4.7 Article

Bonding performance of cross-laminated timber-bamboo composites

期刊

JOURNAL OF BUILDING ENGINEERING
卷 63, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105526

关键词

Bamboo scrimber; Cross -laminated timber -bamboo; Bonding performance; Block shear test; Delamination test

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bamboo, as one of the most important renewable resources in China, has great potential for application in the construction field. This study focuses on the bonding performance of cross-laminated timber-bamboo (CLTB) composites and finds that the adhesive type is the most critical factor affecting the bonding performance.
Bamboo is one of the most important renewable resources in China, leading to the development of bamboo products as well. Alternative applications of bamboo need to be developed in the field of construction, especially in cross-laminated timber (CLT) construction, due to better mechanical performance of bamboo and the increasing popularity of CLT construction in recent years. The bonding performance of cross-laminated timber-bamboo (CLTB) composites fabricated with Spruce-pine-fir (SPF) dimension lumber and bamboo scrimber boards was investigated here. L9 (34) orthogonal experiments with four factors (adhesive type, adhesive spreading rate, clamping pressure, and clamping time) and three levels were applied to evaluate their impacts on the bonding indicators of CLTB through block shear and delamination tests. Results showed that adhesive type had the most critical influence on the bonding performance. The optimal manufacturing parameters were adhesive of phenol resorcinol formaldehyde (PRF), adhesive spreading rate of 250 g/m2, clamping pressure of 1.0 MPa, and clamping time of 420 min, respectively. PRF adhesive yielded higher block shear strength, wood failure percentage, and lower rate of delamination than one-component polyurethane (PUR) and emulsion polymer isocyanate (EPI), especially under wet or boiling condition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据