Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 1063–1069

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Composites: Part B
journal homepage: [Link]/locate/compositesb

Development of layered laminate bamboo composite and their

mechanical properties
C.S. Verma ⇑, V.M. Chariar
AICTE, Chanderlok Building, Janpath, New Delhi, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Dry bamboo culms of Dendrocalamus strictus were processed into thin laminas and cold pressed using
Received 28 June 2011 epoxy resin to produce layered bamboo epoxy composite laminates. Mechanical properties of layered
Received in revised form 19 November 2011 bamboo–epoxy composite laminates including tensile strength, compressive strength, flexural strength
Accepted 30 November 2011
and screw holding capability have been evaluated. Mode of failure were identified at macroscopic level
Available online 8 December 2011
as suggested in ASTM standard and their mechanism were examined at microscopic level using SEM anal-
ysis of fractured surfaces under different type of tests.
Keywords:
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Laminate
A. Wood
B. Mechanical properties

1. Introduction Institute), District Gurgaon (Haryana), India. Moisture content of

green bamboo collected were 37% at the time of felling (Digital
Bamboo is fast becoming a promising wood substitute and one moisture meter model MD-4G). Moisture content is then reduced
of the chief reasons for this is that as usable bamboo can be har- to 10–12% by sundry. This was done to ensure better adhesion be-
vested in 3–4 years from the time of plantation as opposed to tim- tween bamboo laminae and the epoxy resin. A full length bamboo
ber which takes decades [1,2]. While there are several publications culms were labeled at nodes and internodes as shown in Fig. 1.
on characterization of bamboo composites based on bamboo fibers Bamboo culm was cut length-wise into six slats using radial
in polymeric matrix [3–10] very few reports on evaluation of bam- hydraulic splitting machine. Each slat was sliced using sliver cut-
boo composites based on laminas exist in the literature [11,12]. The ting machine for getting slivers from outer, middle and inner
tensile and compressive properties such as strength and modulus of regions as shown in Fig. 1. Slivers prepared from outer regions
fibrous composites decreases with increase of angle of fibers from were processed on two side planning machine to remove some
0° [13]. The modified epoxy was prepared to get improved impact amount of outer skin which is weak in adhesion. Lamina specimens
and adhesive properties by different techniques [14,15]. Conven- were prepared from outer slivers only for fabricating layered lam-
tional screw yielded the maximum screw withdrawal resistance inate bamboo composites (LLBCs). It is noted that width of laminas
in Oak, followed by stone pine, black pine and fir [16,17]. Mechan- comes out from bamboo culms were generally less due to circular
ical and physical properties of woods such as teak, deodar, and kail cross section. Therefore laminas were butt joined using adhesive to
are good for structural purposes [18–24]. Mechanical properties of make laminates/plies with larger width. The liquid diglycidyl ether
bamboo based laminates need to be investigated thoroughly so that of bisphenol–A type (Araldite LY 556) with curing agent/hardener
the full potential of bamboo as a functionally graded composite triethylene tetramine (TETA, HY 951) was used as adhesive.
could be utilized. This publication reports the mechanical proper- Density and curing time at room temperature of adhesive are
ties evaluation of 5-layered bamboo epoxy laminates. 1.3 g/cm3 and 24 h respectively. The suggested ratio of araldite
and hardener used are 100:23 by weight. The said adhesive will
2. Materials and methods provide a low-viscosity, solvent free room temperature curing lam-
inating system. Due to the very low cure shrinkage, Araldite LY 556
2.1. Fabrication of LLBCs with hardener HY 951 based laminates will be dimensionally
stable, free from internal stresses and excellent water resistance
Four year old green bamboo (Dendrocalamus strictus species) [14,15]. Tensile, compressive and flexural strength of Araldite
culms were obtained from TERI Gram (Tata Energy and Research given in Huntsman parts manufacturing selector guide are
30–35 MPa, 110–120 MPa and 85–90 MPa respectively and their
⇑ Corresponding author. Fax: +91 11 2324193. modulus are 3–10 GPa, 2.5–2.8 GPa and 3 GPa respectively. The
E-mail address: csvnsitd@[Link] (C.S. Verma). laminae were butt joined using said adhesive to make one laminate

1359-8368/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2011.11.065
1064 C.S. Verma, V.M. Chariar / Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 1063–1069

Fig. 3. The bamboo epoxy laminated composite (LLBC).

Fig. 1. Bamboo culms and location of laminas on slats.

Fig. 2. Die from M.S. plate.

of larger width. To make first layer of laminate, laminae were

arranged systematically and placed over on die cavity of 250 mm
 100 mm  15 mm (Fig. 2) using adhesive for butt joined. One
piece of lamina (rectangular light thick surface shown in Fig. 5,
which is microscopic image) is butted against another and affixed
with adhesive (rectangular dark thin surface shown in Fig. 5, which
is microscopic image). To avoid adhesion between epoxy and die,
polyesters sheet were used. Top surface of first layer of laminate
was then coated with adhesive for interfacial bonding. Then other
laminas were placed over on first laminate to make another layer
of laminate. In this manner five layers of laminate/ply were stacked
together to form one sample of unidirectional LLBCs. This laminate
was then sandwiched between the plates of die set by applying
pressure of 10 kg/cm2 (2.5 T) using UTM (100 T). This ensured that
the slivers were straight during solidification of adhesive and the
excess adhesive was squeezed out. The sample was left for 24 h
at room temperature for cross linking of epoxy. Surfaces of speci-
mens were cleaned with acetone. The sample obtained was sub-
jected to sand grinding from all sides so as to obtain smooth
surfaces as shown in Fig. 3. Using said suggested methods, follow-
Fig. 4. (A) Sketch of LLBCs specimens with different lamina configuration for tensile
ing types of samples with different lamina configurations/angles testing, (B) sketch of LLBCs specimens with different lamina configuration for
have also been prepared. compressive testing, (C) sketch of LLBCs specimens with different lamina config-
uration for flexural testing, (D) sketch of LLBCs specimens with different lamina
1. Sample A [0°/0°/0°/0°/0°]. 2. Sample B [0°/45°/0°/45°/0°]. configuration for screw withdrawal testing.
3. Sample C [0°/90°/0°/90°/0°].
standards D3039M and D7264 for tensile and flexural testing
Five test specimens were prepared from each type of LLBCs respectively where specimens were in the form of constant rectan-
samples respectively using cross cutting and grinding as per ASTM gular cross section of 250 mm overall length, 16 mm wide with a
 C.S. Verma, V.M. Chariar / Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 1063–1069 1065

Further another specimens of LLBCs were prepared for evaluat-

ing screw holding capability for different lamina configuration as
per IS:1708(P-15)-86 guidelines as shown in Fig. 4D. The screws
were installed according to IS:1708(P-15)-86 guidelines. The shape
of laminates was made uniform by using medium fine sandpaper
(grade 180) where sanding motion was ±45°.

2.2. Equation to determine amount of adhesive required and

fabrication cost of LLBCs

The empirical equation derived for determining volume (Ve) of

adhesives required (trial and error method) during fabrication of
LLBCs is given below:

Ve ¼ ðn þ 1Þ  Lp  Bp  Te þ nðBp =Bs Þ  Lp  T s  Te

where n is the number of layers, Lp is the length of ply, Bp width of

Fig. 5. Cross sectional image of LLBCs cube.
ply, Te thickness of adhesive coated, Bs and Ts width and thickness
of laminae respectively. Five layers laminates has six lap surfaces
out of which four are interfacial and two are free surfaces i.e. top
Table 1 and bottom surfaces. Top and bottom surfaces should coat with
Process used to evaluate mechanical properties.
adhesive to prevent shrinkage, borer attack and to make water-
Mechanical Machine used and Cross head speed (mm/ proof. Five layer laminas has approximately thirty abutting sur-
properties capacity min) faces. Here abutting surfaces dimensions was 250 mm  2 mm for
Tensile Zwick/Roell UTM (25 T) 2 single laminae. Then total volume of adhesive required for a sample
Compressive Instron UTM (10 T) 2 of dimension of 250 mm  100 mm  10 mm when single lamina
Flexural Instron UTM (5 T) 2 thickness was 2 mm will be approximately 33,000 mm3. Thickness
Screw holding UTM (5 T) 2
capacity
of adhesive is 0.19–0.23 mm. Thicknesses of adhesive used in LLBCs
have been seen (as shown in Fig. 5) from Nikon Microscope. Thick-
nesses of adhesive were measured with the help of image J soft-
ware. Thus total amount of adhesive required will be less than
thickness of 10 mm where thickness of laminas were 2 mm each as
60 g (density 1.3 g/cm3). This amount of adhesive have also been
shown in Fig. 4A and C respectively. To ensure that the failure
confirmed by experiments. Thickness of adhesive coated can be re-
should not occur in or near the grip region during testing, the
duced which will reduce the cost of LLBCs.
thickness of laminate sample specimens was increased near the
Cost of bamboo culms, epoxy and hardener used were $0.094/
ends by using small tabs which were made from a bamboo itself
kg (Rs.1 = $0.02352), $3.53/kg and $1.42/kg respectively Then
and attached at the ends of the laminate specimens by using aral-
approximate cost calculated for fabrication of LLBCs was $23.68
dite as an adhesive. Tabs were 50 mm long, 16 mm wide and
per cubic foot (except labor and machining cost). Labor and
1.5 mm thickness with bevel angle of 30–45°. The tabs were made
machining cost for one sample is supposed to be $3.528. Then total
tapered to reduce stress concentration near the grips. To ensure
cost of LLBCs will be $27.22 per cubic foot.
good bonding of tabs, pressure (10 kg/cm2) is applied between
two plates using UTM. After 24 h of curing, the specimens were
ready for tensile testing. For compressive test, specimens were pre- 3. Testing
pared as per ASTM standard D3410 where specimens were also in
the form of rectangular cross section of 120 mm overall length, Five specimens for all type of lamina configuration/angles of
16 mm wide and thickness of 5 mm with 1 mm lamina thickness LLBCs as shown in Fig. 4A–D were tested to evaluate their tensile,
as shown in Fig. 4B. compressive, and flexural properties in addition to screw holding

Table 2
Average mechanical properties of LLBCs with different lamina angles.

Lamina configuration Tensile Compressive Flexural Screw holding power

Max. stress Max. modulus Max. stress Max. modulus Max. stress Max. modulus Load on face Load on edge
(MPa) (GPa) (MPa) (GPa) (MPa) (GPa) (N) (N)
Sample A [0°/0°/0°/ Max. 240 17.2 82.5 17.1 127 15.6 2490 2615
0°/0°] Min. 191 14.3 78 12 125.3 12.3 2449 2592
Mean 205 16 80 15 128.4 13.28 2470 2603
S.D. 19.85 1.28 1.84 2.17 3.04 1.68 19.11 9.53
Sample B [0°/45°/0°/ Max. 232 17 71.9 15.2 74.17 12.4 2657 1943
45°/0°] Min. 175 13 48.6 12.6 58.99 8.3 2601 1905
Mean 188 14.5 55 13.2 68.28 10.51 2636 1920
S.D. 24.66 2.46 9.6 1.7 5.51 1.66 21.90 17.66
Sample C [0°/90°/0°/ Max. 188 16 78.9 16.4 115.6 15.7 1535 1333
90°/0°] Min. 160 12 49.5 12.3 89.6 11.6 1498 1309
Mean 169 14.3 66 14 105.74 13.46 1520 1323
S.D. 11.26 1.52 11.90 2.05 11.25 1.89 15.16 9.3
Average of samples A, B and C 187.3 14.9 67 14.06 100.8 12.42 2208.6 1948.7
1066 C.S. Verma, V.M. Chariar / Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 1063–1069

A: (0/0/0/0/0)
300 B:(0/45/0/45/0)
(A)
Tensile Stress(MPa)

250 C;(0/90/0/90/0)

200
150
100
A
50
C B
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Strain (mm/mm)
90
(B) A:(0/0/0/0/0)
Compressive Stress (MPa)

80
70 B:(0/45/0/45/0)
60 C:(0/90/0/90/0) Fig. 7. Fractured specimens under tensile loading.

50 A
40
30
20
10
C B
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Strain (mm/mm)
140
(C)
120
Flexural Stress (MPa)

A:(0/0/0/0/0)
100 B:(0/45/0/45/0)
A
80 C:(0/90/0/90/0)
C
60
B
40

20

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Strain (mm/mm) Fig. 8. Fractured specimens under compressive loading.

Fig. 6. (A) Tensile stress–strain curves for LLBCs for different laminas configuration 4. Results and discussion
under tensile loading, (B) compressive stress–strain curves for LLBCs for different
laminas configuration under compressive loading, (C) flexural stress–strain curves
for LLBCs for different laminas configuration under flexural loading. Fig. 6A shows that tensile stress increased linearly with increase
in strain until point of ultimate load under tensile loading. Above
this point, the stress–strain curve showed sharp, staggered de-
creases in load and brittle fracture. Laminate under a tensile load-
capability on machines as given in Table 1. For tensile and com- ing, a kink is observed in the stress–strain graph, indicating the FPF
pressive tests, the specimens were carefully positioned at the cen- load and the curve continues with increasing load, but with a smal-
ter of the cross-head with its end faces exactly perpendicular to the ler slope, signifying a reduced stiffness in the direction of the load.
longitudinal axis to get the more accuracy. For flexural strength Tensile fracture of unidirectional LLBC is mainly longitudinal crack-
test, support span to thickness ratio was taken as 20:1 so that fail- ing of fibers. In some specimens, partial damage occurred when the
ure occurs at the outer surface of the specimen, due only to the tensile stress reached 80% of ultimate stress. The material of LLBCs
bending moment. Loading nose and supports were aligned and fi- is not homogenous but has an orthotropic property due to which
nally, the three point bend tests were performed. Mechanical prop- fibers are pulled out from the matrix. Fig. 6B shows that compres-
erties and their stress–strain curves were obtained from the sive stress increased almost linear with increase in strain until
automatic computerized chart recorder with the help of software point of ultimate stress under compressive loading. Above this
called testXpert software inbuilt in UTM machines for above said point, the stress–strain curve showed non-linear segments. During
tests. fracture, compressive stress of LLBCs rapidly decreased with buck-
For measuring screw holding capability, conventional screw ling of specimens.
was driven into the LLBC specimens, perpendicular to the material The stress–strain curves under tensile and compressive loading
surfaces (Fig. 4D). Load was applied to pull the screw with the help are regular up to ultimate point where strength of sample A is
of UTM. Loads were measured with the help of dial indicator in greater than sample B and of sample B than sample C because in
built in machine. sample A, all fibers of laminas are in unidirectional and cross link-
The summarized tests results of above mechanical properties in ing of the polymer is continuous whereas in samples B and C, all
addition to screw holding capability of LLBCs are presented in Ta- fibers are not unidirectional and cross linking is not continuous.
ble 2. Typical stress–strain curves for LLBCs under tensile, com- Thus it is concluded that strength and modulus of LLBCs decreases
pressive and flexural loading are shown in Fig. 6A–C respectively. with increase in lamina angle under tensile as well as compressive
 C.S. Verma, V.M. Chariar / Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 1063–1069 1067

Fig. 9. Fractured specimens under flexural loading.

Fig. 11. (A) SEM photograph (72) of fractured lateral surface under compressive
loading and (B) SEM photograph (600) of fractured lateral surface under
compressive loading.

loading. According to the Tsai–Hill criteria [13], the tensile and

compressive properties of composites continuously decrease as
the angle of orientation of the fibers increases from 0°. In this re-
port, fibers direction in all laminas are same i.e. unidirectional
but laminas angle are different in all type of LLBCs samples. Tensile
and compressive strength is less in sample C than sample B and is
less in sample B than sample A due to increase in orientation of
middle layers fibers from 0°. The tensile strength is three times
than compressive strength along fiber direction but modulus is
nearly same. Fig. 6C shows flexural stress–strain curves for sample
type A, B and C under flexural loading which indicate that the nat-
ure of curve is similar for samples A and C where flexural strength
of sample A is greater than sample C and of sample C is greater
than sample B but sample B predicts more toughness compare to
sample A and sample C on flexural stress–strain curve. From the
curves it is observed that behavior of the samples A and C compos-
ites is close to linear segment and above ultimate stress an irregu-
lar, staggered decrease in stress was observed. Bending fractures
concentrated near the middle of the test specimen where load
was applied and bending fracture was brittle.
Screw holding capability of LLBCs on their edge decreases with
Fig. 10. (A) SEM photograph (70) of fractured lateral surface under tensile loading increase in lamina angles as the number of fibers to hold screw de-
and (B) SEM photograph (180) of fractured lateral surface under tensile loading. creases from sample A to sample C but on face, sample B predicts
1068 C.S. Verma, V.M. Chariar / Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 1063–1069

Fig. 13. Expected LLBCs with increased volume.

Table 3
Mode of failures under different loading conditions.

Loading ASTM standards/sections Mode of failures identified in

condition used for codes terms of codes
Tensile D3039/11.9 DGM, DGT, GGM, GGT, GGB,
MGM, MGT, LGM, AGM
Compressive D3410/11.10 TAT, MGM, AGM
Flexural D7264/11.7 CBT, TTB, MUV, MBM, BBB

Table 4
Comparison of mechanical properties and cost of LLBCs with teak wood.

Properties Layered laminate bamboo Teak wood at 10–12%

composite at 10–12% moisture content
moisture content
Tensile strength 169–205 MPa 95–155 MPa
(MPa)
Compressive 55–88 MPa 48–91 MPa
strength
(MPa)
Flexural strength 68.27–128.4 MPa 86–170 MPa
(MPa)
Screw holding 1520–2636 N/1323–2603 N 1855 N/1420 N
capability (N)
on face/edge
Fig. 12. (A) SEM photograph (70) of fractured lateral surface under flexural Density (kg/m3) 715–890 kg/m3 550–604 kg/m3
loading and (B) SEM photograph (500) of fractured lateral surface under flexural Cost of product $27.22–35.28 per cubic foot $58.8–94.08 per cubic
loading. foot according to quality
of teak wood
more screw holding capability than samples A and C. Average Properties of teak wood are from available literature [19–21].
screw holding power on face was significantly larger than that of
edge. As a result, fastening is not normally recommended for edge source of the cracks and their subsequent propagation and
but for some purposes edge fastening may be necessary. enlargement.
Some fractured specimens of tensile, compressive and flexural Flexural failure on the tension surface of specimens was due to
tests are shown in Figs. 7–9 respectively. Under tensile loading, it matrix and fiber breakage while on the compressive surface was
was observed that some specimens start to fail at edge, some at due to buckling of specimens. In some fractured specimens, disl-
grips and some at multimode. For all layer of laminate, first matrix aminations were also observed in fractured specimens due to frac-
(bamboo as well as adhesive) failure occurs followed by fibers fail- ture of resin during bending (Fig. 9). The SEM photographs
ure with metallic sound where fracture propagates spontaneously (Fig. 12A and B) of fractured lateral surface of specimens tested
and the first layer breaks. Further it is observed that among five in flexure shows delamination along with tension and compression
layers, any one layer first break then propagates to other layers in the upper and lower portions respectively.
(Fig. 7). The SEM photographs (Fig. 10A and B) of fractured lateral Failure modes of fractured specimens of LLBCs have been iden-
surface shows the source of the cracks and their subsequently tified using a standard failure identification codes (three parts)
propagation and enlargement. The fiber pull out indicate that there used in ASTM standards. The summarized identification of failure
were perfect bonding between bamboo and adhesive. modes under different loading conditions are presented in Table 3.
Compressive failure was attributed by microbuckling sur-
rounded by delamination. The delaminated portions spread to
the undamaged areas of the laminate by a combination of delam- 5. Comparison and advantages
ination buckling and growth, the buckling further enhancing the
growth of damaged area. The culmination of this last event is the Comparision of LLBCs with teak wood on the basis of mechanical
complete loss of stiffness of specimens (Fig. 8). The SEM photo- properties and cost incurred are presented in Table 4 where proper-
graphs (Fig. 11A and B) of fractured lateral surface shows the ties of LLBCs are as par of teak wood and even fabrication cost is less
 C.S. Verma, V.M. Chariar / Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 1063–1069 1069

than that of teak wood. As compare to naturally provided bamboo IIT Delhi and lab in charge, Material Testing Lab and central work-
culms, LLBC’s is more usable in terms of building and general pur- shop, NSIT, New Delhi, Delhi test house, Azadpur, New Delhi, Poly-
pose material because there is possibility to increase the volume mer Science Lab of IIT Delhi (SEM analysis) for assistance rendered
of LLBCs in all direction as shown in Fig. 13 by increasing number in testing.
of layers using suitable equipments which is in solid form like
woods. Further thickness and shape of the LLBCs can be tailored References
during fabrication to meet specific requirement. Use of bamboo as
structural purposes in place of wood could also help in prevention [1] Lakkad SC, Patel JM. Mechanical properties of bamboo, a natural composite.
Fiber Sci Technol 1980;14:319–22.
of deforestation because bamboo is useful in 3–4 years inspite of [2] Amada S, Ichikawa Y, Munekata T, Nagase Y, Shimizu K. Fiber texture and
30–40 years in case of wood such as kail, deodar and teak. Defores- mechanical graded structure of bamboo. Composites Part B 1997;28:13–20.
tation of wood causes serious local environmental problem and [3] Jain S, Kumar R. Mechanical behavior of bamboo and bamboo composites. J
Mater Sci 1992;27:4598–604.
possibly relates to the climate change in the world. Like teak wood, [4] Okubo K, Toru F, Yuzo Y. Development of bamboo based polymer composites
surface of LLBCs could be smooth for esthetic purposes by surface and their mechanical properties. Composites Part A 2004;35:377–83.
sanding, policing and finally by ultraviolet finishing. Furthermore, [5] Thwe MM, Liao K. Durability of bamboo–glass fiber reinforced polymer matrix
hybrid composites. Compos Sci Technol 2003;63:375–87.
use of bamboo and technology for fabrication of LLBCs could help [6] Kinoshita H, Koichikaizu, Mikifakuda. Development of green composites
to improve economy of rural people. consists of wood chips, bamboo fibers and biodegradable adhesive. Compos
Part B: Eng 2009;40(7):607–12.
[7] Shibata S, Yongca, Fukumoto I. Flexural modulus of unidirectional and random
6. Conclusions composites made from biodegradable resin and bamboo and kanaf fibers.
Composites Part A 2008:9–15.
1. Laminas can be used for fabrication of LLBCs of different lamina [8] Jindal UC. Development and testing of bamboo–fibers reinforced plastic
composites. J. Compos Mater 1986;20:19–29.
configurations using adhesive. An empirical expression is [9] Chen X, Geo Q, Mi Y. Bamboo fiber-reinforced polypropylene composites: a
derived and used for determining amount of adhesive required study of mechanical properties. J Appl Polym Sci 1999;69(10):1891–9.
per sample of LLBCs which is verified by experiments. [10] Rajulu AV, Baksh SA, Reddy GR, Chary KN. Chemical resistance and tensile
properties of short bamboo fiber reinforced epoxy composites. J Reinf Plast
2. Tensile and compressive properties of LLBCs decreases with Compos 1998;17:1507–11.
increase in lamina angle. A combination of different factors [11] Amada S, Untao S. Fracture properties of bamboo. Composites Part B
could be used to decide the application of bamboo laminates 2000;32:451–9.
[12] Shin FG, Xian XJ, Yipp MW. Analysis of the mechanical properties and micro-
because mechanical properties were affected by the lamina structure of bamboo–epoxy composites. J Mater Sci 1989;24:3489–90.
configuration. [13] Jones RM. Mechanics of composite materials. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975,
3. The mechanical properties evaluated of the LLBCs are resem- 301-3: 73-83.
[14] Samata BC, Maity T, Dalai S, Banthia AK. Mechanical properties of modified
bling with the properties of the teak wood. A comparative cost
epoxy: effect of chain length. J Pigment Resin Technol 2006;35(4):216–23.
and mechanical properties analysis of LLBCs with teak wood [15] Sewda K, Maiti SN. Mechanical properties of teak wood flour-reinforced HDPE
timber indicates that LLBCs could be used as building and gen- composites. J Appl Polym Sci 2009:1826–34.
eral purposes material like, furniture, beam and column, etc., [16] Alper A. Determination of screw and nail withdrawal resistance of some
important wood species. Int J Mol Sci 2008;9:629–37.
because there is possibility to increase the volume in any shape [17] Qinglin Wu. Screw holding capability of two furniture grade plywoods.
and in any direction by increasing number of layers where the Compos Manuf Products 1999:56–9.
thickness and shape of composite can be tailored during fabri- [18] Lee AWC, Xuesong B, Perry NP. Selected physical and mechanical properties of
giant timber grown in South Carolina. Forest Prod J 1994;44(9):40–6.
cation to meet specific requirement. Furthermore use of more [19] Graystone Jon A. Wood and wood based substrates, wood coating. Franco
bamboo and technology for fabrication of LLBCs could help to Bulian; 2009. p. 15–51.
improve economy of rural people. [20] Lyons. Timber and timber products. Mater Architects Builders 2006:96–148.
[21] Sanwo SK. The characteristics of the crown-fromed and stem-formed wood in
plantation grown teal (TectonagrandisL.f.). J Inst Wood Sci 1987;11:85–8.
[22] Kjaer ED, Kajornsrichon S, Lauridsen EB. Heartwood, calcium and silica content
Acknowledgments in five provenances of Teak(Tectonagrandis). Silvae Genet 1999;48:1–3.
[23] Bermeja I, canellas I. Growth and yield models for teak plantation in coastarica.
For Ecol Manag 2004;189(1–3):97–110.
We are grateful to the Laboratory in charge of Stress Analysis [24] Sanwo SK. in plantation grown teak (TectonagrandisL.f.). J Trop For Resour
Lab, Numerical Computation Lab and strength of material Lab of 1990;2:11.