the value of bond strength for
Ghavami [29] found that beams with a 3% ratio of split Sikadur 32-coated bamboo splints embedded in con-
bamboo reinforcement had four times the ultimate crete, when compared to uncoated splints; bond
capacity of comparable unreinforced concrete beams. strength values were: 2.75 and 0.52 MPa, respec-
In the latter two studies, the authors report that tively. Ghavami also conducted tests with an asphalt
bamboo-reinforced concrete with splints having no (Negrolin) and sand coat which resulted in a bond
bond enhancement and a reinforcing ratio of approx- strength of 0.73 MPa (Fig. 1). Agarawal et al. report
imately 1.4%, offer no improvement over the that a bamboo reinforcing ratio of 8% was necessary to
behaviour of unreinforced concrete. Similarly, bam- result in flexural behaviour similar to that of a steel-
boo-reinforced slabs having a reinforcement ratio of reinforced concrete member having a reinforcing ratio
only 0.5% developed a single large crack and exhib- 0.89% (with a reported modular ratio, Esteel/Ebamboo-
ited significant reinforcement slip [32]. = 8.3). Bamboo splint reinforcement coated in
Sikadur 32 required a reinforcing ratio of only 1.4%
Fig. 1 Variation of bond 3.0

round culms no surface treatment (Sakaray et al. 2012)
average bond stress over embedment length, MPa

stress with embedded length
and the effects of surface splints no surface treatment (Geymayer and Cox 1970)
treatment 2.5 splints with no node (Ghavami 1995)
splints with node (Ghavami 1995)
splints (Ararwal et al. 2014)
2.0
round culms (Terai and Minami 2012)
1.5
arrows indicate improvement
in bond capacity resulting
from surface treatment
1.0
0.5
0.0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
pull-out embedment length, mm
to achieve behaviour similar to that steel; implying a available capacity; from this they established their
470% improvement in behaviour when the splints recommendation that bond strength be 44 N/mm of
were coated. reinforcing ‘bar’ circumference and that the embed-
Terai and Minami [32] report pull-out bond tests of ment provided must exceed 305 mm.
round bamboo samples having a variety of synthetic The presence of silica (SiO2) in bamboo could
resin and synthetic rubber surface treatments. contribute to a pozzolanic reaction, increasing the
Untreated bond stress capacity is reported to be amount of calcium silicate hydrates (CSH) through
0.66 MPa and treatments increased this to values reaction with Ca(OH)2 during hydration of Portland
ranging up to 1.34 MPa. In the same test program, the cement, that improves binding with concrete. How-
bond capacity of deformed steel bar was reported as ever, the silica in bamboo occurs primarily in the
2.43 MPa. epidermis (in a cellular level) and must be exposed to
More realistically, Geymayer and Cox [21] and the concrete for the pozzolanic reaction to take place
Sakaray et al. [35] report pull-out bond tests of splints [36]. Therefore, when using bamboo in the form of
and round culms, respectively, having varying embed- culms or splints, additional pozzolanic activity is
ment lengths. Both studies conclude that the average doubtful and is unlikely to contribute in any mean-
bond stress decreases as the embedment length ingful way to bamboo-concrete bond.
increases, and that this decrease is significantly more All known studies that address bond of bamboo in
pronounced than is observed in [isotropic] steel concrete identify shrinkage of untreated, green or pre-
reinforcing bars. Such a reduction can be explained soaked bamboo, and swelling cycles resulting from
by the greater effects of shear lag and the poor variations in moisture in the concrete as being
transverse material characteristics of the anisotropic detrimental to bond. As a result, most studies recom-
bamboo. As seen in Fig. 1, bamboo splints, which mend coating the bamboo in a moisture barrier,
have no pronounced deformations (thus relying mostly provided the coating does not result in a lubricating
on friction to transfer stress), exhibit a lower bond effect thereby, itself degrading the bond. On the other
stress than round culms for which the nodal protru- hand, sealing inadequately seasoned bamboo into a
sions provide some degree of mechanical interlock. watertight environment has the potential to exacerbate
Geymayer and Cox concluded that bamboo splints had decay. Finally, in practice, it is difficult to achieve a
an effective bond length, beyond which further reliable and durable condition of water tightness.
increases in embedded length had no effect on
A common practice is to coat the bamboo in an Nonetheless, there is considerable literature address-
epoxy or polyester resin and broadcast sand onto this ing the durability and treatment of different biomass
to enhance bond characteristics; however, due to materials (occasionally including bamboo) in cemen-
bamboo’s hygroscopic nature, variations in bamboo titious materials. Gram [41] represents perhaps the
moisture content (MC), and relative humidity (RH), first significant study in this regard and Vo and Navard
swelling or contraction of the material depending on [42] and Pacheco-Torgal and Jalali [43] provide recent
moisture absorption and loss can occur. This can lead and very thorough reviews. Most extant studies focus
to labour and energy intensive, and potentially on ‘fibre-reinforcement’ or the inclusion of pulp
expensive treatments that defeat the purpose of using materials in a cementitious composite. In this review,
an inexpensive and locally available material. For the authors have addressed only those durability issues
example, Javadian et al. [37] report a maximum bond believed to be relevant to bamboo-reinforced concrete.
strength comparable to that of steel reinforcing bars, Readers are directed to the review articles noted for a
3.65 MPa, for highly processed composite bamboo discussion of other related durability issues.
splints. To achieve this high bond stress, the splits Portland cement concrete is a highly alkali envi-
were dried below 10% moisture content, heat-treated ronment. The pH of pore water in Portland cement
under pressure (to increase the density of bamboo) and concrete typically exceeds 12. This provides a passi-
coated using a water-based epoxy and fine sand. vating environment for embedded steel reinforce-
Overall, research into cementitious and polymeric ment—effectively mitigating the potential for steel
composites using bamboo and other natural materials corrosion provided the pH remains higher than 10
as reinforcement, highlight common issues such as [44]. In contrast, alkali treatments are often used to
biodegradability, manufacturability and thermal com- break-down the cell structure of lignocellulosic mate-
patibility of the bamboo and matrix material [29, 38]. rials such as wood, hemp, flax and bamboo [45] in
A final issue potentially affecting bond performance of order to retrieve, expose or treat their fibres. Such
bamboo is the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) treatment may improve surface roughness (so called
which is a) affected by moisture content; and b) is as fibre sizing) to improve bond with polymeric resins in
much as five times less than that of concrete or steel in composite materials but are clearly undesirable in the
the longitudinal direction, but two times greater than case of bamboo bars used in bamboo-reinforced
this value in the transverse direction. The reported concrete. Hosoda [46] reports a 50% loss of bamboo
CTE in the longitudinal direction for bamboo ranges tensile capacity following 1-year conditioning in a
between 2.5 and 10 9 10-6/C; transverse CTE is high alkali water bath; after 3 years, the bamboo
approximately an order of magnitude greater [9]. retained only 30% of its initial strength. Hemicellulose
and water soluble extractives (the latter should gen-
3.2 Durability of bamboo reinforcement erally not be present in treated bamboo culms) are
in concrete reactive with calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) present in
cement paste [47–50] leading to crystallisation of lime
Durability of bamboo is closely related to its natural in the biomass pores [43]. Lignin is soluble in hot
composition. As with other lignocellulosic materials, alkali environments [41] as is the case during cement
bamboo consists of cellulose, hemicellulose and hydration, and potentially when the concrete is
lignin. The chemistry of these components in bamboo exposed to direct sunlight in a tropical environment.
changes with age (e.g., when the plants reaches its Reducing alkalinity whether using ternary cements
mature state) and/or after harvesting, which triggers a [51] or through carbonation [52] were found to only
process of cell death and tissue decay. Significant partially mitigate the degradation of biomass. Ligno-
statistical correlation between changes in chemical cellulosic materials in hydrated cement are also
composition, age and density in Phyllostachys pub- embrittled by mineralisation associated with cations
escens and Gigantochloa scortechinii have been (primarily Ca2?) in the concrete pore water [53].
reported by Li et al. [39] and Hisham et al. [40], Water absorption is a critical durability concern for
respectively. biomass of any kind embedded in a cementitious
There are few known studies specifically address- matrix [43]. Water absorption and hygrothermal
ing the durability of bamboo embedded in concrete. cycling result in essentially continuous volumetric
change of the embedded biomass leading to interfacial remain unseen. For example, corrosion of steel
damage and micro- and macro-cracking. These effects reinforcement occurs over years or decades and results
increase permeability, driving the deleterious pro- in expansion of the steel reinforcement, leading to
cesses described previously. cracking, staining and spalling of the cover concrete
Biological attack is arguably the most critical thereby providing a visual ‘warning’ before the
concern for bamboo. When compared to wood there corrosion has become a safety–critical issue. How-
are certain factors that make bamboo more prone to ever, in some environments bamboo could decay
decay, including: (a) its thin-walled geometry (making rapidly and degrade without providing an indication of
decay more significant in terms of reduction in damage at the concrete surface.
member capacity), (b) its high starch content, and
(c) the absence of decay-resistant compounds such as
those found in some hardwood species such as Teak 4 Example: three bay portal frame
and Ipe [3, 54, 55]. There are two causes of biological
decay in bamboo: insect (such as beetles and termites) In order to illustrate bamboo-reinforced concrete and
and fungal attack (rot). Like timber [3, 56], four contrast this with steel-reinforced concrete the first
measures are required to protect bamboo from insect storey of a three bay, two story portal frame prototype
and fungal attack: (a) season the bamboo; (b) treat the is considered (Fig. 2a). The frame is 2.5 m tall and
entire through-thickness with chemicals; (c) keep each bay spans 4.3 m. Such a frame would not be
bamboo dry and able to ‘breath’ throughout its life; uncommon in regions of the world where bamboo-
and, (d) keep bamboo out of reach of termites. reinforced concrete may be considered (Fig. 2b). The
Embedment in concrete is not believed to be details of the steel-reinforced concrete prototype are
sufficient to protect bamboo from insect—especially selected (Fig. 3) and its nominal (i.e., unfactored)
termite—attack. Termites can pass into cracks as gravity load carrying capacity determined post priori
small as 0.8 mm [57]. Bamboo-reinforced concrete is based on the provisions of ACI 318 [62]. The bamboo-
likely to exhibit such cracks from temperature, reinforced alternative is designed for the same gravity
shrinkage and/or load effects. Thus, bamboo rein- load and frame dimensions. In this way, the frames are
forcement requires chemical treatment through its identical functional units—they carry the same nom-
entire wall thickness to mitigate insect attack [55, 58]. inal loads over the same spans. For the sake of
Fungal attack (rot) requires aerobic conditions and example, it was assumed that the frame is located in a
a moisture content typically exceeding 20% [59]. structure also having infilled walls, thus the frame
Bamboo that is fully or partially embedded in concrete considered is not required to carry lateral load.
is vulnerable to rot because concrete (or mortar) is The following assumptions were made:
porous and moisture is easily transported through
1. Concrete compressive strength, fc0 ¼ 21 MPa
capillary action [60] and through existing cracks. p
2. Concrete modulus of rupture, fr ¼ 0:6 fc0 ¼
Additionally, embedment in concrete is likely to
2:75 MPa
prevent moisture that is present as a result of ingress,
3. Reinforcing steel yield strength, fy = 276 MPa
from rapidly evaporating or dispersing resulting in an
(such lower grade steel reinforcement is more
increment in the moisture content of the bamboo.
typical in regions that may consider the use
Surface or ‘paint-on’ treatments are generally not
bamboo reinforced concrete)
considered to provide sufficient protection against rot
4. Moments and shears were determined by ACI 318
in timber [3, 56, 59] or bamboo [61]. To the authors’
§6.5 simplified analysis; as a result, the critical
knowledge no comprehensive tests have been con-
section is negative flexure over the first interior
ducted to specifically assess the likelihood of bamboo
support where the design moment is 0.1wL2 and
decay when completely embedded in concrete. Except
the design shear is 0.58wL, in which w is the
in cases in which the concrete remains dry throughout
uniformly distributed gravity load and L is the
its service life, decay is possible even when the
beam span.
bamboo is coated in a bituminous or epoxy coating.
5. 25 mm clear cover for all members.
The issues of bamboo reinforcement degradation
are aggravated by the fact that such damage will
superimposed gravity load capacity = 13.0 kN/m
2.5 m
4.3 m
(a) (b)
Fig. 2 Three bay concrete portal frame. a Prototype three bay portal frame geometry, b example of concrete portal frame construction
in Philippines. Masonry infill is not load bearing. (photo: homebuildplan.com)
450 mm
36-19 mm culms
350 mm
h = 300 mm
28
4-15M 19 mm
steel culms
200 mm
bars 4-15M
steel bars
b = 200 mm 350 mm 200 mm 350 mm
steel reinforced bamboo reinforced steel reinforced bamboo reinforced
(a) (b)
Fig. 3 Three bay portal frame members. a Beam sections, b column sections

6. Centre-to-centre spacing of bamboo bars must be Mn ¼ As fy d0:59As fy =bfc0
at least 3 9 culm diameter to permit adequate Mn ¼ 2 200 276½257ð0:59 2 200 276Þ=
consolidation of concrete.
ð200 21Þ ¼ 26:6 kNm
The beam section is 300 9 200 mm (height (h) 9
width (b)) having 2–15 M bars (area of single The shear capacity of the beam section is:
bar, Ab = 200 mm2) top and bottom. The columns p
Vn ¼ 0:16 fc0 bd þ Av fy d=s
are 200 mm square having 4–15 M bars. 10 M p
Vn ¼ 0:16 21 200 257 þ 2 100 276
(Ab = 100 mm2) transverse hoops spaced at
257=250 ¼ 37:7 þ 56:7 ¼ 94:4 kN
s = 250 mm are provided in both the beam and
column sections. Although both beams and columns From these capacities, the uniformly distributed
are ‘doubly reinforced’, their moment capacity was gravity load capacity of the frame is found to be
assessed as though they were only singly reinforced. w = 14.4 kN/m as the lower of the following calcu-
The depth to the primary tension reinforcement for the lations of moment and shear.
beam section is:
Mn ¼ 0:1wL2 ! w ¼ 10Mn =L2 ¼ 10 26:6=4:32
d ¼ 30025ðcoverÞ10 ð10M hoopÞ15=2
¼ 14:4 kN/m
ðcentroid of primary barÞ ¼ 257 mm:
Vn ¼ 0:58wL ! w ¼ Vn =0:58L ¼ 94:4=ð0:58 x 4:3Þ
The negative or positive moment capacity of the ¼ 37:8 kN/m
beam sections is determined as:
The self-weight of the beam = 1.4 kN/m, resulting does not yield as steel does, no redistribution between
a nominal superimposed load carrying capacity of layers of reinforcement can occur. Thus, if multiple
13.0 kN/m. The resulting moment and axial load layers of reinforcement are required, it is likely that
demand on the exterior columns is determined by ACI greater than 3% bamboo is required in order to achieve
318 §6.5 simplified analysis to be 16.6 kNm and the desired behaviour implied by Geymayer and Cox
31.0 kN, respectively, while that for the interior [21]. This effect has not been considered in this
columns is 2.4 kNm and 66.6 kN, respectively. intentionally simplified example. Finally, it is noted
that the example considers nominal capacities. Design
4.1 Design by Geymayer and Cox [21] capacities are less that than these. It may be reasonably
assumed that bamboo-reinforced concrete, being
Applying the approach of Geymayer and Cox [21], the composed of two brittle materials, would require an
frame must be redesigned as being uncracked. The increased ‘safety factor’ compared to steel-reinforced
required section modulus of the beam, S = bh2/6, is concrete which is ductile in nature. This would result
determined from the assumed modulus of rupture: in an even less efficient bamboo-reinforced concrete
design.
Sreq ¼ Mn =fr ¼ 26:6 106 =2:75 ¼ 9;700;000 mm3 It is unclear how to handle the shear reinforcement
with bamboo. In this example, the shear reinforcement
Minimising the beam area while providing sufficient is minimal and could, perhaps, be also replaced with
beam width to place a large number of bamboo bars, bamboo, although this is not considered in this
results in a gross concrete beam dimension h 9 b = example. If steel reinforcement were used, the spacing
450 9 350 mm, 260% larger than the steel-reinforced could be increased to 450 mm and 350 mm for the
beam. It is noted that to maintain the same superim- beams and columns, respectively.
posed load carrying capacity of 13.0 kN/m, a larger
section is required due to the increased girder self- 4.1.1 Development of bamboo bars
weight (3.7 kN/m). Similarly, the required column
dimensions are determined from: Using this example, it is informative to investigate the
development of the bamboo reinforcement. Geymayer
Sreq ¼ Mn =fr ¼ 16:6 106 =2:75 ¼ 6;040;000 mm3 and Cox [21] recommend a bamboo bond capacity of
44 N/mm circumference; in this case 2.6 kN/bar (i.e.
Maintaining the column width, b = 350 mm (to
44 9 19 9 p). The 3% bamboo reinforcement ratio is
facilitate ease of formwork), requires a 350 mm
partially premised on ensuring that there is sufficient
square column, 300% larger than the steel-reinforced
reinforcement to resist the tension force if a crack were
column.
to occur. It is therefore possible to estimate the tension
Providing 3% bamboo results in the beams requir-
capacity of the bar required as that corresponding to
ing 4725 mm2 bamboo ‘bars’ top and bottom. Assum-
the bar tension occurring upon initial cracking, Treq:
ing 19 mm diameter culms having a wall thickness of
7 mm (Ab = 264 mm2), 18 such bars are required. Mcr ¼ Sfr ¼ 1=6 4502 350 106 2:75
Similarly, for the columns, 28 culms are required. A ¼ 32:5 kNm
schematic comparison of the beam and column
sections is shown in Fig. 3. Constructability issues Treq Mcr =0:9d ¼ 32:5 103 =ð0:9 415Þ
may require even larger concrete cross sections to ¼ 87 kN or 4:8 kN/bar
(a) ensure adequate spacing between adjacent bars to
Thus the ‘‘equivalent’’ beam design (shown in
ensure concrete consolidation in such a congested
Fig. 3) using bamboo having no bond-enhancing
section; and (b) eliminate interference between beam
surface treatment is able to develop only 54% of the
and column reinforcement. Additionally, although 3%
force present when the beam cracks. That is to say, if a
bamboo is provided, providing this in multiple layers
moment sufficient to crack the beam occurred, the
of reinforcement is less efficient due to the strain
reinforcement would be unable to resist the tensile
gradient in the section. Reinforcement located closer
force—experiencing a bond failure—that would need
to the neutral axis is less efficient and since bamboo
to be transmitted across the crack and the beam would 4.2 One-way slab spanning between adjacent
fail catastrophically as though it were not reinforced at portal frames
all. In order to have sufficient tensile capacity at the
cracking moment, assuming a 300 mm embedment A one-way simply-supported slab spanning 3 m
length, an average bond stress of 0.27 MPa is required between adjacent portal frames (from the previous
for the 19 mm culm to achieve a capacity of 4.8 kN. example) is also designed. In simple concrete con-
[i.e.: 4800/(300 9 p 9 19)]. This level of bond stress struction, slabs tend to be singly reinforced in which
is reported to be achievable using various surface case they cannot be relied upon to develop continuous
treatments [30, 32]. behaviour over supports. The steel reinforced concrete
Perhaps more significantly, the example is a prototype slabs are 100 mm thick and primary rein-
statically indeterminate structure. Such structures rely forcement is 10 M reinforcing bars spaced at 300 mm.
on ductility imparted by reinforcing steel yielding to The moment and shear capacities of the slab are:
affect moment redistribution (implicit in used of ACI
Mn ¼ As fy d0:59As fy =bfc0 ¼ 3:33 100 276
318 §6.5 simplified analysis) and to attain adequate
levels of safety should conditions different to those ½75ð0:59 3:33 100 276Þ=ð1000 21Þ
assumed in design occur. To accomplish these objec- ¼ 6:7 kNm/m
p p
tives, ACI 318-14 implicitly requires a reinforced Vn ¼ 0:16 fc0 bd ¼ 0:16 21 1000 75 ¼ 55 kN/m
concrete element to satisfy the basic ductility require-
ment Mn C 1.2Mcr. Thus, if the section does crack, The self-weight of the slab is 2.4 kN/m2. The
there is sufficient reserve capacity in the reinforced nominal superimposed load that may be carried by the
section to mitigate catastrophic failure and to permit slab is 1.9 kN/m2 and is controlled by the load
moment redistribution through steel yield. In the carrying capacity of the frame rather than the slab
example presented here, unless significantly improved itself (superimposed load carrying capacity of slab
bond is provided, the behaviour is expected to be itself is 3.6 kN/m2).
brittle with the bamboo not providing effective post- The cracking moment of the 100 mm slab is
cracking reinforcement. Such brittle behaviour is 4.6 kNm/m, corresponding to a superimposed load
reported by Agarwal et al. [30], Sevalia et al. [31] capacity of 1.7 kN/m2. Therefore, based on the
and Terai and Minami [32]. Even in cases in which the approach recommended by Geymayer and Cox [21],
Mn C 1.2Mcr is satisfied, there are no known studies the equivalent bamboo-reinforced slab depth must be
demonstrating ductility or energy-absorbing capacity increased marginally to 110 mm in order to resist a
of bamboo-reinforced concrete. The expected brittle superimposed load of 1.9 kN/m2 without cracking.
behaviour of bamboo-reinforced concrete indicates The bamboo reinforcement requirement is 3300 mm2/
that it is inappropriate for use in indeterminate m, equal to 19 mm culms (Ab = 264 mm2) on 80 mm
structures in which moment redistribution is assumed centres.
or permitted and in seismic environments. Once again, using the bond capacity recommenda-
tions of Geymayer and Cox [21], the capacity provided
4.1.2 Summary of frame design quantities without bond-enhancing surface treatment is only 43%
of that required to resist the tension developed in the
Table 1 summarises the comparable steel and bamboo reinforcement upon cracking of the concrete, resulting
reinforced concrete portal frame designs. in a brittle behaviour unaffected by the presence of the
If a construction epoxy having an average coating bamboo reinforcement. In order ensure that the
thickness of 0.5 mm were used to enhance bond bamboo reinforcement can resist tensile force at Mcr
performance, 30 cm3/m of bamboo is required. For a an average bond stress over 300 mm of 0.34 MPa is
single frame, this is 23 L without accounting for required; this value is reported to be achievable with
waste. A bituminous coating may require upwards of appropriate surface treatment.
50 L per frame. Both surface treatment methods come
with additional monetary, labour and environmental
costs.
Table 1 Material quantities for example portal frame

Steel reinforced concrete Bamboo reinforced concrete
Functional unit Three-bay portal frame having nominal superimposed gravity load capacity of 13.2 kN/m
21 MPa concrete 1.2 m3 = 2880 kg 3.3 m3 = 7920 kg
276 MPa 15 M reinforcing steel 92 m = 145 kg None
276 MPa 10 M reinforcing steel & 84 m = 66 kg & 86 m = 68 kg (shear reinforcement)
19 mm diameter bamboo bar None 744 m & 182 kg
Area of formwork required & 18.3 m2 & 30.1 m2
4.3 Constructability and other issues of concern result in sections being larger than is strictly
required to satisfy strength design considerations.
The previous sections discussed a number of key 5. Like GFRP bars, bamboo bars will ‘float’ in
issues regarding the design and performance of concrete. This requires bars to be tied in place to
bamboo-reinforced concrete. However, there are other resist uplift. With the larger number of bars
practical issues that also hinder its use in conventional present, this may be a cumbersome requirement.
construction. These include: 6. In addition to through-thickness treatment for
protection from insect and fungal attack, pre-
1. The weakness of bamboo perpendicular to the
treatment of bamboo with special coatings to
fibres makes hollow bars prone to crushing or
enhance bond and/or the use of waterproof
splitting during transportation, handling and erec-
membranes in ground-supported slabs are labori-
tion. Like GFRP bars (which are also highly
ous and require expensive and complex applica-
anisotropic), bamboo bars must be handled with
tion systems. This is counter to claims that
additional care not required for steel bars.
bamboo-reinforced concrete is a sustainable, local
2. There is no known research addressing methods of
and low cost alterative in developing regions.
splicing or the behaviour of splices in bamboo
7. Unlike steel, that when properly confined can be
reinforcing bars. Like steel, bamboo bars are
relied upon to contribute as ‘compression rein-
practically limited to about 6 m in length; thus
forcement’, the poor transverse properties of
splicing will be necessary in many structures.
bamboo make it ill-suited for use in compression
3. There is no known research addressing the
zones, including columns. Similarly, ACI 440.1R-
anchorage (beyond bond development) of bam-
15 does not permit GFRP bars to contribute to
boo in concrete. Whereas steel bars are easily bent
compression capacity.
and GFRP bars may be bent during their manu-
8. Bamboo is known to creep under the effects of
facture, it is not believed to be practical to bend
sustained loads. Whereas the creep of steel
bamboo bars in a manner appropriate to provide
reinforcement is negligible [indeed, compression
anchorage in concrete. Thus, the only practical
steel is used to mitigate effects of concrete creep
anchorage for bamboo bars is straight bar devel-
(ACI 318)], creep of bamboo is comparable to that
opment. Furthermore, it is not believed to be
of timber [63], limiting the sustained tensile force
practical to produce bar end anchors for bamboo
that can be practically resisted.
reinforcing bars.
9. The behaviour of bamboo at elevated tempera-
4. As illustrated in the portal frame example, bam-
tures or in fire conditions is unknown. Correal [8]
boo-reinforced concrete will have congested bar
reports that bamboo properties degrade above
details. This congestion, and the variability in
50 °C. Youssefian and Rahbar [64] report the
bamboo bars, leads to the recommendation that, in
glass transition temperatures of lignin and hemi-
order to facilitate adequate consolidation of the
cellulose (the primary components of the bamboo
concrete, bamboo bars should be placed with a
matrix) to range from 97 to 171 °C and 140 to
spacing of at least 3 bar diameters. This limit may
180 °C, respectively. It is likely that the behaviour
of bamboo reinforcement under fire conditions is reinforced concrete and steel-reinforced concrete are
inferior to that of steel. There is no known presented in Fig. 4.
research on the fire performance of bamboo As shown in Fig. 4, the production of the bamboo-
reinforced concrete. reinforced portal frame will have emissions of the
order of 2000 kgCO2eq, almost twice the emissions
resulting from the production of the steel-reinforced
portal frame. This increase is attributed to the consid-
5 Life cycle assessment of bamboo and steel
erably greater amount of concrete necessary to meet
reinforced concrete
the load carrying requirement of the functional unit.
The increase effects both concrete materials produc-
Many of the studies cited in this review premise
tion and transportation. The emissions savings
bamboo reinforcement for concrete as a ‘‘green’’ or
achieved by replacing the steel-reinforcement with
‘‘sustainable’’ alternative to steel reinforcement. This
bamboo are surpassed by the emissions from the
section attempts to quantify this claim using life cycle
additional concrete. Considering only the bamboo
assessment (LCA), a well-established methodology
reinforcement: the emissions contribution from the
used to assess the whole life environmental impacts
bamboo reinforcement is minimal, but the emissions
and/or cost of products and services [65]. LCA has
from transportation of bamboo are much greater than
been used for the assessment of construction materials
the materials savings achieved by replacing steel; this
and buildings for more than 30 years and is the basis
conclusion was also drawn by Zea Escamilla and
for certification methods such as Environmental
Habert [71].
Product Declaration (EPD) and Product Environmen-
tal Footprint (PEF).
With the aim of providing a benchmark for the
6 Summary of bamboo reinforced concrete
selection of bamboo or steel as reinforcement in
concrete structures and comparing their environmen-
Concrete reinforced with bamboo, rather than con-
tal impact, a LCA analysis has been carried out using
ventional steel reinforcement exhibits a different
the portal frame example presented and summarised in
behaviour and therefore needs to be designed using
Table 1. Thus the functional unit is ‘‘a three-bay
different paradigms. Fundamental differences
(4.3 m each) portal frame (2.5 m tall) having a
between bamboo and conventional reinforcing steel
nominal superimposed gravity load capacity of
are as follows:
13.0 kN/m. The software OpenLCA [66] was used in
combination with the EcoInvent V3 database [67] and 1. Bamboo is essentially an elastic brittle material,
the environmental impact evaluation method whereas steel exhibits considerable ductility. This
IPCC2013 [68]. The data for bamboo-based construc- limits the ‘allowable’ stress that may be utilised
tion materials and transport distances were calculated with bamboo based on the margin of safety
using the methods developed by Zea Escamilla and desired.
Habert [69–71]. This method allows for the generation 2. The characteristic values of longitudinal tensile
of three scenarios combining the production efficiency modulus and strength of bamboo are typically less
of construction materials and the potential transport than 10% that of steel Kaminski et al. [1, 58]. At
distances. This example was geographically located in 12% moisture content, characteristic modulus of
Colombia (whose concrete design standard is equiv- bamboo is on the order of 7.5–13 GPa and
alent to ACI 318) and this countrys electricity mix characteristic strength is on the order of 40 MPa
was used in the lifecycle inventories. The bamboo (resulting in allowable design strengths on the
culms are assumed to be only boric acid treated and a order of 16 MPa). As a result of the low modulus,
structural epoxy surface treatment is assumed to serviceability considerations (i.e., deflections and
enhance bond. The transport of construction materials crack control) are significant and typically govern
was considered to be primarily road transport. The design despite the low allowable strength.
results from the comparative LCA of bamboo-
Fig. 4 LCA results with 3000

contribution to
Environmental impact in kgCO2eq (IPCC 2013)

environmental impact
2500
2000
transport (859)
1500
steel (133)
1000
transport (306)
concrete
steel (388) bamboo (15.7) (1211 kgCO2eq)
500 and
concrete surface treatment (2.1)
(414 kgCO2eq)
0
steel reinforced concrete bamboo reinforced concrete
3. Bamboo is anisotropic, leading to complex inter- that embedding timber or bamboo into concrete
actions with the surrounding concrete, which will protect it against rot, even if it is coated with a
include: water-proofing product.
(a) The coefficient of thermal expansion of One of the reasons steel reinforced concrete has
bamboo is: (a) different from that of steel been such a successful material is that its ductility
and concrete, which are, themselves, sim- allows engineers to safely design statically indetermi-
ilar; and (b) is almost an order of magnitude nate structures by making use of the lower bound
greater in the transverse direction than in theory of plasticity. The absence of ductility in
the longitudinal direction affecting com- bamboo-reinforced concrete implies that not only is
patibility with the surrounding concrete, it inadequate for seismically active regions, it is
significantly impacting composite bond inappropriate for statically indeterminate structures.
behaviour. Considering only the mechanics of reinforced
(b) Unlike steel, bamboo is dimensionally concrete, bamboo-reinforced concrete has limited
unstable and therefore needs some form of practical use. The approach of Geymayer and Cox
treatment to resist moisture transmission. [21] to base capacity calculation on the unreinforced
Due to anisotropy, dimensional stability is capacity of the concrete and to provide 3–5% bamboo
not uniform in longitudinal and transverse tension reinforcement appears to result in reasonable
directions. assurance of capacity beyond cracking. However,
assuring bond between the bamboo and concrete by
4. Although not affected by corrosion, bamboo is
providing additional mechanical deformation and
susceptible to various degradation mechanisms
mitigating volume change of the bamboo reinforce-
associated with exposure to (a) varying hygrother-
ment is critical to serviceable performance.
mic conditions; and (b) a high-alkali environment.
Both conditions are prevalent in an embedded
concrete environment.
7 Practical uses of bamboo as reinforcing material
5. Bamboo is susceptible to termite and fungal attack
and degrades quickly when exposed to high
While the authors are recommending against the use of
moisture levels. To the authors’ knowledge there
bamboo-reinforced concrete in primary structural
is no published or industry guidance that suggests
members, certain related applications may be practical
provided issues of durability, dimensional stability including Terai and Minami [74], Ahmad et al. [75],
and bond between bamboo and concrete are addressed and Brindha et al. [76]. The nature of fibre reinforce-
as discussed in this work. ment for concrete is quite different from conventional
Small cane or bamboo splints may be an alternative discrete bar reinforcement and beyond the scope of
for crack control reinforcement for slabs on grade this review.
(slabs cast on the ground) provided at least 3%
bamboo is used. Such slabs are designed to remain
uncracked and/or are provided with control joints to 8 Conclusions
permit only controlled cracking.
Light cement bamboo frame (LCBF) panels, known The authors propose that bamboo reinforced concrete
colloquially as bahareque construction, (e.g.,Gonzalez is an ill-considered concept. More importantly, the
and Gutierrez [72]) are well established. LCBF authors propose that bamboo reinforcement—if used
construction is a modern technique utilising composite safely—is not an environmentally friendly or sustain-
shear panels constituted of a wall matrix of bamboo or able alternative to steel. As has been shown, bamboo-
metal lath nailed onto a bamboo framing system, reinforced concrete must be designed to remain
plastered with cement or lime mortar render. This uncracked; the presence of bamboo reinforcing is
method works well because the stresses in the wall intended to impart a degree of ductility to the
matrix are very low. This method of construction is section—and may impart some post-cracking reserve
recognised and promoted by ISO 22156. capacity—in the event of an overload that results in
Small culm or bamboo splints has been proposed as cracking. This post-cracking behaviour is only possi-
reinforcement for masonry construction. Due to the ble if there is sufficient bond between the bamboo and
role masonry reinforcement plays (as different from concrete. It has been shown that some bond-enhancing
concrete reinforcement), some researchers consider surface treatments are sufficient to impart the bond
bamboo-reinforcement as suitable to reinforce hollow- capacity required. Nonetheless, the required ‘un-
core masonry in non-seismic environments (e.g., cracked’ design increases concrete member dimen-
Moroz et al. [73]). sions and has a ‘trickle down’ effect resulting in
Javadian et al. [37] have proposed the use of a heat- increased formwork and foundation requirements.
treated, densified engineered bamboo composite for Additionally, the poor durability and bond character-
concrete reinforcement. The resulting composite strips istics of bamboo require through-thickness treatment
have a reported tensile strength of 295 MPa and a and additional surface treatment of bamboo reinforce-
modulus of 37 GPa. To be used as concrete reinforc- ment, respectively. Such treatments, as described in
ing bars, the composite strips are coated with epoxy the literature, are labour intensive, costly, and often
resin (four variations are reported) and sand is utilise materials of known toxicity or which have
broadcast on to this as a means of enhancing bond. handling restrictions associated with workplace health
Reported bond capacities ranged from 2.42 to and safety. Vo and Navard [42] draw a very prescient
3.65 MPa in direct pull-out tests which was reported conclusion in this regard: ‘‘A large proportion of [the
to be about 80% of comparable steel reinforcement methods used to overcome issues of biomass durabil-
bond strength. Such engineered bamboo composite ity when embedded in concrete] are effectively helpful
reinforcing bars hold promise for overcoming many of in easing the concrete preparation and leading to better
the obstacles associated with using bamboo as final materials. However, most of them, if not all, have
concrete reinforcement. To the authors’ knowledge little practical value since they are either impossible to
no LCA or similar comparison with steel has been be implemented because of the use of chemicals which
made to document assertions of ‘‘sustainability’’. are not environmentally-friendly or much too
Nonetheless, it is clear that the additional processing, expensive.’’
energy and the resins used on their production will
have a significant impact on environmental impact and Compliance with ethical standards
cost. Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no
Finally, Bamboo-fibre reinforced concrete has been conflict of interest.
proposed and demonstrated by multiple researchers
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Concrete. Royal Engineers Journal (Chatham-Kent), 54
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http:// (June 1940), 237–244
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unre- 16. Glenn HE (1950) Bamboo reinforcement in Portland
stricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, cement concrete. Engineering Experiment Station, Clemson
provided you give appropriate credit to the original Agricultural College, Clemson, South Carolina, Bulletin
author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Com- No. 4
mons license, and indicate if changes were made. 17. Smith EF, Saucier KL (1964) Precast concrete elements
with bamboo reinforcement, U. S. Army Engineer Water-
ways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Techni-
cal Report No. 6-646
References 18. Hidalgo López O (1974) Bambú, su cultivo y aplicaciones
en fabricación de papel, construcción, arquitectura, inge-
1. Kaminski S, Lawrence A, Trujillo D, King C (2016b) nierı́a, artesanı́a [Bamboo, its cultivation and applications in
Structural use of bamboo Part 3: design values. Struct Eng papermaking, construction, architecture, engineering,
94(12):42–45 crafts]. Cali, Colombia: Estudios Técnicos Colombianos.
2. Bodig J, Jayne BA (1982) Mechanics of wood and wood https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/164053. Accessed
composites. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York 18 July 2018
3. FPL (2010) Wood handbook—Wood as an engineering 19. Brink FE, Rush PJ (1966) Bamboo reinforced concrete
material. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-190: U.S. construction. US Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory
Department of Agriculture, Madison, WI, USA Report, Port Hueneme
4. Wood LW (1960) Variation of strength properties in woods 20. American Concrete Institute (ACI) (1956) ACI 318-56
used for structural purposes. Wood, Madison Building code requirements for reinforced concrete.
5. Hebel DE, Javadian A, Heisel F, Schlesier K, Griebel D, American Concrete Institute (ACI), Detroit
Wielopolski M (2014) Process-controlled optimization of 21. Geymayer HG, Cox FB (1970) Bamboo reinforced con-
the tensile strength of bamboo fiber composites for struc- crete. J Am Concrete Inst 67(51):841–846
tural applications. Compos B Eng 67:125–131 22. Indra IG (1982) Bamboo as expedient reinforcement for
6. Zhou F (1981) Studies on physical and mechanical prop- concrete beams. M.Sc. thesis, University of Ottawa
erties of bamboo wood. J Nanjing Tech Coll For Prod (2): 23. Kankam JA, Ben-George M, Perry SH (1988) Bamboo-re-
1–32. Cited by [77] inforced concrete beams subjected to third-point loading.
7. Lu X, Wang K, Yi X, Liou J, He J (1985) A study on the ACI Struct J 85(1):61–67
physic-mechanical properties of culmwood of Phyllos- 24. Khare L (2005) Performance evaluation of bamboo rein-
tachys Glauca of Shandong. J Bamboo Res, Zhejiang For- forced concrete beams. M.Sc. thesis, University of Texas at
estry Science Research Institute, Hangzhou, China 4(2): Arlington
98–106. Cited by [77] 25. Rahman MM, Rashid MH, Hossain MA, Hasan MT, Hasan
8. Correal JF (2016) Bamboo design and construction. In: MK (2011) Performance evaluation of bamboo reinforced
Harries K, Sharma B (eds) Chapter 14 in nonconventional concrete beam. Int J Eng Technol 11(4):142–146
and vernacular construction materials: characterisation, 26. Subrahmanyam BV (1984) Bamboo reinforcement for
properties and applications. Woodhead (Elsevier) Publish- cement matrices. In: New Reinforced Concrete. Surrey
ing Series in Civil and Structural Engineering No. 58 University Press, Guildford, England, pp 141–194
9. Ashby MF (2011) Materials selection in mechanical design, 27. Youssef MAR (1976) Bamboo as a substitute for steel
4th edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford reinforcement in structural concrete. New Horiz Constr
10. van der Lugt P, Voglander JG (2015) The environmental Mater 1:525–554
impact of industrial products—life cycle assessment and 28. Ghavami K (1995) Ultimate load behaviour of bamboo-
carbon sequestration. INBAR Technical Report No. 35 reinforced lightweight concrete beams. Cement Concr
11. American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2015) ACI 440.1R-15 Compos 17:281–288
guide for the design and construction of structural concrete 29. Ghavami K (2005) Bamboo as reinforcement in structural
reinforced with fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) Bars. concrete elements. Cement Concr Compos 27:637–649
American Concrete Institute (ACI), Farmington Hills 30. Agarwal A, Nanda B, Maity D (2014) Experimental
12. International Standards Organisation (ISO) (2004) ISO investigation on chemically treated bamboo reinforced
22156-1 bamboo—structural design concrete beams and columns. Constr Build Mater
13. Chow HK (1914) Bamboo as a material for reinforcing 71:610–617
concrete. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://hdl. 31. Sevalia JK, Siddhpura NB, Agarwal CS, Shah DP, Kapadia
handle.net/1721.1/81516. Accessed 18 July 2018 JV (2013) Study on bamboo as reinforcement in cement
14. Datta K (1936) Versuche Uber die Verwendung von Bam- concrete. Int J Eng Res Appl 3(2):1181–1190
bus im Beton bau [Experiments on the use of bamboo in 32. Terai M, Minami K (2012a) Research and development on
concrete construction]. Der Bauingenieur (BerlinWilmers- bamboo reinforced concrete structure. In: 15th World con-
dorf) 17(1):1 ference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon
15. De Simone D (1939) Norme, Materiali e Strutture per la 33. Terai M, Minami K (2011) Fracture behavior and
Limitazione dell’impiego del Ferro nelle Construzioni. mechanical properties of bamboo reinforced concrete
Annali dei Lavori Publlici 77(12): 1189–1223. English members. Eng Proc 10:2967–2972
translation by A. Holme, Substitutes for Steel in Reinforced
34. Leelatanon S, Srivaro S, Matan N (2010) Compressive 52. Tonoli G, Santos S, Joaquim A, Savastano H (2010) Effect
strength and ductility of short concrete columns reinforced of accelerated carbonation on cementitious roofing tiles
by bamboo. Songklanakarin J Sci Technol 32(4):419–424 reinforced with lignocellulosic fibre. Constr Build Mater
35. Sakaray H, Togati NVVK, Reddy IVR (2012) Investigation 24:193–201
on Properties of Bamboo as Reinforcing Material in Con- 53. Jorge FC, Pereira C, Ferreira JMF (2004) Wood-cement
crete. Int J Eng Res Appl 2(1):77–83 composites: a review. Holz Roh Werkst 62:370–377
36. Archila HF, Pesce H, Ansell M, Ball R (2015) Limeboo: 54. Janssen J (2000) Designing and building with bamboo. In:
lime as replacement of cement in wall-framing systems with INBAR Technical Report 20, INBAR, Beijing, China
bamboo-guadua (bahareque encementado). Tenth World 55. Liese W, Tang TKH (2015) Preservation and drying of
Bamboo Congress, Damyang bamboo. In: Liese W, Köhl M (eds) Bamboo. The plant and
37. Javadian A, Wielopolski M, Smith FC, Hebel DE (2016) its uses, vol 10. Springer, Berlin, pp 257–297
Bond-behavior study of newly developed bamboo-com- 56. Wood Protection Association (2012) Manual: industrial
posite reinforcement in concrete. Constr Build Mater wood preservation—specification and practice, 2nd edn.
122:110–117 Wood Protection Association Castleford, Castleford
38. Ho M, Wang H, Lee J-H, Ho C-K, Lau K-T, Leng J, Hui D 57. University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service
(2012) Critical factors on manufacturing processes of nat- (2001) Subterranean Termite Control, PB1344-3M-4/01.
ural fibre composites. Compos B Eng 43(8):3549–3562 http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_agexdise/15/. Accessed Nov
39. Li XB, Shupe TF, Peter GF, Hse CY, Eberhardt TL (2007) 2017
Chemical changes with maturation of the bamboo species 58. Kaminski S, Lawrence A, Trujillo D, King C (2016a)
Phyllostachys pubescens. Trop For Sci 19(1):6–12 Structural use of bamboo. Part 2: durability and preserva-
40. Hisham HN, Othman S, Rokiah H, Latif MA, Ani S, Tamizi tion. Struct Eng 94(10):38–43
MM (2006) Characterization of bamboo Gigantochloa 59. Ridout B (1999) Timber decay in buildings: the conserva-
scortechinii at different ages. Trop For Sci 18(4):236–242 tion approach to treatment. E. & F.N. Spon, Abingdon
41. Gram H (1983) Durability of natural fibres in concrete. 60. Martys N, Ferraris C (1997) Capillary transport in mortars
Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute, Stock- and concrete. Cem Concr Res 27(5):747–760
olm. http://www.cbi.se/objfiles/1/HansErikGramavh_- 61. Liese W, Kumar S (2003) INBAR Technical Report 22:
1704081873.pdf. Accessed 18 July 2018 bamboo preservation compendium. INBAR, Beijing
42. Vo LTT, Navard P (2016) Treatments of plant biomass for 62. American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2014) ACI 318-14
cementitious building materials—a review. Constr Build Building code requirements for structural concrete. Amer-
Mater 121:161–176 ican Concrete Institute (ACI), Farmington Hills
43. Pacheco-Torgal F, Jalali S (2011) Cementitious building 63. Gottron J, Harries K, Xu Q (2014) Creep behaviour of
materials reinforced with vegetable fibres: a review. Constr bamboo. J Constr Build Mater 66:79–88
Build Mater 25:575–581 64. Youssefian S, Rahbar N (2015) molecular origin of strength
44. Behnood A, Van Tittelboom K, De Belie N (2016) Methods and stiffness in bamboo fibrils. Nat/Sci Rep. https://doi.org/
for measuring pH in concrete: a review. Constr Build Mater 10.1038/srep11116
105:176–188 65. Hellweg S, Canals LM (2014) Emerging approaches, chal-
45. Pickering KL, Efendy MGA, Le TM (2016) A review of lenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment. Science
recent developments in natural fibre composites and their 344(6188):1109–1113
mechanical performance. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 66. Green Delta (2017) OpenLCA—the open source life cycle
83:98–112 and sustainability assessment Software. http://www.
46. Hosoda K (1942) Bamboo reinforced concrete. In: Syu- openlca.org/. Accessed 18 July 2018
kyosya Syoin, Japan 67. SCLCI (2017) EcoInvent Database v3. Swiss Centre for
47. Kriker A, Bali A, Debicki G, Bouziane M, Chabannet M Life Cycle Inventories. http://www.ecoinvent.org. Acces-
(2008) Durability of date palm fibres and their use as rein- sed 18 July 2018
forcement in hot dry climates. Cement Concr Compos 68. Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E,
30:639–648 Kadner S, Seyboth K (2014) Climate Change 2014: miti-
48. Ramakrishna G, Sundararajan T (2005) Studies on the gation of climate change. In: Contribution of Working
durability of natural fibres and the effect of corroded fibres Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergov-
on the strength of mortar. Cement Concr Compos ernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2014), Cam-
27:575–582 bridge, UK and New York, NY, USA
49. Roma L, Martello L, Savastano H (2008) Evaluation of 69. Zea Escamilla E, Habert G (2016) Method and application
mechanical, physical and thermal performance of cement- of characterisation of life cycle impact data of construction
based tiles reinforced with vegetable fibers. Constr Build materials using geographic information systems. Int J Life
Mater 22:668–674 Cycle Assess 22:1–10
50. Toledo Filho R, Scrivener K, England G, Ghavami K (2000) 70. Zea Escamilla E, Habert G (2015) Regionalizing the envi-
Durability of alkali-sensitive sisal and coconuts fibres in ronmental impact of bamboo-based buildings by integrating
cement mortar composites. Cement Concr Compos life cycle assessment with geographic information systems.
22:127–143 A comparative case-study in Colombia. World Bamboo
51. John V, Cincotto M, Sjotrom C, Agopyan V, Oliveira C Congress, Damyang
(2005) Durability of slag mortar reinforced with coconut 71. Zea Escamilla E, Habert G (2013) Environmental impacts
fibre. Cement Concr Compos 27:565–574 from the production of bamboo based construction materials
representing the global production diversity. J Clean Prod 75. Ahmad S, Raze A, Gupta H (2014) Mechanical properties of
66:117–127 bamboo fibre reinforced concrete. In: 2nd international
72. Gonzalez G, Gutierrez J (2005) Structural performance of conference on research in science, engineering and tech-
bamboo ‘bahareque’ walls under cyclic load. J Bamboo nology, Dubai, 21–22 March 2014
Rattan 4(4):353–368 76. Brindha M, Khan S, Narayanan SS, Kumar AMS, Viviek V
73. Moroz JG, Lissel SL, Hagel MD (2014) Performance of (2017) Properties of concrete reinforced with bamboo fibre.
bamboo reinforced concrete masonry shear walls. Constr Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol 6(3):3809–3812
Build Mater 61:125–137 77. Janssen J (1991) Mechanical properties of bamboo. Kluwer
74. Terai M, Minami K (2012b) Basic study on mechanical Academic Publishers, Dordecht
properties of bamboo fiber reinforced concrete. In: IABSE
2012, Cairo
Adom-Asamoah et al., Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1477464
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
investigated and reviewed appropriately, since 75% of the anticipated flexural

capacity of slabs were utilised experimentally.
Subjects: Technology; Concrete and Cement; Structural Engineering
Keywords: self-consolidating concrete; beams; slab; bamboo
1. Introduction
The provision of safe and affordable housing facilities, particularly in developing countries, still remains
problematic for municipalities and governmental organisations (Moroz, Lissel, & Hagel, 2014). Also, as
in 2014, global urban indicators of the United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UNHSP),
estimate that 29.7% of the urban population in developing regions live in slums (Global Urban
Indicators Database—UN-Habitat, 2014). Hence a crucial question that remains to be answered is
“with rapid urbanisation in developing countries, what are the innovative technologies that will allow us
to sustainably meet and improve the safety, affordability and durability of housing facilities?”
To date, several research efforts have investigated the use of bio-degradable and renewable
materials that seemly present comparable performance in relation to conventional practices
(Adewuyi, Otukoya, Olaniyi, & Olafusi, 2015; Adom-Asamoah, Tuffour, Afrifa, & Kankam, 2014;
Agarwal, Nanda, & Maity, 2014; Javadian, Wielopolski, Smith, & Hebel, 2016; Kankam & Adom-
Asamoah, 2006; Khare, 2007; Lima, Willrich, Barbosa, Rosa, & Cunha, 2007). Recently, it has been
shown that the inclusion of greener materials, such as hemp fibre can significantly improve the
ductility of masonry bricks (Formisano, Chiumiento, Junior Dessì, & Fabbrocino, 2017; Formisano,
Dessì, & Landolfo, 2017). Another natural material that has received extensive research is bamboo.
It has been shown that bamboo, a species of the grass family, possesses desirable properties, and
hence can be used as reinforcement in concrete structures (Adom-Asamoah & Afrifa Owusu, 2010;
Ghavami, 2005). Several attributes make bamboo a suitable and attractive alternative to conventional
steel in reinforced concrete construction. For instance, the tensile strength of bamboo can be compar-
able to that of mild steel (Agarwal et al., 2014). Moreover, research has shown that the required
amount of energy needed for engineered bamboo to be produced is about 50 times lesser than
conventional steel (Ghavami, 1995; Janssen, 1981). Others (Ghavami, 1995; Ghavami & Hombeeck,
1981) have also shown that the self-weight of bamboo is six times lesser than steel at the same tensile
strength level, thereby reducing the internal forces that are needed to counteract through member
design. Comparatively, the additional load carrying capacity of bamboo reinforced beams can be five
times that of plain concrete beams if effective chemical treatments is applied.
Self-compacted concrete (SCC), a new form of concrete technology, also present numerous advan-
tages over conventional normal concrete (NC) economically. For SCC, there is no need for mechanical
vibration, since the primary requirement in the design mix is to provide a highly fluid concrete matrix
(Harkouss & Hamad, 2015; Hassan, Hossain, & Lachemi, 2008, 2010). In other words, the concrete matrix
is made to flow under its own weight (Hassan et al., 2010). Hence, an economical advantage will be a
reduction in the operating cost of a construction project in that, there is no need for mechanical
vibrators. Consequently, this burgeoning concrete production technology, highly favours the use of
unskilled labourers, which form a significant portion of the labour force in developing regions (Adom-
Asamoah, Osei Banahene, Obeng, & Antwi Boasiako, 2017; Moavenzadeh, 1979; Moroz et al., 2014).
Implicitly, the labour cost is expected to reduce in SCC construction. However, the structural perfor-
mance particularly shear strength of SCC members may be compromised. This is due to the fact that the
contribution of aggregate interlock capacity to the resistance of shear stresses is expected to decrease
(Harkouss & Hamad, 2015; Hassan et al., 2008). The reduction is from replacing a significant portion of
coarse aggregate with fine aggregate to achieve a highly flowable mix. In recent times, the shear
performance of SCC beams has been heavily investigated. However, its application to other structural
components such as slabs are limited.
Page 2 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
Given the series of experimental works by the authors into structural materials that can promote
sustainable construction in developing regions, the paper presents the behaviour of bamboo rein-
forced self-compacted concrete (BRSCC) slabs. The contributions of this research effort is to primarily
study the impact of bamboo longitudinal reinforcement on the ultimate flexural capacities of BRSCC
slabs, and secondarily recommend an empirical partial factor of safety for conservative design of such
components.
2. Experimental programme
2.1. Source and preparation of materials

Fine aggregates (river washed sand) and coarse aggregate (granite of sizes 10 and 20 mm) possessing
specific gravities of 2.2 and 2.65, respectively, were locally acquired. Limestone Portland cement of
strength grade 32.5R produced by Ghacem was the binder for concrete production. Bamboo culms of
Bambusa vulgaris were obtained from the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology
(KNUST) botanical gardens in Kumasi in the Ashanti Region of Ghana. Treated bamboo stripes (bitumi-
nous coating to a thickness of about 2 mm) were prepared for longitudinal reinforcements as replace-
ment of steel to carry tensile stresses. This was necessary so as to minimise the water absorption
capacity. However, to ensure that adequate bonding is achieved, the treated bamboo stripes were
later smeared in sand (Figure 1a). Uniaxial tensile test was carried out for bamboo stripes with/without
nodes (about 40 cm in length). The average tensile strength was 283 MPa and 235 MPa for bamboo
stripes with nodes and without nodes, respectively. The beams were reinforced with three different
flexural reinforcement ratios of 1%, 2% and 3%.
For SCC samples, a 1.2% by weight of cement superplasticiser free from chlorides and which
meets ASTMC 494–92 requirements for Type A and F was used to enhance the flowability of
concrete, without changing the water cement ratio.
Figure 1. Experimental setup.
(a) (b)
(c)
Page 3 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
Table 1. Concrete mixture proportions

Concrete Binder Fine Coarse Water Super-plasticiser
Type (kg/m3) aggregate aggregate (kg/m3) mL/100kg per
(kg/m3) (kg/m3) binder
NC 450 675 1350 225 0
SCC 450 1215 810 225 1.2
Table 2. Physical properties of aggregates

Property Value
Fine aggregate Coarse aggregate
Specific gravity 2.65 2.63
Water adsorption (%) 1.42 1.39
Fineness modulus 2.91 6.99
3. Concrete mix design, casting and curing procedure

A mix ratio of 1:1.5:3 being cement, fine and coarse aggregates, respectively, with a water to
cement ratio of 0.5, was used for NC test specimens. This was redesigned to obtain an equivalent
SCC mix ratio using coarse to fine aggregate ratios from the studies of Girish et al. (Girish,
Ranganath, & Vengala, 2010), Ryan et al. (Ryan & O’Connor, 2016), Lachemi et al. (Lachemi,
Hossain, & Lambros, 2005) and Hassan et al. (Hassan et al., 2008). The coarse aggregate content
was reduced by 40% and replaced with an equivalent quantity of fine aggregates. The water
cement ratio was maintained and a 0.0012l/kg of superplasticiser was added to obtain an
adequate slump flow. This resulted in a mix ratio of 1:2.7:1.8 being cement, fine and coarse
aggregates, respectively. The mix ratios of both NC and SCC are presented in Table 1. Other
physical properties of aggregates are given in Table 2.
The required amount of water was measured and half of it was poured into the drum of the
concrete mixer. The aggregates and the cement were measured and poured into the loader of
the concrete mixer, which was then lifted into the drum. For the NC mix, concrete was allowed
to mix for about a minute before the remaining water was added and then allowed to mix for
about 3–5 min to achieve a uniform workable paste. For SCC mix, the superplasticiser was
mixed with about half of the remaining water, and later added to the concrete. Finally, the
remaining water was added to the concrete to obtain a homogenous and workable mixture. The
mix was poured into a wheelbarrow and wheeled to the already fabricated formwork with their
bamboo reinforcement for placement. Tests on the fresh properties of concrete were immedi-
ately carried out. Samples of concrete mixes were used to cast the 150 mm × 150 mm × 150 mm
concrete cubes and the 100 mm × 100 mm × 500 mm unreinforced concrete beams (prisms) for
the 28 days compressive and modulus of rapture (MoR) tests, respectively. The formwork for the
slabs, cubes and prisms were struck after 24 h and cured for testing at 28 days. The beams and
slabs were cured using damp jute sacks whereas the cubes and prisms were submerged in
water tank. Before testing, the surface of the beams and slabs was given white painting to
allow for easy detection and movement of cracks.
3.1. Experimental setup and loading protocol

Twelve simply supported one-way slabs were cast and tested till ultimate failure under four-point
bending in a monotonic fashion. An over-hang of 50 mm was provided beyond the support points to
ensure adequate anchorage of the flexural reinforcement. Static loads were incrementally applied at
a rate of 2 kN/min. A hydraulic steel jack supported on a rigid steel frame was used to produce loads
Page 4 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
applied through an I-section steel spreader placed on two cylindrical steel bars. This facilitated the
symmetrical transfer of loads to ensure pure bending in the mid-span of the specimen. The shear-
span to depth ratio was set at 2.5 for all test specimens. A dial gauge reading to 0.001 mm accuracy
was placed in the mid-span to record the central deflection of the slabs. The detection of cracks was
done by visual inspection. A crack microscope of 0.02 mm was also used to measure the width of
cracks on the surface of the slabs. The experimental setup is shown in Figure 1c.
The major design variables investigated were the percentage of bamboo reinforcement, and as
such the slabs were designated as follows. “1”, “2” and “3” were used to denote the amount of
tensile bamboo reinforcement present for a particular specimen. “NC” and “SCC” were used to
denote whether the concrete matrix was from a NC or a SCC mix. Finally, “a” and “b” are used to
emphasise the pair of samples having the same percentage of reinforcement and concrete matrix
type. For instance, the slab referenced as 1NCa, as shown in Table 3, represents one with a 1%
bamboo longitudinal reinforcement and from an NC matrix. 1NCb is the other sample with the
same characteristic, which collectively makes up each pair.
4. Theoretical flexural and shear capacities of slabs

For the slab setup instrumented for loading, the expected failure load that correspond to attaining
full flexural and shear capacities is computed here under BS 8110 design guidelines. Considering
load from the self-weight of the test specimen (Figure 1c), and the resistance offered by the
flexural strength of concrete and the reinforcing material (bamboo), the limiting theoretical failure
load that is expected to cause flexural damage is computed as

ωl2 2
Pult ¼ Mult þ Mcr : (1)
8 av
where Mult ¼ ηfy Ab z; Mcr ¼ fr bh2 =6; η is the material reduction factor (3.0 for bamboo (Kankam &
Odum-Ewuakye, 2001)); fy is the yield strength of bamboo; Ab is the area of bamboo in the tension
zone (fairly rectangular sections of about 10 mm by 12 mm); z is the internal level arm; fr is the
modulus of rupture; b is the width of section;his the sectional height; ω is the self-weight uniformly
distributed load; l is the length of specimen and av is the shear span.
Table 3. Test matrix

Slab Slab dimension Shear-span to Reinforcement Compressive
reference depth ratio strength
Width Depth Length Area Percentage
(mm) (mm) (mm)
1NCa 300 55 1000 2.5 324 1.35 26.45
1SCCa 300 55 1000 2.5 324 1.35 26.21
1NCb 300 55 1000 2.5 314 1.31 26.45
1SCCb 300 55 1000 2.5 314 1.31 26.21
2NCa 300 55 1000 2.5 528 2.20 25.30
2SCCa 300 55 1000 2.5 528 2.20 25.10
2NCb 300 55 1000 2.5 558 2.33 25.30
2SCCb 300 55 1000 2.5 558 2.33 25.10
3NCa 300 55 1000 2.5 763 3.18 26.12
3SCCa 300 55 1000 2.5 763 3.18 26.00
3NCb 300 55 1000 2.5 729 3.04 26.12
3SCCb 300 55 1000 2.5 729 3.04 26.00
Page 5 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
The primary shear resisting mechanisms for concrete beams without web reinforcement is
governed by the dowel action of longitudinal reinforcement due to a friction (contributing
15–25% to the total), the aggregate interlock capacity (33–50% to the total) and contribution for
the un-cracked section in the compression zone (20–40% to the total) (Kong & Evans, 1987).
However, for concrete beams with shear stirrups, BS 8110 (BS 8110-1:1997—Structural use of
concrete. Code of practice for design and construction, 1997) estimates the shear strength as an
aggregated sum of the nominal contribution from concrete, Vc , and web reinforcement, Vs . For the
loading protocol employed, the ultimate shear capacities can then be computed as
" 1 1 1 #
0:79 100Ab 3 400 4 fc 3
Pshear ¼ 2:0 :bd (2)
1:25 bd d 25
where b is the width of slab section; d is the effective depth of slab; fc is the characteristic
compressive strength; and Ab is the area of bamboo in the tension zone.
5. Results and discussion
5.1. Load-deformation and energy dissipation characteristics

Figure 2 presents the load–deflection curves of slab specimens. Behaviour of these slabs up until
the formation of first flexural crack was fairly linear elastic. The post-cracking behaviour of SCC
slabs in terms of stiffness were comparatively lower than their NC counterpart.
The reduction of the post-cracking stiffness in SCC slabs may primarily be due to the 40%
reduction in coarse aggregate content; reduced aggregate interlocking mechanism. This finding
is in agreement with the work of Hassan et al., (Hassan et al., 2010) who evaluated the shear
strength performance of large-scale SCC beams. Nevertheless, the anticipated improved bond
behaviour (larger quantity of fine aggregate and the high fluidity of SCC matrix) needed to enforce
the strain compatibility assumption between the concrete and reinforcing material as noted by
Helincks et al.,(Helincks, Boel, De Corte, De Schutter, & Desnerck, 2013) may not have been
Figure 2. Load-deflection
curves.
Page 6 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
Table 4. Load,deflection and energy characteristics

Load, centre deflection and energy characteristics
Slab Reference Load (kN) Deflection (mm) Energy (kN mm)
1NCa 12 2.05 14.23
1SCCa 12 2.69 20.37
1NCb 12 1.65 11.03
1SCCb 10 2.20 13.26
2NCa 16 3.20 31.94
2SCCa 16 3.52 37.80
2NCb 16 3.30 33.02
2SCCb 16 3.62 38.88
3NCa 24 3.55 58.53
3SCCa 22 4.98 73.50
3NCb 20 4.00 48.66
3SCCb 20 4.85 62.07
adequately utilised when bamboo is used. Consequently, SCC slabs were characterised by higher
ultimate deformations. Moreover, the ultimate load carrying capacities were slightly higher for NC
than SCC slabs irrespective of the percentage of bamboo reinforcement. As expected, evaluating
the effect of bamboo longitudinal reinforcement revealed that for a given load, the central
deflection reduces as the reinforcement ratio increases. This implies an attainment of a relatively
higher stiffness with increase in longitudinal reinforcement. The ultimate load capacities of SCC
and NC slabs with 3.0% reinforcement ratio were 100% and 83% higher as those with 1.0%
bamboo reinforcement respectively (see Table 4).
Analogous to bamboo reinforced concrete beams, Schnieder (Schneider, Pang, & Gu, 2014)
reported a 26% increase in ultimate load flexural capacity of beams whose reinforcement ratio
was increased from 1.6% to 2.4%. He also reported a gradual decline in the load carrying
capacities when the reinforcement ratio was further increased to 3.0% and finally to 3.9%. The
inexistence of strain hardening branch of his tested Moso bamboo strips may have caused this
trend, and as such one can infer that for B. vulgaris, the bamboo species used for this experimental
study, is ductile enough to resist applied loads. Similarly, the ultimate deformation capacity of
tested slabs with 3.0% reinforcement ratio was as twice that of slabs with 1.0% bamboo reinforce-
ment, irrespective of concrete type.
Generally, with respect to ultimate strain energy dissipation capacities, SCC slabs were able to
absorb more energy than their corresponding NC slabs (25% more on average) (see Table 3). As
expected, more energy (in the order of four) was dissipated as the longitudinal reinforcement ratio
was gradually increased from 1% to 3% (Figure 3 and Table 4).
5.2. Failure and cracking behaviour

A comparison of the cracking and ultimate failure loads of the slabs considered is presented in
Table 5.
The first flexural crack load ranges from 36% to 88% of the load at ultimate failure. On average,
this cracking load corresponds to 63% of the ultimate failure load (Table 5 Column 6). However, a
comparison of this experimental first crack load to that obtained from theoretical computations
reveals that for such slabs the flexural strength of concrete is fully utilised and can be in excess of
about 111% on average (Table 5, Column 7). These findings are comparable with the study on the
flexural behaviour of Babadua reinforced one-way slabs (Kankam & Odum-Ewuakye, 2001).
Page 7 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
Figure 3. Strain energy–deflec-

tion curves.
Table 5. Flexural crack and failure loads

Slab Experimental loads (kN) Theoretical loads (kN) Pcr Pc r Pult Pult
0 0 0
Pult Pcr Pult Pcr
reference
At first At ultimate At first At
crack Pcr failure Pult crack Pcr0 ultimate
0
failure Pult
1NCa 8 12 4.95 15.35 0.67 1.62 0.78 2.42
1SCCa 8 12 4.50 14.90 0.67 1.78 0.81 2.67
1NCb 8 12 4.95 15.03 0.67 1.62 0.80 2.42
1SCCb 8 10 4.50 14.57 0.80 1.78 0.69 2.22
2NCa 12 16 4.95 21.90 0.75 2.42 0.73 3.23
2SCCa 8 16 4.80 21.75 0.50 1.67 0.74 3.33
2NCb 14 16 4.95 22.86 0.88 2.83 0.70 3.23
2SCCb 8 16 4.80 22.71 0.50 1.67 0.70 3.33
3NCa 14 24 4.65 28.95 0.58 3.01 0.83 5.16
3SCCa 8 22 4.50 28.80 0.36 1.78 0.76 4.89
3NCb 14 20 4.65 27.93 0.70 3.01 0.72 4.30
3SCCb 10 20 4.50 27.78 0.50 2.22 0.72 4.45
Characterising the influence of SCC on the first crack load of tested slabs depicts a slightly lower
performance when compared to their NC counterparts. This can be viewed as the cause for the
larger deflections in SCC slabs.
In addition, we can also infer that the SCC matrix provides reduced bond deterioration between
the bamboo and concrete during loading, thereby increasing its deformability as compared to NC
slabs. On the other hand, all tested specimens were unable to fully utilise their expected flexural
Page 8 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
load carrying capacities (75% of theoretically computed ultimate failure loads on the average).
This therefore suggests that in the absence of any blind prediction, the reliability of the recom-
mended empirical partial factor of safety of 3 for bamboo should be reviewed. However, the
inability of the slabs to fully mobilise its flexural carrying capacities may be due to the interference
from internal shear stress and minimal dowel action contribution from bamboo.
In evaluating the effect of longitudinal reinforcement ratio of the tested slabs under consideration,
we observe that an increase in this parameter does not significantly impact the mobilisation of the
ultimate flexural carrying capacity of slabs considered. Specifically, for slabs with 1% bamboo reinfor-
0
cement, the average of Pult =Pult was 77%. Increasing the bamboo longitudinal reinforcement to 2%
0
and 3.0% yielded Pult =Pult average values of 72% and 76%, respectively. With respect to experimentally
observed loads at first crackPcr , there was a slight reduction in the proportion of ultimate flexural load
Pult utilised before the initiation of first crack, as the longitudinal reinforcement ratio was increased. As
seen in Table 5, the average decline in the Pcr =Pult for the category of slabs whose reinforcement ratio
was increased from 1.0% to 2.0% is approximately 5% on average. Further increase in bamboo
reinforcement to 3.0% also caused an average reduction of approximately 12%. This trend implicitly
and indirectly depicts an improvement in the post-cracking flexural resistance with increasing bamboo
reinforcement, particularly larger in SCC than NC.
5.3. Shear strength and failure mode behaviour

The theoretical nominal and ultimate shear capacities of slabs investigated as per BS 8110 is given
in Table 6. In order to evaluate whether the formation of cracks were flexure or shear controlled,
the ratios Pcr =Ps1 (first crack load to theoretical nominal shear load assuming only concrete section
resist shear), Pult =Ps1 (ultimate failure load to theoretical nominal shear load assuming only
concrete section resist shear) and Pult =Ps2 , which assumes that the contribution by dowel action
between bamboo and concrete is paramount, are considered.
The first flexural crack loads (Pcr ) were significantly lesser than the estimated theoretical shear
capacities of slab members that excludes the contribution longitudinal reinforcement (Ps1 ) (an
average Pcr =Ps1 of 22%) (see Table 6).
Moreover, as given in Table 5, the observed first crack loads of tested slabs (Pcr ) were rather
0
higher than the theoretical predicted flexural strength of concrete P0cr (an average Pcr =Pcr of 212%).
Table 6. Shear capacities of tested slabs

Slab Theoretical shear strength (kN) Pcr Pult Pult
Ps1 Ps1 Ps2
reference Concrete section Including bamboo
only Ps1 reinforcement Ps2
1NCa 46.22 51.09 0.17 0.26 0.23
1SCCa 46.08 50.93 0.17 0.26 0.24
1NCb 46.22 50.56 0.17 0.26 0.24
1SCCb 46.08 50.40 0.17 0.22 0.20
2NCa 45.54 59.23 0.26 0.35 0.27
2SCCa 45.42 59.08 0.31 0.35 0.27
2NCb 45.54 60.33 0.18 0.35 0.27
2SCCb 45.42 60.18 0.18 0.35 0.27
3NCa 46.03 66.39 0.30 0.52 0.36
3SCCa 45.96 66.29 0.17 0.48 0.33
3NCb 46.03 66.39 0.30 0.43 0.30
3SCCb 45.96 66.29 0.22 0.44 0.30
Page 9 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
This implies that the development and propagation of cracks were flexure dominant as opposed to
shear. By comparing the ultimate failure loads Pult to the theoretical shear loads (Ps1 or Ps2 ), one
can also infer that the dominating mode of failure is flexural, since it would have required extra
loads of about 2.8 and 3.66 times the ultimate failure loads to mobilise the full utilisation of the
theoretically estimated shear failure loads Ps1 and Ps2 respectively. Evidently, all tested slab
specimen experience extensive flexural deformation and cracking till ultimate failure with the
formation of diagonal shear cracks. A similar observation was reported in Kankam and Odum-
Ewuakye (2001), which emphasised the role played by Babadua bars in contributing to shear
resistance. It is worth noting that the effect of the reduced aggregate interlocking capacity in
SCC slab was marginal and this could not significantly impact the rapid propagation of cracks to
the compression zone as expected.
5.4. Cracking behaviour

A concrete crack width gauge was used to measure the width of cracks during testing. Crack width
values were recorded at each load step upon the initiation of the first crack. The formation of flexural
crack begun directly at the soffit of the centrally applied load. Upon further load, additional cracks were
formed and propagated upwards and directed into the compression zone. The slab members devel-
oped adequate resistance to diagonal shear, since crack propagation was limited to a constant
moment span of about 300 mm. The maximum crack width at near failure for each slab is outlined
in Table 7. In addition, crack patterns and propagation is shown diagrammatically in Figure 4.
From a theoretical perspective, for structural members with constant ductility, one expects exten-
sive deformation and flexural cracking for components with relatively higher amount of longitudinal
Figure 4. Crack patterns of

tested slabs
Page 10 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
reinforcement. Since there was no interference from shear failure for the slab tested, the number of
flexural cracks for specimens with larger bamboo reinforcement was comparably higher than those
with lower reinforcement (see Table 7). Another notable observation was that no SCC slab had more
flexural cracks than their NC counterpart. However as previously discussed, SCC slabs experienced
large deformation capacities than their NC counterpart. This observed phenomenon emphasises the
impact of crack pattern in attaining improved deformation capacity of structural components.
Evaluating the distribution of maximum crack width at ultimate failure for each specimen, also
revealed that making the concrete matrix self-compacting, significantly affect this parameter.
With the exception of 3NCb and 3SCCb, all SCC specimens produced a much larger maximum
crack width as compared to NC tested slabs. This may be partly due to the ease with which cracks
are able to circumvent the aggregates and the global reduction in the aggregate interlocking
capacity coming from the decrease in the proportion of coarse aggregate in the SCC mix. However,
from Table 7, the correlation between the amount of bamboo reinforcement and the maximum
crack width can be said to be statistically insignificant.
6. Conclusions
A total of 12 one-way simply supported slabs reinforced with B. vulgaris (bamboo species) were
subjected to third-point line loads applied monotonically. Half of these slabs were design from a
SCC mix, and the other half from a normally vibrated concrete matrix (NC). The design variables
were primarily the amount of bamboo longitudinal reinforcement (1%, 2% and 3%) and seconda-
rily the type of concrete matrix (SCC or NC). With the shear-span to depth ratio kept constant at
2.5, the following conclusions on the load-deflection relationships, ultimate failure loads, shear
behaviour and crack patterns were drawn.
● Post-cracking stiffness of bamboo reinforced SCC slabs were lower than NC slabs, and this
can be attributed to the fact that in the presence of a relatively lower coarse
aggregate content, the needed aggregate interlocking mechanism to resist shear stress
is reduced.
● The increase in ultimate load and deformation capacities of bamboo reinforced SCC and NC
slabs can be about 91% on average if the percentage of longitudinal reinforcement is varied
from 1% to 3%. However, for NC slabs, the average increase could be about 83% for this
limited study.
Table 7. Cracking behaviour

Slab reference Number of cracks Maximum crack width (mm)
1NCa 5 0.14
1SCCa 4 0.30
1NCb 4 0.10
1SCCb 4 1.60
2NCa 7 0.12
2SCCa 7 4.00
2NCb 7 0.14
2SCCb 7 4.00
3NCa 5 0.08
3SCCa 8 0.40
3NCb 8 0.40
3SCCb 7 0.30
Page 11 of 13
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1477464
● The cracking performance of bamboo reinforced SCC slabs in terms of number of flexural
cracks and maximum crack width is considerably better than those made from the conven-
tional vibrated concrete.
● The use of B. vulgaris as structural reinforcing bars in rural construction of reinforced concrete
slabs, coupled with the application of SCC mix can be an effective alternative for achieving and
maintaining sustainability. From this limited study, an empirical partial factor of safety of 4.0
can be applied for conservative design.
Funding Formisano, A., Dessì, E., & Landolfo, R. (2017).

The authors received no direct funding for this research. Mechanical-physical experimental tests on lime
mortars and bricks reinforced with hemp. In AIP
Author details conference proceedings (Vol. 1906). 13th
Mark Adom-Asamoah1 International Conference of Computational Methods
E-mail: madom-asamoah.coe@knust.edu.gh in Science and Engineering - ICCMSE 2017,
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1395-4511 Thessaloniki, Greece. doi:10.1063/1.5012363
Jack Osei1 Ghavami, K. (1995). Ultimate load behaviour of bamboo-
E-mail: jobanahene.coe@knust.edu.gh reinforced lightweight concrete beams. Cement and
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3843-7158 Concrete Composites, 17(4), 281–288. doi:10.1016/
Russell Afrifa1 0958-9465(95)00018-8
E-mail: roafrifa.coe@knust.edu.gh Ghavami, K. (2005). Bamboo as reinforcement in struc-
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Kwame Nkurmah tural concrete elements. Cement and Concrete
University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana. Composites, 27(6), 637–649. doi:10.1016/j.
cemconcomp.2004.06.002
Citation information Ghavami, K., & Hombeeck, R. (1981). Application of bam-
Cite this article as: Bamboo reinforced self-compacting boo as a construction material: Part I—Mechanical
concrete one-way slabs for sustainable construction in properties and waterrepellent treatment of bamboo,
rural areas, Mark Adom-Asamoah, Jack Osei & Russell Part II—Bamboo reinforced concrete beams. In Proc
Afrifa, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1477464. of Latin American symp on rational organization of
building applied to low cost housing (pp. 49–66). Sao
References Paulo, Brazil.
Adewuyi, A. P., Otukoya, A. A., Olaniyi, O. A., & Olafusi, O. Girish, S., Ranganath, R. V., & Vengala, J. (2010). Influence
S. (2015). Comparative studies of steel, bamboo and of powder and paste on flow properties of SCC.
rattan as reinforcing bars in concrete: Tensile and Construction and Building Materials, 24(12), 2481–
flexural characteristics. Open Journal of Civil 2488. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.06.008
Engineering, 05(02), 228–238. doi:10.4236/ Global Urban Indicators Database – UN-Habitat. (2014).
ojce.2015.52023 Retrieved November 22, 2016, from http://unhabitat.
Adom-Asamoah, M., & Afrifa Owusu, R. (2010). A com- org/wpdm-package/global-urban-indicators-
parative study of bamboo reinforced concrete beams database/
using different stirrup materials for rural construc- Harkouss, R. H., & Hamad, B. S. (2015). Performance of
tion. Retrieved September 14, 2016, from http:// high strength self-compacting concrete beams under
www.academia.edu/21267273/A_comparative_ different modes of failure. International Journal of
study_of_Bamboo_reinforced_concrete_beams_ Concrete Structures and Materials, 9(1), 69–88.
using_different_stirrup_materials_for_rural_ doi:10.1007/s40069-014-0088-x
construction Hassan, A. A. A., Hossain, K. M. A., & Lachemi, M. (2008).
Adom-Asamoah, M., Osei Banahene, J., Obeng, J., & Antwi Behavior of full-scale self-consolidating concrete
Boasiako, E. (2017). Bamboo-reinforced self-com- beams in shear. Cement and Concrete Composites, 30
pacting concrete beams for sustainable construction (7), 588–596. doi:10.1016/j.
in rural areas. Structural Concrete, 18(6), 1000–1010. cemconcomp.2008.03.005
doi:10.1002/suco.2017.18.issue-6 Hassan, A. A. A., Hossain, K. M. A., & Lachemi, M. (2010).
Adom-Asamoah, M., Tuffour, Y. A., Afrifa, R. O., & Kankam, Strength, cracking and deflection performance of
C. K. (2014). Strength characteristics of hand-quar- large-scale self-consolidating concrete beams sub-
ried partially-weathered quartzite aggregates in jected to shear failure. Engineering Structures, 32(5),
concrete. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 2(5), 1262–1271. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.01.002
134. doi:10.11648/j.ajce.20140205.12 Helincks, P., Boel, V., De Corte, W., De Schutter, G., &
Agarwal, A., Nanda, B., & Maity, D. (2014). Experimental Desnerck, P. (2013). Structural behaviour of powder-
investigation on chemically treated bamboo rein- type self-compacting concrete: Bond performance
forced concrete beams and columns. Construction and shear capacity. Engineering Structures, 48, 121–
and Building Materials, 71, 610–617. doi:10.1016/j. 132. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.08.035
conbuildmat.2014.09.011 Janssen, J. J. A. (1981). Bamboo in building structures.
BS 8110-1:1997 - Structural use of concrete. Code of Eindhoven: Technische Hogeschool Eindhoven.
practice for design and construction. (1997). United Javadian, A., Wielopolski, M., Smith, I. F. C., & Hebel, D. E.
Kingdom: British Standards Institution. (2016). Bond-behavior study of newly developed
Formisano, A., Chiumiento, G., Junior Dessì, E., & bamboo-composite reinforcement in concrete.
Fabbrocino, F. (2017). Experimental shear tests on tuff Construction and Building Materials, 122, 110–117.
triplets with hemp fibres reinforced lime mortar. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.06.084
Presented at the AIMETA 2017 XXIII Conference, The Kankam, C. K., & Adom-Asamoah, M. (2006). Shear
Italian Association of Theoretical and Applied strength of concrete beams reinforced with steel
Mechanics, Salerno, Italy. bars milled from scrap metals. Materials & Design,
Page 12 of 13
ISSN: 0974-2115
www.jchps.com Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences
A Study on Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Slabs
Maruthupandian.G1*, Saravanan.R2, Suresh Kumar.S3, Sivakumar.B.G4
1
Dept of Mechanical Engg, Akshaya College of Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore- 642109.
2
Dept of Mechanical Engineering, Jawahar Engineering College, Chennai- 600093.
3
Dept of Mechanical Engineering, Panimalar Polytechnic College, Chennai - 600029.
4
Dept of Mechanical Engg, Golden Valley Integrated Campus, Andhrapradesh-517325.
*Corresponding author: E-Mail: maruthupandian90@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Polymers synthesized with synthetic fibers are more advantageous as Compared to conventional construction
materials. In spite of the widespread use there is a tendency to decline because of its costs and environmental impacts.
On the other hand natural fibers are less costly, light weight, and easily recyclable. Among multiple fibers bamboo
is one such fibers, because of its low cost, and weight, with it short growth cycle. In this work three different
compositions of bamboo reinforced polymer composites (40, 30 and 25% of bamboo reinforcement volume) are
prepared with the use of epoxy and hardener. From the testing results it clearly revealed 25% of bamboo
reinforcement composite had higher tensile strength among all the three. Simultaneously the bamboo is reinforced
in concrete cement slab instead of steel rod with the standard size. The steel reinforced concrete slab is slightly
superior to the bamboo reinforced concrete slab. At the same time deflection of both slabs are same at 40KN load.
Hence the bamboo as a structural material in the minimal loading applications like kitchen slabs, books slabs can be
served.
KEY WORDS: Bamboo, Concrete slab, Deflection, Steel rod.
1. INTRODUCTION
Generally steel is used in the structural materials. But steel has some disadvantages like its corrodibility,
high cost and also fabrication of steel leads to the release of CO2 in the atmosphere. On the other hand, composites
have shown its advantages like light weight, recyclability and its cost effectiveness. (Mei-po Ho, Kin-Tak Lau, 2012)
In his work, woven glass fiber and chopped silk fibers are used to fabricate the hybrid composites. From the results
Young’s modulus is found to increase with the use of 0.3 wt%, 0.4 wt% of the silk fiber. The Young’s modulus
decreases when the amount of silk fibers increases beyond 0.4 wt%. Furthermore, impact test was conducted, and
the results showed that increasing the amount of silk fibers in the composite results in increasing the maximum load.
When the content of silk fibers increased beyond 0.5 wt%, it is found that the maximum propagation energy decreases
significantly. (Vemuvaraprasad and Mattam Lava kumar, 2011) In his work, specimen for tensile test and chemical
test was prepared by using alkali treated bamboo fibers. In each case ten pre weights of samples was prepared and
then dipped in the chemicals. The final weight of the samples and % weight loss /gain was determined. From the
results the tensile properties and resistant to chemicals are found to be higher when alkali treated bamboo fibers were
used in the hybrid composites. (Yushun Li, 2012) They prepared a lightweight bamboo–steel composite slab
composed of the cold-formed thin-walled steel channel and the bamboo plywood sheathings. Three types of
specimens were investigated, which are adhesive bonding, self-tapping screw enhanced connection and stability
improved connection with bamboo laths glued on the both sides of cold-formed steel channel. Tests are carried out
by applying the constant step loading and compared with the theoretical deformation values. (Khosrow Ghavami,
2005) In his work, characteristics of bamboo is studied in terms of modulus of elasticity and density using the material
selection method. From the literature survey Bambusa Bamboos species can be used as a reinforcement material for
the slab.
Thus our aim is to fabricate the tensile test specimen according to the ASTM D638 standard for plastics by
epoxy based polymer composite (40%, 30% and 25% of bamboo reinforced volume) and to evaluate the tensile
strength of these polymer composites. Furthermore fabricate the steel and bamboo reinforced composite concrete
slab and to compare load withstanding capacity and deflection of both slabs.
2. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
Bambusa bamboo’s is one of the medicinal plants, which grows well in sandy loam and fertile soil with
tropical to sub-tropical climatic conditions. The Bambusa bamboos species which is used in this work was confirmed
by Agriculture University Coimbatore. After testing it is then treated with Alkali as shown in Figure 1. Alkali
treatment allows better fiber wetting and removes cementing substances and also it removes waxes and oils from the
surfaces. The alkali used where 1.5N Noah by dissolving 60g per liter distilled water. The matrix material used was
LY 556 for composite fabrication and hardener used here is HY-951.
April - June 2016 978 JCPS Volume 9 Issue 2

ISSN: 0974-2115
a b c
Fig. 1a, b, c Bamboo materials distilled with 1.5N Noah solution, Die for making tensile specimen,
Bamboo reinforced polymer composites of varying compositions
The tensile test specimen was prepared by using the aluminum die as in Figure 1b with the ASTM standard
D638. Initially the mixture of epoxy LY 556 and the hardener HY 951 with the ratio of 1:10 was prepared and mixing
is made with the bamboo material by stirring at room temperature. After proper stirring for 10 minutes, the mixture
was poured into suitable moulds to obtain a dog bone shape and the composite is cured for 8 hours. After curing the
bamboo reinforced polymer composite is removed from the aluminum die. Three different bamboo-reinforced epoxy
composites were fabricated by changing the amount of reinforcement as in Figure 1c. ASTM D638 standard testing
methods were used for tension testing of plastic materials.
Fabrication of Slab: A mould box was prepared by the size of 1005mm × 1005mm × 102mm with the help of wood
material. Before placing the concrete in the mould box oil or grease is applied on inside surface, to make it easy to
remove them once the concrete has set. The steel rods are accurately cut by 1m from the length rod with the size of
8mm and 10mm diameter. Then steel reinforcement mat was prepared by winding the steel rods with spacing of
250mm and giving the 300mm center to center spacing of steel rods as in Figures 2a.Simultaneously bamboo sticks
were dried in the atmospheric temperature for three days, with the size of 8mm and 10mm square stick and 1m length
bamboo stick. To prevent from the corrosion, a epoxy layer coating is made and cured for 12 hours as in Figure 2b.
a b
Figure. 2a & 2b steel and bamboo reinforced mat
Preparation of a Concrete Mixing: Measure the quantity of sand and cement required and mix the sand and cement
together until the mix has a homogeneous colour. Form a hollow in the middle, slowly add a little water in the hollow
and moisten part of the mix. Repeat adding water little by little until the whole mix is moistened (i.e.) in plastic
consistency. The mixture should have a firm, smooth appearance and also it should sit on a trowel cleanly. After
concrete mixing the Steel & bamboo reinforcement mat is placed 15mm above from the face of the concrete bottom
surface. After placing the concrete mixture of 1: 2: 4 (cement: sand: aggregate) is added to the reinforcement mat
and the concrete is strongly rammed to tighten the coarse aggregates as in Figure 3a &3b.
After settling there exist an chemical reaction between these two ingredients results in the setting and
progressive hardening of the concrete as in Figure 3c. For getting the strongest possible concrete, curing is done for
28 days.
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 3a &3b Steel and bamboo reinforcement Figure 3c Steel and bamboo reinforcement slab.

ISSN: 0974-2115
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The three different specimens are tested in the uniaxial tensile testing machine and the tensile strength values
are shown in Figure 4. The 25% of the reinforcement volume had more strength value than the 30% and 40% of
reinforcement volume.
Figure.4. Tensile strength Vs. Reinforcement for different compositions of composites.

Simultaneously the compressive test is made on the steel and bamboo reinforced concrete slabs by using the
compressive testing machine. The values of the deflection and load withstanding capacity are found and shown in
Figure 5.
Figure.5. Comparison between load and deflection values for bamboo and steel reinforced slab.
Similarly a Six Concrete cubes were prepared by mixing of cement, sand, and aggregates without using any
reinforcements and it is also cured for 28 days to attain the maximum strength. After curing, the specimens were
tested in compression testing machine.
4. CONCLUSION
Thus the bamboo can be used as a possible replacement of steel in the modern engineering constructions.
The tensile strength of bamboo is relatively high which makes bamboo an attractive alternative to steel in tensile
loading applications. The bamboo reinforced concrete slab (43KN) has less load withstanding capacity than the steel
reinforced concrete slab (61KN). The bamboo reinforced concrete slab and steel reinforced concrete slab are having
high tensile stress than normal concrete without reinforcement. At the same time the deflection of the both slabs are
merely equal at 40KN load. So that steel can be replaced with bamboo in minimal loading for structural applications.
REFERENCES
Khosrow Ghavami, Bamboo as reinforcement in structural concrete elements, Cement & Concrete Composites, 27,
2005, 637-649.
Mei-po Ho, Kin-Tak Lau, Design of an impact resistant glass fibre/epoxy composites using short silk fibres,
Materials and Design, 35, 2012, 664-669.
Vemuvaraprasad, Mattam Lava kumar, Chemical resistance and tensile properties of bamboo and glass fibers
reinforced epoxy hybrid composites, International Journal of Materials and Biomaterials Applications, 1 (1), 2011,
17-20.
Yushun Li, Huangying Shen, Wei Shan, Tianshi Han, Flexural behavior of lightweight bamboo–steel composite
slabs, Thin Walled Structures, 53, 2012, 83-90.

International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue VI, June 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com
Behaviour of Bamboo Reinforced Slab Panel

Rohit Deshmukh1, Aditya Raj2, Avinish Kumar3, Amit Mahto4, Bhimsingh Rathaur5
1,2,3,4,5
Department of Civil, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune-411007
Abstract: This report has been prepared for successfully testing the design and construction of bamboo reinforced slab. The
information in this report has been compiled from reports of experiments done by us under the guidance of faculty and expects.
Slab panels are made using bamboo reinforcement having good compressive strength.
Nowadays global warming is a big issues for society. Bamboo, low cost, fast growing, and broad distribution of growth, is
expected to contribute significantly to earthquake resistant construction and seismic retrofit technology in the developing
countries. So bamboo is cost effective, eco-friendly and having good compressive strength. It can be use for light weight
structure and temporary structure.
Keywords: Bamboo reinforced slab, Bamboo skeleton, Slump cone test, Load provision, Crack pattern
I. INTRODUCTION
The main purpose of this project is to ensure that a bamboo reinforced concrete slab is suitable and sustainable for light weight
structure or temporary structure. Nature’s material, bamboo has been widely used for many purposes. Mainly as a strength bearing
material. It is used for building shelters from an earlier time. Bamboo has used for scaffolding works, formwork supporting stands
and many in building construction works. In the history of Civil Engineering construction, bamboo was a vital material in
construction. A study of the feasibility of using bamboo as the reinforcing material in precast concrete elements was conducted at
the U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station in 1964. , the bamboo is used for construction of houses in hilly and
flooded areas but it is also used in other conventional construction.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW

[1] Experimental Investigation of Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Slab, American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) e-ISSN :
2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936 Volume-03, Issue-01, pp-128-131 www.ajer.org. are working on replacement of conventional
materials of building construction with eco friendly material for sustainable development. Bamboo has been in use of mankind for
various purposes since a long time. ISO-22156 for Bamboo Structural Design and ISO-22157 for Determination of physical and
mechanical properties of bamboo have been published by International Standards.
[2] Research and Development on Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Structure Masakazu TERAI & Koichi MINAMI Fukuyama
University, Japan. Suggests that alternative cheaper reinforcement material with a high tensile strength is bamboo. Recently, in the
attention in response to global warming issues and sustainable society, the manufacturing using natural materials has become
actively. Bamboo, low cost, fast growing, and broad distribution of growth, is expected to contribute significantly to earthquake-
resistant construction and seismic retrofit technology in the developing countries.
The tensile strength filled with cement paste cured w/c=80% and 100% significantly increase with aging time. The behavior of pull-
out test with bamboo is almost the same as the plain steel bar; however, the bond strength with bamboo was higher than the one with
plain steel bar. It can be expected that the bond strength covering with full treatment shows the high value 1.2-1.35MPa. Bamboo
reinforced concrete slab.
[3] Maruthupandian.G1* , Saravanan.R2 , Suresh Kumar.S3 , Sivakumar.B.G4 A Study on Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Slabs
1Dept of Mechanical Engg, Akshaya College of Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore- 642109. Proved that the application of
Polymers synthesized with synthetic fibers are more advantageous as Compared to conventional construction materials. Generally
steel is used in the structural materials. But steel has some disadvantages like its corrodibility, high cost and also fabrication of steel
leads to the release of CO2 in the atmosphere. On the other hand, composites have shown its advantages like light weight,
recyclability and its cost effectiveness. In his work, woven glass fiber and chopped silk fibers are used to fabricate the hybrid
composites. From the results Young’s modulus is found to increase with the use of 0.3 wt%, 0.4 wt% of the silk fiber. The Young’s
modulus decreases when the amount of silk fibers increases beyond 0.4 wt%.
[4] Prof. Dirk E. Hebel1, Felix Heisel and Alireza Javadian, “Engineering Bamboo The new composite reinforcement” Chair of
Architecture and Construction Future Cities Laboratory, Singapore ETH Centre Singapore.
©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 283

Bamboo is an incredibly rapidly growing, affordable and widely available natural resource in Africa, which has outstanding
constructive qualities. The cultivation and industrially processing of bamboo offers huge potential n the form of composite material
products known as Woven Strand Bamboo (WSB). The research group is investigating these possibilities. This paper documents the
investigations that were carried out in order to understand the production process of WSB products in accordance to its change of
mechanical and physical properties. All tests documented in this paper were completed using 5-year-old Phyllostachys edulis, also
known as Moso Bamboo, which was harvested in the Anji area of South China. The WSB material used in the described research
activities was prepared in Anji. The tested WSB material represented an average fiber collection from upper, middle and lower
sections of the bamboo culm.
III. METHODOLOGY
A. Information of Materials Used for Concrete
1) Ordinary Portland cement (M53 Grade) is used. Which is locally available in market. It is the most suitable cement for
infrastructure project because of its high flexural strength.
2) Advantages of cement
a) Excellence resistance to chloride & sulphate attacks.
b) Low risk of cracking.
c) Improved workability.
d) Better compatibility with all type of admixtures.
3) Aggregate
a) Aggregate of 10 mm and 20mm size are used.
b) It consisting sharp, angular, grains particles.
c) It should be free from dust, dirt and organic matters.
d) It is hard and durable.
e) It should not be elongated or flaky but of cubical shape only.
4) River sand
a) Sand used for concrete is fine, free from dust, dirt and organic matter.
5) Water
a) In concrete work the water used for both mixing and curing is free from injurious amounts of deleterious material like acid,
alkalies, etc.
b) Potable water is generally used for mixing in proportion 0.37- 0.39 and curing.
B. Preparation of Formwork
1) Formwork is prepared from well finished and smooth plywood of thickness 12 mm.
2) Rectangular box type structure is prepared which is open at top as well as bottom.
3) Size(inner) of formwork is 1000mm x 1000 mm x 70mm.
4) Treaming is done at corner edge of strips to avoid it from wedge action.
5) Joints in formwork are connected with screw which can easily removed at the time of dismoulding and can use further work.
C. Preparation of Bamboo Skeleton

1) Bamboo Treatment
a) Well seasoned bamboo of size 40mm diameter are taken.
b) Split it into four equal parts longitudinally .
c) Primer coat is applied on bamboo and rangoli is spread or coated over the primer coat.
2) Advantages
a) Prevent decay of bamboo .
b) Prevent absorption of water from concrete.
c) Prevent cracking of concrete.
d) Coating of rangoli on bamboo increases roughness and improve bonding of bamboo and concrete.
4) Preparation of reinforcement / skeleton
a) Strips of length 1000mm and width 1/4 are prepared .

b) Bamboo strips having approximate 12 mm diameter and 20mm width is bounded with another strips of diameter 12mm
perpendicularly using binding wire making a square mash structure.
c) Spacing between main bamboo are (i)175mm,(ii)125mm
D. Preparation of concrete mix

1) Mix design (1:1.7:2.89)
Total volume of slab panel = 1 x 1 x 0.07 = 0.07 m3
Weight of slab panel = 2400 x 0.06 = 168 kg
Total weight of slab panels = 3x168 = 504 kg
2) Batching
a) Weigh batching method is used for measuring the materials.
b) Material required for one slab panel (volume=0.07 m3) 1:1:7:2.89
3) Mixing
a) Hand mixing is done on clean solid water tight and thin steel sheet platform to provide ample mixing.
b) Dry mix is prepared.
c) The cement is dumped on the sand and distributed evenly the sand cement is mixed thoroughly with spade, turning the mixture
over and over again ,until it is of even color throughout and free from streak.
d) The measured quantity of coarse aggregate is spread out and the sand cement mixture is spread on its top and it is mixed at least
three times by shoveling and turning over by twist by center to side again back to center.
e) The hollow is made in a middle of mixed pile. 3 quarter of total quantity of water is added while the material is turned in toward
the center with spade.
f) Cur bond admixture is added with 0.3 % by weight of cementaceous material.
g) Remaining water is added slowly, turning the whole mixture over and over again until the uniform colour and consistency is
obtained throughout. The platform is washed at the end of day.
E. Placing
1) Proper oiling is done on formwork before placing the concrete.
2) Slurry type concrete mix is poured into the formwork with proper compaction.
3) For proper compaction, 6 mm diameter tamping rod is used for tamping to avoid honeycombing.
4) Top level plane finished surface is made using trowel.
5) Due to improper compaction honeycombing arises in slab panel.
F. Removal of formwork
1) Formwork is removed after 20 hours of casting of the slab panel.
2) Formwork is removed with proper care so that it could be used for the future.
H. Curing
1) Once the formwork is removed then curing is done for next 28 days.
2) Gunny bag method is used for curing.
I. Testing
1) The wall panel of size (1000 X 1000 X 70 mm) is tested under uniform distributed load.
2) Distribute the load uniformly over entire slab panel .I section of length 1000 mm and of adequate strength are used as support
at the four edges so as to make it as simply supported slab.
3) Deflectometer of least count 0.01mm is used for measuring the longitudinal deformation of wall panel.
4) Testing continued until failure occurred in wall panel.
J. Study of crack pattern

1) After applying load on slab panel for considerable time the cracks started to appear.

2) Cracks appears due to improper compaction during casting, temperature effect, use of more fine materials and due to
earthquake.
3) By taking suitable measures during and after casting of slab these cracks can be prevented.
K. Future scope of project

1) Use of bamboo also reduces cost and make it eco-friendly construction.
2) Use of quarter piece of bamboo instead of half piece will reduce cracks.
3) Use of recycled aggregate of size less than 10 mm.
4) Use of light weight materials for construction helps to reduce weight of panels which results into easy handling of panels during
slab construction.
IV. EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

Observation Table 4.1: Load Applied and Deflection Of Slab Panal 1 (175mm Spacing)
Cummulative Dialgauge Reading Deflection
Weight
Type
Sr Layer Total Of Total Least
Of During During During During
No. No. Units Each Weight Weight Load Count
Layer Loading Unloadig Loading Unloading
Unit
kg kg Kg KN mm mm mm
1 Tile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 178 0.01 0 1.78
2 Tile 1 20 6.94 138.8 138.8 1.3602 9 202 0.01 0.09 2.02
3 Tile 2 20 6.94 138.8 277.6 2.7205 18 222 0.01 0.18 2.22
4 Tile 3 20 6.94 138.8 416.4 4.0807 27 241 0.01 0.27 2.41
5 Tile 4 20 6.94 138.8 555.2 5.441 35 255 0.01 0.35 2.55
6 Tile 5 20 6.94 138.8 694 6.8012 43 276 0.01 0.43 2.76
7 Tile 6 20 6.94 138.8 832.8 8.1614 54 284 0.01 0.54 2.84
8 Tile 7 20 6.94 138.8 971.6 9.5217 69 297 0.01 0.69 2.97
9 Tile 8 20 6.94 138.8 1110.4 10.882 77 307 0.01 0.77 3.07
10 Tile 9 20 6.94 138.8 1249.2 12.242 91 317 0.01 0.91 3.17
11 Tile 10 20 6.94 138.8 1388 13.602 109 325 0.01 1.09 3.25
12 Tile 11 20 6.94 138.8 1526.8 14.963 149 332 0.01 1.49 3.32
13 Tile 12 20 6.94 138.8 1665.6 16.323 183 340 0.01 1.83 3.4
14 Tile 13 20 6.94 138.8 1804.4 17.683 212 346 0.01 2.12 3.46
15 Tile 14 20 6.94 138.8 1943.2 19.043 244 352 0.01 2.44 3.52
16 Tile 15 20 6.94 138.8 2082 20.404 258 357 0.01 2.58 3.57
17 Tile 16 20 6.94 138.8 2220.8 21.764 279 365 0.01 2.79 3.65
18 Beam 17 8 156.55 2377.35 23.298 310 360 0.01 3.1 3.6
19 Boy1,2 18 2 114 2491.35 24.415 320 343 0.01 3.2 3.43
20 Boy3 19 1 49 2540.35 24.895 328 345 0.01 3.28 3.45
21 Boy4 20 1 59 2599.35 25.474 346 346 0.01 3.46 3.46
Load Deflecion Curve During Loading and Unloading

A. Activity : Testing of BRC slab -1

1) ISMB 100 frame of dimension 1 m × 1 m was fabricated for testing of slabs.
2) Red oxide paint is applied to the frame to prevent rusting.
3) The frame of 70 cm high, so that cracks can be observed from below. Also dial gauge was easily placed below the slab.
4) Testing of 1nd slab was scheduled on 27th may 2017. The slab of bamboo reinforcement at 175 mm c/c was tested. Uniformaly
distributed Load was applied with the help of paving tiles. Each loading interval was of 20 tiles having load of 138.8 kg.
Deflection at center was measured with a magnetic dial gauge. Total load of 25.48 KN/m2 was applied. Only two , three minor
cracks of 0.3 mm width were noticed.
5) The total deflection at center was 3.46 mm at 25.48 KN/m2 load.
6) Unloading was done at same interval of 138.8 kg.
7) Permanent set was recorded as 1.8 mm.
8) The observations were tabulated and a graph was plotted of deflection v/s load applied.
Observation Table 4.2 : Load Applied and Deflection Of Slab Panel 2 (175mmSpacing)
Weight Dialgauge Dialgauge

Type Deflection Deflection
Sr Layer Total Of Total Cummulative Cummulative Reading Reading Least
Of During During
No. No. Units Each Weight Weight Load During During Count
Layer Loading Unloading
Unit Loading Unloadig
Kg Kg Kg KN mm mm mm
1 Tile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 243 0.01 0 2.43
2 Tile 1 20 6.94 138.8 138.8 1.36024 20 278 0.01 0.2 2.78
3 Tile 2 20 6.94 138.8 277.6 2.72048 38 300 0.01 0.38 3
4 Tile 3 20 6.94 138.8 416.4 4.08072 54 317 0.01 0.54 3.17
5 Tile 4 20 6.94 138.8 555.2 5.44096 66 331 0.01 0.66 3.31
6 Tile 5 20 6.94 138.8 694 6.8012 78 346 0.01 0.78 3.46
7 Tile 6 20 6.94 138.8 832.8 8.16144 91 357 0.01 0.91 3.57
8 Tile 7 20 6.94 138.8 971.6 9.52168 102 368 0.01 1.02 3.68
9 Tile 8 20 6.94 138.8 1110.4 10.88192 116 376 0.01 1.16 3.76
10 Tile 9 20 6.94 138.8 1249.2 12.24216 129 382 0.01 1.29 3.82
11 Tile 10 20 6.94 138.8 1388 13.6024 141 390 0.01 1.41 3.9
12 Tile 11 20 6.94 138.8 1526.8 14.96264 264 398 0.01 2.64 3.98
13 Tile 12 20 6.94 138.8 1665.6 16.32288 298 405 0.01 2.98 4.05
14 Tile 13 20 6.94 138.8 1804.4 17.68312 316 410 0.01 3.16 4.1
15 Tile 14 20 6.94 138.8 1943.2 19.04336 335 414 0.01 3.35 4.14
16 Tile 15 20 6.94 138.8 2082 20.4036 352 420 0.01 3.52 4.2
17 Tile 16 20 6.94 138.8 2220.8 21.76384 367 424 0.01 3.67 4.24
18 Tile 17 20 6.94 138.8 2359.6 23.12408 382 429 0.01 3.82 4.29
19 Tile 18 20 6.94 138.8 2498.4 24.48432 396 432 0.01 3.96 4.32
20 Beam 19 8 165.55 2663.95 26.10671 414 432 0.01 4.14 4.32

Load Deflection Curve During Loading and Unloading
B. Activity : Testing of BRC slab -2

4) Testing of 2nd slab was scheduled on 27th may 2017. The slab of bamboo reinforcement at 175 mm c/c was tested. Uniformly
Observation Table 4.3 : Load Applied and Deflection Of Slab Panel 3 (175mmSpacing)
Weight Dialgauge Dialgauge
Type Deflection Deflection
Sr Layer Total Of Total Cummulative Cummulative Reading Reading Least
Of During During
No. No. Units Each Weight Weight Load During During Count
Layer Loading Unloading
Unit Loading Unloadig
Kg Kg Kg KN mm mm mm
1 Tile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 0.01 0 2.54
2 Tile 1 20 6.94 138.8 138.8 1.36024 34 284 0.01 0.34 2.84
3 Tile 2 20 6.94 138.8 277.6 2.72048 67 309 0.01 0.67 3.09
4 Tile 3 20 6.94 138.8 416.4 4.08072 99 327 0.01 0.99 3.27
5 Tile 4 20 6.94 138.8 555.2 5.44096 121 343 0.01 1.21 3.43
6 Tile 5 20 6.94 138.8 694 6.8012 136 358 0.01 1.36 3.58
7 Tile 6 20 6.94 138.8 832.8 8.16144 150 379 0.01 1.5 3.79
8 Tile 7 20 6.94 138.8 971.6 9.52168 170 389 0.01 1.7 3.89
9 Tile 8 20 6.94 138.8 1110.4 10.88192 185 396 0.01 1.85 3.96
10 Tile 9 20 6.94 138.8 1249.2 12.24216 209 402 0.01 2.09 4.02
11 Tile 10 20 6.94 138.8 1388 13.6024 223 409 0.01 2.23 4.09
12 Tile 11 20 6.94 138.8 1526.8 14.96264 239 411 0.01 2.39 4.11
13 Tile 12 20 6.94 138.8 1665.6 16.32288 253 417 0.01 2.53 4.17
14 Tile 13 20 6.94 138.8 1804.4 17.68312 268 421 0.01 2.68 4.21
15 Tile 14 20 6.94 138.8 1943.2 19.04336 281 425 0.01 2.81 4.25
16 Tile 15 20 6.94 138.8 2082 20.4036 297 429 0.01 2.97 4.29
17 Tile 16 20 6.94 138.8 2220.8 21.76384 319 432 0.01 3.19 4.32
18 Tile 17 20 6.94 138.8 2359.6 23.12408 336 435 0.01 3.36 4.35
19 Tile 18 20 6.94 138.8 2498.4 24.48432 355 438 0.01 3.55 4.38
20 Beam 19 8 165.55 2663.95 26.10671 376 441 0.01 3.76 4.41
21 Iron 20 121.07 2785.015 27.293147 393 442 0.01 3.93 4.42
22 Cube 21 141 2926.015 28.674947 425 433 0.01 4.25 4.33
23 Deepa 22 60 2986.015 29.262947 429 434 0.01 4.29 4.34
24 Piyush 23 54 3040.015 29.792147 435 435 0.01 4.35 4.35

Load Deflection Curve During Loading and Unloading

C. Activity : Testing of BRC slab -3
4) Testing of 3rd slab was scheduled on 27th may 2017. The slab of bamboo reinforcement at 175 mm c/c was tested. Uniformly
V. CONCLUSIONS
The compression test is made on bamboo reinforced slabs by applying a gradually uniformly distributed load. The values of load
and deflection withstanding capacity are founded and shown in figure.
A. The first crack appeared at a load of 15.00 KN/m2.
B. The stress strain relationship is linear up to certain limit.
C. Average deflection of slab panel is 2.65mm at the time of first crack developed.
D. it is beneficial for light weight and temporary building.
E. environmental and financial comparison demonstrates that bamboo can compete as Building material
F. Bamboo solution is highly sustainable and cost effective and beautiful construction material for home
G. Bamboo construction require good preparation and accurate calculation.
RFERENCES
[1] Experimental Investigation of Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Slab American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) e-ISSN : 2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936
Volume-03, Issue-01, pp-128-131 www.ajer.org.
[2] Research and Development on Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Structure Masakazu TERAI & Koichi MINAMI Fukuyama University, Japan.
[3] Maruthupandian.G1* , Saravanan.R2 , Suresh Kumar.S3 , Sivakumar.B.G4 A Study on Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Slabs 1Dept of Mechanical Engg,
Akshaya College of Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore- 642109.
[4] Prof. Dirk E. Hebel1, Felix Heisel and Alireza Javadian, “Engineering Bamboo The new composite reinforcement” Chair of Architecture and Construction
Future Cities Laboratory, Singapore ETH Canter Singapore.

© IJEDR 2019 | Volume 7, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939
Design Parameters of Bamboo Reinforcement One

Way Slab
Mr. Mahesh Sadashiv Sarode, Mr. Sumeet Gannure
Assistant Professor
Dhole Patil College of Engineering, Pune
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract— Investigation was undertaken to find design parameters, the potential of bamboo as a reinforcement within
concrete slab to compensate the low tensile property of the concrete. Although steel reinforcement is a very
appropriate material for complementing concrete’s low tensile strength, considering the cost. In some parts of the
world people build their houses by using solely concrete or mud-brick which is very vulnerable. To overcome these
problems, bamboo may be the materials to substitute the reinforcing bar in concrete for less important structures. To
evaluate these properties, tension test was conducted on bamboo specimen. From this test, the tensile strength, proof
strength and modulus of elasticity were determined from stress-strain curve for bamboo reinforcement and
satisfactory results are obtained in terms of tensile strength and stress-strain characteristics of bamboo for using as
reinforcement in the concrete.
Index Terms— Tensile Strength, stress-strain characteristics, standard deviation, Stress block, Modulus of elasticity of
bamboo, Modulus of elasticity of concrete
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. INTRODUCTION
Most developing countries have many issues, and one amongst the most issues is housing. The housing problem has been
related to lack of analysis in field of low price housing schemes. Scientists, engineers, and designers need training and education
for finding low cost construction and efficient plans. Bamboo is one of the oldest building materials used by mankind. The
bamboo culm, or stem, has been made into an extended diversity of products ranging from domestic household products to
industrial applications. Their strength, straightness, lightness combined with extra ordinary hardness, range in size, abundance,
simple propagation, and also the short amount within which they attain maturity, make them suitable for a variety of purposes
and hundreds of different uses.
It is the single most important organic building material which is easily available in India. It's utilized over 70% of rural
houses and extensively used as informal shelter for the urban poor. At present, there is an acute shortage of housing because of
the scarcity of conventional materials coupled with rapid population growth. Several villagers were already adopted weavers of
bamboo, thus quickly mastered the frame construction technique. Bamboo is one material, which can have an
incredible economic advantage, because it reaches its full growth in just a few months and reaches its maximum mechanical
resistance in just few years. Moreover, it exists in abundance in tropical and subtropical regions of the globe. The energy
necessary to produce 1 m3 per unit stress projected in practice for materials commonly used in civil construction, such as steel or
concrete, has been compared with that of bamboo. It was found that for steel it is necessary to spend 50 times more energy than
for bamboo. The tensile strength of bamboo is relatively high and can reach 370 MPa. This makes bamboo an attractive
alternative to steel in tensile loading applications. This is due to the fact that the ratio of tensile strength to specific weight of
bamboo is six times greater than that of steel.
II. CALCULATION OF DESIGN CONSTANT

Table 1 Calculation of average tensile strength and standard deviation
Tensile strength Average tensile Deviation Square of
Sample No. ! %
(x) MPa strength ! = !−! deviation ! − !
#
1 136.32 0.4 0.16
2 133.4 -2.52 6.35
3 135.6 -0.32 0.1
4 133.8 -2.12 4.49
5 135.6 -0.32 0.1
135.92
6 137.4 1.48 2.2
7 137.74 1.82 3.31
8 139.1 3.18 10.11
9 134.7 -1.22 1.49
10 135.5 -0.42 0.18
Total 1359.16 28.49
fck = 20 N/mm/
IJEDR1902076 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 405

1359.16
Average tensile strength of bamboo, fby =
10
fby = 135.92 N/mm/
135.92
Standard deviation =
N−1
135.92
= = 3.87 N/mm/
10 − 1
Standard deviation
Coefficient of variation = ×100
Average tensile strength
3.87
= ×100 = 2.85 %
135.92
γN = 1.5
Strain = 0.0028
EP = 19.7×10Q N/mm/
ER = 5700 fck
ER = 5700 20
ER = 25.49×10Q N/mm/
fby fby
= = 0.67fby
γN 1.5
0.67 fby
εPU =
EP
εRU
xU = ×d
εRU + εPU
xU NXY εRU ×EP
=
d εRU ×EP + (0.67 fby)
xU NXY 0.0035×19.7×10Q
=
d 0.0035×19.7×10Q + 0.67×135.92
xU NXY
= 0.431
d
^__ àb
% \] =
bc
III. FOR SINGLY REINFORCED SECTION
fby fby
The maximum stress in bamboo is limited to = ≅ 0.67 fby
γN 1.5
From fig. 5.2 area cU of design stress block,
k Q ×fck
cU = area ABCD = kj ×xU ×DC = kj ×xU ×
γN
kj = 0.8095, k Q = 0.67 and γN = 1.5
cU = 0.36 fck xU
CU = TU
0.36 fck X U b = 0.67 fby Asb
xU 0.67×fby×Asb
=
d 0.36×fck×b×d
xU fby
= 1.861 ×Pt
d fck
fck 1
Pt = 0.431× ×
fby 1.861
20 1
Pt = 0.431× ×
135.92 1.861
% \] = m. n^
IV. MOMENT CALCULATION
MU = TU ×Z
TU = 0.67 fby Asb
Z = d − 0.42 xU …………. As per page No.64 IS 456-2000
MU = 0.67×fby×Asb× d − 0.42 xU
!r
qr = _. st×ubv×àb×c ^ − _. n%
c
V. EQUAL TO LIMITING VALUE
MU wxN = 0.36×fck×xU NXY ×b× d − 0.42 xU NXY

0.36×fck×xU NXY 0.42 xU NXY

MU wxN = 1− bd/
d d
MU wxN = 0.36 fck×0.431 1 − 0.42×0.431 ×bd
qr yz{ = _. ^%t u|} bc%
VI. DESIGN TO DETERMINE AREA OF REINFORCEMENT OF BAMBOO
Determine the limiting value moment of resistant
0.36×fck×xU NXY 0.42
MU wxN = 1− bd/
d d
MU = MU wxN Balanced section
MU > MU wxN Doubly reinforced section
MU < MU wxN Under reinforced section
Take MU < MU wxN
MU = 0.67×fby×Asb×(d − 0.42 xU )
xU 0.67×fby×Asb
=
d 0.36×fck×b×d
xU
MU = 0.67×fby×Asb×d 1 − 0.42
d
0.67×fby×Asb
MU = 0.67×fby×Asb×d 1 − 0.42
0.36×fck×b×d
0.774×fby×Asb
MU = 0.67×fby×Asb×d 1 −
fck×b×d
0.519×fby / ×Asb/
MU = 0.67×fby×Asb×d 1 −
fck×b
MU ×fck×b = 0.67×fby×Asb×fck×b×d − 0.519 fby / Asb/
0.519 fby / Asb/ − 0.67×fby×Asb×fck×b×d + MU ×fck×b = 0
This is a quadratic equation in the form of,
ax / + bx + c = 0
−b ± b / − 4ac
x=
2a
x = Asb
a = 0.519 fby /
b = −0.67fby×fck bd
c = Mu×fck×d
Ç ÇÉ.ÑÖÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ Ç Çä.ÑÖ×ÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ ã Ç å×É.çjé×ÜPáã ×èU×ÜRà×P
Asb =
/×É.çjé×ÜPáã
É.ÑÖÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ Ç ä.ÑÖ×ÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ ã Ç /.ÉÖÑ×ÜPáã ×èU×ÜRà×P
Asb =
j.ÉQê×ÜPáã
ë.íãëìî
É.ÑÖÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ Ç ä.ÑÖ×ÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ ã jÇ ã
ïñó×òô
Asb =
j.ÉQê×ÜPáã
ë.íãëìî
É.ÑÖÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ Ç ä.ÑÖ×ÜPá×ÜRà×Pâ jÇ
ïñó×òôã
Asb =
j.ÉQê×ÜPáã
4.624Mu
0.67fby×fck×bd 1 − 1−
fck×bd/
Asb =
1.038×fby /
_.snöu|} n.s%nqr
àb = ^− ^−
ubv u|}×bc%
Table 2 List of Abbreviations

FUwõ Maximum load fPá Tensile strength of bamboo
σUwõ Maximum tensile strength EP Modulus of elasticity of bamboo
FRà Characteristic compressive strength ER Modulus of elasticity of concrete
MU Factored moment γN Partial safety factor for material
pt % Percentage tensile steel A ûP Tensile area for bamboo
τR Shear taken by concrete asb Tensile area for one bamboo
fá Tensile strength of steel
VII. CONCLUSION
The bamboo Culm, in general, is a cylindrical shell, which is spilt by transversal diaphragms at the nodes. Bamboo shells are
orthotropic materials with high strength in the direction parallel to the fibers and low strength perpendicular to the fibers. The
thickness and strength of bamboo, however, decreases from the bottom to the top of the bamboo shell. In this paper work
attempt is made to find out design parameters of Chandrapur bamboo over steel. Tensile strength of bamboo with node is

135.92 N/mm2 and bamboo without node is

2 jÉÉ †ûP Yî /
349.21N/mm . % Pt = , % Pt = 3.41, MU = 0.67×fby×Asb×d 1 − 0.42 , MU wxN = 0.127 fck bd ,
Pâ â
É.ÑåçÜRà å.Ñ/åèU
Asb = 1− 1−
ÜPá ÜRà×Pâã
REFERENCES
[1] M.R. Wakchaure* and S.Y. Kute “Effect of Moisture Content on Physical and Mechanical Properties of Bamboo”
Asian Journal of Civil Engineering (Building and Housing), Vol.13, No.6, Issue 25 February 2012, PP. 753-763.
[2] Md Ahsan Sabbir*, S.M. Ashfaqul Hoq, and Saiada Fuadi Fancy, “Determination of Tensile Property of Bamboo for
Using as Potential Reinforcement in the Concrete” International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering
IJCEE-IJENS, Vol. 11 No: 05, PP. 47-51.
[3] Dr. Patel Pratima A*, Maiwala Adit R., Gajera Vivek J., Patel Jaymin A., Magdallawala Sunny H., “Performance
Evaluation of Bamboo as Reinforcement in Design of Construction Element” International Refereed Journal of
Engineering and Science (IRJES),Volume 2, Issue 4(April 2013), PP.55-63.
[4] Dinesh Bhonde*, P. B. Nagarnaik, D. K. Parbat, U. P. Waghe , “Experimental Investigation of Bamboo Reinforced
Concrete Slab”, American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER), Volume-03, Issue-01, PP.128-131.
[5] Funso Falade*, Efe Ikponmwosa, “Behaviour of Axially Loaded Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Columns”, African
Journal of Engineering Research and Development, Vol. no 1, 2008, PP. 15-25.
[6] Adom Asamoah Mark*, Afrifa Owusu Russell, “A Comparative Study of Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Beams Using
Different Stirrup Materials for Rural Construction”, International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering, Volume
2, No 1, 2011, PP. 407-423.
[7] Wu Yao*, Zongjin Li, “Flexural Behavior of Bamboo Fiber Reinforced Mortar Laminates” Cement and Concrete
Research, vol. no 33, 20 June 2002, PP. 15–19.
[8] Dr. Patel Pratima A*. Patel Jaymin A, Magdallawala Sunny H., Maiwala Adit R., Gajera Vivek J., “ Design of
Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Water Tank Resting over Firm Ground”, International Journal of Engineering, Business
and Enterprise Applications (IJEBEA), vol. no 5, Sep 2013, PP. 113-117.
[9] M. M. Rahman, M. H. Rashid, M. A. Hossain*, M. T. Hasan and M. K. Hasan, “Reinforced Concrete Beam”,
International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS, Vol. 11 No. 04, August 2011, PP. 113-118.

International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7 (3.27) (2018) 336-338
International Journal of Engineering & Technology

Website: www.sciencepubco.com/index.php/IJET
Research paper
Strength Characteristics of Bamboo Reinforced Slabs

S. Suppiah1*, S. Agnihotri2, S. Mishra3, S. Vishwakarma4
1
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Veltech Rangarajan Dr. Sakunthala, R&D Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai.
2
B. Tech. Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Veltech Rangarajan Dr. Sakunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology,
Chennai.
3
Chennai.
4
Chennai.
Abstract
The construction industry consumes large quantities of composite materials, such as steel, cement and other binding materials. This
process emits enormous volume of carbon dioxide leading to global warming and other environmental degradation. As an alternative to
steel, bamboo, rattan cane and other agricultural products have been used as reinforcement in different parts of world. However, the
application of this non fossil-fuel products has not been exploited to greater extent. In the present study the use of bamboo (bambusa
vulgaris) has been adopted as an alternative to steel in fabricating slabs of dimension 1500 mm x 500 mm x 75 mm (length x breadth x
thickness). M25 grade with water cement ratio as 0.5 was used. The slabs were tested using Non-Destructive Tests to determine the
quality of concrete adopted. Subsequently, destructive tests were carried using a loading frame of capacity 1000 kN. The non-destructive
tests and destructive tests were repeated on steel reinforced slabs and control slabs (without any reinforcement). The result s indicate that
the bamboo reinforced slabs comparatively weaker with respect to steel reinforced slabs and stronger with respect to control slabs.
Therefore, it is recommended to adopt BRC slabs for low cost dwellings.
Keywords: Bamboo, steel, reinforcement, Non-destructive test, control slabs.
1. Introduction main objective of this study. The findings of this investigation will
lead to sustainable growth and a reduction in global warming with
less demand for fossil fuel and fulfilling the demands of housing
The pioneering investigation by Glenn (Glenn, 1950) and the
requirement to some extent.
subsequent research work by Francis and Paul (1966) have led to
significant application of bamboo as an alternative to steel.
Manufacturing of one ton of steel generates, two ton of carbon 2. Previous Studies
dioxide. It has been observed that producing steel requires 50
times more energy than that required for bamboo (Devi and Many studies have been performed with bamboo as an alternative
Nuralinah, 2016). The construction industry is the single most to steel which is based on fossil fuel. A few of the pioneering
contributor in producing carbon dioxide (CO2) due to the study, worthy of note is Glenn (1950), Francis and Paul (1966),
involvement of fossil fuels (steel and cement). One of the Low (1988), Janssen (1991), Ghavami (1995, 2005). The
significant advantages of bamboo is that it absorbs carbon dioxide relationship between water-cement ratio and tensile strength of
(CO2) and generates oxygen ?, making it as an environmentally bamboo has been reported by Terai and Minami (2012). They
sustainable building material. Among all the varieties of bamboo concluded that the tensile strength increased with aging time when
available all over the world, three types of bamboo are being the cement paste was cured at w/c = 80% and 100%. Interestingly,
widely used in the construction industry due to their strength they used untreated bamboo.
characteristics. These are: (i) bambusa vulgaris (ii) bambusa Nayak et al (2013) investigated the performance of bamboo
balcooa and (iii) dendrocalamus strictus. These types of bamboo reinforced one way slab of size 3000mm by 2000mm and
are harvested for various applications during 3 to 4 years of their concluded that using bamboo was cheaper by as many as three
age. These varieties are widely grown in south-east Asia, in times when used as an alternative to steel. Different shapes of
countries like China, India and Sri Lanka (Suppiah and bamboo culms e.g., circular, square and triangular had been used
Venugopal, 2015). Importantly, south-east Asia is one of the most as reinforcement in testing of slabs of dimensions 1000mm x
populated region in the world demanding low-cost dwellings to a 1000mm x 50mm by Khan (2014). The important finding was that
larger extent. load carrying capacity of square shaped bamboo reinforcement
In the present study, bamboo (bambusa vulgaris) of 3 to 4 years of was higher than the other two shapes. Imbulana et al (2013)
age was used for casting of 1500 mm x 500 mm x 75 mm (length conducted a literature survey on the application of bamboo as a
x width x thickness) slabs. This type of bamboo which is yellow in reinforcing material in structural applications and concluded that
colour was harvested in Kerala (India). as much as 60% savings had been noticed when compared to steel.
Preparing slabs with bambusa vulgaris for low-cost dwellings and A study by Suppiah and Venugopal (2015) shows that bamboo has
evaluating the strength characteristics of the panels cast is the been used as reinforcement in fence walls.
Copyright © 2018 Authors. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
International Journal of Engineering & Technology 337
In addition, adopting bamboo as reinforcement leads to a saving of 6. 28-day compressive strength (N/mm2) 24
cost of the order of 35 to 40%. Interestingly, many varieties of 7. Cement (kg) 383
bamboo grow in many parts of the world with least effort. Among 8. Fine aggregate (kg) 727
the different varieties of bamboo, bambusa vulgaris, popularly 9. Coarse aggregate (kg) 1103
known as ‘Chinese bamboo’ is being widely used as scaffolding in 10. Water/cement ratio 0.45
the construction industry due to its strength characteristics. 11. Unit weight of BRC (kg/m3) 2400
3.2.1. Laboratory Tests on Steel Reinforced and Control Slabs

3. Experimental Investigation
The various tests performed on BRC slabs were repeated on SRC
The different stages of construction related to bamboo reinforced (Steel Reinforced Concrete) slabs and control slabs as well to
slabs are shown in Fig. 1. In the present study, slabs of dimension study the behaviour of all the three types. The control slabs did not
1500 mm x 500 mm x 75 mm (length x width x thickness) were have any reinforcement.
cast for light-weight applications, with bamboo (bambusa
vulgaris) as reinforcement. This variety of bamboo is also called 4. Results and Discussion
‘Chinese bamboo’ and has been found in the South region of
India.
4.1. Tensile Test on Bamboo Splints
Harvesting bambusa vulgaris from
South region of India
The tensile strength values recorded on bamboo splints are
presented in Table 2 which shows that the bamboo splints treated
Preparing splints of size with coal tar creosote yielded the tensile strength (mean) value of
(1500 mm x 19.5 mm x 9.75 mm)
the order of 195.03 N/mm2. This value is higher by 10.54% than
the strength of untreated splints.
Air drying the splints in shade
Table 2: Tensile strength of bamboo splints
Sl. No. Tensile strength of splints (N/mm2)
Treating with coal tar creosote
Untreated Treated with coal tar creosote
1. 152.08 176.56
Working out mix design for M25 2. 194.52 212.91
3. 176.83 195.54
Mean 174.47 195.03
Casting BRC, SRC and Control slabs
4.2. Non-Destructive Tests

Curing the slabs
4.2.1. Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests
Testing of BRC, SRC and Control slabs
Fig. 1: Flow chart showing the different stages of casting.
This type of test (make: PUNDIT) was performed on all the three
types of slabs to assess the quality of the concrete used. The
Bamboo splints of size 1500 mm x 19.5 mm x 9.75 mm (length x velocity values were measured by ‘direct method’. This method
width x thickness) were cut and air-dried in shade without ensures the maximum transmission of signal between the
exposing to direct sunlight, for a period of four weeks. Bamboo in transducers (Proceq, 2011). The velocity values recorded are
its natural state consists of starch and utilizing as reinforcement shown in Table 3
without any treatment reduces the bond strength and forms fungi
Table 3: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Values
(Suppiah and Venugopal, 2015). Thus, the air-dried splints were
Sl. No. Ultrasonic pulse velocity (m/sec)
soaked in coal tar creosote for about 24 hour and excess solution BRC slab SRC slab Control slab
was drained out by keeping the splints in a vertical position. 1. 4241 4383 3849
2. 4250 4454 3856
3.1. Strength Characteristics of Bamboo Splints 3. 4248 4355 3819
Mean 4246.3 4397.3 3841.3
The tensile strength of bamboo splints was determined in a Among all the slabs tested the minimum velocity of the order of
Universal Testing Machine (model: TUN 400). Two type of 3841.3 m/sec in control slab and the maximum value of 4397.3
bamboo splints were tested namely, (i) untreated splints and (ii) m/sec in SRC slab were recorded. The velocity values indicate
splints treated with coal tar creosote. that ‘good’ quality of concrete has been used in fabricating all the
type of slabs (Shetty, 2012).
3.2. Preparation of Bamboo Reinforced Concrete (BRC)
Slabs 4.2.2. Rebound Hammer Tests
M25 mix ratio was adopted in preparing the BRC panels. The As part of NDT, rebound hammer was used to assess the
quantity and the characteristics of the various materials used are compressive strength. The compressive strength values recorded
shown in Table 1. The codal provisions prescribed in IS: 456-2000 for the three type of slabs are shown in Table 4. From this table it
and IS: 10262-2009 have been followed in preparing the BRC can be observed that the lowest value of the order of 15.39N/mm 2
panels. was recorded on control slabs and the highest value of the order of
21.56N/mm2 recorded on SRC slabs. Interestingly, BRC slabs
Table 1: Details of Mix-Design yielded intermediate value of the order of 17.42N/mm2.
Sl. No. Parameter Value
1. Mix-ratio M25
2. Type of cement (OPC) 43 grade
3. Specific gravity of cement 3.15
4. Specific gravity of fine aggregate 2.65
5. Specific gravity of coarse aggregate 2.68
Table 4: Rebound Hammer Test Values
338 International Journal of Engineering & Technology
Sl. No. Compressive strength (N/mm2) References

BRC slab SRC slab Control slab
1. 25.44 27.38 22.56
2. 24.71 27.71 22.20 [1] Francis EB & Paul JR, Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Construction,
U. S. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, California, (1966).
3. 25.98 28.43 22.66
[2] Ghavami K, “Bamboo as Reinforcement in Structural Concrete
mean 25.37 27.84 22.47
Elements”, Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol.27, No.6,
(2005), pp.637-649.
4.2.3. Compression Tests on Slabs [3] Ghavami K, “Ultimate load behaviour of bamboo-reinforced
lightweight concrete beams”, Cement and concrete composites,
The compression tests performed on all type of slabs using UTM Vol.17, No.4, (1995), pp.281-288.
showed that cracks emanated from any one corner and extended [4] Glenn HE, Bamboo Reinforcement in Portland Concrete.
towards the centre of the slab. The maximum load and the Engineering Experiments Station, Clemson, Agricultural College,
corresponding deflection values recorded are given in Table 5. Clemson, South Carolina, (1950).
[5] Grosser D & Liese W, “On the Anatomy of Asian Bamboo, with
The flexural strength values presented show that BRC slabs
Special Reference to the Vascular Bundles”, Wood Science
yielded intermediate (mean) value of the order of 4.35N/mm2.[22] Technology, (1971), pp. 290-312.
[6] Imbulana PK, Fernandez T, Jayawardene PARP, Perera TLY,
Table 5: Maximum Values of Load Versus Deflection Arachchi HNK & Mallawaarachchi RS, “Bamboo as a Low Cost
Sl. Type of Unit Maximum Load at Flexural and green alternative for reinforcement in light weight concrete”,
No. reinforcement weight deflection maximum strength SAITH Res. Symp. Eng. Adv., (2013), pp. 160-172.
(kN/m3) (mm) crack (N/mm2) [7] IS 15912: 2017, “Structural design using bamboo”, (First
(kN) Revision), Building construction practices sectional committee,
1. Bamboo 2225 26 24.5 3.77 CED 13, ICS 91.080.20 Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak
2. 2256 28 25.3 3.89 Bhavan, No. 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
3. 2215 29 26 4.00 www.bis.org.in.
5. Steel 2426 28 22 4.37 [8] IS 15912: 2012, “Structural Design Using Bamboo”, (First
6. 2478 29 24 4.34 Revision), Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, No. 9,
7. 2492 27 26 4.46 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
[9] IS 6874: 2008, “Method of Tests for Bamboo”, (First Revision),
4.2.4. Load versus Deflection Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, No. 9, Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
[10] IS 9096: 2006, “Preservation of Bamboo for Structural Purpose”,
The load versus deflection curves of all the three types of slabs are
(First Revision), Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, No.
presented in Fig. 2. From which it can be seen that SRC slabs have 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
the lowest deflection value and the highest load values whereas [11] IS 10262: 2002, “Method of Mix Design”, (Second Revision),
the control slabs yielded the highest deflection and the lowest load Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, No. 9, Bahadur Shah
carrying capacity. The BRC slabs yielded the intermediate values Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
of load and deflection.[23] [12] IS 456: 2000, “Method of Tests for Concrete”, (First Revision),
Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, No. 9, Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
[13] IS 13311 (Part-2): 1992, “Non-Destructive Testing of Concrete-
Methods of Test”, (1st Rev.), Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak
Bhavan, No. 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
[14] IS 516: 1959, “Method of Tests for Strength of Concrete”,
(Eighteenth Reprint), Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan,
No. 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
[15] Khan IK, “Performance of Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Beams”,
International Journal of Science, Environment Technology, Vol. 3,
No.3, (2014), pp.836-840.
[16] Lade F & Ikponmwosa EF, “Scope of Bamboo reinforcement in
Concrete Beams for Low-cost Housing”, Journal of Construction
and Materials Technology, Vol.3, No.1-2, (2006), pp.39-45.
[17] Procedures EO, Operating Instructions, PUNDIT Lab, Switzerland,
2011.
Fig. 2: Load versus deflection for all type of slabs [18] Suppiah S & Venugopal M, “Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Slabs
for Fence Walls”, Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol.8,
No.9, (2015).
5. Conclusion [19] Dewi SM & Nuralinah D, “The Recent Research on Bamboo
Reinforced Concrete”, MATEC Web of Conferences, Vol.103,
(2017).
Bamboo is being used a construction material since prehistory [20] Terai M & Minami K, “Research and Development of Bamboo
days mostly for scaffolding work. Nevertheless, bamboo as a Reinforced Concrete Structure”, 15th World Conference on
replacement for steel is meagre in application. This paper presents Earthquake Engineering, (2012), pp.23-36.
the feasibility of adopting bamboo (bambusa vulgaris) as an [21] Shetty MS, Concrete Technology: Theory and Practice (7th ed.), S.
alternative to steel in construction, such as partition wall, cow Chand Publishing Co., New Delhi, (2012).
barn, and other low cost applications. Based on the extensive [22] G Abilbakieva, M Knissarina, K Adanov, S Seitenova, G
testing work the following conclusions are drawn at: Bekeshova (2018). Managerial competence of future specialists of
the education system (Preschool education and upbringing) and
1. Bambusa vulgaris family can be successfully used a
medicine in the comparative aspect. Opción, Año 33, No. 85. 44-
replacement for steel in low cost construction. 62.
2. Treating of bamboo with coal tar creosote increases the [23] Akhpanov, S. Sabitov, R. Shaykhadenov (2018). Criminal pre-trial
strength characteristics and retards the attack of fungi. proceedings in the Republic of Kazakhstan: Trend of the
3. Bamboo reinforced panels yield higher deflection and institutional transformations. Opción, Año 33. 107-125.
lower load carrying capacity values than the steel
reinforced panels of the same dimensions.
International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE)
ISSN: 2278-3075, Volume-8, Issue-11S, September 2019
Bamboo Bonding in Concrete: A Critical

Research
Abhishek Dixit, Vishal Puri 
Abstract— Housing needs across developing countries are at produces wastewater contaminants, hazardous wastes and
its peak especially due to increasing population growth rate. This solid wastes which poses a threat to the environment.
has caused a great demand for conventional building materials Further with increased demand, the steel costs have risen
leading to over-exploitation of natural resources required for
significantly over the years. This hinders its application for
their production along with their detrimental effects on the
environment. Sustainable construction practices are thus low-cost housing. Similarly, cement production results in
required which involves the application of materials such as high levels of carbon-dioxide emissions. As per the recent
bamboo, fly ash, kenaf, etc. Bamboo is a lightweight, cost- report (National Cement Consumption, CAGR 2017-2021),
effective, environment-friendly material with more than six times the cement production growth has been reported to be more
the strength by weight ratio compared to steel. This paper reviews than 5% in many developing countries across the globe
the application of bamboo in the form of reinforcement in
(Figure 1) leading to the huge production of greenhouse
concrete with detailed aspects focussed on its bond strength
development in concrete. Different bamboo reinforcement gases. Cement production alone contributes 4-5% of the
treatment processes developed in literature combined with their total worldwide emission of carbon-dioxide. Similarly, for
applications and limitations are presented. It was observed that steel, the demand was observed to be about 1648 million
with Sikadur 32 Gel epoxy coating method and with the tonnes (Accessed on worldsteel.org) across the globe
application of G.I. rolled wires method, 3.25MPa and 9.71MPa of (Figure 2). Also, the extraction of raw materials causes the
bond strength could be achieved respectively. This highlights that
degradation of land, loss of agricultural land, dust and noise
with proper surface treatment processes, bamboo as
reinforcement in concrete can develop significant bond strength pollution. In addition to this, the transportation of these raw
compared to steel reinforcement. However, issues such as lack of materials results in vehicle pollution, noise pollution and
codal guidelines, non-standardized pull out testing mechanism to excessive consumption of fuel further deteriorating the
incorporate density variation of fibers, combined with wide environment.
variation in its properties requires further standardization before Thus, there is a requirement for alternative sustainable
its mass application.
materials such as bamboo, jute, kenaf, fly ash, rice husk,
straw bales, recycled aggregates, palm oil shell, etc.
Keywords: Bamboo, Bamboo Bonding, Bamboo Reinforced
Concrete, Low-Cost Housing, Sustainable Material. Considerable research is focussed on such unconventional
building materials which are cost effective and are
I. INTRODUCTION sustainable.
In developing countries like India, the migration of people
from village areas to urban cities are causing a huge housing
shortage in cities. Currently, the shortage of more than 10
million houses is reported in Indian urban cities (Report on
‘Affordable housing in India’). The population growth rate
of India in 2019 is reported as 1.08% which is higher than
the world population growth rate of 1.07% as reported by
Department of Economics and Social Affairs, Population
Division (Accessed on www.worldometers.info). Such a
huge population growth rate causes tremendous demand for
housing leading to the exploitation of conventional natural Bamboo is one such sustainable building material which
resources such as iron ore required for producing steel has higher than six times the strength by weight ratio
reinforcement. Further, the production of these conventional comparable with steel (Ghavami, 2005). The amount of CO 2
materials is also detrimental to the environment due to the emission in the atmosphere in case of bamboo is 50 times
production of a large amount of greenhouse gases. less as compared to steel and cement. Further, bamboo also
Steel production causes an environmental impact by consumes around 1 tonne of carbon dioxide during its
emitting gases such as CO, SOX, NOX, and PM2, primarily growth phase (Xiao et al., 2013; Sharma et al., 2014).
being the carbon dioxide gas. Apart from these it also However, there are different issues such as properties
variation across species, bond strength development in
Revised Manuscript Received on September 10, 2019. concrete, treatment processes involved in the application of
Abhishek Dixit, M.Tech Structural Engineering, Amity University, bamboo in the form of reinforcement in concrete. This study
Noida, Uttarpradesh, India.
(Email: dixitabhishek2512@gmail.com)
Dr. Vishal Puri, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
Amity University, Noida, Uttarpradesh, India.
(Email: vpuri@amity.edu)
Published By:
Retrieval Number: K106109811S19/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijitee.K1061.09811S19
323 & Sciences Publication
Bamboo Bonding in Concrete: A Critical Research
evaluates bamboo bond issues in concrete and discusses the northeastern states of India still have the majority of
different shortcomings which require further research. dwellings based on bamboo reinforcement highlighting its
great potential.
Numerous research studies across the world have started
to recognize this potential by evaluating the performance of
bamboo reinforcement in different structural components.
Table 1 discusses the research application of bamboo
reinforcement as evaluated in different studies.
II. BAMBOO AS REINFORCEMENT IN

CONCRETE
Bamboo, which is a form of natural grass, has more than
1200 species found across the globe which can serve the
purpose of replacing steel in concrete due to its various
advantages (Sharma et al., 2014). The distribution of
bamboo across the globe (Schroder, 2016) is shown in
Figure 3. Most of the species are found across many
developing countries where their application potential is
immense
Different advantages of bamboo comparable to mild steel

include high tensile strength (Ghavami, 1995), the fast
growth rate of up to 91cm per day (Guinness world record),
low cost, less weight, and energy efficiency (Ghavami,
1995; Ghavami, 2005). Bamboo has been used as a building
material in village areas from decades. Most of the
Published By:
DOI: 10.35940/ijitee.K1061.09811S19 324 & Sciences Publication
Table 1. Bamboo as reinforcement in different structural components.

Researcher/ Year Research area Outcome/Findings
H. K. Chow (1914) Bamboo used in the form Tested small diameter bamboo and bamboo splits
reinforcing material in in the form of reinforcing material for concrete
concrete beams. applications which showed positive results.
K. Datta (1936) Experiments on the use of Studied the future possibility of bamboo in
bamboo in concrete various applications due to its outstanding
construction. mechanical and technical properties.
H. E. Glenn (1950) Bamboo in the form of Tested small diameter bamboo and bamboo
reinforcement material in splints application by using it in the full-scale
full-scale building. building. Observed that the results were feasible
in principle but due to various disadvantages
related to bamboo, de-bonding occurred between
bamboo and concrete and the building collapsed
after a few days.
McClure (1953) Use of untreated unseasoned Reported that cracks in longitudinal direction in
bamboo in the form of concrete were due to the absorption of water in
reinforcement in longitudinal bamboo. It also reduces the load bearing capacity
direction embedded in of the concrete members. It has also been
concrete. observed that when the treatment of brush coat
of asphalt emulsion is done, it showed better load
carrying capacity.
F.E. Brink and P.J. Rush Guidelines related to List of guidelines about the utilization of bamboo
(1966) construction using concrete in construction was developed. They concluded
which is reinforced with that bamboo which is green and unseasoned
bamboo were developed. should be avoided for construction. The bamboo
which is at least 3 years in age and is brown in
colour after waterproofing should be used. It has
been observed that mix design can be the same
for bamboo and steel but the slump can go to the
point at which the workability condition is
satisfied.
H.G. Geymayer and F.B. Studied the use of bamboo Determined that bamboo has a tensile strength as
Cox (1970) reinforcement for temporary high as 37 Mpa but the Young’s Modulus of
structures. bamboo is as low as one-tenth of steel. Also
observed that the ultimate flexural load bearing
capacity of bamboo reinforced members is 2 to 4
times higher than unreinforced members of same
dimensions. It also says that the use of bamboo
splints is more advantageous than using bamboo
culms as a whole in reinforcement.
M.A. Mansur and M.A. Performed some tests by The study revealed that the use of bamboo in the
Aziz (1983) using woven mesh made from form of mesh enhances the toughness and ductile
bamboo slints on cement nature of the mortar and also improves its tensile,
composites. flexural and impact strength.
J.A. Kankam, M. B. Studied the effect of using Reported that the seasoned bamboo has a high
George and S.H. Perry bamboo reinforcement on a tensile strength than unseasoned bamboo. Also
(1986) two-way concrete slab. observed that more than 4% reinforcement of
bamboo should not be used in concrete
structures. Also suggested that further studies are
required to find out the long term characteristics
of bamboo in terms of humidity along with the
chemical reactions between bamboo and
concrete.
Published By:
DOI: 10.35940/ijitee.K1061.09811S19
J.A. Kankam, M. B. Studied about the bamboo Suggested few measures on improving the bond
George and S.H. Perry reinforced concrete beams strength between bamboo and concrete like
(1988) subjected to third-point seasoning, filing of smooth surfaces and
loading. waterproof paint coating with sand treatment.
K. Ghavami (1995) Studied the mechanical Observed that the ultimate load carrying
properties of bamboo used in capacity of bamboo reinforced concrete beam is
simply supported lightweight 400% of the un-reinforced concrete beam. The
concrete beams. modulus of elasticity for bamboo is 1/15 of steel
and the tensile strength of bamboo was much
higher than its compressive strength.
J. Janssen (2000) Studied the building The study highlighted the limitations while using
constructed with bamboo and bamboo in the building made with bamboo
also presented the details on reinforced concrete. The limitations observed
joints. were bond strength, absorption of water in the
bamboo, smooth wall of the bamboo culm. Out of
all the limitations, improper bond strength was
found out to be the biggest issue.
S. Amada and S. Untao Studied the fracture Observed that the tensile strength of bamboo
(2001) properties of bamboo. fibers was comparable to steel. Further, the
origin of fracture is the main reason on which the
fracture properties of bamboo depends. Also, the
fibers in the nodes of bamboo do not have any
role in fracture resistance.
S. Iyer (2002) Studied the applications of Some guidelines were set for constructing
bamboo reinforcement and seismically safe reinforced masonry dwellings. It
provided some guidelines. was concluded that bamboo can be used
effectively in place of steel as reinforcement in
cement concrete and can be cost-effective in
bearing masonry for seismically safe houses.
W. Yao and Z. Li Studied the behaviour of In this study extruded fiber reinforced mortar
(2003) bamboo reinforced mortar sheet and sandwich plate which is combined with
laminates under flexure. reformed bamboo plate were considered.
Observed that the reformed bamboo can enhance
and improves the strength of mortar along with
reducing the total weight of laminate due to the
high strength by weight ratio.
K. Ghavami (2005) Studied the structural Observed that the bamboo in the direction
properties of bamboo and parallel to fibers showed high strength and is
also the various kinds of termed as a functionally graded composite. Also
treatments for bamboo which concluded that the use of 4% bamboo as a
can be used as reinforcement. reinforcement in the concrete beam is ideal for
maximum efficiency. Apart from these columns
and floor slabs reinforced with bamboo were also
tested which showed that bamboo can be an
effective cheap substitute for steel.
L. Khare (2005) Studied the use of bamboo Reported that there is an increment in the load
reinforcement in concrete carrying capacity by 250% after the use of
beams. bamboo as reinforcement as compared to initial
crack load on the concrete beam. Also, observed
that beams reinforced with bamboo have an
average of 35% load carrying capacity in
comparison to beams reinforced with steel.
M. Terai and K. Minami Studied the effect of using Observed that beam reinforced with bamboo
(2011) bamboo as a reinforcement in shows a similar pattern of cracking to that of
beams and columns. normal reinforced beams. The already available
formula of fracture behavior for reinforced
concrete beams can be used for bamboo
reinforced beams.
Published By:
A. Agarwal, B. Nanda and Studied the use of bamboo The treatment on the bamboo surface is done
D. Maity (2014) reinforcement in beams and with the use of some chemicals. When a member
columns and compare it with is subjected to axial loading the bamboo gives
unreinforced members. sufficient ductility so that there is a warning
before the failure of members. It was observed
that the columns which are reinforced with 8%
treated bamboo gives the same strength and
behavior under transverse and axial loading as
that of normal RCC columns.
A. Javadian, M. Used various chemical In this study, the bonding properties of newly
Wielopolski, F.C. Smith treatments on bamboo and developed bamboo composite reinforcement were
and D.E. Hebel (2016) calculated the bond strength. evaluated. Different chemical treatments were
made on bamboo composite reinforcement. It was
observed that the bamboo composite
reinforcement without any coating showed
adequate bond strength. However, when epoxy
based coating with fine sand particles was used,
the bond strength increased to 3.65MPa.
V. Puri, P. Chakrabortty, Prepared wall panel which Observed that due to the addition of bamboo
S. Anand and S. was prefabricated and the mesh the flexibility of walls increased. Also, there
Majumdar (2017) bamboo mesh was being used can be a significant cost reduction for walls of up
as a reinforcement. 40% and the dead load reduction of up to 56% as
compared to traditional brick walls.
P.R. Mali and D. Datta Studied the experimental It was observed that the load carrying and
(2018) evaluation of bamboo deformation capacity of concrete slab panel with
reinforced concrete slab newly enhanced bamboo strip improved as
panel. compared to normal PCC and RCC slabs. Also,
the flexural performance has shown significant
improvement.
From literature, as discussed in the table, it can be behaviour is affected by several factors including concrete
apprehended that the application of bamboo as reinforcing nominal cover, reinforcing bar spacing, reinforcing bar size,
material enhances the structural performance of the building transverse reinforcement, concrete and steel properties,
components significantly. Out of all the advantages and surface condition of reinforcing bars, position of casting,
benefits associated with bamboo, there are also some issues. development and splice length. Further the anchorage length
The first one being the durability. The bamboo strips tend to of reinforcing bars depends on the bond strength
get weak and splits over a considerable period of time due to development between steel and concrete. Different failures
absorption of water. The second disadvantage is the occur due to non-provision of adequate anchorage length
decomposition of bamboo because the aqueous concrete is especially at cantilever supports, lap splices and beam-
alkaline in nature. The third disadvantage is that the bond column joint in traditional building design. This highlights
strength between bamboo and concrete is not good enough the importance of anchorage length which is dependent on
because of the inadequate chemical and mechanical action sufficient bond strength. When there is proper reliability of
between the two at the interface (Mali and Datta, 2018). end anchorages, there is sufficient bond available due to
Further, it is affected by the fungus and termite attacks as it which the beam can carry applied load even after the
has a high content of nutrients. These issues play a unavailability of local bond in other parts of the beam
significant role on the concrete composite strength due to (Subramanian N., Design of RCC Structures).
which the issue of low bond strength of bamboo is a matter Conventionally, pull out tests as stipulated by IS 2770
of great concern if it is to be used as a sustainable building (Part 1) are carried out to determine the bond strength
material. This calls for the standardization of bamboo and development between the steel bars and concrete. The
application of suitable chemical treatments which is a prime primary purpose of pull-out tests is to evaluate the
research aspect to combat the problems of bamboo bond interfacial strength between the reinforcing bars and
strength. concrete. The arrangement of the conventional pull out test
is shown in Figure 4
III. BOND DEVELOPMENT IN CONCRETE Pull out test was first introduced in 1938 by Skramtajew,
Bond development between concrete and reinforcing bars which involved a reinforcement with a spherical end placed
ensures the adequate transfer of stress from the reinforcing in fresh concrete and then measuring the force required to
material to the concrete leading to strain compatibility. This pull it from hardened concrete (Skramtajew, 1938). In 1944,
ensures that there is no slippage between the reinforcing a non-linear relationship between pull out force and
bars relative to the surrounding concrete required for their
composite behaviour. The bond development mechanism
determines the anchorage of reinforcing bars and influences
the crack control patterns and section stiffness. The bond
Published By:
DOI: 10.35940/ijitee.K1061.09811S19
compressive strength was developed (Carino and Malhotra, homogeneity such as fiber density variation across thickness
2004). Later, in 1972 the affecting its properties, no separate methodology for pull out
testing is available. Due to this, effective evaluation of bond
P strength development is limited under if bamboo fails first in
the standard testing mechanism. In 2019, Puri in his
experimental investigation observed that the bamboo splints
coming out from embedded mortar specimens failed first
primarily due to their deterioration during curing. As the
15cm standard pull out test mechanism IS 2770 does not provide
30cm
any guideline to inculcate the specimen degradation,
bamboo specimens failed under tension leading to reduced
bond strength determination. Further, the guideline does not
provide any specifications for incorporating the fiber density
variation across the thickness affecting bond strength
mechanism of concrete failure to determine the relationship
determination. Hence the bond strength which we get due to
between the compressive strength and pull out force was
friction is not achieved as there is no proper load transfer
determined by Arni (Arni, 1972). It was concluded that
within the mortar resulting in failure (Puri, 2019). This
concrete is subjected to a non-uniform, three-dimensional
requires the modification of standard test guidelines.
complex state of stress by pull out load. In 1991, Yener and
Further, several issues such as shrinkage, water
Li reported that the relationship between concrete strength
absorption, species type, etc. affect the bamboo performance
and pull out force could be attributed to the crushing of
in cement composites. Raw bamboo absorbs moisture from
concrete (Yener and Li, 1991). In 2000, Ohdaira and
the concrete and also from the environment through
Masuzawa concluded that the failure mechanism under pull
microcracks in concrete. This results in swelling of bamboo
out loading was based on the progression of microcracking
which induces internal local stress degrading the
(Ohdaira and Masuzawa, 2000). Pull out load is observed to
surrounding concrete. Further, shrinkage of bamboo also
have a good correlation with the compressive strength of
occurs with a reduction in moisture content leading to voids
concrete despite the lack of agreement on the failure
creation. Due to this continuous cycle of swelling and
mechanism. Pull out equipment limits the use only in fresh
shrinkage of bamboo, the proper bond cannot be formed
concrete and cannot be used in existing structures. This led
between bamboo and concrete and creates a serious
to different instruments investigated in the 1970s (Bungey
limitation to use it as a reinforcement in place of steel
and Grantham, 2014). Later a post-installation method
(Ghavami, 2005).
known as CAPO (Cut and Pull out) test was developed in
Hence to remove these limitations and to achieve high
1976 having the same geometry as pull out test. Identical
bond strength, various chemical surface treatments are being
correlations between CAPO tests and pull out tests were
evaluated on bamboo fibres by different researchers for
reported by Petersen in 1997 (Petersen, 1997). Different
building different structural components as discussed in
standard including ASTM C900 (2015) and EN12504
Table 2. These chemical coatings make the surface of
(2005) later included the pull out test and CAPO test as post
bamboo impermeable and enhances bond strength
installed pull out test (Petersen, 1997; Szilagyi and
development.
Borosnyoi, 2009).
IV. BAMBOO BOND ISSUES AND TREATMENT

PROCESS & RESULTS
For bamboo, a natural product with the presence of non-
Published By:
Table 2. Different bamboo surface chemical treatments.

Researcher Year Treatments
Glenn 1950 Asphalt Emulsion
Kankam and Perry 1988 Bitumen
Youssef 1976 Varnish
Fang and Fey 1978 Sulphur
Ghavami 1995 Negrolin
Negrolin
Negrolin with sand
Ghavami 2005
Negrolin with sand and wire
Sikadur 32 Gel
Synthetic Resin (Spraying/Brush Coating)

Terai and Minami 2012
Synthetic Rubber (Spraying/Brush Coating)
Sakaray et al. 2012 Waterproof coating

Araldite
Araldite with Wire
Agarwal et al. 2014 Tapecrete P 151
Anti Corr RC
Sikadur 32 Gel
Water-based epoxy coating
Water-based epoxy coating with fine sand
Water-based epoxy coating with coarse sand
True Grip EP and BP
Javadian et al. 2016
True Grip EP and BP with coarse sand
Exaphen
Exaphen with coarse sand
Enamel
Nindyawati et al. 2016 Waterproofing paint sprinkled with sand
Mulyati et al. 2016 Varnish and winding wire
Puri et al. 2017 Sikadur 32 LP epoxy
Epoxy Coated Sand Rolled Bamboo
Epoxy Coated Coir Rolled Bamboo
Dey et al. 2018
Epoxy Coated G.I. Rolled Bamboo
Copper Chrome Boron
Bond Tite Chemical adhesive with Sandblasting
Mali and Datta 2018
process
Ghavami in 1995, initially evaluated bamboo Where, F = applied pull load, S = bamboo perimeter and
reinforcement with different type of coatings (Ghavami, L = length of bonded interface.
1995). Further, in 2000 Janssen pointed out the need for It was concluded from the test results that the Sikadur 32
bamboo treatment before using it as a reinforcement to Gel treatment gave better values of bond strength. In 2014,
increase its life span dramatically. There are different Agarwal et al. made a comparison between different
treatment methods available including traditional and adhesives used for improving the bond strength between
chemical methods. Traditional methods are easier and bamboo and concrete. The various chemical treatments used
popular such as smoking, air curing, lime washing, were Araldite, Araldite with binding wire, Tapecrete P-151,
seasoning, and soaking. Among the various chemical Anti Corr RC, and Sikadur 32 Gel. They also reported that
methods, the most used is the modified Boucherie process Sikadur 32 Gel gave the highest values of bond strength for
(for whole green bamboo culms) and dip diffusion method bamboo and concrete (Agarwal et al., 2014). In 2016,
(for split bamboo culms). To prevent the bamboo from Javadian et al. observed the bond strength between bamboo
insect and fungal attacks, they should be harvested in the and concrete by using water-based epoxy coating, TrueGrip
season when their starch content is low (Janssen, 2000). EP, TrueGrip BP, and Exaphen coating. These coatings
In 2005, Ghavami reported that after using two- were used with and without sand. They observed that the use
component epoxy resin the bonding of bamboo of sand marginally improves the bonding between bamboo
reinforcement increased to up to five times as compared to and concrete due to the enhancement of friction between
that of plain bamboo reinforcement (Ghavami, 2005)
wherein the bonding shear stress τ is calculated as shown in
equation 1:
τ = F/(L.S) (1)
Published By:
DOI: 10.35940/ijitee.K1061.09811S19
concrete surface and sand particles (Javadian et al., 2016).

In 2012, Terai and Minami used a variety of synthetic resin
and rubber surface treatments on bamboo for pull out tests.
It was reported that the bond stress increased from 0.60 Mpa
to 1.34 MPa after the treatment (Terai and Minami, 2012).
In 2012, Sakaray et al. carried out the pull out test but with
bamboo round culms. It was reported that as the length of
embedment increases, the average bond stress decreases.
Further, they observed that the decrease of bond stress is
more pronounced in case of steel bars. The reason behind
this reduction is that the bamboo is anisotropic in nature
which has transverse material characteristics and also the
larger effects of shear lag (Sakaray et al., 2012). In 2016,
Mulyati et al. used two types of bamboo namely Petung and
Wulung. Both the bamboos are tested for bond strength by
using varnish and winding wire as the treatment. It was
observed that Petung bamboo with varnish treatment
achieved the highest bond strength of 2.22 MPa (Mulyati
and Arman, 2016). In 2016, Nindyawati et al. used Apus
bamboo coated with waterproofing paint and sprinkled with
sand. The average bond strength achieved was 0.41 MPa
(Nindyawati and Umniati, 2016). In 2018, Dey et al. used
three types of products as Coir rolled bamboo, G.I. rolled
bamboo and Sand rolled bamboo rebar. All these were
epoxy coated. It was observed that G.I. rolled bamboo rebar
gave the highest bond stress of 9.71 Mpa as compared to
that of 5.96 Mpa and 8.46 Mpa for sand rolled and Coir
rolled bamboo rebar respectively (Dey and Chetia, 2018). A
detailed review of the bond strength achieved using different
types of chemical treatments is discussed in Table 3.
Published By:
Table 3. Comparison of bamboo bond strength achieved by various researchers with different treatments.
Bond Strength
Researcher Year Treatment/Coating
achieved (MPa)
Without treatment 0.52
Ghavami 1995 Negrolin + sand 0.73
Negrolin + Sand + Wire 0.97
Without treatment 0.52
Negrolin + sand 0.73
Ghavami 2005 Negrolin + Sand + Wire 0.97
Sikadur 32 Gel 2.75
Steel 3.25
Synthetic resin (Brush Coating) 1.34
Synthetic resin (Spraying) Slot processing
1.18
@25mm
Synthetic resin (Spraying) 1.25

Terai and Minami 2012 Synthetic rubber (Spraying) 1.18
Synthetic rubber (Spraying) Slot processing
0.85
@60mm
Synthetic resin (Brush Coating) Slot processing
0.60
@40mm
Deformed Bars 2.43
Waterproof coating (150mm embedment length) 1.45-1.95
Sakaray et al. 2012

(200mm embedment length) 1.07-1.25
(260mm embedment length) 0.95-1.05
Plain Bamboo 0.127
Araldite 0.232
Araldite with Wire 0.539

Agarwal et al. 2014
Tapecrete P 151 0.315
Anti Corr RC 0.159
Sikadur 32 Gel 0.588
No Coating 3.61
Water Based Epoxy coating 3.47

Javadian et al. 2016
Water Based Epoxy coating with fine sand 3.65
Published By:
DOI: 10.35940/ijitee.K1061.09811S19
Water Based Epoxy coating with coarse sand 3.61
TrueGrip EP 3.30
TrueGrip EP with coarse sand 3.45
TrueGrip BP 2.42
TrueGrip BP with coarse sand 2.62
Exaphen 3.36
Exaphen with coarse sand 3.46
Enamel 3.40
Nindyawati et al. 2016 Waterproofing paint and sprinkled with sand 0.41
Petung bamboo 0.62
Square Petung bamboo with varnish 2.22
Square Petung bamboo with winding wire 1.90
Round Petung bamboo with varnish 1.70
Round Petung bamboo with winding wire 1.49

Mulyati et al. 2016
Wulung bamboo 0.62
Square Wulung bamboo with varnish 1.33
Square Wulung bamboo with winding wire 0.95

Round Wulung bamboo with varnish 1.12
Round Wulung bamboo with winding wire 0.98
Epoxy coated Sand Rolled bamboo bar 5.96

Dey et al. 2018
Epoxy coated Coir Rolled bamboo bar 8.46
Published By:
Epoxy coated G.I. Rolled bamboo bar 9.71
As observed from the literature, the bond strength of raw 2. Agarwal, A., Nanda, B., & Maity, D. (2014).
bamboo in concrete is usually improved through surface Experimental investigation on chemically treated
chemical treatments. Sikadur 32 Gel epoxy coating method bamboo reinforced concrete beams and columns.
Construction and Building Materials, 71, 610-617.
and the application of G.I. rolled wires method have been http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.09.011
reported to achieve best bond strength results. However, the 3. Amada, S., & Untao, S. (2001). Fracture properties of
cost aspects related to these treatments are not well bamboo. Composites Part B: Engineering, 32(5), 451-
researched upon which could hinder their large scale 459. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-8368(01)00022-1
application. Alternatively, some cheap treatment methods 4. Arni, H. T. (1972). Impact and penetration tests of
can also be adopted using bituminous material, asphalt portland cement concrete. Highway Research Record,
No. 378.
paints and tar based paints to make impermeable bamboo 5. Brink, F. E., & Rush, P. J. (1966). Bamboo reinforced
(Sharma et al., 2014). concrete construction. US Naval Civil Engineering
Further, there are very limited studies which determine Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California.
the effect of concrete or mortar composition on the bond 6. Bungey, J. H., & Grantham, M. G. (2014). Testing of
strength development. To increase the bond strength of concrete in structures. Crc Press.
bamboo, only chemical treatments are not sufficient. In 7. Carino, N. J., & Malhotra, V. M. (Eds.). (2004).
Handbook on nondestructive testing of concrete. CRC
2006, Jung reported that the dependency of bamboo pull out Press.
strength is on various parameters such as mortar 8. Chow, H. K. (1914). Bamboo as a material for
composition and strength, loading rate, reinforcement reinforcing concrete (Doctoral dissertation,
binding. In calculating the bond strength of bamboo Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
composite structures, bond behaviour plays a vital role when 9. Current World Population. Worldometers (Source:
it is subjected to different loading conditions (Jung, 2006). www.worldometers.info/world-population/).
10. Datta, K. (1936). Versuche über die Verwendung von
In 2019, Puri evaluated and characterized the effect of Bambus im Betonbau [Experiments on the use of
different factors affecting the cement mortar mix on the bamboo in concrete construction]; Datta, K [ramadiswar]
bamboo bond strength development in such mixes. It was (Doctoral dissertation, J. Springer).
observed that the bamboo bond strength development is also 11. Dey, A., & Chetia, N. (2018). Experimental study of
significantly dependent upon the mortar or concrete mix Bamboo Reinforced Concrete beams having various
properties which affect the surface friction development. It frictional properties. Materials Today: Proceedings, 5(1),
436-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.11.103
was observed that the research is at a very nascent stage on 12. Fang, H. Y., & Fay, S. M. (1978, August). Mechanism of
these aspects (Puri, 2019). bamboo-water-concrete interaction. In Proceedings of the
International Conference on Materials of Construction
V. CONCLUSION for Developing Countries Bangkok (pp. 37-48).
13. Geymayer H.G., & Cox F.B. (1970). Bamboo reinforced
In the present study, the application of sustainable concrete. J Am Concrete Inst 67(51):841–846.
building material such as bamboo and the issues affecting its 14. Ghavami, K. (1995). Ultimate load behaviour of
bond strength development in concrete are analyzed. It was bamboo-reinforced lightweight concrete beams. Cement
observed from the study that with the surface chemical and concrete composites, 17(4), 281-288. doi:
treatments sufficient bamboo bond strength development 10.1016/0958- 9465(95)00018-8
15. Ghavami, K. (2005). Bamboo as reinforcement in
can be achieved and the issues such as bamboo shrinkage
structural concrete elements. Cement and concrete
and water absorption can be negated. However, there are no composites, 27(6), 637-649.
standard guidelines or procedures which stipulates the doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2004.06.002
correct method of treatment. Further, the available 16. Glenn, H. E. (1950). Bamboo reinforcement in portland
guidelines also do not provide any standard testing cement concrete. Engineering Experiment Station.
mechanism incorporating the fiber density variation of 17. Guinness World Record, Fastest growing plant, United
Kingdom Bamboo Plant (Source:
bamboo affecting the bond strength determination. Further,
http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-
the effect of the coefficient of thermal expansion of bamboo records/fastest-growing-plant).
affecting its bond behaviour in concrete is not well 18. IS: 2770 (Part 1) – 1967 (Reaffirmed 2007), Methods of
stipulated upon. This requires further significant research testing bonds in Reinforced Concrete, (Part 1) Pull out
efforts to undermine the potential of bamboo as a test.
sustainable building material. Different treatment methods 19. Iyer, S. (2002). Guidelines for building bamboo-
reinforced masonry in earthquake-prone areas in India
used in the literature further highlights the great potential of
(Doctoral dissertation, University Of Southern
bamboo for the construction industry by achieving California).
significant bond strength compared to steel reinforcement. 20. Janssen, J. J. A. (2000). Designing and building with
bamboo. International Network for Bamboo and Rattan
VI. REFERENCES (INBAR). Beijing (No. 20). China: Technical report.
1. A report on ‘Affordable Housing in India – Emerging
trends, growth drivers and new opportunities’ India
Infrastructure Research, Release Date: Oct 18, 2018.
Published By:
DOI: 10.35940/ijitee.K1061.09811S19
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2014
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

e-ISSN : 2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936
Volume-03, Issue-01, pp-128-131
www.ajer.org
Research Paper Open Access
Experimental Investigation of Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Slab

Dinesh Bhonde1, P. B. Nagarnaik2, D. K. Parbat, U. P. Waghe
1
Research Scholar, Yeshvantrao Chavhan College of Engineering, Nagpur, India
2
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, G.H. Raisoni College of Engineering, Nagpur, India
3
Department of Civil Engineering, Government Polytechnic, Sakoli, India
.4
Principal, Yeshvantrao Chavhan College of Engineering, Nagpur, India
Abstract: - Bamboo is a perennial, renewable, eco friendly, green, fast growing natural material found in
almost all part of the world. Bamboo is a lightweight material with good tensile strength. The tensile strength
specific weight ratio of bamboo is 20 times more than that of steel. Researchers are working on bamboo as a
substitute to steel reinforcement in concrete. An experimental investigation of bamboo reinforced concrete slab
cast in the laboratory and subjected to concentrated load at mid span is presented in this paper. The crack
pattern, load-elongation curve and the experimental values were investigated. Bamboo reinforced concrete may
be a feasible alternative to Steel Reinforced Cement Concrete Structural elements
Keywords: - bamboo, bamboo composites, bamboo reinforced concrete, brc slab
I. INTRODUCTION
The depletion of natural resources has posed a serious problem of existence before the next generations.
Researchers are working on replacement of conventional materials of building construction with eco friendly
material for sustainable development. Bamboo has been in use of mankind for various purposes since a long
time. There are more than 1000 species of bamboos and are used for more than 1500 uses all over the world.
Bamboo regenerates and can be used within four years, Bamboo has, therefore, acquired a place in the list of
material of green technology and renewable source. Bamboo has been used for building construction in different
parts of world. Various techniques have been developed for housing. Walls, Roofs, Trusses, Doors, Ccomposite
laminates made up of bamboo have been used.
Use of bamboo as a reinforcing material in concrete was first investigated by US Naval Civil Engineering
Laboratory, California and have published report in 1966 to assist the construction personnel in design and
construction of bamboo reinforced concrete structural members. Some design charts and working stress method
is suggested. Yet elaborate standards on bamboo as a structural material have not been developed in many
countries. ISO-22156 for Bamboo Structural Design and ISO-22157 for Determination of physical and
mechanical properties of bamboo have been published by International Standards. Indian Standards have
published several codes on bamboo, however, there are only few for bamboo as a structural material. Bamboo as
a reinforcement in concrete slab has been investigated by the authors in the laboratory and the results are
presented.
II. LABORATORY PROGRAM

Laboratory Mix design of M20 concrete was used for the experiment. Bamboo samples were collected from the
farm Lohgad, 40 km away from Nagpur (India). The species of bamboo was Dendrocalmus Strictus which is
predominantly found in India. The age of bamboo used was 5 years. The bamboo splints of width 15 mm were
prepared as reinforcement. The water absorption capacity of bamboo split is upto 32% and it swells when water
is absorbed. In green concrete, bamboo splints absorb water and swells. When the concrete becomes dry, the
bamboo splints contracts and leave spaces between the contacts. The bond strength decreases and the members
fail in bond. To overcome this limitation various sealant materials were tested and asphalt was found to be the
best economical alternative. All bamboo reinforcements were embedded in asphalt, sand was sprinkled on those
to improve bond and were dried. Bamboo splints were tied about 10 cm c/c to form a reinforcing mesh. Binding
www.ajer.org Page 128

wire was used to tie the reinforcements. A slab of 600x600x120 mm was cast with clear cover of 15 mm to
reinforcement grid. The slab was cured with water and tested under computerized universal testing machine
after 28 days.
Table 1: Test Data for BRC slab
Particulars Values
Specimen Type Bamboo Reinforced Slab
Concrete Grade M20
Size of slab 600x600x120 mm
Effective depth 99 mm
Effective span 490 mm
Reinforcement Bamboo splints of Dendrocalmus Strictus
Area of reinforcement along span 1154.03Sqmm
Tensile strength of reinforcement 95.81MPa
Ultimate Load 16.200 KN
Eb 18600 MPa
Ec 22361 MPa
Figure 1: BRC slab under test
490
Figure 2: Span and central load
2.1 Experimental Observations and Output

The slab was placed under UTM and load was applied at a constant rate. A visible crack was observed
at a load of 15.65 KN at the mid span and the machine paused and did not take any load however the load
started dropping up to 9.8 KN. Again the slab took load; the peak load observed was 16.200 KN. At this stage
the crack widened and the load started dropping down up to 7.8 KN. Again the slab took load and reached to
another lower peak of 10.65 where the crack widen further, After this peak the load dropped continuously and
the slab failed.
Figure 3: BRC slab failure

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure 3: Load Elongation Chart till failure
Dead load= w=24000x0.12=2880 N/m

Point load per unit length= 27000 N/m
𝑊𝐿 𝑤 𝑙2 27000 𝑥0.49 2880 𝑥0.49 2
Maximum Bending Moment at the peak load= + = +
4 8 4 8
=3393.94 N.m = 3.394 KNm/ m
As per ISO 22156, allowable stresses in bamboo reinforcement are

sall = Rk x G x D / S and allowable stress is 1/7 of characteristics stress
= 13.69 MPa
As per IS-456, Table 21, allowable stress in concrete= 7 MPa
Eb
Modular ratio = n = = 0.8
Ec
fb allow 13.69
r= = = 1.956
fc allow 7.0
n 0.8
k= =
n+r 0.8+1.956
k 0.29
j= 1 − = 1 − =0.90
3 0.3
Mdr= fb.j.d.At
Mdr= 13.69x0.90x99x1154.03= 1.408 KNm/ m
Mu/Mdr = 2.41
Design moment of resistance Mdr is 2.41 times less than Experimental ultimate moment Mu.
Figure 3: Load Elongation graph up to first crack

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The slab under uniformly increasing testing load under UTM was carefully observed. The first crack
appeared at a load of 15.65 KN, at this point the concrete surrounding bamboo reinforcement fails and the curve
drops sharply, however the reinforcements again start taking load up to a peak load of 16.2 KN and the
reinforcement fails in bending along with concrete surrounding it, again other reinforcement and their failure
can be visualized from the graphs. The stress strain relationship is linear up to certain limit. The maximum
bending moment was at mid section and the crack develops under the load and extends along the horizontal line.
Comparing the designed moment of resistance and the ultimate BM at failure, the design moment using working
stress method is half of ultimate moment.
V. CONCLUSION
BRC elements follows same pattern as those in steel RCC structural members. The design moment is
found less than experimental ultimate moment and thus working stress method can be used to design BRC
structural members safely. However, proper sealant such as asphalt shall be used to conceal the reinforcement
from water absorption so that they may not swell and degrade the bond.
VI. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The experiment and the testing of bamboo were carried out at Government Polytechnic, Nashik, India and
thanks are due to the Head of Institute Dr. Nandanwar, faculty members, laboratory staff and the students.
REFERENCES
[1] Eiichi Obataya, Æ Peter Kitin, Æ Hidefumi, Yamauchi Bending characteristics of bamboo (Phyllostachys
pubescens) with respect to its fiber–foam
[2] composite structure, Springer-Verlag 2007
[3] Wu Yao, Zongjin Li Flexural behavior of bamboo–fiber-reinforced mortar laminates, Cement and
Concrete Research 33 (2003) 15–19
[4] Dinesh Bhonde, P. B. Nagarnaik, D. K. Parbat, U P Waghe Tension Test on Male Bamboo
(Dendrocalmus Strictus), International Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering ISSN: 223
–572 Volume 2, Issue-1, 2013
[5] International Standards ISO 22157 Bamboo - Determination of physical and mechanical properties
[6] Wan Tarmeze Wan Ariffin Numerical Analysis of Bamboo and Laminated Bamboo Strip Lumber
[7] Punmia B. C., Ashok Kumar Jain, Comprehensive RCC Deigns
[8] R. Srinivasan and K. Sathiya Flexural Behavior of Reinforced concrete Beams using finite element
analysis (elastic analysis), Bul. Inst. Polit. Iaşi, t. LVI (LX), f. 4, 2010
[9] Dinesh Bhonde, P. B. Nagarnaik, D. K. Parbat, U P Waghe, Experimental Analysis of Bending Stresses
in Bamboo Reinforced Concrete Beam

Binder1 PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Binder1 PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ISSN(Online): 2319-8753

ISSN (Print): 2347-6710

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

Cost and Design Analysis of Steel and Bamboo

KEYWORDS: Bamboo, Flexural Strength, Cost Estimation, Economical.

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22464

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

II. BAMBOO AS CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL

Some specific properties of Bamboo are as given below:

Some specific properties of Bamboo are as given below:

1. Specific gravity - 0.575 to 0.655

III. SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF BAMBOO SELECTION

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22465

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

IV. CONSTRUCTION PRINCIPLES

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22466

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

V. TABLES & GRAPHS

a. Properties of bamboo and steel reinforcing bars Bamboo

3/4 Inch Wide Splints

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22467

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22468

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

Figure 2- Bamboo substitute beams and reinforcement.

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22469

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

Figure 3- Size and spacing of bamboo reinforcement in slabs and walls.

VI. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22470

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

VII. DESIGN OF BUILDING

1. Positive moment reinforcement

2. Negative moment reinforcement

VIII. DESIGN OF BEAM

9. Shear Reinforcement. Calculate the maximum shear force in the beam.

10. Check for Development length at the end.

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22471

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

2. Find super impose load the column is required to carry.

IX. DESIGN OF FOOTING

1. Depth for bending moment.

2. Depth for shear.

Check for development length.

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22472

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

L1 = 3.9 – 2* .025 +.42 *.080

L2 = 7-2* .025 + .42 * .080

No. of bars = (7 /spacing) + 1

No of distribution bars = (12 m/ spacing) + 1

Copyright to IJIRSET DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2017.0612046 22473

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Vol. 6, Issue 12, December 2017

= .184 m, Therefore: 2 (.634+.184) +8ϕ = 1.764 Cost =

A2 = .25-2.025-.08 = .192, Therefore = (A1+A2) 2+8ϕ = .932, Cost =83.25 50 = 4162.984 Rs

Total cost = 26 1.15 10 +31310+.21*10 =Rs 530

Enhancement of bond strength at bamboo concrete interface.

General Characteristics of Bamboo Reinforcement 10 10