Axial Tensile Strength Analysis of Naturally

Treated Bamboo as Possible Replacement of Steel

Reinforcement in the Concrete Beam
Teodoro A. Amatosa, Jr.1,2*, Michael E. Loretero1,3
1EngineeringGraduate Program, School of Engineering, University of San Carlos,
Talamban Campus, Cebu City, 6000 Philippines
2College of Engineering and Technology, Northwest Samar State University, Calbayog

City, Samar 6710 Philippines

3Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of San Carlos,

Talamban Campus, Cebu City, 6000 Philippines

Corresponding Author*: [email protected]; [email protected]

ABSTRACT
This paper was undertaken to evaluate Giant bamboo (Dendrocalamus Asper) which is abundant natural
resource that can be considered as an alternative for construction materials for reinforcement to
compensate the low tensile property of the concrete. Considering the cost, even though steel reinforcement
is a very suitable material for complementing concrete’s low tensile strength, bamboo products as it enter
the diverse worldwide markets; the value of this natural resource stands to grow. At this time, bamboo is
most likely comparable to steel as structural materials but with different engineering qualities used for the
construction of buildings and other engineering construction related purposes. To overcome these
problems, full socio-economic potential of bamboo is yet to be realized as alternative materials to substitute
the reinforcing bar in concrete for less important structures by investigating the tensile properties of this
type of natural reinforcement. To evaluate these properties, 5 for each bamboo were tested in natural
preservation submerged in fresh-water and salt-water for 7 days and 28 days cycles for internode and node
section in which tension test was conducted on bamboo specimen following the ASTM standards. From this
test, average ultimate tensile strength is approximately 211.18 MPa in the specimens without node for 7
days soaked in salt-water and 138.97 MPa in the specimens with node soaked in fresh water for 28 days.
Finally, 7 cycles of wetting and drying in solution of salt-water treated did not increase the bamboo tensile
strength neither the Young’s Modulus, therefore, the study concludes that due to the minimal breaking force
(FB) of bamboo, it cannot be employed as a main structural member in buildings and other heavy
engineering works but can be used for non-structural purposes such as partition walls, ceilings, roofs and
other areas of lightweight engineering construction that is not heavy loadbearing capacity.

Keywords:
Construction Materials, Dendrocalamus Asper Bamboo, Mechanical Properties, Natural Preservation,
Ultimate Tensile Strength

1. INTRODUCTION

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
Organic materials such as jute, sisal, coconut coir and date palm are among some of the
alternatives that have been used to replace steel. However, the tensile capacity of these materials
is often too low when compared with steel [1 - 4]. Among these organic materials, bamboo has
good materials for possible replacement of steel in reinforced concrete due to its strength. Bamboo
is a general name for more than 1250 species of woody grasses naturally spread all over the world
(except Europe) and most of them are relatively fast-growing [5]. In addition, bamboo is an eco-
friendly material as it reaches maturity much faster than conventional trees (3-5 years versus 30-
50) [6] and has a higher compressive strength than wood, brick, or concrete and a tensile strength
that rival steel [7 - 8]. Bamboo is a renewable, sustainable material with a yield of biomass per
hectare competitive with wood [9]. Worldwide, there is a growing interest in the development of
bamboo products as a sustainable, cost effective and ecologically responsible alternative
construction material [10]; recently, there has been increased interest in the design and application
of Structural Bamboo Products (SBP) [11].

Steel reinforcement mechanical properties have been methodically studied and well
reported; but, there are none comprehensive data describing bamboo reinforcement [12]. This
study aims to provide a preliminary evaluation to test the mechanical properties and behaviors of
Dendrocalamus asper bamboo as reinforcement. In some other studies, the age of the bamboo is
one of the factors in tensile strength. The optimum strength value occurs between 2.5 and 4 years
[13]. Amada et al. 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 culms [14]. Some studies of bamboo, in relation to mechanical
properties, found out that the physical, mechanical attributes vary with respect to other parameters
such as diameter, length, age, type, position along culms, and moisture content of bamboo [15].
In contradiction to other studies, this study states that the tensile strength of bamboo fibers almost
corresponds to that of steel [16]. But, Ghavami discussed the mechanical properties of bamboo,
specifically pertaining to bamboo in concrete. This study showed that the ultimate strength of a
concrete beam reinforced with bamboo is approximately 4 times when compared with un-
reinforced concrete [17].

“In 1992, Costa Rica was hit by an earthquake which registered 7.5 in magnitude on the
Ritcher scale. The only buildings which survived were homes built of bamboo construction . . .”
(Russell, 2015) [18]. However, with all these environmental benefits bamboo has on construction,
bamboo is sliced into piece and glued together while working with. A serious health and safety
issue surrounds the handling and the application of gluing them together. Presently no specific
standard is stated for its construction or gluing together, and glue contains formaldehyde which
can be harmful to the environment (Kennan, 2015) [19].

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Materials

Three year old Philippine Giant Bamboo (Dendrocalamus asper) was harvested from
Mandaue City, Province of Cebu in the Philippines. Portions cut up to 3.0 m from the basal portion
were used for the evaluation of mechanical properties. The bamboo were manually cut into
specified length of 180 mm were split longitudinally at the internode and node part [Fig. 1]. It
was undergo a series of cleaning and machining of the bamboo before the submersion of
specimens and testing [Figure 2].

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
 Table 1. Macroscopic characteristics of Philippine Giant bamboo (Dendrocalamus Asper)

Macroscopic Unit Literature Native

Characteristics 1 2 3 Bamboo

Culm length m 20-30 18-23 - 20-30

Internode length cm 20-25 35 14-45 30-35
Internode Diameter cm 8-20 9-13 1.2-9.3 8-18
Culm wall Thickness mm 11-20 10-14 4-30 6-13
Literature: 1/ Dransfield and Widjaja (1995) 2/ Othman et al. (1995) 3/ Pakhkeree (1997) [20-22]

2.2 Methods of Testing

During the submersion of specimens, 5 for each bamboo were submerged in fresh-water
and salt-water for 7 and 28 days cycles for internode and node section. A set up was developed
to expose the specimens to wetting and drying cycle; the bamboo specimens were removed from
the water and were stacked vertically in air-drying for 1 week. After 7 days of air-drying, tensile
strength and Young’s Modulus were measured after this cycle and were determined using the 6
tonner Universal Testing Machine [Figure 3].

Standard test method to cover the determination of tensile properties of wood based
structural panels is as per ASTM D 3500 - 90 [23] employs the specimens that should have
reduced cross-section at the center of their length to avoid failure in the grip area. In order to
conduct the tensile tests, it was necessary to prepare the bamboo samples. First, the samples were
cut to the proper size and shape. The length of the samples was largely determined by the distance
between the nodes. The widths of the samples were reduced since some of the original samples
were too strong to be broken. The width thickness differed between the samples of Bamboo due
to its physical properties vary. For this cause, a careful dimensioning of the sample was done
before testing the bamboo.
The dimensions were measured at five points along the length of the sample. To calculate
average dimensions of the test specimen. The five points included the midpoint, the ends, and two
points approximately halfway between the middle and the ends. These dimensions are pictured in
[Figure 1]. Since the information given in literature is limited with regards to the effect of the
node on bamboo’s strength, it was desired to investigate this effect. Thus, some samples with
nodes were selected to compare their behavior to un-noded samples. The samples with nodes were
prepared so that a node was at the center of the gauge length. ASTM D4761 – 13 [24] Standard
Test Methods for Mechanical Properties of Lumber and Wood-Base Structural Material.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
 Specimens for tensile strength test shall be taken from the bottom position. The test
specimens shall be at least with one node in the center portion. The load shall be applied constant
and the movable head of the universal testing machine shall travel at a constant rate of 0.01 mm/s.

2.3 Computations of Mechanical Properties

Analysis of tensile strength is the investigation of the behavior of the materials under
different loading conditions. Information about the deformation behavior, stress state and the
failure behavior of bamboo species will observe in different test techniques, specimen preparation
and test data have been presented for typical bamboo species. Each experiment/measurements
were repeated five times unless otherwise stated. All the data were processed by using Microsoft
Excel and statistical analyses.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This paper analyzes the treated and untreated Philippine Giant bamboo (Dendrocalamus
asper) species soaked in salt and fresh-water within one week and air-dried for another one week
could influence the mechanical properties of the specimen specifically in tensile strength and if
there is a significant effect between internode and nodal position as an important requirement for
the effective use of this bamboo species for different engineering applications.

Table 2. Computed results for tensile strength of DA Bamboo for 7 days treatment (Internode)

Specimen Original Immersion Final Percent Load Fracture Modulus Modulus

Dimension Condition Length Elongation Details of Elasticity of Rupture
(mm) (Days) 50 (mm) (%) Pmax (N) E (GPa) σUTS, (MPa)
1-ft 10 x 8.0 7 54.97 9.94 10,093 63.43 126.16
2-ft 10 x 8.0 7 55.36 10.71 10,484 61.17 131.05
3-ft 9.9 x 8.1 7 56.06 12.12 11,037 56.77 137.64
4-ft 9.9 x 8.0 7 56.06 12.12 11,037 57.50 139.36
5-ft 10 x 8.0 7 57.29 14.58 11,242 48.20 140.52
1-st 10.1 x 8.0 7 65.17 30.30 19,060 77.85 235.89
2-st 10 x 8.0 7 58.50 17.00 10,190 74.93 127.38
3-st 10 x 8.0 7 59.99 19.90 15,280 95.98 191.00
4-st 10 x 7.9 7 64.46 28.90 19,570 85.72 247.72
5-st 9.0 x 8.1 7 64.73 29.50 18,510 86.07 253.91
ft – fresh-water tensile; st – salt-water tensile

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
 Table 3. Computed results for tensile strength of DA Bamboo for 7 days treatment (Node)

Specimen Original Immersion Final Percent Load Fracture Modulus Modulus

Dimension Condition Length Elongation Details of Elasticity of Rupture
(mm) (Days) 50 (mm) (%) Pmax (N) E (GPa) σUTS, (MPa)
1-ft 10 x 8.0 7 55.77 11.55 12,179 65.93 152.24
2-ft 10 x 8.0 7 57.95 15.90 12,249 48.14 153.11
3-ft 10 x 8.1 7 55.51 11.01 5,959 33.40 73.56
4-ft 9.9 x 8.1 7 57.69 15.38 12,598 51.08 157.10
5-ft 10 x 8.0 7 60.28 20.57 11,198 34.03 139.97
1-st 10 x 8.0 7 53.67 7.35 8,083 68.60 101.04
2-st 10 x 8.0 7 55.01 10.03 9,913 61.03 122.38
3-st 10 x 8.0 7 55.02 10.06 9,893 60.72 122.14
4-st 10.01 x 8.0 7 55.36 10.72 9,924 57.86 124.05
5-st 9.8 x 8.1 7 56.04 12.08 12.042 62.31 150.53
ft – fresh-water tensile; st – salt-water tensile

Table 4. Computed results for tensile strength of DA Bamboo for 28 days treatment (Internode)

Specimen Original Immersion Final Percent Load Fracture Modulus Modulus

Dimension Condition Length Elongation Details of Elasticity of Rupture
(mm) (Days) 50 (mm) (%) Pmax (N) E (GPa) σUTS, (MPa)
1-ft 10 x 8.0 28 56.60 13.19 12,713 60.22 158.91
2-ft 10 x 8.0 28 56.48 12.96 11,041 53.25 138.01
3-ft 10 x 8.1 28 57.01 14.01 11,945 52.63 147.47
4-ft 10 x 8.1 28 55.23 10.47 9,941 58.61 122.73
5-ft 10 x 8.0 28 53.66 7.32 8,769 74.82 109.61
1-st 10 x 8.0 28 58.04 16.08 9,399 36.53 117.48
2-st 10 x 8.0 28 56.26 12.51 11,172 55.66 139.32
3-st 10 x 8.1 28 55.78 11.56 6,155 32.86 75.99
4-st 9.0 x 8.0 28 57.66 15.32 12,098 49.33 151.22
5-st 10 x 8.1 28 55.76 11.54 12,174 65.95 152.17
ft – fresh-water tensile; st – salt-water tensile

Table 5. Computed results for tensile strength of DA Bamboo for 28 days treatment (Node)

Specimen Original Immersion Final Percent Load Fracture Modulus Modulus

Dimension Condition Length Elongation Details of Elasticity of Rupture
(mm) (Days) 50 (mm) (%) Pmax (N) E (GPa) σUTS, (MPa)
1-ft 10 x 8.1 28 56.86 13.72 14,531 65.38 179.40
2-ft 10 x 8.0 28 60.93 21.87 13,911 39.76 173.89
3-ft 10 x 8.0 28 54.61 9.22 5,967 40.43 74.59
4-ft 9.7 x 8.1 28 56.65 13.30 13,916 66.59 177.12
5-ft 10 x 8.0 28 55.94 11.88 7,189 37.84 89.87
1-st 10 x 8.0 28 56.99 13.97 11,158 49.89 139.48
2-st 10 x 8.1 28 55.23 10.48 10,059 60.61 127.01
3-st 10 x 8.0 28 55.54 11.08 10,427 58.66 130.03
4-st 10 x 8.0 28 54.99 9.93 10,250 64.48 128.13
5-st 9.8 x 8.1 28 54.85 9.72 10,006 64.35 125.07
ft – fresh-water tensile; st – salt-water tensile

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
 Giant bamboo is comparable to mild steel based on the results that can relate to another
study in relation to the average ultimate tensile strength of some other bamboo was determined to
be between 204 N/mm2 and 250 N/mm2 [25]. The study shows highest average ultimate tensile
strength for internode is 211.18 MPa soaked in salt-water for 7 days while with the node is 138.97
MPa at fresh-water treatment for 28 days. Bamboo undergoes brittle failure. i.e., it breaks sharply
without plastic deformation. With some similarity of another bamboo, this undergoes brittle
failure that provides breaking elongation of 0% - 15%. This work excludes the investigation of
bamboo as reinforcement in structural concrete. However, a similar study of bamboo as
reinforcement in structural concrete elements shows that it can replace steel satisfactorily as
reinforcement in concrete structures [26].

Table 6. Comparison of Materials with naturally treated Giant bamboo (Dendrocalamus asper)

Material Ultimate Tensile Strength (MPa) References

SS304 620 [27]
Al6061 300 [27]
Rattan 85.35 [28]
Fir, Pine, and Spruce ~30-50 [29, 30]
Mousou bamboo 140-230 [29, 30]
Native bamboo (Fresh-water) 138.97 this study
Native bamboo (Salt-water) 211.18 this study

Native giant bamboo from the Philippines is comparable to some organic materials which
are 2.38 stronger to rattan and 5.28 against the good wood. Although, bamboo utilizes already in
many engineering application in construction because of its high strength to weight ratio [31],
data from the potential designation as reinforcement, it must be given emphasized in order to
accumulate the designed of respective planning for construction, so it is by no means the easiest
material to use and considerably more research is required if its potential is to be realized.

4. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

4.1 Summary

Strength of bamboo is greater than many organic and even good timber products, but it
is quite less than the tensile strength of steel. We know the fact that bamboo is easily obtainable
as it is in almost every tropical and subtropical regions. These materials perhaps lower the cost of
construction and increase the strength of the buildings that would otherwise be unreinforced.
Tension test is the most basic type of mechanical test.

4.2 Conclusion

A sustainable building, or green building, or green architecture was fundamentally seen

in so many ancient civilizations and traditional architectures. But having these, mechanical
properties must be evaluated and one is the tensile strength of bamboo that has been shown to be
quite high and vary widely between species. Bamboo has been cited as having tensile strength
similar to mild steel in some cases [32]. This particular Philippine bamboo based on [Table 7],
showing comprehensively that there is no significant effect on the relationship between the
internode and node position to the traditional treatment of the specimen that focus on 7 days and
28 days cycles respectively.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
 Table 7. ANOVA: Two Factors with Replication for Significant Effect of bamboo parts

Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F-crit

Sample 6320.95 1 6320.95 5.94859 0.020456 4.149097
Columns 10807.09 3 3602.37 3.390153 0.029766 2.90112
Interaction 13356.32 3 4452.11 4.189839 0.013091 2.90112
Within 34003.08 32 1062.60
Total 64487.45 39

Based on the experimental studies presented in this paper, the following conclusions can
be drawn: In general, sample failure was accompanied by tension failure for bamboo specimens.
The value of MOE, E of this giant bamboo is found to be much lower to the data given in relation
to steel reinforcement.

Philippine giant bamboo species, the test showed that the bamboo tensile strength is
comparable with the best woods used in constructions. Bamboo average tensile strength is
approximately 211.18 MPa in the specimens without node for 7 days soaked in salt-water which
are 1.57 times as strong as the fresh-water treatment and about 1.56 times as strong as the
specimens with node and 138.97 MPa in the specimens with node soaked in fresh water for 28
days. Finally, 7 cycles of wetting and drying in solution of salt-water treated did not increase the
bamboo tensile strength neither the Young’s Modulus.

The tensile test result showed that giant bamboo has a very poor tensile property and
undergoes brittle failure when loaded unlike steel. This is a huge disadvantage of using bamboo
as a structural member in building construction. But then, the study concludes that due to the
minimal breaking force (FB) of bamboo, although it is comparable to mild steel, it cannot be
commissioned as a main structural member in buildings and other heavy engineering works but
can be used for partition walls, ceilings, roofs and other areas of lightweight engineering
construction that is not heavy load bearing.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This study was conceptualized by the author/s and sponsored through Engineering Research
and Development for Technology under the Department of Science and Technology and all
experiments were carried out in the Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Laboratory, University of San Carlos, Cebu City, 6000 Philippines.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
REFERENCES

[1] Kundu, S.P. Jute Fibre Reinforced Cement Concrete for Structural Applications, 2015.
[2] Tan, H., Yan, L., Huang, L., Wang, Y., Li, H., Chen, J.Y. Behavior of sisal fiber concrete cylinders
externally wrapped with jute FRP, Polym. Compos. (2015).
[3] Ardanuy, M., Claramunt, J., Toledo, R.D., Filho. Cellulosic fiber reinforced cement based
composites: a review of recent research, Constr. Build. Mater. 79 (2015) 115–128.
[4] Ali, M., Liu, A., Sou, H., Chouw, N. Mechanical and dynamic properties of coconut fibre
reinforced concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 30 (2012) 814–825.
[5] Scurlock, J.M.O., Dayton, D.C., Hames, B. Bamboo: an overlooked biomass resource? Biomass
Bioenergy 19 (2000) 229–244.
[6] Prieto, M. G., Vidal, N. J., Rojas, T., & Eduardo, J. (2013, December). Bamboo as a sustainable
material for several city uses. In New Concepts in Smart Cities: Fostering Public and Private
Alliances (SmartMILE), 2013 International Conference on (pp. 1-4). IEEE.
[7] Roach, Mary. The Bamboo Solution: Tough as steel, sturdier than concrete, full-size in a year.
Discover Magazine. 1 June 1996. Retrieved 7 December 2013.
[8] Rottke, Evelin. Mechanical Properties of Bamboo. RWTH Aachen University. Faculty of
Architecture. Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Section 3, page 11 and Section 4, page
11. 27 October 2002. Retrieved 7 December 2013.
[9] Vogtländer J, Van der Lugt P, Brezet H. The sustainability of bamboo products for local and
Western European applications. LCAs and land-use. J Clean Prod 2010; 18: 1260–9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.04.015.
[10] De Flander, K. The role of bamboo in global modernity: from traditional to innovative
construction material. Thesis: Wageningen University, Wageningen Netherlands; 2005.
[11] Dixon, P.G., Ahvenainen, P., Aijazi, A.N., Chen, S.H., Lin, S., Augusciak, P.K., Borrega, M.,
Svedström, K., Gibson, L.J. Comparison of the structure and flexural properties of Moso, Guadua
and Tre Gai bamboo: Construction and Building Materials, 90 (2015) 11–17
[12] Sabbir, Md.A., Ashfaqul Hoq, S.M., and Fancy, S.F. 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
[13] Amada, S. and Untao, S., Fracture Properties of Bamboo, Composites Part B. Vol. 32, 2001, pp.
451-459.
[14] Amada, S., Lchikawa, Y., Munekata, T., Nagase, Y. and Shimizu, H., Fiber Texture and
Mechanical Graded Structure of Bamboo, Composites Part B, Vol.288, 1997, pp 13-20.
[15] Lo, Cuo, Leung. The Effect of Fiber Density on Strength Capacity of Bamboo, Materials Letter,
vol. 58, 2004, pp. 2595-2598.
[16] Amada, S. and Untao, S. Fracture Properties of Bamboo, Composites Part B. Vol. 32, pp 451-
459. 2001
[17] Ghavami, K. Ultimate Load Behavior of Bamboo-Reinforced Lightweight Concrete Beams,
Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 17, pp 281-288. 1995
[18] Russell, B. The Use of Green Materials in the Construction of Buildings’ Structure,
http://www.aia.org/practicing/groups/kc/AIAB081061. Retrieved on the 2nd January 2015.
[19] Kennan, C., Bamboo: Good or Bad for the Environment,
http://greenbuildingelements.com/2011/11/27/bamboo-good-or-bad-for-the-environment/.
Retrieved on the 2nd January 2015.
[20] Dransfield, S. and Widjaja, E. A. Plant resources of South-east Asia No. 7: Bamboos. 1995.
Leiden, Netherlands.
[21] Othman, A. R., Mohmod, A. L., Liese, W. and Haron, N. Research Pamphlet No. 118: Planting
and utilization of bamboo in Peninsular Malaysia. Forest Research Institute Malaysia. 1995. Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.
[22] Pakhkeree, T. Physical and mechanical properties of Dendrocalamus asper Becker. M.S. Thesis,
Kasetsart University. 1997. Thailand.
[23] American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM). 1990. Standard Test Methods for Structural
Panels in Tension, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, ASTM D 3500 – 90 (Reapproved 1995),
Vol. 04.10, pp 453 – 457.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
[24] ASTM D4761 – 13 Standard Test Methods for Mechanical Properties of Lumber and Wood-Base
Structural Material
[25] Alade, G.A., Olutoge, F.A. The durability and mechanical strength properties of bamboo in
reinforced concrete. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 4 (1), 35–40. Alfonso, D.J., 1987. Let’s plant
bamboo. Agribus. Wkly. 1 (19), 25. 2004
[26] Ghavami, K. Bamboo as reinforcement in structural concrete elements: cement and concrete
composites, pp. 637-649, http:// www.sciencedirect.com. 2004
[27] Li, D., Leroux, P. Yield and Tensile Strength of Steel and Aluminum using Micro indentation.
Today’s Standard for Tomorrow’s Materials, Nanovea, 2014
[28] Adewuyi, A.P., Otukoya, A.A., Olaniyi, O.A., Olafusi, O.S. Comparative Studies of Steel, Bamboo
and Rattan as Reinforcing Bars in Concrete; Tensile and Flexural Characteristics. Open Journal
of Civil Engineering, 2015, 5, 228-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojce.2015.52023
[29] Amada, S., Ichikawa, T., Munekata, T., Nagase, Y., and Shimizu, H. Fiber texture and mechanical
graded structure of bamboo, Composites: Part B, 28B, pp. 13-20. 1997
[30] Amada, S., Munekata, T., Nagase, Y., Ichikawa, Y., Kirigai A., and Zhifei, Y. The Mechanical
Structures of Bamboo in Viewpoint of Functionally Gradient and Composite Materials, Journal
of Composite Materials, 30(7), pp. 800-819. 1996
[31] South East Asia Community Access Programme (SECAP), Technical Paper No. 1, ―Development
of Local Resource Based Standards, for the Royal Government of Cambodia,‖ 2008.
[32] Laroque, P. Design of a Low Cost Bamboo Footbridge. Master’s Thesis, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology (MIT), June 2007, pp. 87.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3083832