Bamboo reinforced concrete: a critical review

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.     

Ratcheting in a nonlinear viscoelastic adhesive

Uniaxial time-dependent creep and cycled stress behavior of a standard and toughened film adhesive were studied experimentally. Both adhesives exhibited progressive accumulation of strain from an applied cycled stress. Creep tests were fit to a viscoelastic power law model at three different applied stresses which showed nonlinear response in both adhesives. A third order nonlinear power law model with a permanent strain component was used to describe the creep behavior of both adhesives and to predict creep recovery and the accumulation of strain due to cycled stress. Permanent strain was observed at high stress but only up to 3% of the maximum strain. Creep recovery was under predicted by the nonlinear model, while cycled stress showed less than 3% difference for the first cycle but then over predicted the response above 1000 cycles by 4–14% at high stress. The results demonstrate the complex response observed with structural adhesives, and the need for further analytical advancements to describe their behavior.