Abstract
The use of small diameter whole-culm (bars) and/or split bamboo (a.k.a. splints or round strips) has often been proposed as an alternative to relatively expensive reinforcing steel in reinforced concrete. The motivation for such replacement is typically cost—bamboo is readily available in many tropical and sub-tropical locations, whereas steel reinforcement is relatively more expensive—and more recently, the drive to find more sustainable alternatives in the construction industry. This review addresses such ‘bamboo-reinforced concrete’ and assesses its structural and environmental performance as an alternative to steel reinforced concrete. A prototype three bay portal frame, that would not be uncommon in regions of the world where bamboo-reinforced concrete may be considered, is used to illustrate bamboo reinforced concrete design and as a basis for a life cycle assessment of the same. The authors conclude that, although bamboo is a material with extraordinary mechanical properties, its use in bamboo-reinforced concrete is an ill-considered concept, having significant durability, strength and stiffness issues, and does not meet the environmentally friendly credentials often attributed to it.
Highlights
The mechanical properties of bamboo and its availability in developing regions has led to its empirical use as reinforcement in concrete structures
While the authors are recommending against the use of bamboo-reinforced concrete in primary structural members, certain related applications may be practical provided issues of durability, dimensional stability and bond between bamboo and concrete are addressed as discussed in this work
The authors propose that bamboo reinforced concrete is an ill-considered concept
Summary
The mechanical properties of bamboo and its availability in developing regions has led to its empirical use as reinforcement in concrete structures. Bamboo is a typically hollow, anisotropic, natural material with high variability of physical and mechanical properties across the section and along the culm. Some tests of small ‘clear’ (i.e., defect free) specimens of bamboo have reported ultimate tensile strengths on the order of 250 MPa (e.g., Zhou et al [6] and Lu et al [7]) Such results are not representative of the strength that can be mobilised in a full or partial culm: characteristic strength on the order of 40 MPa and safe working stress for design on the order of 16 MPa— similar to hardwood timber [1]. The carbon footprint of steel is significantly greater than that of bamboo, with 2.2–2.8 kgCO2/kg (equivalent kg of CO2 per kg of material) for medium carbon steel [9] and 0.25 kgCO2/kg for bamboo [10]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
