Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Moso bamboo has strong mechanical property and high economic efficiency. However, its anisotropy and inhomogeneity will increase the time and cost of mechanical properties testing. Aiming to solve this problem, in this paper, a series of tests were systematically carried out to test the parallel-to-grain compressive resistance, bending resistance, tensile resistance, shear resistance and perpendicular-to-grain compressive resistance, tensile resistance. Then, the characteristic values of mechanical properties of bamboo were analyzed for establishing the relationship between mechanical properties and density of bamboo and finding a kind of conversion method among mechanical properties. The results show that the parallel-to-grain properties of bamboo are better than that perpendicular to the grain. There is a high correlation between Mechanical properties and density of bamboo and can be well fitted by Linear functions. This research provides mechanical properties conversion parameters that can be used to evaluate and predict the properties of the moso bamboo.

Keywords

Moso bamboo mechanical properties density prediction

Introduction

Many countries have published a series of policies to promote environment-friendly construction to solve the increasingly severe environmental problem, such as the “Zero Energy and High-Performance Green Building Executive Order” of the United States and the “Green New Deal” of European Union and “Green Building Creation Action Plan” of China. As one of the main building structures, the bamboo structure can realize the harmonious coexistence with the ecological system, which is one of the major trends in the future development of the building. At present, the typical applications of bamboo structure include Green School in Bali Island,¹ Nomadic Museum in Mexico,² Suntory Museum of Art in Japan.³ In China, its main application can be observed in village characteristic buildings, tourism buildings,⁴ the roof of large characteristic stadiums.⁵ Moso bamboo is the most commonly used species^6,7 because of its excellent mechanical properties and low economic cost.^8–10

At present, the research on bamboo mainly concentrates on the basic mechanical properties^11–15 and the properties of components and joints.^16–20 However, systematic research on the prediction of its mechanical properties was rarely carried out. Sá Ribeiro et al.²¹ carried out bending tests of bamboo stalks and respectively fitted the relationship between bending strength, elastic modulus and density. Dixon and Gibson²² investigated the relationship between the parallel-to-grain compressive strength and density of bamboo and found they had a high correlationship. Javadian et al.²³ correlated bamboo’s parallel-to-grain tensile and bending properties to the wall thickness, perimeter and density, and proposed the relevant calculation formulas. In order to determine the appropriate influencing factor of the mechanical properties of bamboo, scholars studied and found that the density had a strong correlation with the mechanical properties of bamboo. Bahtiar et al.²⁴ measured the compressive strength and bearing capacity of bamboo stalks, and the results showed that there was a good linear relationship between density and compressive strength. Lo et al.²⁵ studied the effect of bamboo diameter and bamboo age on compressive strength, and the results showed that the fiber density of bamboo internal sacrosanct tissue was a good indicator of bamboo strength ability. A large number of literature studies showed that density was a physical parameter with a high correlation with bamboo mechanical properties.

Bamboo is a kind of two-phase porous and compressible anisotropic material. A fully understanding of the mechanical properties of bamboo is the basis for the application of bamboo structure. At present, the research about the prediction of mechanical properties of bamboo did not comprehensively study bamboo properties and the number of samples and the sampling sites is limited, and the transformation relationships between mechanical properties have not been established, which can save a lot of time and cost of testing materials for the engineering application.²⁶ In order to systematically study the mechanical properties of Moso bamboo and establish the corresponding prediction model, the following research contents were finished in this paper: (1) The specimen used for testing various mechanical properties (including compressive resistance, bending resistance, tensile resistance, parallel-to-grain shear resistance, perpendicular-to-grain compressive resistance and tensile resistance) were made and tested under the consideration of bamboo nodes influence. And the density of specimens were measured after the test. (2) The characteristic values of mechanical properties of bamboo were analyzed statistically. (3) The relationships between the mechanical properties and density were established. (4) The conversion methods of mechanical properties of Moso bamboo were proposed.

Material and method

Preparation of specimens

In this paper, bamboos were harvested from Chenzhou City, Hunan Province, China; their DBH (diameter at breast height) were about 100 mm. About 160 vertical bamboo stalks without mildew, insect pests, rot were randomly selected in the bamboo forest, and the Cutting position was 0.1 m away from the ground. Each bamboo stalk sample was 6 m long and marked with labels before transporting to the laboratory and stacking in the ventilated and waterproof place with air-drying treatment, as shown in the Figure 1(a).

Figure 1.

The processing and testing of Moso bamboo: (a) raw Moso bamboo, (b) internode and node specimens, (c) density determination, and (d) experiments.

The mechanical properties tests in this paper include compressive resistance (UC), bending resistance (B), tensile resistance (UT), parallel-to-grain shear resistance (US), perpendicular-to-grain compressive resistance (CC), and tensile resistance (CT). Twenty-five bamboo stalk samples were randomly selected to make the specimen as shown in the Figure 1(b). All kinds of node and internode specimens were selected alternately along with bamboo stalk height and made under the consideration of node influence. The ratio of height to the outer diameter of the specimen (UC and US) was set as 1. The size of the B specimen was 220 mm × 15 mm × t mm, the size of the UT specimen was 330 mm × 15 mm × t mm, the size of the CC specimen was 15 mm × 15 mm × t mm, and the size of the CT specimen was 100 mm × D mm × t mm.^27,28 The detailed size and labeling of various specimens are shown in Figure 2 and Table 1.

Figure 2.

The size of internode and node specimens.

Table 1.

Dimensions of specimens.

	UC	US	B	UT	CC	CT
Dimensions (mm)	Ratio of height to diameter (H/D) = 1		220 × 15 × t	330 × 15 × t	15 × 15 × t	100 × D × t

H refers to the height of the specimens; D refers to the diameter of the specimens; t refers to the thickness of the specimens.

Mechanical property test

The universal testing machine was used to apply load to UC, US, and UT specimens with the rate of 0.01 mm/s. The loading rate of B specimen was 150 N/mm² per minute, the loading rate of CC specimen was 20 N/mm² per minute, and the loading rate of CT test was 0.005 mm/s. The process of experiments are shown in Figure 1(c). Then, the parallel-to-grain compressive strength (UCS), parallel-to-grain elastic compressive modulus (UCE), bending strength (MOR), elastic bending modulus (MOE), parallel-to-grain tensile strength (UTS), parallel-to-grain elastic tensile modulus (UTE), parallel-to-grain shear strength (USS), perpendicular-to-grain compression strength (CCS), and perpendicular-to-grain tensile strength (CTS) were obtained from those experiments. The calculation formulas of the mechanical property indexes are as follows²⁷:

S_{W} = \frac{P_{m a x}}{A}

(1)

E_{W} = \frac{20 Δ P}{A Δ l}

(2)

M O R_{W} = \frac{150 P_{m a x}}{t b^{2}}

(3)

M O E_{W} = \frac{1920000 Δ P}{8 δ_{m} t b^{3}}

(4)

where, S_W represents UCS, UTS, USS, CCS, and CTS (MPa) when the moisture content is W; E_W represents UCE and UTE (MPa) of when the moisture content is W; MOR_W and MOE_W are bending strength (MPa) and elastic bending modulus (MPa) when the water content is W, respectively. P_max and A are the failure load (N) and the stressed area (mm²) of the specimen, respectively. ∆P and ∆l are the difference in load limitation (N) and the deformation (mm) between the top and bottom in the elastic section, respectively. t and b are the thickness (mm) and height (mm) of the specimen, respectively. δm is the deflection of Pure bending section of the specimen under the impact of ∆P (mm).

Measurement of density and moisture content

After the specimen was damaged, a small test piece with a size of about 20 mm × 20 mm near the failure zone was selected to measure its density and moisture content. The mass was measured by electronic scale, and the volume was measured by Archimedes drainage method, as shown in Figure 1(d). The calculation formulas are as follows²⁸:

ρ_{W} = \frac{m_{1}}{V}

(5)

W = \frac{m_{1} - m_{0}}{m_{0}} \times 100

(6)

where, ρ_W (g/cm³) is the density when the moisture content is W; m₁ is the air-dry mass (g); V is the air-dry volume (cm³); m₀ is the absolute dry mass (g).

Adjustment of the index value of property

Before analyzing bamboo properties, the value of the index of property should be converted to the value under the condition of the standard water content (12%) as follows²⁷:

ρ_{12} = ρ_{W} [1 - 0.01 \times (1 - K) \times (W - 12)]

(7)

M_{12} = K_{W} M_{W}

(8)

where, ρ₁₂ (g/cm³) is the density for standard water content; K is the volume shrinkage coefficient; M₁₂ is the mechanical property for the standard water content; M_W is the mechanical properties when the water content is W; K_W is the correction coefficient of water content.

Outliers handling

The physical and mechanical properties of bamboo were discrete to some degree, and there were inevitably abnormal values of mechanical property index obtained in the test. In this paper, the performance index values were analyzed after eliminating those discrete data according to the IQR criterion. The IQR criterion aims to obtain the lower quartile value Q₁ from 1/4 and the upper quartile value Q₂ from 3/4 in the data sorted from the smallest to the largest on the premise that the data meets the standard normal distribution. The interquartile range of IQR is calculated by the following formula²⁹:

I Q R = Q_{2} - Q_{1}

(9)

The detection interval of outliers is calculated by the following formula²⁹:

[Q_{1} - 1.5 \cdot I Q R, Q_{2} + 1.5 \cdot I Q R]

(10)

All the data analyzed in this paper were obtained after excluding outliers.

Results and discussion

Eigenvalue statistics

Figures 3 and 4 and Table 2 were obtained from the statistics of mechanical property indexes of moso bamboo. As shown in Figure 3 and Table 2, The parallel-to-grain mechanical properties were significantly better than those perpendicular to the grain direction. Among all the strengths, the parallel-to-grain tensile strength was the highest, with an average value of 139.542 MPa. The average parallel-to-grain internode tensile strength was 147.723 MPa. The parallel-to-grain compressive strength was also high, while the bending strength was lower than the parallel-to-grain tensile strength. The bending elastic modulus was slightly higher than that of parallel-to-grain compression and tensile resistance. It can be seen from Table 2 that the average density of node bamboo was 0.936 g/cm³, and the average density of internode bamboo was 0.898 g/cm³. The bamboo culms were divided into six segments with the length of 1 m and labeled ρ_-1 to ρ_-6 from the bottom to the top of the bamboo stem. The average density of each segment is shown in Figure 4, and it can be seen that the density of bamboo gradually increased, and there existed a difference in density between node bamboo and that of internode bamboo. Compared with other major building materials, the strength of bamboo is higher than that of wood, and the parallel-to-grain tensile strength is about twice that of wood. The strength-to-weight ratio of bamboo is better than that of steel.³⁰ In conclusion, Moso bamboo is an ideal renewable material for green building with the advantages of high strength, high stiffness, and high ratio of strength to weight.

Figure 3.

Histogram of mechanical properties: (a) strength and (b) modulus of elasticity.

Figure 4.

Density histogram.

Table 2.

Statistical results of characteristic values of mechanical properties.

Mechanical Performance Index	Quantity	Mean	Maximum	Minimum	5% Quartile value	Standard deviation	Variable coefficient
ρ _N	906	0.936 g/cm³	1.29 g/cm³	0.484 g/cm³	0.706 g/cm³	0.135 g/cm³	0.145
ρ _I	1260	0.898 g/cm³	1.43 g/cm³	0.408 g/cm³	0.673 g/cm³	0.144 g/cm³	0.161
UCS _N	81	59.7 MPa	68.7 MPa	51.1 MPa	52.3 MPa	4.26 MPa	0.071
UCS _I	240	57.7 MPa	68.8 MPa	49.0 MPa	50.9 MPa	3.87 MPa	0.067
UCE _N	74	15.0 GPa	17.3 GPa	12.2 GPa	12.9 GPa	1.32 GPa	0.088
UCE _I	232	13.6 GPa	16.4 GPa	10.9 GPa	11.3 GPa	1.29 GPa	0.095
MOR _N	74	131 MPa	184 MPa	86.2 MPa	95.4 MPa	19.5 MPa	0.149
MOR _I	79	133 MPa	179 MPa	93.3 MPa	103 MPa	17.7 MPa	0.133
MOE _N	155	17.6 GPa	20.7 GPa	15.2 GPa	16.0 GPa	1.10 GPa	0.062
MOE _I	80	17.8 GPa	20.7 GPa	15.2 GPa	15.7 GPa	1.29 GPa	0.073
UTS _N	168	139 MPa	159 MPa	114 MPa	123 MPa	9.82 MPa	0.070
UTS _I	162	148 MPa 9.40926	173 MPa	123 MPa	127 MPa	11.8 MPa	0.080
UTE _N	167	16.3 GPa	18.7 GPa	13.8 GPa	14.3 GPa	1.18 GPa	0.073
UTE _I	159	16.3 GPa	18.9 GPa	13.7 GPa	14.2 GPa	1.17 GPa	0.072
USS _N	60	15.8 MPa	17.9 MPa	13.7 MPa	14.1 MPa	1.11 MPa	0.070
USS _I	139	15.8 MPa	18.2 MPa	13.3 MPa	13.7 MPa	1.14 MPa	0.072
CCS _N	77	37.3 MPa	46.5 MPa	25.5 MPa	29.1 MPa	4.65 MPa	0.125
CCS _I	100	27.9 MPa	30.4 MPa	25.0 MPa	25.7 MPa	1.37 MPa	0.049
CTS _N	47	6.33 MPa	8.83 MPa	3.46 MPa	4.05 MPa	0.489 MPa	0.077
CTS _I	73	3.77 MPa	5.47 MPa	2.16 MPa	2.45 MPa	0.517 MPa	0.137

The relationship between mechanical properties and density

By applying the Linear function, Exponential function, and Power function to fit the relationship between mechanical properties and density of Moso bamboo, fitted curves and relationship expressions are obtained and shown in Figure 5 and Table 3. Relationship expressions in Figure 5 are the optimal fitted relationship expressions. Determination coefficient R², a parameter in the range of [0, 1], used for measuring the fitting degree. It can be seen from Figure 5 that the parallel-to-grain compressive strength, bending strength, parallel-to-grain tensile strength, parallel-to-grain shear resistance, and perpendicular-to-grain compressive strength of internode of bamboo all showed a positive correlation with density while perpendicular-to-grain tensile strength and perpendicular-to-grain compressive strength of node of bamboo had a negative correlation with density. It can be seen from Table 3 that, generally, there is a good correlation between the mechanical properties of bamboo. The mean of each determination coefficient R² of optimal relationship expression is 0.658.

Figure 5.

Fitting curve of mechanical properties and density: (a) UCS, (b) UCE, (c) MOR, (d) MOE, (e) UTS, (f) UTE, (g) USS, (h) CCS, and (i) CTS.

Table 3.

Fitting relation between mechanical properties and density.

	Linear		Exponential		Power
	Relationship	R ²	Relationship	R ²	Relationship	R ²
UCS _N -ρ	$U C S_{N} = 18.544 ρ + 43.293$	0.530	$U C S_{N} = 45.274 e^{0.31 ρ}$	0.524	$U C S_{N} = 61.838 ρ^{0.269}$	0.516
UCS _I -ρ	$U C S_{I} = 17.128 ρ + 43.545$	0.401	$U C S_{I} = 45.079 e^{0.296 ρ}$	0.392	$U C S_{I} = 60.561 ρ^{0.247}$	0.390
UCE _N -ρ	$U C E_{N} = 7.093 ρ + 8.123$	0.717	$U C E_{N} = 9.392 e^{0.479 ρ}$	0.718	$U C E_{N} = 15.242 ρ^{0.443}$	0.716
UCE _I -ρ	$U C E_{I} = 5.712 ρ + 8.4$	0.503	$U C E_{I} = 9.182 e^{0.427 ρ}$	0.502	$U C E_{I} = 14.116 ρ^{0.38}$	0.511
MOR _N -ρ	$M O R_{N} = 113.34 ρ + 24.404$	0.563	$M O R_{N} = 55.413 e^{0.923 ρ}$	0.564	$M O R_{N} = 137.41 ρ^{0.835}$	0.579
MOR _I -ρ	$M O R_{I} = 78.752 ρ + 58.432$	0.576	$M O R_{I} = 75.107 e^{0.594 ρ}$	0.576	$M O R_{I} = 137.07 ρ^{0.547}$	0.569
MOE _N -ρ	$M O E_{N} = 7.923 ρ + 10.176$	0.734	$M O E_{N} = 11.547 e^{0.448 ρ}$	0.735	$M O E_{N} = 18.103 ρ^{0.413}$	0.723
MOE _I -ρ	$M O R_{I} = 9.165 ρ + 9.434$	0.623	$M O E_{I} = 11.093 e^{0.515 ρ}$	0.619	$M O E_{I} = 18.598 ρ^{0.466}$	0.617
UTS _N -ρ	$U T S_{N} = 43.526 ρ + 98.376$	0.669	$U T S_{N} = 103.44 e^{0.314 ρ}$	0.663	$U T S_{N} = 142.25 ρ^{0.288}$	0.661
UTS _I -ρ	$U T S_{I} = 56.968 ρ + 94.71$	0.704	$U T S_{I} = 102.82 e^{0.386 ρ}$	0.695	$U T S_{I} = 151.92 ρ^{0.347}$	0.688
UTE _N -ρ	$U T E_{N} = 4.541 ρ + 12.039$	0.495	$U T E_{N} = 12.497 e^{0.28 ρ}$	0.491	$U T E_{N} = 16.606 ρ^{0.255}$	0.491
UTE _I -ρ	$U T E_{I} = 3.615 ρ + 12.943$	0.432	$U T E_{I} = 13.215 e^{0.223 ρ}$	0.430	$U T E_{I} = 16.594 ρ^{0.203}$	0.436
USS _N -ρ	$U S S_{N} = 3.716 ρ + 12.259$	0.560	$U S S_{N} = 12.622 e^{0.236 ρ}$	0.560	$U S S_{N} = 16.058 ρ^{0.213}$	0.555
USS _I -ρ	$U S S_{I} = 4.312 ρ + 11.865$	0.505	$U S S_{I} = 12.268 e^{0.274 ρ}$	0.498	$U S S_{I} = 16.203 ρ^{0.246}$	0.496
CCS _N -ρ	$C C S_{N} = - 14.879 ρ + 50.403$	0.157	$C C S_{N} = 53.672 e^{- 0.422 ρ}$	0.162	$C C S_{N} = 35.147 ρ^{- 0.374}$	0.154
CCS _I -ρ	$C C S_{I} = 7.541 ρ + 20.869$	0.455	$C C S_{I} = 21.646 e^{0.271 ρ}$	0.452	$C C S_{I} = 28.379 ρ^{0.236}$	0.436
CTS _N -ρ	$C T S_{N} = - 12.419 ρ + 17.571$	0.573	$C T S_{N} = 40.278 e^{- 2.076 ρ}$	0.561	$C T S_{N} = 5.076 ρ^{- 1.34}$	0.552
CTS _I -ρ	$C T S_{I} = - 2.129 ρ + 5.71$	0.395	$C T S_{I} = 6.249 e^{- 0.579 ρ}$	0.386	$C T S_{I} = 3.469 ρ^{- 0.431}$	0.372

Ruiz-Aquino et al.³¹ had established a model to predict the log value of mechanical properties based on physical properties. The range of the optimal univariate fitting determination coefficient R² in the model was [0.104, 0.494]. The range of determination coefficient R² of the multiple regression model was [0.190–0.646]. Although the fitting result of mechanical properties of wood and bamboo was discrete to a certain extent. On the whole, the fitting of mechanical properties of Moso bamboo in this paper has a good result. Among fitted relationship expressions for 18 mechanical properties, 12 Linear functions have optimal fitting results, 4 Exponential functions have optimal fitting results, and 2 Power functions have optimal fitting results, and each mean of determination coefficient R² value of fitted relationship was 0.533, 0.529, and 0.526, respectively. Therefore, it is suitable to use Linear functions for predicting the mechanical properties of bamboo because of its good prediction result and strong practicability.

The basic density of moso bamboo is related to its section surface system, vascular bundle system and ground tissue system,³² and the distribution density and basic tissue content of vascular bundle are also in significant relationship with the basic density of moso bamboo. The larger the distribution density of the vascular bundle, the larger the basic density of the moso bamboo.³³ Bamboo can be treated as a two phase composite made of vascular bundle and ground tissue, in which the fibrous sheath in the vascular bundle is the enhancement phase³⁴ with a large aspect ratio and thick cell wall, and it almost decides all the mechanical properties of bamboo.

When the moso bamboo is under loads such as parallel-to-grain compression, tension and perpendicular-to-grain compression, the vascular bundle and ground tissue can bear loads at the same time. When local tissue in the section is destroyed, the rest tissues can continue to bear loads. While the vascular bundle is the main part for bearing loads,³⁵ and the basic density of the moso bamboo increases with the increase of the distribution density of the vascular bundle. Therefore, the larger the section density of the bamboo, the higher the section strength. Thus, parallel-to-grain compressive strength, tensile strength, shear strength, bending strength and perpendicular-to-grain compressive strength of internode of bamboo are all in positive relationship with density.

When the moso bamboo is under perpendicular-to-grain tension, the perpendicular-to-grain mechanical performance of vascular bundle is poor, so the basic system bears the main load. Although the basic density of the moso bamboo increases with the distribution density of the vascular bundle, once there is a slight separation between basic system fibers, the broken section will spread quickly along the longitudinal direction until the whole section peels or slides. Therefore, the tensile mechanical properties of node transverse grain is in negative relationship with density.

As for the perpendicular-to-grain compressive strength of node, the fiber texture at the node of specimen is more fluffy and disordered compared with other places. When the bamboo is under perpendicular-to-grain compression, the bamboo node of specimen is mostly crushed first. Thus, the bamboo node has a reduction effect on the perpendicular-to-grain compressive property. Specimen density will increase with the elevation of sampling height, but the proportion of the bamboo node in the whole specimen increases as well. Thus, perpendicular-to-grain compressive strength of node of bamboo is in negative relationship with density.

Relationship between mechanical properties

Based on the above analysis, the linear relationship between the mechanical properties and density can be used to derive the relationship among the mechanical properties. Table 4 shows the conversion relationship between mechanical properties of specimens of node and specimens of internode. Table 4 also reflects the quantitative impact of bamboo nodes on mechanical properties of bamboo. Because multiple mechanical properties can not be obtained simultaneously from one mechanical property specimen, so in this paper, the conversion relationships of multiple mechanical properties were derived from the linear fitting relationships between the mechanical property and the density. The conversion formula between mechanical properties is as follows:

M_{2} = η M_{1} + θ

(11)

where M₁ and M₂ are the mechanical property indexes; η and θ are the conversion parameters, whose details are shown in Tables 5 and 6.

Table 4.

Relationship of mechanical properties between node and internodes of Moso bamboo.

Mechanical Performance Index	Node-Internode	Internode-Node
UCS	UCS_N = 1.08UCS_I–3.85	UCS_I = 0.924UCS_N + 3.56
UCE	UCE_N = 1.24UCE_I–2.31	UCE_I = 0.805UCE_N + 1.86
MOR	MOR_N = 1.44MR_I–59.7	MOR_I = 0.695MOR_N + 41.5
MOE	MOE_N = 0.864UCE_I + 2.02	MOE_I = 1.16UCE_N–2.34
USS	USS_N = 0.862USS_I–2.03	USS_I = 1.16USS_N–2.36
UTS	UTS_N = 0.764UTS_I + 26.0	UTS_I = 1.31UTS_N–34.0
UTE	UTE_N = 1.26UTE_I–4.22	UTE_I = 0.796UTE_N + 3.36
CCS	CCS_N = −1.97CCS_I–91.6	CCS_I = −0.507CCS_N + 46.4
CTS	CTS_N = 5.83CTS_I–15.7	CTS_I = 0.171CTS_N + 2.70

Table 5.

Mechanical property conversion parameters of node bamboo specimens.

Parameter	M₂ M₁	UCS_N2	UCE_N2	MOR_N2	MOE_N2	USS_N2	UTS_N2	UTE_N2	CCS_N2	CTS_N2
η	UCS_N1	1	0.382	6.11	0.427	0.2	2.35	0.245	−0.802	−0.670
	UCE_N1	2.61	1	16.0	1.117	0.524	6.14	0.64	−2.10	−1.75
	MOR_N1	0.164	0.063	1	0.07	0.033	0.384	0.04	−0.131	−0.11
	MOE_N1	2.34	0.895	14.3	1	0.469	5.50	0.573	−1.88	−1.57
	USS_N1	4.99	1.91	30.5	2.13	1	11.7	1.22	−4.00	−3.34
	UTS_N1	0.426	0.163	2.60	0.182	0.085	1	0.104	−0.342	−0.285
	UTE_N1	4.08	1.56	25.0	1.75	0.818	9.59	1	−3.28	−2.74
	CCS_N1	−1.25	−0.477	−7.61	−0.532	−0.25	−2.93	−0.305	1	0.835
	CTS_N1	−1.50	−0.571	−9.12	−0.638	−0.299	−3.51	−0.366	1.20	1
θ	UCS_N1	0	−8.44	−240	−8.32	3.58	−3.24	1.44	85.1	46.6
	UCE_N1	22.1	0	−105	1.10	8.00	48.5	6.84	67.4	31.8
	MOR_N1	39.3	6.60	0	8.47	11.5	89.0	11.1	53.6	20.2
	MOE_N1	19.5	−0.987	−121	0	7.49	42.5	6.21	69.5	33.5
	USS_N1	−17.9	−15.3	−350	−16.0	0	−45.2	−2.94	99.5	58.5
	UTS_N1	1.38	−7.91	−232	−7.73	3.86	0	1.78	84.0	45.6
	UTE_N1	−5.87	−10.7	−276	−10.8	2.41	−17.0	0	89.9	50.5
	CCS_N1	106	32.2	408	37.0	24.8	245	27.4	0	−24.5
	CTS_N1	69.5	18.2	185	21.4	17.5	160	18.5	29.4	0

Table 6.

Conversion parameters of mechanical properties of internode bamboo specimens.

Parameter	M₂ M₁	UCS_I2	UCE_I2	MOR_I2	MOE_I2	USS_I2	UTS_I2	UTE_I2	CCS_I2	CTS_I2
η	UCS_I1	1	0.333	4.60	0.535	0.252	3.33	0.211	0.440	−0.124
	UCE_I1	3.00	1	13.8	1.61	0.755	9.97	0.633	1.320	−0.373
	MOR_I1	0.217	0.073	1	0.116	0.055	0.723	0.046	0.096	−0.027
	MOE_I1	1.87	0.623	8.59	1	0.470	6.22	0.394	0.823	−0.232
	USS_I1	3.97	1.33	18.3	2.13	1	13.2	0.838	1.75	−0.494
	UTS_I1	0.301	0.100	1.38	0.161	0.076	1	0.063	0.132	−0.037
	UTE_I1	4.74	1.58	21.8	2.54	1.19	15.8	1	2.09	−0.589
	CCS_I14	2.27	0.757	10.4	1.22	0.572	7.55	0.479	1	−0.282
	CTS_I1	−8.05	−2.68	−37.0	−4.31	−2.03	−26.8	−1.70	−3.54	1
θ	UCS_I1	0	−6.12	−142	−13.9	0.902	−50.1	3.75	1.70	11.1
	UCE_I1	18.4	0	−57.4	−4.04	5.52	10.9	7.63	9.78	8.84
	MOR_I1	30.8	4.16	0	2.63	8.67	52.4	10.3	15.3	7.29
	MOE_I1	25.9	2.52	−22.6	0	7.43	36.1	9.22	13.1	7.90
	USS_I1	−3.59	−7.32	−158	−15.8	0	−62.0	2.99	0.119	11.6
	UTS_I1	15.1	−1.10	−72.5	−5.80	4.70	0	6.93	8.33	9.25
	UTE_I1	−17.8	−12.1	−224	−23.4	−3.57	−109	0	−6.13	13.3
	CCS_I1	−3.86	−7.41	−160	−15.9	−0.068	−62.9	2.94	0	11.6

Discussion

Moso bamboo has been widely used in bamboo structures because of its highest yield and economic value. A large amount of bamboo and bamboo text is needed in bamboo structural engineering due to the discreteness of mechanical properties of bamboo. It will take a lot of time and cost to make specimens with high precision and do multiple experiments. So the engineering practicability will be restricted by factors above.

The bamboo density test is suitable for engineering applications because it does not need a highly precise measurement of specimen size while predicting the mechanical properties, and the test method is simple and high-efficient. A lot of time and cost of material testing can be saved in actual engineering. In reference,²² the predicted values of UTS_I and UCE_I were 130.6 MPa and 10.6 GPa by substituting the measured ρ into the prediction formula in this paper, and the measured UTS_I and UCE_I values were 130 MPa and 10.56 GPa. As shown in Table 7, the absolute error between the predicted value and measured value of UTS_I was 0.6, and the relative error was 0.46%. The absolute error between the predicted value and measured value of UCE_I was 0.6, and the relative error was 0.46%, indicating that the prediction model proposed in this paper behaves well in predicting the mechanical properties of Moso bamboo.

Table 7.

The difference between the experimental value and calculated value.

Mechanical property parameter	Predicted value	Measured value	Absolute error	Relative error
UTS_I	130.6	130	0.6	0.46%
UCE_I	10.6	10.56	0.04	0.38%

Conclusions

This paper systematically carried out tests for mechanical properties of bamboo materials and analyzed the relationship between the mechanical properties and density, and put forward the prediction formula and conversion method of mechanical properties of bamboo. The main conclusions are as follows:

The mechanical properties of Moso bamboo have a significant anisotropic characteristic, especially for the parallel-to-grain tensile properties, bending properties. Performances of parallel-to-grain compressive strength, tensile strength and bending strength are significantly better than Performances of perpendicular-to-grain mechanical properties. Moso bamboo is an ideal renewable green building material with the advantages of high strength, high stiffness and high ratio of strength to weight.

The density of Moso bamboo gradually increases along the height of the bamboo stem. The parallel-to-grain compressive resistance, parallel-to-grain tensile resistance, parallel-to-grain shear resistance, parallel-to-grain bending resistance, and perpendicular-to-grain compressive resistances of internode are positively correlated with the density. In contrast, the perpendicular-to-grain compressive resistance of node and perpendicular-to-grain tensile resistance are negatively correlated with the density. There is a strong correlation between mechanical properties and the density of Moso bamboo, which can be fitted and used to predict the mechanical properties of Moso bamboo.

The conversion parameters of the mechanical properties are derived from the relationship between mechanical properties and density of moso bamboo. Those parameters can provide references for the performance evaluation of bamboo materials and the prediction of mechanical properties of bamboo in actual engineering.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and valuable suggestions.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported in part by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFC0703500).

ORCID iD

Pengcheng Liu

References

Lianto

Trisno

Husin

, et al. Changing the face of modern architecture: bamboo as a construction material. Case study: Green school, Bali – Indonesia. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 2019; 508(1): 012023.

Crolla

. Building indeterminacy modelling – the ‘ZCB Bamboo Pavilion’ as a case study on nonstandard construction from natural materials. Vis Eng 2017; 5(1): 15.

Pollock

. Kengo Kuma’s signature screens, deployed inside and out, create a serene oasis for viewing works in Tokyo’s Suntory Museum of Art. Archit Rec 2007; 195(11): 138–141.

Peng

. Study on the current situation of bamboo building in Enshi area. Urban Architecture 2021; 18(12): 69–72. (in Chinese).

Fei

Sha

, et al. Construction technology of large-span circular bamboo arch structure – case analysis of Bamboo and Rattan Pavilion of 2019 Beijing International Horticultural Exhibition. World Bamboo Rattan 2020; 19(6): 14–20. (in Chinese).

Chen

, et al. Flexural strength and ductility of moso bamboo. Constr Build Mater 2020; 246: 118418.

Liu

Jiang

Zhang

, et al. Effect of fiber on tensile properties of Moso bamboo. BioResources 2014; 9(4): 6888–6898.

Fitriana

Tsai

. Safety assessment of moso bamboo column under fire by using bamboo as protection layer. IPTEK J Proc Ser 2017; (3).

Wei

Zhou

Chen

, et al. Bending flexibility of Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys edulis) with functionally graded structure. Materials 2019; 12(12): 2007.

10.

Abdul Khalil

Bhat

Jawaid

, et al. Bamboo fibre reinforced biocomposites: a review. Mater Des 2012; 42: 353–368.

11.

Deng

Chen

Wang

, et al. Variation of parallel-to-grain compression and shearing properties in Moso bamboo culm (Phyllostachys pubescens). BioResources 2016; 11(1): 1784–1795.

12.

Dixon

Ahvenainen

Aijazi

, et al. Comparison of the structure and flexural properties of Moso, Guadua and Tre Gai bamboo. Constr Build Mater 2015; 90: 11–17.

13.

Chen

Cheng

Wang

, et al. Erratum to: tensile properties of bamboo in different sizes. J Wood Sci 2016; 62(2): 213–213.

14.

Liu

Zhou

Jiang

, et al. Fundamental research on tensile properties of Phyllostachys bamboo. Results Mater 2020; 7: 100076.

15.

Chung

Wang

. Erratum to: effects of peeling and steam-heating treatment on basic properties of two types of bamboo culms (Phyllostachys makinoi and Phyllostachys pubescens). J Wood Sci 2017; 63(5): 483–483.

16.

Zhou

Wei

Smith

, et al. Evaluation of uniformity of bamboo bundle veneer and bamboo bundle laminated veneer lumber (BLVL). Forests 2019; 10(10): 921.

17.

Lei

Wang

, et al. Experimental investigation on short concrete columns reinforced by bamboo scrimber under axial compression loads. Adv Civil Eng 2020; 2020: 1–12.

18.

Chung

Wang

. Effects of peeling and steam-heating treatment on mechanical properties and dimensional stability of oriented Phyllostachys makinoi and Phyllostachys pubescens scrimber boards. J Wood Sci 2018; 64(5): 625–634.

19.

Wei

Duan

, et al. Flexural performance of bamboo scrimber beams strengthened with fiber-reinforced polymer. Constr Build Mater 2017; 142: 66–82.

20.

Nurhazwani

Jawaid

Tahir

, et al. Hybrid particleboard made from bamboo (Dendrocalamus asper) veneer waste and rubberwood (Hevea brasilienses). BioResources 2015; 11(1): 306–323.

21.

Sá Ribeiro

Miranda

IPA

. Bending strength and nondestructive evaluation of structural bamboo. Constr Build Mater 2017; 146: 38–42.

22.

Dixon

Gibson

. The structure and mechanics of Moso bamboo material. J R Soc Interface 2014; 11(99): 20140321.

23.

Javadian

Smith

IFC

Saeidi

, et al. Mechanical properties of bamboo through measurement of culm physical properties for composite fabrication of structural concrete reinforcement. Front Mater 2019; 6: 15.

24.

Bahtiar

Imanullah

Hermawan

, et al. Structural grading of three sympodial bamboo culms (Hitam, Andong, and Tali) subjected to axial compressive load. Eng Struct 2019; 181: 233–245.

25.

Cui

Leung

. The effect of fiber density on strength capacity of bamboo. Mater Lett 2004; 58(21): 2595–2598.

26.

Liu

Xiang

Zhou

, et al. Prediction of mechanical properties of structural bamboo and its relationship with growth parameters. J Renew Mater 2021; 9(12): 2223–2239.

27.

Chinese Standards Agency (CSA). Testing methods for physical and mechanical properties of bamboo used in building. JG/T199-2007; 2007 (in Chinese).

28.

ISO. [ISO] International Standards, bamboo – determination of physical and mechanical properties – part I: requirements ISO 22157–1:2004 (E). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization, 2004.

29.

. Calculation of standard IQR and its application example in laboratory capability verification. China New Technol New Prod 2012; 3: 41–42. (in Chinese).

30.

Tian

Jing

Hao

. Research and engineering application of modern bamboo structure. Eng Mech 2019; 36(5): 1–18. 27. (in Chinese).

31.

Ruiz-Aquino

González-Peña

Valdez-Hernández

, et al. Mechanical properties of wood of two Mexican oaks: relationship to selected physical properties. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 2018; 76(1): 69–77.

32.

Feng

Sun

, et al. Study on component distribution and orientation microscopic imaging of Phyllostachys pubescens parenchyma cells. Spectrosc Spect Anal 2020; 40(9): 2957–2961. (in Chinese).

33.

Shang

Sun

Jiang

, et al. Sectional morphology and variation of Phyllostachys pubescens vascular bundles. For Sci 2012; 48(12): 16–21. (in Chinese).

34.

Yuan

Zhang

, et al. Effects of vascular bundle distribution and structure on macroscopic compression properties of bamboo. J Cent S Univ For Technol 2019; 39(6): 121–127. (in Chinese).

35.

Meng

Feng

, et al. Prediction model of bamboo axial compressive strength based on apparent properties. Ind Constr 2020; 50(4): 71–75. (in Chinese).

Test and prediction of mechanical properties of Moso bamboo

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Material and method

Preparation of specimens

Mechanical property test

Measurement of density and moisture content

Adjustment of the index value of property

Outliers handling

Results and discussion

Eigenvalue statistics

The relationship between mechanical properties and density

Relationship between mechanical properties

Discussion

Conclusions

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References