Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Assessment of bamboo application in building envelope by comparison

with reference timber
Zujian Huang a,b, Yimin Sun a,, Florian Musso b
a
School of Architecture, State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China
b
Chair of Building Construction and Material Science, Department of Architecture, Technical University of Munich, Munich 80333, Bayern, Germany

h i g h l i g h t s

Typical bamboos hygrothermal properties test based on building envelope HAM model.

Performance comparison between bamboo and timber exterior wall and space units.

Bamboo units had better heat storage and vapor resistance but worse heat transport performance.

Bamboo surpassed timber in lightweight construction in hot and temperate regions.

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

Article history: For obtaining material parameters of typical bamboos, assessing the performance of bamboo in building
Received 12 May 2017 envelope, timber units were set as reference model, accordingly bamboo units of the same construction
Received in revised form 9 August 2017 and space size as evaluation model, by which the performances in aspects of material, building compo-
Accepted 6 September 2017
nent and enclosed space unit were compared. Results showed that bamboo units had strengths on heat
storage and vapor resistance but weakness on heat transport performance, which varied with climate
condition, building function and construction type. Bamboo showed disadvantages in severe cold and
Keywords:
cold zones, and advantages in full bamboo/timber constructions in hot and temperate regions.
Bamboo
Timber
2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Building envelope
Hygrothermal properties
Thermal performance
Hygric performance
Indoor environment
Energy consumption

1. Introduction forest resources, modified bamboos in standard panel or square

1.1. Industrial utilization of bamboo resources and the strategy of
substitute timber with bamboo
Bamboo forests were widely distributed in the tropical, sub-
tropical and temperate climate zones in the Asia Pacific (ca. 67%),
the Americas (ca. 30%) and Africa (ca. 3%) [1]. The application of
bamboo in building industry varied with regional differences due
to the local forest resources, economic conditions and construction
technology. Large-diameter round bamboos, as an easily accessi-
ble, affordable and seismic construction material, were widely
used in traditional bamboo building in the Southeast Asia and
South America [2]. Since 1970s, restricted by the regional wood
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: arymsun@scut.edu.cn (Y. Sun).
form were considered to be an ideal substitute for timber [3]. Strat-
egy of substitute timber with bamboo was promoted to efficiently
use the bamboo resources and lessen the regional shortage of
wood forest [4]. In Southeast countries including China, India, Thai-
land, Vietnam, Costa Rica, Malaysia, etc. timber processing tech-
nologies were introduced to the industrial utilization of bamboo,
afterwards plybamboo (BMB) in the 1980s; bamboo particleboard,
bamboo oriented strand board (BOSB), and bamboo laminated
lumber (BSB) in the 1990s; bamboo scrimber (BFB) in the 2000s;
and flattened bamboo panel (FB) in the 2010s were successively
developed [57], and promoted to the concrete formworks, load-
bearing components, truck and bus bottom boards, furniture and
finishes industries [3].
Building industry was of huge potential to the consumption of
bamboo. In China, scholars and architects took reference from
the multilayer timber construction system to carry out the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.09.026
0950-0618/ 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860
application of bamboo panels in construction practices. Qisheng
ZHANG, Zhitao LU developed bamboo anti-seismic housing in
2009, in which plybamboo was used as wall framework and insu-
lation material were filled inside to achieve favorable thermal per-
formance [8]. Yan Xiao carried out a series of housing construction
with 2440  1220 mm wall and ceiling panel units that were com-
posed of plybamboo board as partition, plybamboo square as inner
support, and insulation material as filler [9,10]. Hao Lin adopted
the 2  4 construction method (2  4 inch, 5  10 cm) in bamboo
housing, in which bamboo laminated lumber and bamboo scrim-
ber were used as wall framework and insulation material as filler
[11]. Various bamboo panel profiles for flooring, ceiling and wall
were applied in building envelope, which formed a parallel and
competitive product series with timber in some regions [12]. Vogt-
lander, J.G. and Van der Lugt, P. carried out LCA assessment on typ-
ical bamboo flooring products and showed that the long-distance
transport would accounted for a major part of the CO2 footprint
and eco-costs [13,14]. Therefore the performance comparison with
timber competitive products and adaptability evaluation in local
regions were of great significance.
1.2. Research status of bamboo material parameters and the
comparison with timber
The existing substantial mechanical studies on bamboo could
support the application in load-bearing structure, however owing
to lack of hygrothermal properties, bamboo was not regarded as
an independent material when used in building envelope, for
example the thermal design code in China [15]. Due to the insuffi-
ciency of material study, bamboo properties were commonly sub-
stituted with timber parameters, which caused inaccuracy to the
projects, as material parameters had significant impacts on the
building envelope calculation results [16].
In terms of the hygrothermal properties studies on bamboo,
there were previous experiments performed on bulk density,
porosity, specific heat capacity, thermal conductivity, sorption iso-
therm and water vapor permeability on raw bamboo [17]. Wu et al.
showed that the bulk density of Moso bamboo was from 600 to
800 kg/m3 [18]. Huang et al. carried out CT measurement on poros-
ity test and concluded that the average porosity of Moso bamboo
internode was between 44.9% and 63.4% [19]. Wu and Huang
showed that the specific heat capacity of Moso bamboo varied
from 1.08 to 2.29 kJ/kgK [18], and from 1.7 to 2.3 kJ/kgK at
40 C using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) method [20].
Wu et al. measured the thermal diffusivity of Moso bamboo in lon-
gitudinal direction by a laser flash method [18]. Huang et al. found
that both morphological structure and thermal properties of Moso
bamboo were non-homogenous in different directions [21]. Ohmae
and Nakano tested the sorption isotherm of Moso bamboo in lon-
gitudinal direction by a saturated solution method [22]. Wang
et al. found that the equilibrium moisture content (EMC) of the
hemicelluloses was much higher than the lignin, and the EMC of
bamboo fiber was higher than the bamboo block [23]. Huang
et al. measured the moisture transport properties of Moso bamboo,
and found that the water vapor diffusion resistance factor by dry
cup was from 30 to 57 in the radial and tangential directions
[24], and the water adsorption coefficients were 0.014, 0.008, and
0.0019 kg/m2s0.5 for exterior, middle, and interior parts of bamboo
culm wall, and respectively the capillary saturation moisture con-
tents were 572, 479, and 385 kg/m3 [25].
In terms of the comparison between bamboo and timber, Du
Fuyuan and Oscar Hidalgo found that the density of bamboo was
approximately equal to or higher than hardwood [26,1]. Walter
Liese, Qisheng Zhang, D. Grosser, Xian Xingjuan observed the
microstructure of bamboo and found that the fibers were almost
totally longitudinally arranged in parallel, with extremely few
845
radial fibers at the nodes, which was far different from wood
[2730]. Qisheng Zhang and Youdi Chen analyzed the chemical
composition and showed that the main compositions of bamboo
were similar to wood, while the trace elements difference made
bamboo more vulnerable to erosion [31]. Oscar Hidalgo studied
on the microscopic drying characteristics of bamboo and found
that compared with wood, bamboo was more prone to cracking
in the process of losing water [1]. The existing knowledge
prompted that the hygrothermal properties of bamboo were differ-
ent from timber to some degree, which meant an individual param-
eters system was necessary to support its practical application.
The reviewed studies provided certain hygrothermal properties
that could support the evaluation of bamboo applicability in build-
ing envelope at an initial stage. However, these studies on bamboo
properties generally concentrated on raw bamboo, which couldnt
represent bamboo-based panels that were more commonly used in
practical application. Bamboo-based panels were changed in terms
of constituent units, assembly methods and protective treatments
during the manufacturing process [7], which resulted in the change
of hygrothermal properties; The existing works generally focused
on certain basic properties, hygric properties or thermal properties
in steady state that couldnt cover completely the parameters nec-
essary for a full model to simulate the heat and moisture process in
building envelope.
On the other hand, the comparison between bamboo and tim-
ber were performed only between raw bamboo and raw wood,
and mostly on microstructure characteristics, rather than the
hygrothermal properties necessary for the building envelope cal-
culation; Comparison on building component and enclosed space
couldnt be found; Actual application conditions such as climate,
building function, construction type, HVAC, and so on, had not
been taken into consideration; To promote the strategy of substi-
tute timber with bamboo, the discussion on substitutability of
bamboo for timber in terms of forest production, prices and
mechanical performance were mostly stressed, but the physical
performance of bamboo compared with timber wasnt sufficiently
studied.
Based on these, the paper systematically tested typical bamboos
for the hygrothermal properties and showed the relative position
in the range of corresponding reference timbers; designed exterior
walls with three groups of bamboos and timbers in same construc-
tion size that met the requirement of different climate zones, and
compared the thermal and hygric performance; finally constructed
enclosed space units with the above exterior walls in EnergyPlus
and simulated the indoor environment and energy consumption.
The motivation of this study was to gain preliminary comparative
results between bamboo and timber, synthetically from progres-
sive perspectives of material, building component and enclosed
space, prejudge the physical performance feasibility of substituting
timber with bamboo, and provide reference for the practical appli-
cation, with consideration to climate condition, building function
and construction type.
2. Bamboo hygrothermal properties test
2.1. Material samples
Bamboo products were classified by the decomposition and
recombination manufacturing process, which decided the con-
stituent units and assembly methods of the final products [7,6].
Based on the literature, market and material producers investiga-
tion in bamboo industry, six typical bamboo products were chosen
as the test objects, which were distinguished and named according
to the terminology standard [6]. Flattened bamboo panel (FB) was
composed of flattened bamboo culm wall [32,33]; Bamboo lami-
nated lumber (BSB) was composed of bamboo strips [34];
846 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

Table 1
Information of the bamboo samples.
FB
Constituent unit mm Main application
Assembly method Thickness Sample sources
(Flattened bamboo panel)

Raw bamboo wall Dasso Industrial Group Co.

- 8.0 Indoor flooring, finishes
(thickness: ca. 8mm) Ltd. Hangzhou, China

BSB
Constituent unit Assembly method Thicknessmm Main application Sample sources
(Bamboo laminated lumber)
Bamboo strip Plain-side-plain
Indoor flooring, finishes, Dasso Industrial Group Co.
(width:15-20mm, pressed, orthogonal 30.0
furniture Ltd. Hangzhou, China
thickness: 5.0-8.0mm) 3 layers

BMB
Constituent unit Assembly method Thicknessmm Main application Sample sources
(Plybamboo)
Concrete formwork, truck Institute of Modern Bamboo,
Bamboo sliver Weave sliver into
and bus bottom board, Timber and Composite
(width:15-30mm, mat, orthogonal 15 27.8
load-bearing component, Structures (IBTCS).
thickness: 0.8-2.0mm) layers
wallboard Changsha, China

BFB
Constituent unit Assembly method Thicknessmm Main application Sample sources
(Bamboo scrimber)
Load-bearing component,
Bamboo bundle Dasso Industrial Group Co.
Parallel 30.0 indoor/outdoor flooring,
(width:10-30mm) Ltd. Hangzhou, China
finishes, furniture

BPB
Constituent unit Assembly method Thicknessmm Main application Sample sources
(Bamboo particleboard)
Bamboo particle
(length: 20-30mm, Non-oriented, 3 Furniture, packaging Southeast Forest Co., Ltd.
18.4
width: 1.0-5.0mm, layers material Ningguo, China
thickness: 0.1-0.5mm)

BOSB
Constituent unit Assembly method Thicknessmm Main application Sample sources
(Bamboo OSB)
Long and flat bamboo
fragment (length: 50- Concrete formwork, load-
Oriented, Yunnan Yonglifa Forest Co.,
90mm, width: 5-20 27.6 bearing component,
orthogonal 5 layers Ltd. Mangshi, China
mm, thickness: 0.3- wallboard
0.7mm)

Thickness specifications of bamboo panels were normally 18 and 28 mm. Using thicker samples would be conducive to the test stability.
However there were only 8 mm FB and 18.4 mm BPB available on the market
 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860 847

Table 2
Operation method, equipment arrangement and specimens treatment of the basic properties test.

Item 1. Density test (left) and Item 2. Vacuum saturation test (right)

Category Item Operation method Equipment arrangement Specimens

Basic properties 1. Density test
Target value: dry bulk density
qd[kg/m3]
2. Vacuum saturation test
Target value: open porosity U[kg/
m3]; vacuum saturation moisture
content wvac[kg/m3]
*1
Specimens after being dried in item 1 were put in the vacuum dryers for test item 3.
treatment
Drying oven: digital stainless Quantity: 9
steel electric blast oven 101A-2S, copies for 1 type
accuracy 1 C Size:
Balance: SHIMADZU UX6200H, 10  20 cm*1
accuracy 0.01 g
Refer to the American standard ASTM Drying oven: same as item 1 Quantity: 3
D7370-2009, and the European standard Balance: same as item 1 copies for 1 type
DIN EN 19362007[42,43] Vacuum chamber & pump: Size: 10  10 cm
Sliding vane rotary vacuum
pump Fopump-2X-8, speed 8L/s,
Extreme pressure 600 Pa

Plybamboo (BMB) was composed of bamboo mats [35]; Bamboo
scrimber (BFB) was composed of bamboo fiber bundle [36]; Bam-
boo particleboard (BPB) was composed of fine bamboo particles
[37]; and Bamboo oriented strand board (BOSB) was composed
of oriented coarse particles [38]. Among them the FB was flattened
from round bamboo wall without gluing, which could represent
the raw bamboo, while the others were bamboo-based panels.
For the building envelope, FB, BSB and BFB were the main materials
to make decorative panels such as flooring and wall finishes, of
which the BFB was the only one that could be used in outdoor envi-
ronment; The BMB and BOSB were normally interlayer boards in
multilayer construction; The BPB was morphologically similar to
the wood particleboard and MDF, which could have the potential
to be used as interlayer board. Representative samples from the
material manufacturers in China that own the corresponding
patents were chosen as the test subjects [39]. (Table 1)
2.2. Test items
There were dozens of hygrothermal properties that could sup-
port different heat and moisture process models that normally
consisted of highly coupled nonlinear partial differential equations
that described simultaneously the heat and moisture processes in
building envelope, which were solved through numerical methods
[40]. The models relied on material parameters as inputs, including
basic properties such as bulk density and porosity; hygric proper-
ties such as isothermal absorption and desorption curve that char-
acterized the moisture storage capacity, water vapor transfer
coefficient that characterized the gaseous water transport ability
and water absorption coefficient that characterized the liquid
water transport ability; thermal properties such as specific heat
capacity, thermal conductivity and heat storage coefficient that
characterized the heat storage and transport ability. The test items
aimed at obtaining these parameters through architectural stan-
dard methods. Test items included density calculation and vacuum
saturation test for basic properties; sorption test for moisture stor-
age properties; capillary absorption test and water vapour trans-
mission test for moisture transport properties; thermal analysis
for heat storage properties; thermal conductivity test for heat
transport properties.
2.3. Operation methods, equipment arrangement and specimen
treatment
Seven test items were carried out according to the correspond-
ing test standards. The tests targeted only for the thickness
848 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

Table 3
Operation method, equipment arrangement and specimens treatment of the hygric properties test.

Item 3. Sorption test

Category Item Operation method Equipment arrangement Specimens treatment

Hygric properties 3. Sorption test Refer to the international Vacuum dryer (9 copies): inner Quantity: 3 copies for 1 type,
Target value: standard ISO 12571:2012 and diameter = 30 cm including 1 large sample and
isothermal absorption the American standard ASTM Balance: same as item 1 2 small samples
and desorption curve C1498-04a [44,45] T & RH recorder: TH10R-EX, with exterior Size: large sample 10  20 cm*2,
w[kg/m3] sensor (9 copies), accuracy T 0.2 C, small samples 4  5 cm
RH 2%

Item 4. Capillary absorption test

Hygric properties 4. Capillary Refer to the international Water sink: Quantity: 3 copies for 1 type,
absorption test standard ISO 15148:2002(E) length  width  height = 40  30  10 cm; sealed on top and side surfaces,
Target value: water [46]. Stainless steel nuts supports of equal height while kept 4 5  5 mm air vents
absorption coefficient With the results of water were fixed on the bottom; Distilled water on top surface and 6 mm gaps
Acap[kg/(m2s0.5)]; absorption coefficient and were injected in the sink and kept the water close to the bottom edges on side
capillary saturation capillary saturation moisture level 3 mm above the supports surfaces open
moisture content content, liquid transport coef- Balance: same as item 1
wcap[kg/m3] ficient Dl[m2/s] was then cal-
culated [47]
 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860 849

Table 3 (continued)

Category Item Operation method Equipment arrangement Specimens treatment

Item 5. Water vapor transmission test

Hygric properties 5. Water vapor Refer to the international Dry cups (3 copies), wet cups (3 copies) Quantity: 6 copies for 1 type
transmission test standard ISO 12572:2001(E) Balance: same as item 1 Size: 10  10 cm
Target value: water and the American standard Constant T&RH curing box: HWS-250 B,
vapor diffusion ASTM E 96/E 96M-2005[48,49] accuracy T 0.5 C, RH 5%
resistance factor l[]
*2
Specimens after reaching the equilibrium moisture content were carried on in test item 7.

direction, considering that the thickness of the bamboo panels in when:

practical application was far less than the plane dimensions, which
meant the heat and moisture transferred approximately one-
dimensionally and vertically through the panels. As some previous
studies had shown that the repeatability error was generally far
smaller than the unevenness error of the samples [41], multiple
copies were carried out simultaneously during the test, rather than
repeated the specimens for the same items. (Table 2, 3, 4)
3. Test results analysis
RP < 0%: Bamboo value < RT;
0%  RP  20%: Bamboo value was in a low position of RT;
20% < RP  40%: Bamboo value was in a middle to low position
of RT;
40% < RP  60%: Bamboo value was in a middle position of RT;
60% < RP  80%: Bamboo value was in a middle to high position
of RT;
80% < RP  100%: Bamboo value was in a high position of RT;
RP > 100%: Bamboo value > RT

3.1. Reference timber
Since the knowledge on timber was relatively sufficient and
available, the comparison with timber could be helpful to the eval-
uation of bamboo. To set comparison reference for bamboo, related
parameters from various databases were collected to form the ref-
erence timber (RT). (Annex Table 1)
However, the parameters from different databases varied
greatly and it was difficult to judge which were representative
and authoritative, which meant that to obtain precise Bamboo-
Timber ratio was impractical. Here we defined the range of RT with
the available maximum and minimum values (Table 5 in Sec-
tion 3.2), and the Bamboo-Timber parameter ratio as RP value to
describe the relative position of bamboo parameters in the range
of RT:
Bamboo v alue  RT  min v alue
RP  100%
RT  max v alue  RT  min v alue
The bamboo parameters, as described in Section 2.2, were cho-
sen for the comparison between bamboo and RT. The wRH=50%,
wRH=95% and wcap were selected out from the isothermal absorption
and desorption curve to describe respectively the gaseous water
and liquid water storage properties. The 1/l was reciprocal of
the water vapor diffusion resistance factor, so as to describe the
moisture transport rate in a positive correlation.
3.2. Comparison between bamboo and the reference timber
1) Raw material. FB was compared separately with Softwood
and Hardwood. The bulk density q value of FB > Softwood
and open porosity U value of FB < Softwood, while the q
value of FB was in a low position of hardwood, and the U
value of FB was in a middle position of hardwood, which
meant that the basic properties of bamboo were closer to
hardwood, and quite different from softwood which was
850 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

Table 4
Operation method, equipment arrangement and specimens treatment of the thermal properties test.

Item 6. Thermal analysis (left) and Item 7. Thermal conductivity test (right)

Category Item Operation method Equipment arrangement Specimens treatment

Thermal properties 6. Thermal analysis
Target value: specific heat
capacity c [kJ/(kgK)]
7. Thermal conductivity test
Target value: thermal
conductivity k[W/(mK)]
*3
Use the specimens after reaching the equilibrium moisture content in test item 3.
Refer to the international standard
ISO 11357-4-2005 [50]
Refer to the international standard
ISO 11357-4-2005 [51]24 h heat
storage coefficient S24h[W/(m2K)]
was calculated by:
p
S24h 0:51  q  c  k
Differential thermal scanning/thermos- Quantity: 3 copies for
gravimetric analyzer: TA4000/2910MDSC 1 type
Reference material: sapphire Mass: 20 mg
Guarded hot plate apparatus: CD-DR3030, Quantity: 4 copies for
hot plate T = 35 C, cold plate T = 15 C, 1 type, including 3
size of central heat transfer area large samples and 1
15  15 cm, accuracy 2% small sample
Size: large samples
30  30 cm, small
sample 10  20 cm*3

normally the raw material for wood-based panels. Mean-
while, as mentioned above, the bamboo fibers were almost
totally longitudinally arranged, with extremely few radial
fibers at the bamboo nodes, which was far different from
wood which microscopically consisted of multi-directional
fiber. These could significantly affect the moisture transport
ability.
2) Bamboo/Wood-based panels. When made into bamboo/
wood-based panels, the difference in raw material, con-
stituent unit, assembly method and protective treatment,
etc. during the manufacturing process could affect the
hygrothermal properties of the final products. The
bamboo/wood-based panels below were separated into 3
groups according to their usages, constituent units and
assembly methods for more pertinent comparison:
Group 1 Exterior board: BFB, compared RT were Hardwood,
Plywood high, Wood fiberboard hard.
Group 2 Interior board: BSB, compared RT was Laminated
board.
Group 3 Interlayer boards: BMB, BPB, BOSB, compared RT
were respectively BMB - Laminated veneer lumber (LVL),
Plywood; BPB - Particleboard / Chipboard, Fiberboard
(MDF); BOSB - Wood oriented strand board (OSB).
Judging from Table 5, we could see that: except BPB, the other
bamboo-based panels had higher bulk density and lower porosity
than RT. Most of the hygric properties were lower than RT or dis-
tributed in a low or middle to low position of RT, which meant
lower moisture capacity and vapor permeation rate. The higher
vapor permeation resistance could be dialectical that could help
to weaken the vapor transport, but might also cause water retarda-
tion on the boundaries between two layers (as would be showed in
the exterior wall condensation in Section 5.1). The BFB had a higher
liquid water transport resistance, which was beneficial to outdoor
use. Except BPB, most of the thermal properties were higher than
RT or distributed in a high or middle to high position of RT, which
meant higher heat storage ability that was beneficial to thermal
stability, and higher heat transport ability that was unfavorable
to the thermal insulation. (Table 5)
 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860 851

Table 5
Relative position of bamboo parameters in the range of RT.

RP < 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Timber. Timber. Relative
Items Bamboo 0% RP <RP <RP <RP <RP R
max min Position 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 100%
Raw material: FB - Softwood
Basic [kg/m3] 666.38 530.00 350.00 175.77%
properties [-] 0.52 0.90 0.73 -122.12%
Raw material: FB - Hardwood
Basic [kg/m3] 666.38 740 650 18.20%
properties [-] 0.52 0.72 0.35 46.59%

Exterior board: BFB - Hardwood, Plywood high, Wood fiberboard hard

Basic [kg/m3] 1108.77 959.00 400.00 126.79%
properties [-] 0.17 0.96 0.35 -28.92%
Hygric wRH=50% [kg/m3] 28.17 82.50 19.30 14.03%
properties - wRH=95% [kg/m3] 144.85 228.00 108.10 30.65%
gaseous water 1/ [-] 0.0022 0.0277 0.0029 -2.53%
Hygric wcap [kg/m] 165.93 573.00 236.00 -20.79%
properties - Acap [kg/(ms0.5)] 0.000873 0.004200 0.000720 4.40%
liquid water Dl [m2/s] 1.96E-11 4.61E-10 1.64E-11 0.73%
c J/kgK 1550 2100 1400 21.43%
Thermal
W/mK 0.1625 0.1800 0.0680 84.38%
properties
S24h [W/mK] 8.52 7.98 3.65 112.54%

Interior board: BSB - Laminated board

Basic [kg/m3] 563.81 500.00 400.00 163.81%
properties [-] 0.54 0.90 0.56 -5.97%
Hygric wRH=50% [kg/m3] 30.44 53.00 18.00 35.54%
properties - wRH=95% [kg/m3] 96.44 268.03 88.00 4.69%
gaseous water 1/ [-] 0.0143 0.0500 0.0101 10.65%
c J/kgK 1960 2100 1300 82.50%
Thermal
W/mK 0.1475 0.1400 0.0860 113.89%
properties
S24h [W/mK] 6.51 5.65 3.69 143.65%

Interlayer board: BMB - Laminated veneer lumber (LVL), Plywood

Basic [kg/m3] 776.21 708.00 400.00 122.15%
properties [-] 0.50 0.96 0.50 -0.91%
Hygric wRH=50% [kg/m3] 39.20 62.00 19.30 46.60%
properties - wRH=95% [kg/m3] 115.90 228.00 75.97 26.26%
gaseous water 1/ [-] 0.0099 0.1200 0.0050 4.23%
c J/kgK 2020 1880 1400 129.17%
Thermal
W/mK 0.1733 0.1300 0.0680 169.84%
properties
S24h [W/mK] 8.41 5.70 3.65 232.14%
Interlayer board: BPB - Particleboard / Chipboard, Fiberboard (MDF)
Basic [kg/m3] 623.32 1000.00 500.00 24.66%
properties [-] 0.63 0.80 0.50 43.90%
Hygric wRH=50% [kg/m3] 36.89 74.00 32.70 10.15%
properties - wRH=95% [kg/m3] 102.05 291.00 11.80 32.32%
gaseous water 1/ [-] 0.0478 0.0311 0.0080 172.00%
c J/kgK 1760 2100 1300 57.50%
Thermal
W/mK 0.0801 0.1400 0.0820 -3.28%
properties
S24h [W/mK] 4.78 6.63 4.38 17.64%
Interlayer board: BOSB - Wood oriented strand board (OSB)
Basic [kg/m3] 895.02 725.00 518.00 182.14%
properties [-] 0.42 0.95 0.41 2.44%
Hygric wRH=50% [kg/m3] 46.07 71.00 22.10 49.02%
properties - wRH=95% [kg/m3] 132.07 245.00 106.89 18.23%
gaseous water 1/ [-] 0.0037 0.0160 0.0016 14.35%
c J/kgK 1663 2100 1400 37.57%
Thermal
W/mK 0.1197 0.1300 0.0840 77.61%
properties
S24h [W/mK] 6.81 6.94 4.55 94.30%

Note: the grey, blue and orange lines and color blocks showed respectively the distribution of basic properties, hygric properties, and thermal
properties.

4. Building component calculation and enclosed space unit
simulation
To assess the performance of applying bamboo in building
envelope by clarifying the performance difference between bam-
boo and timber, timber units were set as reference model, accord-
ingly bamboo units of the same construction and space size as
evaluation model, by which performance regarding to building
component and space unit were compared. Based on the material
study above, Bamboo scrimber (BFB) was chosen as exterior board,
Bamboo laminated lumber (BSB) as interior board, Bamboo ori-
ented strand board (BOSB) as interlayer board for bamboo units,
while Beech, Spruce and Wood oriented strand board (OSB) were
for timber units. (Annex Table 2)
4.1. Model design
The simulation models were constructed in EnergyPlus, which
were composed of external conditions, internal conditions, bound-
ary conditions and HVAC conditions: (Fig. 1)
852 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860
Fig. 1. Model design (external condition, internal condition, boundary condition and HVAC condition).
1) External conditions. Harbin, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou
and Kunming were chosen as the representative cities for
severe cold climate zone, cold climate zone, hot summer &
cold winter climate zone, hot summer & warm winter cli-
mate zone and temperate climate zone. The TMY weather
data of the five cities were input as the external conditions
for the model. (Annex Table 3)
2) Internal conditions. Two types of building functions were set.
Type A was office building represented by standard office that
was 3.0 m6.0 m3.0 m (width  depth  height). The occu-
pancy schedule was 9:0018:00, which represented the space
for daytime use. Type B was residential building represented
by sleeping room that was 3.0 m  4.0 m  3.0 m
(width  depth  height). The occupancy schedule was
22:0007:00, which represented the space for night time use.
3) Boundary conditions, namely the building envelope. The
exterior walls were chosen as the study objects, while the
flooring and ceiling were set as adiabatic. Considering that
in practical projects, the bamboo/timber (B/T) boards were
generally used as partition boards in full B/T construction,
or as interior finishes attached to existing walls (which were
set as 200 mm brick walls in this study), both types in the
five cities were designed according to the local U value reg-
ulatory requirements, see Section 4.2.
4) HVAC conditions. Based on the models consisted of the
above conditions, the HVAC were firstly turned off to evalu-
ate the indoor environment without energy consumption,
which was characterized by the PMV indicator during the
occupancy hours. Afterwards turned on the HVAC and ran
the model with ideal heater & ideal cooler to maintain cer-
tain thermal comfort, and calculated the annual energy con-
sumption per unit area.
4.2. Bamboo and timber exterior walls design
In order to ensure the comparability between bamboo and tim-
ber components, between full B/T construction and interior fin-
ishes construction types, and among the five cities, the exterior
walls were designed to reach the required U value by adjusting sin-
gle factors: (Table 6)
From bamboo to timber components: replaced the bamboo
boards with timber boards, while maintained the construction
layer dimensions;
From full B/T construction to interior finishes construction
types: replaced the 18 mm exterior board with 200 mm brick
wall, while maintained the remaining construction layer
dimensions;
From one city to another city: adjusted the thickness of the
thermal insulation layer, or replaced the insulation material
with air, while maintained the remaining construction layer
dimensions.
5. Calculation and simulation results analysis
5.1. Building component
Nine indicators related to the thermal and hygric performances
were chosen and compared between bamboo and timber building
components. The heat transfer coefficient U value was the most
commonly used indicator to characterize the thermal transport
performance. The heat capacity - S value, and thermal capacity
inside Si value were indicators to characterize the thermal stabil-
ity, which had decisive effect on the temperature phase shift,
attenuation and fluctuation on interior surface. The vapor diffusion
thickness sd value was chosen to characterize the total vapor per-
meation resistance of the whole components, meanwhile the con-
densation and the drying time could partly describe the hygric
defects of the constructions. (Table 7, Fig. 2)
1) Heat transport properties. Calculated results showed that
with the same construction dimensions and layer arrange-
ment, the U values of bamboo components were slightly
higher than the timber components, which was caused by
the higher thermal conductivity of bamboo. From the severe
cold climate zone HEB southwards to hot summer & warm
Table 6
Boundary condition (Construction of the external walls).

City Type 1 2 3*1 4 5*1 6 7 Construction graph

BSB Spruce PE EPS- air BOSB OSB- air PE BFB Common Brick n- full r-as internal
foil Rigips (unventilated Platte (unventilated foil beech construction finishes
RigiBead layer) (DIN layer)
035 EN
ISO
10456)
HEB B-n 12.5 0.2 100 12.5 40 18
T-n 12.5 0.2 100 12.5 40 18
B-r 12.5 0.2 100 12.5 40 200
T-r 12.5 0.2 100 12.5 40 200

Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

BJ B-n 12.5 0.2 60 12.5 40 18
T-n 12.5 0.2 60 12.5 40 18
B-r 12.5 0.2 60 12.5 40 200
T-r 12.5 0.2 60 12.5 40 200

SH B-n 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 18

T-n 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 18
B-r 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 200
T-r 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 200

GZ B-n 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 18

T-n 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 18
B-r 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 200
T-r 12.5 30 12.5 40 0.2 200

KM B-n 12.5 0.2 30 12.5 40 18

T-n 12.5 0.2 30 12.5 40 18
B-r 12.5 0.2 30 12.5 40 200
T-r 12.5 0.2 30 12.5 40 200

Type: B-bamboo, T-timber, n-full B/T construction, r-B/T as internal finishes.

*1
Inner supports of internal distance D=720 mm, width d=60 mm, and the same thickness with the local layer. Material used: Bamboo construction-BFB, Timber construction- KVH Fichte.

853
854 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

Table 7
Building components thermal and hygric performance calculation results.

City Type Heat transfer Heat Thermal Temperature Temperature Temperature fluctuation Vapor Condensation Drying
coefficient capacity capacity phase shift attenuation on interior surface diffusion time
inside thickness
[W/m2K] [kJ/ [kJ/m2K] [h] [] [C] [m] [kg/m2] [d]
m2K]
HEB B-n 0.334 86 27 7.5 4.18 4.5 34.19 0.072 62
T-n 0.323 62 16.4 6.5 2.87 6.7 25.02 0.07 26
B-r 0.324 455 46 13.3 12.05 1.2 46.45 0.073 93
T-r 0.314 434 35 12.5 8.06 1.8 41.44 0.078 92
BJ B-n 0.478 80 24 6.5 2.80 6.8 33.81 0.014 11
T-n 0.465 58 15.3 5.5 1.99 9.6 24.75 0 0
B-r 0.457 449 51 12.3 7.87 1.8 45.99 0.032 6
T-r 0.446 431 41 11.5 5.62 2.6 41.16 0.042 50
SH B-n 0.715 74 23 5.5 1.89 10.0 33.46 0 0
T-n 0.701 56 15 4.3 1.46 13.1 24.54 0 0
B-r 0.668 444 60 11.3 5.29 2.7 45.58 0 0
T-r 0.657 428 52 10.3 4.13 3.5 40.95 0 0
GZ B-n 1.196 74 25 4.0 1.40 13.3 33.31 0 0
T-n 1.181 55 17 3.0 1.21 15.7 24.40 0 0
B-r 1.072 443 83 9.7 3.97 3.6 45.43 0 0
T-r 1.062 428 73 9.0 3.46 4.1 40.81 0 0
KM B-n 1.196 74 25 4.0 1.41 13.2 33.31 0 0
T-n 1.181 55 17.2 3.0 1.22 15.7 24.40 0 0
B-r 1.072 443 83 9.7 3.97 3.6 45.43 0 0
T-r 1.062 428 73 9.0 3.46 4.1 40.81 0 0

Fig. 2. Thermal and hygric performance comparison between bamboo and timber components (The bamboo values and timber values were marked on the boundaries of each
column, when the connection lines went down, it meant that the bamboo values was higher than the timber values, and vice versa).

winter zone GZ, the Bamboo-Timber U value magnitudes were
enlarged from 0.0090.010 W/m2K to 0.1190.124 W/m2K.
2) Heat storage properties. Calculated results showed that the
S values and Si values of bamboo components was higher
than the timber components, with magnitudes corre-
spondingly of 1524 kJ/m2K and 7.811 kJ/m2K. The
temperature phase shifts of bamboo components were
0.71.2 h longer than timber components. The tempera-
ture attenuation of bamboo components were 0.191.31
larger than timber components in full B/T constructions,
and 0.513.99 in interior finishes constructions. The
temperature fluctuations on interior surface of bamboo
 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860 855

components were 2.23.1 C smaller than timber compo-
nents in full B/T constructions, and 0.50.8 C in the inte-
rior finishes constructions.
3) Hygric performance. Calculated results showed that the sd
values of bamboo components was larger than the timber
components, with magnitudes of 4.629.17 m, which was
caused by the higher water vapor permeation resistance
factor l value of bamboo. It meant that the bamboo compo-
nents were of higher resistance to moisture transport. How-
ever, in HEB and BJ, where vapor transported mainly from
indoor to outdoor, the condensation happened on boundaries
between two layers of disparate l values. The values of con-
densation and drying time showed that the results from
higher l value could be dialectical that might help to weaken

Table 8
Enclosed space units indoor environment and energy consumption performance simulation results.

City Type 1.0  PMV1.0 h ratio Annual energy consumption per unit area
Bamboo [%] Timber [%] B-T ratio [] Bamboo [J/m2] Timber [J/m2] B-T ratio []
HEB O-n 17.82 18.00 99.01% 3.30E+08 3.21E+08 102.85%
O-r 19.03 19.27 98.72% 3.15E+08 3.04E+08 103.62%
S-n 13.25 13.11 101.04% 3.34E+08 3.22E+08 103.93%
S-r 13.48 13.55 99.49% 3.19E+08 3.06E+08 104.43%
BJ O-n 21.59 21.03 102.67% 2.84E+08 2.76E+08 102.98%
O-r 25.10 24.89 100.83% 2.70E+08 2.60E+08 104.10%
S-n 15.70 16.03 97.95% 2.76E+08 2.66E+08 103.88%
S-r 15.29 15.77 96.96% 2.57E+08 2.45E+08 105.21%
SH O-n 28.19 26.59 106.03% 2.77E+08 2.72E+08 101.68%
O-r 31.75 31.77 99.96% 2.54E+08 2.46E+08 103.31%
S-n 19.92 19.11 104.23% 2.61E+08 2.51E+08 104.24%
S-r 21.21 21.70 97.73% 2.38E+08 2.28E+08 104.42%
GZ O-n 34.15 32.85 103.96% 3.08E+08 3.25E+08 94.61%
O-r 33.05 33.33 99.18% 2.64E+08 2.59E+08 102.10%
S-n 29.86 28.30 105.52% 2.65E+08 2.85E+08 92.98%
S-r 24.63 23.89 103.10% 2.63E+08 2.58E+08 101.74%
KM O-n 24.36 22.99 105.96% 2.62E+08 2.83E+08 92.64%
O-r 46.66 46.44 100.47% 1.82E+08 1.79E+08 101.60%
S-n 23.75 19.62 121.05% 2.28E+08 2.40E+08 94.92%
S-r 32.19 33.45 96.23% 1.49E+08 1.46E+08 102.48%

Type: O-standard office room, S-sleeping room, n-full B/T construction, r-B/T as internal finishes.

Fig. 3. Indoor environment and energy consumption performance comparison between bamboo and timber enclosed space units.
856 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860
the vapor transport on one hand, while on the other hand
might also cause water retardation on the boundaries and
slow down the condensed water from drying out.
5.2. Enclosed space unit
There were various indicators to characterize the indoor envi-
ronment and energy consumption performance. For simplification,
the hours proportion of 1.0  PMV  1.0 in the total occupancy
schedule when HVAC off, here defined as PMV0 value, and the
annual energy consumption per unit area when HVAC on, here
defined as P[J/m2] value, were chosen as indicators to evaluate
the indoor environment and energy consumption performance of
the enclosed space units. (Table 8, Fig. 3)
1) Impact of the climate condition. The simulation and compar-
ison results of the bamboo and timber space units showed dif-
ferences among the five cities. As to HEB and BJ, the Bamboo-
Timber ratio of PMV0 and P values were corresponding in the
range 96.96%102.67% and 102.85%105.21%, which showed
the disadvantage of applying bamboo under such climate con-
ditions. Along with the climate zones moving southwards, a
turning point appeared in SH, where the Bamboo-Timber ratio
of PMV0 values in full B/T constructions was in the range
104.23%106.03%, however the Bamboo-Timber ratio of
PMV0 values in interior finishes constructions and P values
for both types were corresponding in the range 97.73%
99.96% and 101.68%104.24%. As to GZ and KM, the
Bamboo-Timber ratio of PMV0 and P values in full B/T con-
structions were corresponding in the range 103.96%
121.05% and 92.64%94.92%, which showed the advantage
to use bamboo in full B/T constructions in these climate zones.
However the advantages were weakened in the internal fin-
ishes constructions.
2) Impact of the construction type. Bamboo components had
both higher heat storage and heat transport abilities, which
functioned with different weights that varied with the cli-
mate conditions. For the full B/T constructions that were
normally lightweight, the bamboo units performed better
in GZ and KM than timber units, while for the internal fin-
ishes constructions where large heat capacity already
existed in the heavyweight walls, the advantage of bamboo
units were weakened significantly.
3) Impact of the building function. The standard office and sleep-
ing room respectively represented the two typical building
functions for daytime use and night time use. Judging from
the PMV0 values, the standard office rooms performed signif-
icantly better than the sleeping rooms, which might result
from the larger size of the former space that weakened the
wall radiation. For the full B/T constructions type, the former
was 0.61%8.27% higher than the latter, while for the internal
finishes constructions, this was 3.37%7.48%. However, the
impact of building function on the pros and cons between
bamboo and timber units was inconspicuous.
6. Discussion
The performance of bamboo and timber application in building
envelope was compared in aspects of material, building compo-
nent and enclosed space.
In terms of material. Raw bamboo and five typical bamboo-
based panels were compared with the corresponding reference
timber products. Results showed that the basic properties of raw
bamboo were closer to hardwood and quite different from soft-
wood that normally was the raw material for wood-based panels.
Judging from the bulk density, open porosity and microscopic fiber
arrangement, it could be deduced that substituting bamboo with
timber parameters would cause calculation errors to the perfor-
mance evaluation of building envelope. Compared with raw bam-
boo, the properties spectrum range of bamboo-based panels was
broadened to be suitable for diverse usage. The comparison
between each bamboo-based panel with corresponding reference
timber products showed that, except BPB, the other bamboo-
based panels strengthened the distinction with timber, and had
higher bulk density and lower porosity, lower moisture storage
and transport properties, higher heat storage and transport proper-
ties than RT.
In terms of building component. With the same construction
dimensions, three groups of bamboos and timbers were chosen
as the exterior boards, interior boards and interlayer boards of
the exterior wall constructions. Both the heat transport and the
heat storage performances of bamboo components were higher
than the timber components. The total moisture permeation resis-
tance of bamboo components were higher than timber compo-
nents due to the higher l value of bamboo, which could be
dialectical that might help to weaken the vapor transport, while
might also cause water retardation on the boundaries and slow
down the condensed water from drying out.
In terms of enclosed space unit. The impacts of different factors
on the indoor environment and energy consumption performance
of bamboo and timber space units were compared. The results
showed that the performance was comprehensively affected by
the heat transfer U values and the heat storage S values of the
building envelope. The bamboo space units performed slightly
worse than the timber space units in severe cold and cold climate
zones where the weight of U value was higher. In the full B/T con-
structions in hot summer and temperate climate zones, the weight
of S values rose, which highlighted the advantage of bamboo space
units. However in the internal finishes constructions, the heat stor-
age advantage of bamboo components was weakened due to the
already existing large heat capacity of the walls. The climate zones
where bamboo showed benefits to be applied in full B/T construc-
tions, or could be extended to all lightweight constructions, were
coincided with the distribution of bamboo forest resources.
The impact of certain material properties could be dialectic, and
the different building component performance indicators might
weight variously when they were judged from the perspective of
the enclosed space that was comprehensively affected by the cli-
mate condition, building function, construction type and HVAC
control, etc. which showed the insufficiency of describing the
building envelope merely with the material and building compo-
nent indicators. Therefore it would be necessary to evaluate the
performance synthetically based on aspects of material, building
component and the enclosed space. In this study, the experiments
by architectural standard methods enable us to obtain convincing
material parameters, while the calculation and simulation works
with computer tools allowed us to take more conditions, in terms
of construction types, building function and climate zones into
consideration. Compared with measurement by experimental
rooms, simulation had a better feasibility and could provide pre-
liminary results, which was beneficial at initial stage to give refer-
ence to the substitutability of bamboo for timber. However the
EnergyPlus, although developed by Department of Energy (DOE)
and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), was authorita-
tive and widely accepted in building industry, the simulation
works should be verified by further measurement.
7. Conclusion
The hygrothermal parameters obtained by architectural stan-
dard methods, calculated and simulated results of building compo-
nents and enclosed space units under practical application
 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860 857

conditions, and the comparison with corresponding timber units, diverse applications, which showed the benefits of industrial uti-
provided a comprehensive reference for the bamboo application lization of bamboo resources through the modification process.
in building envelope, and could help to prejudge the feasibility of
substitute timber with bamboo.
Acknowledgements
Bamboo had better heat storage and vapor resistance but worse
heat transport properties. It surpassed timber in lightweight con-
The research was funded by: the (Chinese) State Key Laboratory
struction in hot and temperate regions, where the vast majority
of Subtropical Building Science Project: No. 2017KC22; the State
of bamboo forest situated. It meant that the application of bamboo
Scholarship Fund by the Chinese Scholarship Council: No.
in regions where bamboo was available, would be beneficial for
201506150017.
both utilizing the local forest resources and playing the corre-
sponding physical strengths.
The modification effects during the bamboo-based panel pro- Annex
cess could strengthen the distinction with timber and broaden
the material properties spectrum that were beneficial to the See Annexure Tables 13.

Annex Table 1
Reference timber and the source collection.

Reference timber Sources

Softwood FB
1 Softwood Fraunhofer-IBP
2 dena Softwood Materials for dena Constructions (Germany Energy Agency)
3 Spruce U wert.net
4 Spruce, radial Fraunhofer-IBP
5 Spruce, tangential LTH Lund University, Sweden
6 Spruce North America database
7 Scandinavian spruce transverse direction NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
8 Scandinavian spruce transverse direction II NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
9 Pine U wert.net
10 Eastern white pine North America database
11 Southern yellow pine North America database
12 Pine transverse direction, density 510 NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
13 Eastern white cedar North America database
14 Western red cedar North America database
15 Douglas fir U wert.net
16 GFM-Diagonalplatte U wert.net
17 GFM-Diagonalplatte Fraunhofer-IBP
18 Larch U wert.net
Hardwood FB
1 Hardwood Fraunhofer-IBP
2 Oak old MASEA database, Germany
3 Oak, radial Fraunhofer-IBP
4 Common beech U wert.net
Hardwood, Plywood high, Wood fiberboard hard BFB
1 Hardwood Fraunhofer-IBP
2 Oak old MASEA database, Germany
3 Oak, radial Fraunhofer-IBP
4 Common beech U wert.net
5 Woodfibreboard, hard LTH Lund University, Sweden
6 Wood fibre board, hard-wind barrier NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
7 Wood fibre board, hard NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
8 Composite wood siding North America database
9 BFU 100 Plywood MASEA database, Germany
10 Plywood (USA) North America database
11 Plywood high North America database
12 Plywood low North America database
13 veneer plywood beech BFU-BU Fraunhofer-IBP
14 Wood fibre board, hard NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Laminated board BSB
1 3-layer panel U wert.net
2 3-ply cross-laminated panel Fraunhofer-IBP
3 Brettstapeldecke U wert.net
4 Cross Laminated Timber U wert.net
5 GFM-Diagonalplatte U wert.net
7 Spruce U wert.net
8 Spruce, tangential LTH Lund University, Sweden
9 Spruce North America database
10 Stora Enso CLT Fraunhofer-IBP
Laminated veneer lumber (LVL), Plywood BMB
1 Plywood Fraunhofer-IBP
2 veneer plywood beech BFU-BU Fraunhofer-IBP
3 veneer plywood BFU-100 Fraunhofer-IBP
4 Plywood LTH Lund University, Sweden

(continued on next page)

858 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

Annex Table 1 (continued)

Reference timber Sources

5 BFU 100 Plywood MASEA database, Germany
6 Plywood (USA) North America database
7 Plywood high North America database
8 Plywood low North America database
9 Plywood density 410 NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
10 Plywood density 600 NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Particleboard/Chipboard, Fiberboard (MDF) BPB
1 particle board V100 Fraunhofer-IBP
2 Particleboard LTH Lund University, Sweden
3 Particle board density 550 NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
4 Particle board density 610 NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
5 Chip board/particle board U wert.net
6 KRONTEC DP50/WP50 U wert.net
7 Chipboard V100 E1F0 MASEA database, Germany
8 Chipboard Fraunhofer-IBP
9 Chipboard IDA Indoor climate and energy
10 MDF (500) U wert.net
11 MDF (750) U wert.net
12 medium density fibreboard #1 Fraunhofer-IBP
13 medium density fibreboard #2 Fraunhofer-IBP
14 AGEPAN DWD protect Fraunhofer-IBP
Wood oriented strand board (OSB) BOSB
1 Oriented strand board North America database
2 OSB-Platte (DIN EN ISO 10456) U wert.net
3 OSB plate Japan Database
4 Oriented strand board high North America database
5 Oriented strand board low North America database
6 OSB/3 U wert.net
7 OSB 3 (oriented strand board) MASEA database, Germany
8 Oriented strand board (density 553 kg/m3) Fraunhofer-IBP
9 Oriented strand board (density 595 kg/m3) Fraunhofer-IBP
10 Oriented strand board (density 615 kg/m3) Fraunhofer-IBP
11 Oriented strand board (density 630 kg/m3) Fraunhofer-IBP
12 AGEPAN OSB/3 PUR U wert.net
13 AGEPAN OSB/3 PUR, 12 mm Fraunhofer-IBP
14 AGEPAN OSB/4 PUR U wert.net
15 AGEPAN OSB/4 PUR, 12 mm Fraunhofer-IBP
16 particle board (micro strand board) Fraunhofer-IBP
17 MSB (microstrandboard) MASEA database, Germany
18 Medite Vent Fraunhofer-IBP
19 Smartply Vapairtight Fraunhofer-IBP
20 KRONOPLY OSD/F**** U wert.net
21 elka esb P5 U wert.net
22 esb-Platte elka strong board P5 Fraunhofer-IBP

Annex Table 2
Parameter list of the material used in external walls.

Type Material Bulk density Specific heat capacity Thermal conductivity Water vapor
[kg/m3] [J/kgK] [W/mK] diffusion
resistance
factor []
Bamboo Interior board BSB (bamboo laminated lumber) 563.81 1960 0.1475 69.78
Interlayer board BOSB (bamboo OSB) 895.02 1663 0.1197 270.14
Exterior board/ Inner support BFB (bamboo scrimber) 1108.77 1550 0.1625 446.94
Timber Interior board Spruce 450.00 1600 0.1300 2050
Interlayer board OSB-Platte (DIN EN ISO 10456) 650.00 1700 0.1300 3050
Exterior board Common beech 720.00 2100 0.1600 50200
Inner support KVH Fichte 470.00 1600 0.1300 4040
Else Existing wall Brick 2000.00 1000 0.9600 50100
Thermal insulation EPS-Rigips RigiBead 035 18.00 1500 0.0350 5
Vapor barrier PE foil 930.00 1800 0.4000 100000
Air layer air (unventilated layer) 1.20 1000 auto 1
Annex Table 3
Exterior wall design requirements and conditions in five climate zones of China.

Climate condition Design condition Exterior climate data for building envelope
calculation
Climate zone Representative Main indicators Secondary indicators Design requirement Winter Summer U value Winter Winter Summer Summer
city heating T cooling T regulatory outdoor outdoor outdoor outdoor
difference difference requirement T RH T RH
[C] [C] [W/m2 K] [C] [%] [C] [%]
Severe cold Harbin Average temperature in the Days of daily average Must fully meet the winter 28 0.40.5 27.2 75 26.8 61

Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

coldest month  10 C temperature  5 C:145 insulation, normally do
not consider the summer
heat proofing
Cold Beijing Average temperature in the Days of daily average Must meet the winter 1828 0.50.6 9.8 37 29.9 58
coldest month: 100 C temperature  5 C:90145 insulation, partly consider
the summer heat proofing
Hot summer & Shanghai Average temperature in the Days of daily average Must meet the summer 818 14 1.0 1.2 74 30.8 69
cold winter coldest month:010 C; temperature  5 C: 090; heat proofing, should (611)
Average temperature in the Days of daily average consider the winter
hottest month: 2530 C temperature  25 C: 49 insulation
110
Hot summer & Guangzhou Average temperature in the Days of daily average Must fully meet the 13 1.5 5.3 74 31.9 66
warm winter coldest month  10 C; temperature  25 C: summer heat proofing, (610)
Average temperature in the 100200 normally do not consider
hottest month: 2529 C the winter insulation
Temperate Kunming Average temperature in the Days of daily average Should partly consider the 11 72 23.1 65
coldest month 013 C; temperature  5 C: 090 winter insulation,
Average temperature in the normally do not consider
hottest month: 1825 C summer heat proofing

859
860 Z. Huang et al. / Construction and Building Materials 156 (2017) 844860

References [24] Puxi Huang, Eshrar Latif, Wen-Shao Chang, Martin P. Ansell, Mike Lawrence,
Water vapour diffusion resistance factor of Phyllostachys edulis (Moso
bamboo) [J], Constr. Build. Mater. 141 (15) (2017) 216221.
[1] Oscar Hidalgo Lpez, Bamboo: The Gift of the Gods [M]. O. Hidalgo-Lopez,
[25] Puxi Huang, Hygrothermal Performance of Moso Bamboo Based Building
(2003).
Material [D], University of Bath, 2007. 105107.
[2] Walter Liese, Michael Khl, Bamboo: The Plant and Its Use [M], Springer, 2015.
[26] Du Fuyuan, Zhang Jianshun, Lin Wenqin, A study on bamboo density [J], J.
[3] Zhang Qisheng, Jiang Shenxue, Tang Yongyu, Industrial Utilization on Bamboo
Bamboo Res. 11 (1) (1992) 5058.
[M]. Technical Report No.26, International Network for Bamboo and Rattan,
[27] Xian Xingjuan, Xian Dingguo, The relationship of microstructure and
(2002).
mechanical properties of bamboo [J], J. Bamboo Res. 9 (3) (1990) 1023.
[4] Wang Ling, Review of industrial utilization ways of bamboo plants [J], J. Anhui
[28] Linhua Zou, Helena Jin, Lu. Wei-Yang, Nanoscale structural and mechanical
Agric. Sci. 39 (17) (2011).
characterization of the cell wall of bamboo fibers [J], Mater. Sci. Eng., C 29
[5] P.M. Ganapathy, Zhu Huan-Ming, S.S. Zoolagud, D. Turcke, Z.B. Espiloy. Bamboo
(2009) 13751379.
Panel Boards: a State-of-the-Art Review [M]. Technical Report No.12,
[29] D. Grosser, Beitrag zur Histologie und Klassifikation asiatischer Bambusarten
International Network for Bamboo and Rattan, (1999).
[D]. Kommissionsverlag Buchhandlung Max Wiedebusch Hamburg, (1971).
[6] LY/T 1660-2006 Standard terminology for bamboo-based panel [S]
[30] Walter Liese, The Anatomy of Bamboo Culms [M]. Technical Report 18,
[7] Yimin Sun, Zujian Huang, Wang Pan, Manufacturing Classification of
International Network for Bamboo and Rattan, (1998).
Bamboo and Comparative Study on Several Physical Properties, Specially
[31] Chen Youdi, Qin Wenlong, Li Xiuling, Gong Jianping, Ni Manna, Study on
Considering the Application in Building Envelope [C], in: Proceedings of
chemical composition of ten species of bamboo. [J], Chem. Ind. For. Prod. 5 (4)
the 31st International PLEA Conference, Ass. Building Green Futures,
(1985) 3239.
Bologna, 2015:651
[32] Hai Lin, Xufeng Xu, Hongzheng Liu, US 8354161 B2 Flattened bamboo panel
[8] Wei Yang, Lu Qingfang, Zhang Qisheng, Yu Yongzhe, Lu Zhitao, Design and
[P]. United States Patent, (2013).
construction of modern bamboo anti-seismic living room [J], Constr. Technol.
[33] Hai Lin, Xufeng Xu, Hongzheng Liu, EP 2066480 B1 Flattened bamboo panel
38 (11) (2009) 5254.
[P]. European Patent, (2007).
[9] Xiao Yan, She Liyong, Shan Bo, Zhou Quan, Yang Ruzhen, Chen Guo, Research
[34] Xu Xufeng, Du Yingzhuo, CN 200960684 Y Bamboo laminated plate [P]. China
and Design of Prefabricated Bamboo House [J], Ind. Constr. 39 (1) (2009) 56
Patent, (2007).
59.
[35] Shan Bo, Xiao Yan, Dou Jianqing, CN 203210470 U Structural bamboo plywood
[10] Xiao Yan, Chen Guo, Shan Bo, Yang Ruizhen, She Liyong, Research and
[P]. China Patent, (2013).
applicant of lightweight glue-laminated bamboo frame structure [J], J. Build.
[36] Zhang Qisheng, Jiang Shenxue, Lin Hai, Xu Xufeng, Liu Hongzheng, Xu Bin, He
Struct. 31 (6) (2010).
Wen, EP 2269788 B1 A recombined bamboo section material and its
[11] H.A.O. Lin, Contemporary bamboo construction for a green future [J], Eco-city
manufacturing method [P]. European Patent, (2009).
and Green Building 4 (2010) 8089.
[37] Chen Xianxin, CN 103465336 A Method for producing bamboo particle board
[12] W.U. Junqi, International Trade of Bamboo and Rattan 2012[R], International
by using bamboo shavings [P]. China Patent, (2013).
Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR), Beijing, 2014.
[38] Qiu Tianxiang, CN 201154506 Y Oriented structure plate of antiskid filmed
[13] Pablo van der Lugt, Joost Vogtlnder, Han Brezet. Bamboo, a Sustainable
bamboo strip and bamboo-wood strips [P]. China Patent, (2008).
Solution for Western Europe - Design Cases, LCAs and Land-use [R]. INBAR,
[39] The State Forest Administration of China, Center forIPR Studies, Analysis of
Technical Report No. 30, 2008-11.
Wood/Bamboo Scrimber Patents [M]. China Forestry Publishing House, 2014
[14] P. Van der Lugt, A. Van den Dobbelsteen, J.J.A. Janssen, An environmental,
[40] M. Van Belleghem, H.J. Steeman, M. Steeman, et al., Sensitivity analysis of CFD
economic and practical assessment of bamboo as a building material for
coupled non-isothermal heat and moisture modelling [J], Build. Environ. 45
supporting structures [J], Constr. Build. Mater. 20 (9) (2006) 648656.
(11) (2010) 24852496.
[15] GB 50176-2016 Code for thermal design of civil building [S]. National
[41] Feng Chi, Study on the Test Methods for the Hygric Properties of Porous
standards of China, (2016).
Building Materials [D], Dissertation of South China University of Technology,
[16] W.U. Xiao-chen, Influence of Envelope Thermal Parameter on Indoor Thermal
2014.
Load Calculations of Public Buildings [J], Building Energy EFFICIENCY 1 (2014)
[42] ASTM D7370-2009: Standard Test Method for Determination of Relative
3436.
Density and Absorption of Fine, Coarse and Blended Aggregate Using
[17] Puxi Huang, Hygrothermal performance of Moso bamboo based building
Combined Vacuum Saturation and Rapid Submersion [S].
material [D], University of Bath, 2007. 105107.
[43] DIN EN 1936-2007: Natural stone test method - Determination of real density
[18] W.U. Shuci, Y.U. Shouyi, H.A.N. Jian, W.U. Yiqiang, Testing and analysis of the
and apparent density, and of total and open porosity; English version of DIN
thermodynamics parameters of Phyllostachys edulis [J], J. Cent. South For.
EN 1936:2007-02 [S].
Univ. 24 (5) (2004) 7075.
[44] ISO 12571:2012: Hygrothermal performance of building materials and
[19] Puxi Huang, Wen-Shao Chang, Martin P. Ansell, Chew Y.M. John, Andy Shea,
products - Determination of hygroscopic sorption properties [S].
Porosity estimation of Phyllostachys edulis (Moso bamboo) by computed
[45] ASTM C1498 - 04a(2016): Standard Test Method for Hygroscopic Sorption
tomography and backscattered electron imaging [J], Wood Sci. Technol. 51 (1)
Isotherms of Building Materials [S].
(2017) 1127.
[46] ISO 15148:2002(E): Hygrothermal performance of building materials and
[20] Puxi Huang, Wen-Shao Chang, Andy Shea, Martin P. Ansell, Mike Lawrence,
products - Determination of water absorption coefficient by partial immersion
Non-homogeneous Thermal Properties of Bamboo [J], in: S. Aicher, H.W.
[S].
Reinhardt, H. Garrecht (Eds.), Materials and Joints in Timber Structures [M],
[47] G.A. Scheffler, R. Plagge, A whole range hygric material model: Modelling
Springer, Netherlands, 2013, pp. 657664.
liquid and vapour transport properties in porous media [J], Int. J. Heat Mass
[21] Puxi Huang, Anita Zeidler, Wen-shao Chang, Martin P. Ansell, Y.M.J. Chew,
Transf. 53 (13) (2010) 286296.
Andy Shea, Specific heat capacity measurement of Phyllostachys edulis (Moso
[48] ISO 12572:2001(E): Hygrothermal performance of building materials and
bamboo) by differential scanning calorimetry [J], Constr. Build. Mater. 125
products - Determination of water vapour transmission properties [S].
(2016) 821831.
[49] ASTM E 96/E 96M-2005: Standard Test Methods for Water Vapor Transmission
[22] Yoshimi Ohmae, Takato Nakano, Water adsorption properties of bamboo in
of Materials [S].
the longitudinal direction [J], Wood Sci. Technol. 43 (56) (2009) 415422.
[50] ISO 11357-4-2005: Plastics - Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) - Part 4:
[23] W.A.N.G. Hankun, Study of the mechanism of moisture affecting the bamboo
Determination of specific heat capacity [S].
fiber cell walls and macroscopic mechanical behavior [D], Central South
[51] ISO 8302-1991: Thermal insulation; determination of steady-state thermal
University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha, 2010.
resistance and related properties; guarded hot plate apparatus [S].