Development and Material Characterization

of Cross-Laminated Bamboo
Kunal Mohinderu1, Saahastaranshu R. Bhardwaj 2 & Sriram Aaleti3
Ph.D. Candidate; 2Assistant Professor; 3Associate Professor
1

Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, United States.

Introduction and Objectives Results

• Cross laminated bamboo (CLB) is dimensionally stable and has higher strength to weight ratio in comparison to Cross  Compression Results of Laminated Bamboo (LB) and Cross Laminated Bamboo (CLB) specimens:
laminated timber (CLT). Faster growth rates and improved mechanical properties compared to conventional timber  Failure modes for Compression specimens
• Generalized failure modes observed (depending on the specimen’s size and layers orientation) were:
further enhance its appeal. These superior capabilities of bamboo offer a promising alternative to CLT. Hence, this
Buckling, Delamination of layers, Crushing.
research focuses on in-house development of CLB panels fabricated by gluing the commercially available single-layer
bamboo sheets in orthogonal directions. Five and ten-layered CLB panels were fabricated, alongside five-layered
laminated bamboo (LB) specimens. The panels were used to test compressive and bending properties of CLB and
compressive properties of LB.
• The influence of aspect ratio and layer orientation on the compressive properties of CLB panels was evaluated.
Flexural performance of CLB was characterized by measuring force-displacement response, moment-curvature A. LB_L B. LB_T C. CLB-200-50 D. CLB-100-50 E. CLB-50-50 F. CLB-L-50-25 G. CLB-T-50-25
response, and strain distribution across the specimen depth. Figure 3. Failure Patterns under compression loading
 Compression stress strain response of LB-L (A) , LB-T (B), CLB-L-50-25 (C.), CLB-L-50-25 (D.), CLB-200-
50 (E.), CLB-100-50 (F.), CLB-50-50 (G.), and their comparison (H.)
Fabrication
A B C. D.

E. F. G. H.
A) Application of B) Application of C) Placement of LB D) Loading/Pressing
primer on LB sheets adhesive on LB sheets sheets orthogonally Set-up
Figure 1. Process of fabrication of CLB

Table 1. Test Matrix and Results

Number of Dimensions (L Number of Peak Stress (ksi) Modulus of Elasticity Figure 4. Compression stress strain response results
Specimen Name#  Bending results of CLB specimens
Layers# x B x H) (inch) Specimens (n) (COV%) (ksi) (COV%)#
 Failure modes identified: breakage of layers in tension, rolling shear failure, and delamination
Compression Specimens
Laminated Bamboo Specimens
Longitudinal: LBL–100–25 5–L 2x1x4 6 8.20 (6.05%) 2552.9 (16.81%)
Transverse: LBT–100–25 5–T 2x1x4 6 2.62 (4.22%) 302.0 (16.76%)
Cross Laminated Bamboo Specimens Layer Breakage Delamination
CLB–200–50 5–L;5–T 2x2x8 6 5.44 (2.38 %)* 955.7 (21.39 %)
CLB–100–50 5–L;5–T 2x2x4 6 5.89 (2.34 %)* 1018.0 (19.07%)
CLB–50–50 5–L;5–T 2x2x2 6 6.45 (2.19%)* 1030.0 (37.07 %)
CLB–L–50–25 3–L;2–T 1x1x2 6 6.78 (7.01 %)* 1094.8 (29.17 %) C. Moment vs. Curvature
A. Force vs. Displacement B. Variation of strain along Rolling Shear
CLB–T–50–25 3–T;2–L 1x1x2 6 5.84 (4.39%)* 621.9 (21.75 %) response (till peak load)
(till peak load) the height of the specimen
Bending Specimens
Number of Dimensions (L Number of Peak Force(kips) Modulus of Elasticity Figure 5. Bending test results
Layers# x B x H) (in) Specimens (n) (COV%) (ksi) (COV%) #
CLB-B–50–50 5–L;5–T 21 x 2 x 2 9 2.86 (14.58 %) 3303.92 (19.95 %)
• *Compressive stress for CLB specimens was calculated using equation: σ = P/A Observations and Conclusion
• # Only specimens with no fabrication issues are considered in the results.

• Compression: 1. Transverse layered LB specimens showed more ductile behavior compared to Longitudinal layered LB
Experimental Test Setup specimens. Longitudinal layered LB specimens had a strength of 3 to 4 times as that of Transverse layered LB specimens. 2.
Due to increase in the CLB specimens’ height there was decrease in compressive strength by 20% (approx.). When the aspect
ratio was doubled, the compression strength decreased by 10% (approx.). 3. Stress strain behavior can be categorized as bi-
• ASTM D143 [2] and ASTM D1037 [3] standards were used as the testing methodology. linear behavior.
• Instrumentation: Load was recorded using both MTS machine and Load cell (only in compression test). Strain was • Bending: Strain distribution along the height of beam was linear, indicating plane section remains plane assumption is valid
measured using Foil type Strain gauges and using Image processing (“Photogrammetry”), and displacement was till peak load.
measured using Photogrammetry. • The fabrication process, presence of joints (finger joints, etc.), influence of aggressive environment, can influence the
compression and bending properties which are the topics for future research.

References
[1] Lee, C. H., Chung, M. J., Lin, C. H., & Yang, T. H. (2012). Effects of layered structure on the physical and mechanical properties of laminated moso bamboo
(Phyllosachys edulis) flooring. Construction and Building Materials, 28(1), 31-35.

[2] ASTM, “Standard Test Methods for Small Clear Specimens of Timber” D143. West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2023. doi: 10.1520/D0143-23.

[3] ASTM , “Standard Test Methods for Evaluating Properties of Wood-Base Fiber and Particle Panel Materials” D1037. West Conshohocken, PA,
USA, 2020. doi: 10.1520/D1037-12R20.

A. Compression test set-up B. Bending Test Setup

Figure 2. Experimental Test Setup
Acknowledgement
Contact : [email protected]
Or