Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 May 23;20(5):e0323011. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0323011

Mechanical properties of raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite cementitious materials and their strengthening mechanism

Xian Fu 1,#, Peng Liu 1,*,#, Dewen Kong 1,#, Yuan Li 1,#, Yongfa Wang 1,#
Editor: Solomon Oyebisi2
PMCID: PMC12101643  PMID: 40408342

Abstract

Phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials (PGCs) typically exhibit low strength and poor toughness when utilized as construction materials. This study explores the incorporation of raw bamboo fibers of varying lengths into PGCs at different ratios to develop raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite materials (BFRPGCs). Firstly, the influence of the water-cement ratio on the mechanical properties of BFRPGCs was investigated through a one-factor experimental approach, leading to the identification of an optimal water-cement ratio. Secondly, the effects of the length and content of raw bamboo fibers on the mechanical properties of BFRPGCs at this optimal water-cement ratio were examined, along with an exploration of the mechanisms by which raw bamboo fibers impact the mechanical properties of the composites, considering their damage modes. Finally, the microstructure of BFRPGCs was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), which elucidated the mechanisms through which raw bamboo fibers influence the working and mechanical properties of the composites. The results demonstrated that the incorporation of raw bamboo fibers significantly enhanced the mechanical strength of the specimens. Specifically, when the length of the bamboo fibers was 12 mm and the doping amount was 1.0%, the compressive and flexural strengths of BFRPGCs reached their maxima at 28.99 MPa and 8.41 MPa, respectively. These values represent increases of 123.73% and 169.82% compared to the control group. Additionally, hydration-generated calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H) gels and calcium aluminate (AFt) phases formed a skeletal support around the CaSO₄·2H₂O, reinforcing the matrix structure. Furthermore, numerous hydration products adhered to the surfaces of the raw bamboo fibers, resulting in enhanced adhesion between the fibers and the matrix. This study provides valuable insights for the research and application of fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based building materials.

1. Introduction

Phosphogypsum is a byproduct generated during phosphate production, primarily composed of calcium sulfate dihydrate. The substantial accumulation of phosphogypsum, coupled with severe environmental pollution and low utilization rates, underscores the urgent need for effective recycling and reuse strategies [13]. As of 2024, China’s stockpile of phosphogypsum has surpassed 600 million tons, increasing by over 80 million tons annually, with storage facilities approaching capacity [46]. The comprehensive utilization of phosphogypsum encompasses three main avenues: 1) its application as a construction material [79], 2) its use in agriculture [1012], and 3) its decomposition for sulfuric acid production, which is essential for cement co-production [1315]. Among these, the use of phosphogypsum in construction has gained prominence, yet the inherent limitations of phosphogypsum-based building materials, characterized by poor toughness and low strength, hinder its widespread adoption in the construction sector [4,16,17].

To enhance the mechanical properties of phosphogypsum and broaden its construction applications, numerous studies have been conducted globally. However, practical engineering applications face challenges: steel fibers are prone to corrosion when exposed to air [18,19], polypropylene (PP) fibers exhibit low tensile strength [20,21], polyvinyl alcohol fibers are costly [22,23], and glass and asbestos fibers pose health hazards [24,25]. In contrast, plant fibers are natural polymer materials with specific chemical compositions [26,27], drawing significant attention due to their safety, availability, biodegradability, and potential for sustainable regeneration [2830]. Among these, bamboo fiber—a rapidly renewable plant fiber—exhibits mechanical properties comparable to traditional fiber-reinforced cement, significantly enhancing the toughness of composite cementitious materials [31,32]. Moreover, bamboo fibre-reinforced phosphogypsum has been demonstrated to exhibit distinct advantages over conventional fibre-reinforced materials with regard to environmental friendliness, resource and sustainability, and compatibility with biodegradable materials.

Current research on bamboo fibers focuses on their application as a substitute for traditional fiber-reinforced geopolymers and cementitious materials. For instance, Correia et al. [33] demonstrated that bamboo fibers could effectively reinforce cement, resulting in mechanical properties similar to those of conventional fiber-reinforced composites. Zhou et al. [34] introduced a novel bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composite wall, highlighting the synergistic benefits of raw bamboo and phosphogypsum for green building applications. Bala et al. [35] explored bamboo reinforcement in concrete, finding that an admixture of approximately 4% bamboo significantly improved the material’s strength and toughness while minimizing cracking. Liu et al. [36] developed a stress-strain principal model for raw bamboo and phosphogypsum, proposing a calculation method for the load-bearing capacity of combined short columns, supported by experiments involving bamboo cylinders filled with phosphogypsum and finite element analysis. While bamboo is widely utilized in the construction industry, its composite products with gypsum are largely limited to gypsum walls, panels, and bricks. Consequently, there is a notable lack of research on raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite cementitious materials. Exploring the potential of raw bamboo fibers to reinforce phosphogypsum cementitious materials could significantly improve the overall utilization rate of phosphogypsum.

In this study, we prepared raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite materials (BFRPGCs) by blending raw bamboo fibers with phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials to optimize the properties of these composites. A one-way experimental design was employed to investigate the effect of the water-cement ratio on BFRPGCs, identifying the optimal ratio for enhanced performance. Under this optimal water-cement ratio, we analyzed the effects of fiber length, doping amount, and their interactions on composite properties. Additionally, the microscopic characteristics of bamboo fibers within phosphogypsum-based building materials were examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and the mechanisms by which bamboo fibers influence the properties of phosphogypsum-based composites were explored. This research aims to provide valuable insights for the development and application of fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based building materials.

2. Experimental program

2.1. Material

2.1.1. Phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials.

The principal raw materials employed in this experiment included phosphogypsum, cement, silica fume, quicklime, and a water-reducing agent. Phosphogypsum was sourced from Guizhou Kaifu Phosphogypsum Comprehensive Utilization Co., while the cement utilized was ordinary silicate cement (P.O. 42.5) produced by Guiyang Conch Panjiang Cement Plant. Silica fume, primarily composed of SiO₂, was obtained from Henan Gongyi Baichuan Environmental Protection Engineering Co., Ltd. Quicklime, containing over 97% active CaO, was procured from Sichuan Yibin Sichuan Fume Biotechnology Co., Ltd. Additionally, the polycarboxylic acid water-reducing agent was purchased from Shanghai Chenqi Chemical Technology Co. Both primary phosphogypsum (DPG) and hemihydrate phosphogypsum (HPG) were utilized in this study. The preparation method was as follows: the phosphogypsum was crushed, naturally dried, and sieved to obtain DPG. This DPG was then calcined in an oven at 160 °C for 2 hours, followed by a sealing process for natural aging over 7 days to yield HPG [37]. Fig 1 illustrates the X-ray diffractograms of the two types of phosphogypsum, while Table 1 presents the chemical composition of the principal raw materials.

Fig 1. XRD pattern of DPG, HPG.

Fig 1

Table 1. Detailed chemical composition of raw materials.
Materials SO3 CaO SiO2 P2O5 Fe2O3 Al2O3 MgO K2O
DPG 52.009 43.869 1.863 0.878 0.564 0.315 0.036 0.078
HPG 54.163 42.033 1.709 0.918 0.471 0.294 0.017 0.074
Cement 3.962 61.713 19.897 0.169 4.456 5.155 1.725 1.196
Silica fume 0.316 0.130 96.030 0.011 0.078 0.280 0.107 0.191
Quicklime 0.263 97.231 0.448 0.003 0.132 0.139 1.902 0.030

2.1.2. Raw bamboo fibres.

The bamboo fibers used in this study were bundled natural yellow bamboo fibers (Fig 2(a)) sourced from Sichuan Changsheng New Material Technology Co. Their performance parameters are detailed in Table 2, while their microscopic morphology is depicted in Fig 2(b). The lengths of the raw bamboo fibers employed in the experiments were 4 mm, 8 mm, 12 mm, and 16 mm, which were prepared through both manual and mechanical cutting methods.

Fig 2. Macroscopic and microscopic morphology of raw bamboo fibres.

Fig 2

Table 2. Physical and mechanical properties of raw bamboo fibres.
Density
(g•cm − 3)
Average diameter (mm) Tensile
strength
(MPa)
Elastic
Modulus
(GPa)
Elongation
(%)
1.3-1.5 0.18 350-800 25-45 2.5-5.8

2.2. Method

2.2.1. Experimental design.

In the pre-experiment, we observed that when the water-cement ratio was below 0.25, the workability of PGCs was poor and difficult to handle. On the other hand, when the water-cement ratio exceeded 0.45, the strength of PGCs decreased. Based on these findings, we conducted a one-factor experiment with water-cement ratio as the influencing factor, ranging from 0.25 to 0.45. The optimal water-cement ratio of 0.275 was determined, with raw bamboo fiber length fixed at 8 mm and doping amount at 1.0%. The initial experiment employed a one-way design, focusing primarily on the water-cement ratio. The optimal water-cement ratio of 0.275 was determined while maintaining the length of the raw bamboo fibers at 8 mm and the dosage at 1.0 wt %. Following this, the effects of fiber length and dosage on the mechanical properties of bamboo fiber-reinforced polymer concrete (BFRPGCs) were investigated. The lengths of the raw bamboo fibers were 4 mm, 8 mm, 12 mm, and 16 mm, with the fiber dosage for each length set at four levels: 0, 0.50, 1.0, and 1.5 wt%. The experimental design is summarized in Table 3. In this study, samples were labeled according to the length and dosage of the raw bamboo fibers. For instance, the designation “BF8-1.0” indicates a fiber length of 8 mm with a dosage of 1.0 wt %.

Table 3. Mixing ratio design for BFRPGCs.
Mix Powder proportion (wt.%) Fiber
Length/mm
Fiber
Length/%
Designation PG Cement Silica fume Quicklime
DPG HPG
BF00 60 40 15 5 4 0 0
BF4-0.5 60 40 15 5 4 4 0.5
BF4-1.0 60 40 15 5 4 4 1.0
BF4-1.5 60 60 15 5 4 4 1.5
BF8-0.5 60 40 15 5 4 8 0.5
BF8-1.0 60 40 15 5 4 8 1.0
BF8-1.5 60 40 15 5 4 8 1.5
BF12-0.5 60 60 15 5 4 12 0.5
BF12-1.0 60 60 15 5 4 12 1.0
BF12-1.5 60 40 15 5 4 12 1.5
BF16-0.5 60 40 15 5 4 16 0.5
BF16-1.0 60 40 15 5 4 16 1.0
BF16-1.5 60 60 15 5 4 16 1.5

2.2.2. Specimen making.

The mass ratio of DPG to HPG was set at 60:40, with the remaining components comprising 15% cement, 5% silica fume, and 4% quicklime, relative to the total mass of the polymer grout (PG). Additionally, the bamboo fibers used in each experimental trial were weighed according to the specifications outlined in Table 3. A water-reducing agent was consistently mixed at a concentration of 0.2% across all experiments, and the water-to-material ratio was established at 0.275. Initially, the aforementioned powders were combined and blended thoroughly. Water was then added, followed by blending and stirring: first at a slow speed for 30 seconds, and subsequently at a high speed for 90 seconds using an electric mixer, to achieve a homogeneously mixed slurry. This slurry was poured into a mold with dimensions of 40 mm × 40 mm × 160 mm and was removed from the mold once the final setting had occurred. The specimens underwent curing for 7 days and 28 days under natural conditions at a temperature of 20 ± 2 °C. Following the curing periods, a series of performance tests were conducted on the specimens. All physical and mechanical property experiments were performed at the School of Civil Engineering Testing Center at Guizhou University.

2.3. Experimental test methods

Upon completion of the specified maintenance procedures, the samples will be transferred to an oven set at a temperature of 40 ± 2 °C until their quality stabilizes. Subsequently, the specimens will undergo mechanical properties testing [38]. The determination of compressive and flexural strength of bamboo fiber-reinforced polymer concrete (BFRPGCs) will be conducted in accordance with GB/T 17669.3-1999, titled “Determination of Mechanical Properties of Building Gypsum” [39].

2.3.1. Compressive strength.

The 7d and 28d compressive strength tests were conducted using a YA-300 microcomputer-controlled electro-hydraulic servo pressure tester, produced by Changchun Kexin Testing Instruments Co.

2.3.2. Flexural strength.

The flexural strength tests, conducted on a 7-day and 28-day timescale, were performed using a DKZ-5000 electric flexural tester, produced by Jianyi Zhongke Instruments.

2.3.3. Micromorphological analysis.

The micro-morphological observations of the specimens were conducted using a TESCAN MIRA LMS scanning electron microscope, manufactured in the Czech Republic.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Effect of water-cement ratio on mechanical properties of BFRPGCs

Fig 3 illustrates the effect of the water-cement ratio on the compressive strength of bamboo fiber-reinforced polymer concrete (BFRPGCs). As shown in the figure, the 7-day and 28-day compressive strengths of BFRPGCs gradually decrease as the water-cement ratio increases from 0.250 to 0.450. At a water-cement ratio of 0.250, the 7-day compressive strength is 19.02 MPa, and the 28-day compressive strength is 27.08 MPa, representing the maximum values. In contrast, at a water-cement ratio of 0.450, the 7-day compressive strength drops to 1.66 MPa, and the 28-day compressive strength decreases to 2.41 MPa, indicating the minimum values. Increasing the water-cement ratio provides an adequate water environment for the hydration process of phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials, allowing the hydration reaction to proceed smoothly. However, excessive water can lead to issues such as water secretion and delamination of the material during the hardening process [40]. These phenomena compromise the internal structure of the matrix, leading to the formation of defects such as cracks and voids. Additionally, the evaporation of excess water creates more pores, resulting in increased porosity as the water-cement ratio continues to rise. This leads to a less dense internal cementation of the specimen and causes stress concentration when subjected to pressure, which is macroscopically manifested as a reduction in compressive strength.

Fig 3. Effect of water-cement ratio on compressive strength of BFRPGCs.

Fig 3

Fig 4 demonstrates the influence of the water-cement ratio on the flexural strength of BFRPGCs. The data indicate that the flexural strengths at both 7 days and 28 days decrease progressively as the water-cement ratio increases from 0.250 to 0.450. Specifically, at a water-cement ratio of 0.250, the 7-day flexural strength reaches 6.71 MPa, while the 28-day flexural strength peaks at 8.05 MPa, representing the highest values recorded. In contrast, at a water-cement ratio of 0.450, the 7-day flexural strength falls to 1.54 MPa, and the 28-day strength declines to 1.85 MPa, marking the lowest values observed. As the water-cement ratio increases, the higher water content leads to a greater retention of free water during the hardening process of phosphorite-based cementitious materials. The evaporation of this free water results in pore formation, which subsequently increases the material’s porosity. An increase in porosity compromises the internal structure of the phosphogypsum matrix, leading to a reduction in density. Consequently, the specimens become more prone to fracture under external loads. Additionally, the increase in porosity, combined with a more heterogeneous distribution of voids, weakens the bonding strength within the phosphogypsum matrix. This further enhances the material’s vulnerability to fracture when subjected to bending moments.

Fig 4. Effect of water-cement ratio on flexural strength of BFRPGCs.

Fig 4

In addition, the experiments revealed a delamination phenomenon in the bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composite cementitious material when the water-cement ratio exceeded 0.325. At a water-cement ratio of 0.250, the formation of this composite material was hindered, leading to a tendency for bamboo fibers to agglomerate. Consequently, it is essential to maintain a moderately high water-cement ratio to prevent low strength and delamination while ensuring that it is not too low to avoid mixing difficulties. Although the compressive strength at 7 days and 28 days for a water-cement ratio of 0.275 was found to be 3.36% and 6.87% lower, respectively, than that at a water-cement ratio of 0.250, the flexural strength at 7 days and 28 days was observed to be 2.39% and 2.36% lower than at the lower ratio. A comparison of Fig 3 and Fig 4 indicates that the reductions in compressive and flexural strengths at a water-cement ratio of 0.275 are minor compared to those observed at 0.250. However, once the water-cement ratio exceeds 0.300, a significant decline in both compressive and flexural strengths is noted. Thus, the optimal water-cement ratio for the bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composite cementitious material is determined to be 0.275.

3.2. Effect of bamboo fibres on the mechanical properties of BFRPGCs

3.2.1. Effect of bamboo fiber on flexural strength of BFRPGCs.

Fig 5 illustrates the variation in flexural strength of bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composites (BFRPGCs) as a function of bamboo fiber length and doping amount. Without the addition of bamboo fibers, the 7-day and 28-day flexural strengths of PGCs were 4.31 MPa and 4.95 MPa, respectively. After the incorporation of bamboo fibers, the flexural strength of BFRPGCs gradually increased with the increase in fiber content, while the length of the bamboo fibers remained constant. In terms of 7-day flexural strength, it was observed that for a bamboo fiber length of 16 mm, the flexural strength of the specimens declined as the dosage increased. For the 28-day flexural strength, when the fiber length exceeded 8 mm, the specimens exhibited an initial increase in flexural strength followed by a decrease with rising dosage. Upon determining the optimal dosage of bamboo fibers, it was found that both the 7-day and 28-day flexural strengths of BFRPGCs initially increased before declining with longer bamboo fiber lengths. Notably, for a low dosage of 0.5%, the 7-day flexural strength of the specimens increased with longer fibers, although this trend was not particularly pronounced. For specimens with a bamboo fiber length of 12 mm, the 7-day flexural strength peaked at 7.07 MPa with a doping level of 1.5%, representing a 64.04% increase compared to the control group. For the 28-day flexural strength in specimens with a bamboo fiber length of 12 mm, the maximum value reached 8.41 MPa at a dosage of 1.0%, corresponding to a 69.90% increase relative to the control group. When the length of bamboo fibers exceeds 12 mm, the flexural strength of the samples decreases as the content increases. For the specimen with a bamboo fiber content of 1.5%, the flexural strength at 7 days and 28 days were 5.75 MPa and 6.62 MPa, respectively, which represent reductions of 18.67% and 21.28% compared to the maximum group. In conclusion, the incorporation of bamboo fibers has been shown to enhance the flexural strength of the specimens, with the optimal performance observed when the length of the bamboo fibers is 12 mm.

Fig 5. Variation of flexural strength of BFRPGCs.

Fig 5

As illustrated in Fig 5, increasing both the length and the doping of bamboo fibers enhances the flexural strength of bamboo fiber reinforced glass composites (BFRGCs). This improvement is attributed to the longer fibers, which, when the specimen is subjected to a bending load, reinforce the bonding capacity within the matrix [41]. Additionally, higher fiber doping increases the number of interfaces, further contributing to this effect. However, it was observed that when the length of the bamboo fibers exceeded 12 mm, there was no significant enhancement in the flexural strength of the specimens at 7 and 28 days, despite the effects of fiber doping and length. This lack of improvement may result from the uneven distribution of fibers within the matrix, which can lead to defects caused by the increased fiber length and doping [42]. This observation aligns with previous studies [43,44], that concluded that the enhancement of the flexural properties of gypsum materials by fibers is primarily due to mechanical occlusion, interfacial adhesion, and cohesion between the fibers and the matrix. Moreover, a densely formed fiber-matrix interfacial transition zone (ITZ) is established between the fibers and the matrix. The superior tensile strength and fracture toughness of bamboo fibers enable a robust interface that effectively resists internal tensile stresses and absorbs substantial energy, thereby minimizing internal damage and cracking. Additionally, cracks that span the BFRGCs can serve as load bridges, enhancing the stress field within the matrix and significantly improving the overall toughness of the material [45].

3.2.2. Effect of bamboo fiber on compressive strength of BFRPGCs.

Fig 6 illustrates the relationship between the compressive strength of Bamboo Fiber Reinforced Geopolymer Composites (BFRPGCs), the length of bamboo fibers, and the amount of doping. Without the addition of bamboo fibers, the 7-day and 28-day compressive strengths of PGCs were 16.20 MPa and 23.43 MPa, respectively. After the addition of bamboo fibers, the 7-day compressive strength of BFRPGCs increased gradually with the increase in fiber content, provided that the length of the bamboo fibers remained unchanged and did not exceed 12 mm. However, when the fiber length is increased to 16 mm, a decline in compressive strength occurs with the addition of doping. For the 28-day compressive strength of BFRPGCs, a similar trend is observed. When the fiber length is less than 12 mm, compressive strength increases steadily with higher doping levels. Beyond this length, the compressive strength of the specimens initially increases and then decreases with increasing doping amounts. Once the bamboo fiber dosage is set, both the 7-day and 28-day compressive strengths of BFRPGCs demonstrate a pattern of initial increase followed by a decrease as the fiber length increases. Notably, for a lower dosage of 0.5%, the compressive strengths at both 7 days and 28 days show a gradual increase with longer fibers, although this trend is less pronounced. As depicted in Fig 6, with a fixed bamboo fiber length of 12 mm and a doping level of 1.5%, the 7-day compressive strength reached a maximum of 19.35 MPa, representing a 19.44% increase compared to the control group. In specimens with a bamboo fiber length of 12 mm, the highest compressive strength for those with 1.0% doping was recorded at 28 days, achieving 28.99 MPa, which is a 23.73% increase over the control group. When the length of bamboo fibers exceeds 12 mm, the flexural strength of the samples first increases and then decreases with the increase in content. For the specimen with a bamboo fiber content of 1.5%, the compressive strength at 7 days and 28 days were 16.62 MPa and 23.42 MPa, respectively, which represent reductions of 14.11% and 19.21% compared to the maximum group. In conclusion, the addition of bamboo fibers significantly enhances the compressive strength of the specimens. The optimal compressive strength is achieved with bamboo fiber lengths of 12 mm. This enhancement can be attributed to the fibers’ ability to restrict crack propagation and increase porosity [46,47]. However, if porosity increases beyond the capacity to limit crack growth, the compressive strength will decrease. Conversely, a manageable increase in porosity, while effectively limiting crack extension, can improve compressive strength [48].

Fig 6. Variation of compressive strength of BFRPGCs.

Fig 6

Fig 6 illustrates that the capacity of long fibers to enhance the compressive strength of the matrix is significantly greater than that of short fibers. This difference arises primarily from the fact that short fibers contribute to a suboptimal pore structure, which can result in considerable adverse stress. In contrast, the incorporation of long fibers leads to a more effective hoop effect, enhancing the overall integrity of the matrix. However, it is important to note that excessive fiber length may lead to uneven mixing and the formation of agglomerates, which can concentrate local stresses within the matrix. This concentration can influence the damage mode of the specimen and adversely affect overall compression performance [42,49,50]. Additionally, Fig 6 indicates that the ability of bamboo fibers to enhance the compressive strength of the matrix is not easily discernible at low dosages. Moreover, the compressive strength of the specimen is significantly reduced when the dosage is excessively high and prolonged. This reduction is primarily due to the fact that fiber over-dispersion at lower dosages is more prone to creating unfavorable pressure conditions. Conversely, an excessive quantity of fibers, especially when both numerous and lengthy, can lead to poor dispersion and the formation of agglomerates, ultimately increasing the porosity of the matrix [37,49].

3.3. Destruction patterns of BFRPGCs

Fig 7(a) illustrates the flexural strength failure of the specimens. Upon applying the load, the control group specimens exhibited the formation of penetrating cracks at their midpoint. This phenomenon can be attributed to the presence of voids within the phosphogypsum matrix. As the loading increased, the cracks propagated from the bottom upwards until the bond within the phosphogypsum matrix could no longer withstand the additional stress, resulting in specimen failure. The incorporation of bamboo fibers resulted in a random distribution of fibers that provided support to the gypsum matrix. Upon the formation of cracks, the bamboo fibers within the phosphogypsum matrix facilitated a “bridging effect,” effectively constraining the propagation of crack growth and enhancing the flexural strength of the specimens. This transformation reflects a shift in damage behavior from brittle to ductile in phosphogypsum cementitious materials (PGCs) to bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum cementitious materials (BFRPGCs). Upon reaching the maximum maximum load capacity, the samples in the blank group underwent brittle damage and sudden fracture, while the samples with added bamboo fibers underwent continuation damage and initiated the process of cracking [37]. This change is attributed to the bonding network established by the bamboo fibers, which enhances the continuity of the matrix, allowing for more effective regulation of crack width. Furthermore, as depicted in Fig 7(a), the majority of the observed cracks exhibit an oblique curvature, which can be explained by the extension of cracks along the porous zones. When subjected to bending loads, the upper load-bearing region of the specimen experiences compression, while the area between the two lower load-bearing points is subjected to tensile stresses. The integration of bamboo fibers into phosphogypsum-based composite cementitious materials enhances their tensile modulus, resulting in anisotropic behavior and improved tensile capacity in the lower portion of the matrix.

Fig 7. Damage pattern of the specimen.

Fig 7

Fig 7(b) illustrates the damage morphology of phosphogypsum composites (PGCs) and bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composites (BFRPGCs) under vertical pressure. The results indicate that samples without added bamboo fibers exhibit fractures and partial spalling. When the pores within the phosphogypsum matrix experience longitudinal compression, stress concentration occurs, leading to the formation of transverse cracks that gradually penetrate the material. As the load continues to increase, these cracks extend outward, ultimately compromising the integrity of the specimens once they breach the surface. In contrast, the specimens containing bamboo fibers demonstrate a different fracture behavior, characterized by vertical cracking primarily at the edges of the compression zone. The incorporation of fibers allows the samples to undergo longitudinal compression while being supported transversely by the bridging effect of the bamboo fibers. This reinforcement significantly mitigates the propagation of cracks in the longitudinal direction. Upon reaching the ultimate load, the decrease in load is minimal, and the specimens exhibit a “failure without separation” behavior.

3.4. Microanalysis

In this study, the microstructure of bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composites (BFRPGCs) was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to investigate the hydration reaction process. As illustrated in Fig 8 (a), the hydration products of BFRPGCs primarily consist of calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H) gels, calcite alumina (AFt), and a substantial quantity of calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO4·2H2O). Furthermore, in the control samples, a multitude of pores is evident in Fig 8 (a), resulting from the extensive spaces between the massive calcium sulfate dihydrate crystals and the expansion of the hydration products (e.g., AFt). In subsequent phases, this phenomenon may lead to the formation of minor fissures [51]. Fig 8 (b) illustrates that in the specimen doped with bamboo fibers, the fibers are embedded within the matrix, with their surfaces extensively adhered to hydration products.

Fig 8. Test image of the sample.

Fig 8

This observation suggests a favorable bond between the matrix and the bamboo fibers, resulting in the formation of a relatively dense interfacial transition zone (ITZ) and an improved pore structure. This robust interaction effectively constrains the relative movement between the bamboo fibers and the matrix when an external load is applied [52,53], while simultaneously impeding the swelling that occurs as a result of the formation and development of hydration products. As illustrated in Fig 7(b), the hydration products are firmly attached to the surfaces of the bamboo fibers. This strong adhesion can be attributed to two factors: the large specific surface area and rough texture of the bamboo fibers [54], as previously discussed, along with the fibers’ favorable hydrophilicity [55], which enables them to absorb and retain a portion of the free water, facilitating the precipitation of hydration products on their surfaces.

Fig 9 presents the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composites (BFRPGCs) with varying degrees of bamboo fiber doping. Hardened phosphogypsum is characterized as a porous material; consequently, the interior of the phosphogypsum composites contains numerous pores when no fibers are incorporated, as illustrated in Fig 9(a). The introduction of bamboo fibers enhances the hydrophilicity of the composite, promoting a more effective integration with the phosphogypsum matrix and resulting in an increased internal density in the resulting BFRPGCs. Fig 9 further illustrates that when the amount of bamboo fibers is insufficient, they fail to disperse thoroughly and uniformly within the gypsum matrix, leading to greater distances between the fibers (Fig 9(b)). In contrast, with a moderate bamboo fiber content, the fibers are evenly distributed throughout the matrix without entanglement or agglomeration, as demonstrated in Fig 9(c). However, at high bamboo fiber concentrations, the dispersion capacity of the fibers within the matrix becomes inadequate, resulting in tendencies to cross, tangle, and agglomerate, yielding an uneven distribution (refer to Fig 9(d)). The hydrophilicity of bamboo fibers facilitates the precipitation and crystallization of calcium sulfate dihydrate on their surfaces, which enhances adhesion between the fibers and the phosphogypsum matrix. This interaction results in a more compact internal structure of the BFRPGCs, thereby improving the bridging effect of the fibers [56]. Consequently, additional doping with bamboo fibers is required to address the voids and imperfections present within the specimen. Conversely, excessive doping leads to agglomeration, characterized by comparatively minimal phosphogypsum content in these irregularly distributed zones. Moreover, the surfaces of the fibers exhibit a reduced quantity of hydration products, which ultimately diminishes matrix density and compromises the strength of the BFRPGCs.

Fig 9. SEM images of BFRPGCs specimens at different doping levels.

Fig 9

3.5. Mechanism of mechanical properties strengthening of BFEPGCs

The model of bamboo fiber reinforced phosphogypsum composites (BFRPGCs) with varying bamboo fiber lengths at a constant dosage is illustrated in Fig 10. The incorporation of short bamboo fibers facilitates a degree of bridging; however, their limited length leads to rapid displacement following crack formation within the BFRPGCs (see Fig 10 (a)). As a result, the observed enhancement in strength is relatively modest. In contrast, with the increase in bamboo fiber length, the bonding between the fibers and the phosphogypsum matrix becomes more robust, effectively preventing fiber pullout and crack propagation, thereby enhancing strength (Fig 10 (b)). Nevertheless, as the length of the bamboo fibers continues to increase, their dispersion ability within the slurry becomes increasingly constrained, leading to an uneven distribution characterized by clumps, tangles, and intersections (as illustrated in Fig 10 (c)). Upon hardening of the slurry, this uneven distribution of phosphogypsum in these areas generates stress concentration points, ultimately diminishing the strength of the specimens. Moreover, if the length of the bamboo fibers is insufficient to reach the critical length, the phosphogypsum matrix may be incapable of effectively transferring load to the fibers, resulting in a reduction in the flexural strength of the specimens. When the length of the bamboo fibers is moderate and meets the critical length, they can effectively share the load and provide adequate deformation capacity, thereby significantly enhancing the flexural strength of the specimens [57].

Fig 10. Model of BFRPGCs with different bamboo fiber lengths at the same doping level.

Fig 10

The model of bamboo fiber reinforced polymer composites (BFRPCs) with different bamboo fiber doping of the same length can be found in Fig 11. When the bamboo fiber doping is less, the fibers in the matrix are more dispersed (as in Fig 11(a)), and the bond generated between the fibers and the matrix is not readily apparent, resulting in a relatively modest improvement in strength. As the amount of doping increases, the bamboo fibers become more evenly distributed throughout the matrix (see Fig 11(b)). This results in a stronger bond between the fibers and the matrix, which enhances the material’s overall strength. When the bamboo fiber doping is excessive, the bamboo fibers exhibit inadequate dispersion within the slurry, resulting in cross-links, tangles, and an uneven distribution (Fig 11(c)). It increases the number of pores and defects within the matrix, significantly reducing the material’s strength. It can thus be concluded that the addition of moderate amounts of bamboo fibers to the matrix results in the uniform attachment of hydration products to the surface of the fibers. It effectively increases the interaction force between the fibers and the matrix, enhancing the mechanical properties of the BFRPGCs [4].

Fig 11. Model of BFRPGCs with different bamboo fiber blends of the same length.

Fig 11

The phosphogypsum matrix is observed to exhibit brittleness under bending loads in transverse tension (Fig 12(a)). The addition of bamboo fibers to the phosphogypsum matrix serves to prevent the development of cracks through the phenomenon of “bridging effect” (Fig 12(b)). The bamboo fibers within the specimens were selected for analysis, and the resulting loads are illustrated in Fig 14(a). The combined force (P) can be divided into two components: the tensile force (P1) along the fiber direction (P1 = P cos α) and the tensile force (P2) perpendicular to the fiber direction (P2 = P sin α), representing the adhesion force between the bamboo fibers and the phosphogypsum matrix. When the angle α between the bamboo fibers and the transverse direction P is 0°, P1 = P, and P2 = 0, the bamboo fibers are subjected to a tensile force of P. Conversely, when α is 90°, P1 = 0, and P2 = P, the bamboo fibers do not undergo any tensile strain. When the bamboo fibers are distributed uniformly in the matrix, the external force is applied, the stress on the specimen is more uniform, the cracks in the phosphogypsum matrix are effectively limited, and the flexural strength is increased. However, when the bamboo fibers on the specimen are agglomerated, the specimen will exhibit a stress concentration phenomenon after being subjected to an external force. The microcracks in the phosphogypsum matrix will only be partially limited, and the flexural strength will only be increased to a certain extent.

Fig 12. Analysis of flexural strength tests.

Fig 12

Fig 14. Strength test analysis of BFRPGCs.

Fig 14

When the blank group specimens were subjected to longitudinal compression, a multitude of longitudinal cracks emerged on the surface, resulting in the two sides being crushed and the surface assuming a “saddle-shaped” appearance (Fig 13(a)). The addition of bamboo fibers resulted in the suppression of longitudinal cracks due to the bridging effect of the fibers (Fig 13(b)). A single bamboo fiber from the specimen was selected for examination, and the loading is illustrated in Fig 14(b) below. The longitudinal pressure (F) can be divided into two components: the pressure (F1) along the direction of the bamboo fibers (F1 = Fcosβ) and the pressure (F2) perpendicular to the direction of the bamboo fibers (F2 = Fsinβ). When the angle β between the bamboo fiber and the pressure F is 0°, F1 = F and F2 = 0, the direction of the bamboo fiber is parallel to the direction of the force, and the pressure on the bamboo fiber is the F pressure. When β equals 90°, F1 is equal to 0, and F2 is equal to F. In this case, the direction of the bamboo fiber is perpendicular to the direction of the force, which is primarily resisted by the shear properties of the bamboo fiber.

Fig 13. Analysis of compressive strength tests.

Fig 13

When subjected to longitudinal compression, specimens exhibiting a uniform distribution of bamboo fibers demonstrated a marked increase in resistance to crack development, thereby enhancing their compressive strength. In contrast, the presence of non-uniform distributions of bamboo fibers leads to the formation of stress concentration phenomena, which ultimately diminishes compressive strength.

4. Conclusions

This study investigates the mechanical properties of raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite cementitious materials (BFRPGCs) and elucidates their reinforcement mechanisms. The following conclusions can be drawn from the investigation:

  • (1)

    An increase in the water-cement ratio results in a reduction of the mechanical properties of BFRPGCs. This decline can be attributed to several interrelated factors, including increased porosity, incomplete hydration, the presence of air bubbles, and delamination.

  • (2)

    The incorporation of bamboo fibers significantly enhances the mechanical properties of BFRPGCs. Among the variables tested, the compressive and flexural strengths of BFRPGCs at 28 days were maximized with a fiber length of 12 mm and a doping amount of 1.0%. These strengths exhibited increases of 123.73% and 169.82%, respectively, when compared to the control group.

  • (3)

    The SEM results indicate that raw bamboo fibers demonstrate strong adhesion to the phosphogypsum composite matrix. This adhesion is primarily attributed to the rough surface texture and high water absorption capacity of natural bamboo fibers, which facilitate the attachment of a substantial quantity of hydration products to the fiber surfaces.

  • (4)

    The mechanism underlying the enhancement of mechanical properties in BFRPGCs was investigated through an analysis of the stress damage patterns associated with bamboo fibers. It was determined that fibers of moderate length provide a more uniform distribution within the composite, effectively inhibiting crack propagation in the phosphogypsum composites and exhibiting a more pronounced “bridging effect.”

5. Challenges and prospects

Although this study demonstrated the positive effects of raw bamboo fibers on the properties of phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials, a critical challenge remains in translating these results from laboratory conditions to practical industrial applications, especially with regard to ensuring uniform fiber dispersion. Experimentally, we have improved fiber dispersion by optimizing the fiber pretreatment processes (e.g., drying, artificial dispersion, etc.). However, under industrial-scale production conditions, achieving uniform fiber distribution remains a significant challenge. Therefore, future research should focus on the use of efficient mixing technologies, such as high-shear mixers or ultrasonic dispersing equipment, to further improve fiber dispersion and distribution uniformity. Additionally, given the natural characteristics of raw bamboo fibers, their hydrophilicity and hygroscopicity may impact the large-scale production process. As such, further process optimization is essential for future work. We believe that with continuous improvements in both the production process and equipment, the application of raw bamboo fibers in phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials holds great promise and can contribute to the development of the green building materials industry.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the reviewers and editors for their valuable comments, which greatly improved this manuscript.

Data Availability

All experimental data files are available from the Figshare database (accession number 10.6084/m9.figshare.28130249).

Funding Statement

Guizhou Provincial Basic Research Program (Natural Science) (Qiankehejichu-ZK[2023] General 067 to PL); the Guizhou Provincial Basic Research Program (Natural Science) (Qiankehejichu MS[2025] 677 to PL); the Innovation Fund of Guizhou University Survey and Design Institute Co. Design Institute Co., Ltd. (Guidakancha [2022] 05 to YL).

References

  • 1.Amrani M, Taha Y, Kchikach A, Benzaazoua M, Hakkou R. Phosphogypsum recycling: New horizons for a more sustainable road material application. Journal of Building Engineering. 2020;30:101267. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101267 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Rashad AM. Phosphogypsum as a construction material. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017;166:732–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.049 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Zeng L-L, Bian X, Zhao L, Wang Y-J, Hong Z-S. Effect of phosphogypsum on physiochemical and mechanical behaviour of cement stabilized dredged soil from Fuzhou, China. Geomechanics for Energy and the Environment. 2021;25:100195. doi: 10.1016/j.gete.2020.100195 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Huang R, Tao Z, Wu L, Shen J, Xu W. Investigation of Workability and Mechanical Properties of PVA Fiber-Reinforced Phosphogypsum-Based Composite Materials. Materials (Basel). 2023;16(12):4244. doi: 10.3390/ma16124244 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cui Y, Bai J, Chang I-S, Wu J. A systematic review of phosphogypsum recycling industry based on the survey data in China – applications, drivers, obstacles, and solutions. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2024;105:107405. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107405 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Wei Z, Deng Z. Research hotspots and trends of comprehensive utilization of phosphogypsum: Bibliometric analysis. J Environ Radioact. 2022;242:106778. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2021.106778 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Mun KJ, Hyoung WK, Lee CW, So SY, Soh YS. Basic properties of non-sintering cement using phosphogypsum and waste lime as activator. Construction and Building Materials. 2007;21(6):1342–50. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.12.022 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Li X, Zhang Q. Dehydration behaviour and impurity change of phosphogypsum during calcination. Construction and Building Materials. 2021;311:125328. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125328 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ding C, Sun T, Shui Z, Xie Y, Ye Z. Physical properties, strength, and impurities stability of phosphogypsum-based cold-bonded aggregates. Construction and Building Materials. 2022;331:127307. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127307 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Haneklaus N, Barbossa S, Basallote MD, Bertau M, Bilal E, Chajduk E, et al. Closing the upcoming EU gypsum gap with phosphogypsum. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2022;182:106328. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106328 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Hu J, Wang Z, Williams GDZ, Dwyer GS, Gatiboni L, Duckworth OW, et al. Evidence for the accumulation of toxic metal(loid)s in agricultural soils impacted from long-term application of phosphate fertilizer. Sci Total Environ. 2024;907:167863. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167863 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Wang J. Retraction notice to “Utilization effects and environmental risks of phosphogypsum in agriculture: A review” JCLP 276 (2020) 123337. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022;330:129604. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129604 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ma J, Xu J, Liu C, Yi Q, Zheng M, Cheng L, et al. Chemical looping combustion of sulfur paste to SO2 by phosphogypsum oxygen carrier for sulfur acid production. Fuel. 2022;323:124386. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2022.124386 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Li J, Chang J, Wang T, Zeng T, Li J, Zhang J. Effects of phosphogypsum on hydration properties and strength of calcium aluminate cement. Construction and Building Materials. 2022;347:128398. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128398 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tayar SP, Palmieri MC, Bevilaqua D. Sulfuric acid bioproduction and its application in rare earth extraction from phosphogypsum. Minerals Engineering. 2022;185:107662. doi: 10.1016/j.mineng.2022.107662 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Du C-X, Zhao Z-M, Li S, Liu Z-Y. Experimental Study on Pretreatment of Preparing Phosphorus Building Gypsum with Yunnan Phosphogypsum. In: Advances in Physics Research. Atlantis Press. 2014. doi: 10.2991/icmsa-15.2015.127 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Vasconcelos G, Lourenço PB, Camões A, Martins A, Cunha S. Evaluation of the performance of recycled textile fibres in the mechanical behaviour of a gypsum and cork composite material. Cement and Concrete Composites. 2015;58:29–39. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2015.01.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Shin W, Yoo D-Y. Influence of steel fibers corroded through multiple microcracks on the tensile behavior of ultra-high-performance concrete. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;259:120428. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120428 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Marcos-Meson V, Michel A, Solgaard A, Fischer G, Edvardsen C, Skovhus TL. Corrosion resistance of steel fibre reinforced concrete - A literature review. Cement and Concrete Research. 2018;103:1–20. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.05.016 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Hasan KMF, Hasan KNA, Ahmed T, György S-T, Pervez MN, Bejó L, et al. Sustainable bamboo fiber reinforced polymeric composites for structural applications: A mini review of recent advances and future prospects. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering. 2023;8:100362. doi: 10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100362 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Ku H, Wang H, Pattarachaiyakoop N, Trada M. A review on the tensile properties of natural fiber reinforced polymer composites. Composites Part B: Engineering. 2011;42(4):856–73. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.01.010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bheel N, Ali MOA, Kırgız MS, Shafiq N, Gobinath R. Effect of graphene oxide particle as nanomaterial in the production of engineered cementitious composites including superplasticizer, fly ash, and polyvinyl alcohol fiber. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Jabbour R, Assaad JJ, Hamad B. Cost-to-performance assessment of polyvinyl alcohol fibers in concrete structures. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures. 2021;29(20):2973–83. doi: 10.1080/15376494.2021.1882625 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wang J, Schlagenhauf L, Setyan A. Transformation of the released asbestos, carbon fibers and carbon nanotubes from composite materials and the changes of their potential health impacts. J Nanobiotechnology. 2017;15(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s12951-017-0248-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Moitra S, Farshchi Tabrizi A, Idrissi Machichi K, Kamravaei S, Miandashti N, Henderson L, et al. Non-Malignant Respiratory Illnesses in Association with Occupational Exposure to Asbestos and Other Insulating Materials: Findings from the Alberta Insulator Cohort. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(19):7085. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17197085 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Katman HYB, Khai WJ, Bheel N, Kırgız MS, Kumar A, Benjeddou O. Fabrication and Characterization of Cement-Based Hybrid Concrete Containing Coir Fiber for Advancing Concrete Construction. Buildings. 2022;12(9):1450. doi: 10.3390/buildings12091450 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Bheel N, Kumar S, Kirgiz MS, Ali M, Almujibah HR, Ahmad M, et al. Effect of wheat straw ash as cementitious material on the mechanical characteristics and embodied carbon of concrete reinforced with coir fiber. Heliyon. 2024;10(2):e24313. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24313 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Shang L, Wang S, Mao Y. Recent advances in plant-derived polysaccharide scaffolds in tissue engineering: A review. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024;277(Pt 1):133830. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.133830 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Ramesh M, Palanikumar K, Reddy KH. Plant fibre based bio-composites: Sustainable and renewable green materials. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017;79:558–84. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.094 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Vázquez-Núñez E, Avecilla-Ramírez AM, Vergara-Porras B, López-Cuellar M del R. Green composites and their contribution toward sustainability: A review. Polymers and Polymer Composites. 2021;29(9_suppl):S1588–608. doi: 10.1177/09673911211009372 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Wang Y, Zhang H, Zheng C, Xu L, Tang J. Study of metakaolin geopolymer composites reinforced by clean broom-like bristle bamboo fibers. Journal of Materials Research and Technology. 2023;25:3507–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.06.118 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Gao X, Zhu D, Fan S, Rahman MZ, Guo S, Chen F. Structural and mechanical properties of bamboo fiber bundle and fiber/bundle reinforced composites: a review. Journal of Materials Research and Technology. 2022;19:1162–90. doi: 10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.05.077 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Correia V da C, Santos SF, Mármol G, Curvelo AA da S, Savastano H Jr. Potential of bamboo organosolv pulp as a reinforcing element in fiber–cement materials. Construction and Building Materials. 2014;72:65–71. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.09.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Zhou Q, Li W, Tian J, Liu P, Jiang N, Fu F. Study on axial compression performance of original bamboo-fiber reinforced phosphogypsum composite walls. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures. 2023;31(17):4169–85. doi: 10.1080/15376494.2023.2192710 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Bala A, Gupta S. Engineered bamboo and bamboo-reinforced concrete elements as sustainable building materials: A review. Construction and Building Materials. 2023;394:132116. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.132116 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Liu P, Tian J, Li J, Shan Y, Zhang H. Compressive constitutive models of bamboo and fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum and axial compression properties of composite short columns. Industrial Crops and Products. 2022;188:115666. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115666 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Xie L, Zhou Y, Xiao S, Miao X, Murzataev A, Kong D, et al. Research on basalt fiber reinforced phosphogypsum-based composites based on single factor test and RSM test. Construction and Building Materials. 2022;316:126084. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126084 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.C.g. GB/T 9776-2008. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People's Republic of China, Beijing.
  • 39.G.T. 17669.3-1999S. Determination of Mechanical Properties of Building Gypsum, The state bureau of quality and technical supervision, 1999.
  • 40.Chen X, Bi R, Zhang L. Effect of water-to-cement ratio on sulfo-aluminate type cementitious grouting materials. Magazine of Concrete Research. 2019;71(6):298–308. doi: 10.1680/jmacr.17.00244 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Suárez F, Felipe-Sesé L, Díaz FA, Gálvez JC, Alberti MG. On the fracture behaviour of fibre-reinforced gypsum using micro and macro polymer fibres. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;244:118347. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118347 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Aminul Haque M, Chen B, Liu Y, Farasat Ali Shah S, Ahmad MR. Improvement of physico-mechanical and microstructural properties of magnesium phosphate cement composites comprising with Phosphogypsum. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020;261:121268. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121268 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Khandelwal S, Rhee KY. Recent advances in basalt-fiber-reinforced composites: Tailoring the fiber-matrix interface. Composites Part B: Engineering. 2020;192:108011. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Fiore V, Scalici T, Di Bella G, Valenza A. A review on basalt fibre and its composites. Composites Part B: Engineering. 2015;74:74–94. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.12.034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Sattarifard AR, Ahmadi M, Dalvand A, Sattarifard AR. Fresh and hardened-state properties of hybrid fiber–reinforced high-strength self-compacting cementitious composites. Construction and Building Materials. 2022;318:125874. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125874 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Abdollahnejad Z, Mastali M, Luukkonen T, Kinnunen P, Illikainen M. Fiber-reinforced one-part alkali-activated slag/ceramic binders. Ceramics International. 2018;44(8):8963–76. doi: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.02.097 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Özkan Ş, Demir F. The hybrid effects of PVA fiber and basalt fiber on mechanical performance of cost effective hybrid cementitious composites. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;263:120564. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120564 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Shah SFA, Chen B, Oderji SY, Aminul Haque M, Ahmad MR. Comparative study on the effect of fiber type and content on the performance of one-part alkali-activated mortar. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;243:118221. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118221 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Tran NP, Gunasekara C, Law DW, Houshyar S, Setunge S. Microstructural characterisation of cementitious composite incorporating polymeric fibre: A comprehensive review. Construction and Building Materials. 2022;335:127497. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127497 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Zhou Z, Zhao B, Lone UA, Fan Y. Experimental study on mechanical properties of shredded prepreg carbon cloth waste fiber reinforced concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2024;436:140456. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140456 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Hua S, Wang K, Yao X, Xu W, He Y. Effects of fibers on mechanical properties and freeze-thaw resistance of phosphogypsum-slag based cementitious materials. Construction and Building Materials. 2016;121:290–9. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.06.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Xia W, Fan S, Li C, Xu T. Effects of Different Nanofibers on Self-Healing Properties of Composite Modified Emulsified Asphalt. J Mater Civ Eng. 2021;33(7). doi: 10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0003796 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Wang D, Wang H, Larsson S, Benzerzour M, Maherzi W, Amar M. Effect of basalt fiber inclusion on the mechanical properties and microstructure of cement-solidified kaolinite. Construction and Building Materials. 2020;241:118085. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118085 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Zheng Y, Zhuo J, Zhang P. A review on durability of nano-SiO2 and basalt fiber modified recycled aggregate concrete. Construction and Building Materials. 2021;304:124659. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.124659 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Krayushkina K, Khymeryk T, Bieliatynskyi A. Basalt fiber concrete as a new construction material for roads and airfields. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng. 2019;708(1):012088. doi: 10.1088/1757-899x/708/1/012088 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Li Z, Wang X, Zhu Z, Wu Z. Effect of mixing methods on the dispersion of fibers in the gypsum matrix and performance improvement mechanism. Construction and Building Materials. 2022;320:126193. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126193 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Araya-Letelier G, Antico FC, Burbano-Garcia C, Concha-Riedel J, Norambuena-Contreras J, Concha J, et al. Experimental evaluation of adobe mixtures reinforced with jute fibers. Construction and Building Materials. 2021;276:122127. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.122127 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Solomon Oyebisi

15 Dec 2024

PONE-D-24-56170Mechanical properties of raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite cementitious materials and their strengthening mechanismPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Peng Liu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 29 2025 11:59PM.. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Solomon Oyebisi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf .

2. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: [All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.]

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

3. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

“This study was supported by the Science and Technology Plan Project Guizhou Provincial, China (Qiankehejichu-ZK[2023] General 067); the Innovation Fund of Guizhou University Survey and Design Institute Co., Ltd. (Guidakancha [2022]05), and the Open Laboratory Project of Guizhou University (SYSKF2024-006).”

We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. Please note that funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1- While the paper highlights the potential of bamboo fibers for reinforcing phosphogypsum, the novelty should be better articulated by comparing results with existing materials like polypropylene or steel fibers.

2- The selection of the optimal bamboo fiber length (12 mm) and doping amount (1.0%) lacks a clear explanation of whether other combinations might provide comparable or better results.

3- The one-way experimental design is appropriate but limits the exploration of interactions between parameters. A factorial design could provide deeper insights.

4- The study does not mention the use of statistical tools to validate the significance of observed trends in mechanical properties. Adding ANOVA or regression analysis could strengthen the reliability of findings.

5- The mechanical properties of control specimens are referenced but not thoroughly analyzed to demonstrate the incremental benefits of bamboo fibers.

6- The SEM analysis is informative but would benefit from quantitative metrics, such as porosity measurements or fiber-matrix adhesion strength, to substantiate qualitative observations.

7- The long-term performance and durability of BFRPGCs under environmental conditions (e.g., moisture, freeze-thaw cycles) are not addressed, which is critical for construction materials.

8- The paper does not discuss potential challenges in scaling the laboratory findings to industrial applications, particularly with uniform fiber dispersion.

9- The effect of excessive bamboo fiber concentration on mechanical properties due to agglomeration is noted but not quantified. Including dispersion indices would add rigor.

10- The mechanical performance of BFRPGCs could be contextualized better by comparing it directly with other fiber-reinforced cementitious materials.

11- The environmental benefits of using bamboo fibers and phosphogypsum are implied but not quantified. Including a life-cycle analysis or CO₂ emission savings could be valuable.

12- While hydration products are identified, their specific role in enhancing fiber-matrix interaction should be elaborated with additional microstructural data.

13- The distinction between brittle and ductile failure modes is described but not supported with stress-strain curves or energy absorption metrics.

14- The choice of water-cement ratio range (0.250–0.450) seems arbitrary. Justifying this range based on literature or preliminary studies would strengthen its credibility.

15- Given the scope and content of this paper, it may benefit from considering the following related works:

https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0004528

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125874

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.124645

Reviewer #2: The presented study is an original study on the usability of bamboo fiber and phosphogypsum as additives in cementitious materials production. Within the scope of the study, the required properties of cementitious materials were examined in detail and the results were presented understandably. The structure of the study, the methods used, and the evaluation of the results are problem-free. My only negative opinion about the study is that the references are not current enough. If it is possible, please supplement the manuscripts below.

*https://doi.org/10.1080/15440478.2022.2162186

*https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12091450

*https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24313

*https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24313

*https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.010

Then, the journal could put your manuscript into its current archive.

Best wishes.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 May 23;20(5):e0323011. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0323011.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 1


3 Jan 2025

Responses to reviewers' comments

Dear Editors and Reviewers,

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers' comments concerning our revised manuscript entitled "Mechanical properties of raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite cementitious materials and their strengthening mechanism" (PONE-D-24-56170). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope to meet with approval. Revised portion is marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the response to their viewer's comments are as flowing:

Reviewer #1:

1. Comment: While the paper highlights the potential of bamboo fibers for reinforcing phosphogypsum, the novelty should be better articulated by comparing results with existing materials like polypropylene or steel fibers.

Response: Thank you for your careful review and valuable comments on the paper. Firstly, as noted in the introduction, I acknowledge that the list of adverse effects associated with various contemporary fibres, such as polypropylene and steel fibres, may not be exhaustive. To address this, a further comparison will be made between the performance of bamboo fibre and polypropylene fibre and steel fibre in terms of different performance indexes, as illustrated in a table:

Table 1

Performance of bamboo fibre with polypropylene fibre, steel fibre and polyvinyl alcohol fibre on different performance indicators

Performance indicators Bamboo fibres Polypropylene fibres Steel fibres Polyvinyl alcohol fibres

Mechanical performance High tensile strength, good toughness, enhanced material crack resistance Lower tensile strength for improved material resistance to cracking Superior tensile strength to increase the overall strength of the material Good tensile properties, but weak compared to steel fibres

Environmental benefit Renewable Energy, biodegradable, low carbon footprint Petroleum-based material, non-degradable, negative impact on the environment High energy consumption, difficult recycling, higher carbon emissions Environmentally friendly materials, biodegradable, low carbon footprint

Cost effectiveness Low-cost, resourceful and particularly suited to large-scale production Medium cost, widely used but costly in the long term High cost, higher production and transport costs Higher production costs, especially in large-scale utilisation

References Zhang et al. (2020), Liu et al. (2021) Silva et al. (2018), Mahmood et al. (2020) Li et al. (2017), Mohamed et al. (2019) Zhang et al. (2022), Chen et al. (2020)

Secondly, within the ambit of the 'bamboo instead of plastic' research, the utilisation of bamboo fibre-reinforced phosphogypsum, as an emerging building material, has the potential to amalgamate the environmental properties of phosphogypsum with the elevated strength of bamboo fibres. In comparison to conventional polypropylene and steel fibre reinforcements, bamboo fibre-reinforced phosphogypsum exhibits distinctive advantages in terms of environmental sustainability, resource efficiency, and compatibility with biodegradable materials. In response to your suggestion, we will further clarify and mark in red the introductory paragraph, which will be reworked as follows:

To enhance the mechanical properties of phosphogypsum and broaden its construction applications, numerous studies have been conducted globally. However, practical engineering applications face challenges: steel fibers are prone to corrosion when exposed to air [18, 19], polypropylene (PP) fibers exhibit low tensile strength [20, 21], polyvinyl alcohol fibers are costly [22, 23], and glass and asbestos fibers pose health hazards [24, 25]. In contrast, plant fibers are natural polymer materials with specific chemical compositions [26, 27], drawing significant attention due to their safety, availability, biodegradability, and potential for sustainable regeneration [28-30]. Among these, bamboo fiber—a rapidly renewable plant fiber—exhibits mechanical properties comparable to traditional fiber-reinforced cement, significantly enhancing the toughness of composite cementitious materials [31, 32]. Moreover, bamboo fibre-reinforced phosphogypsum has been demonstrated to exhibit distinct advantages over conventional fibre-reinforced materials with regard to environmental friendliness, resource and sustainability, and compatibility with biodegradable materials.

2. Comment: The selection of the optimal bamboo fiber length (12 mm) and doping amount (1.0%) lacks a clear explanation of whether other combinations might provide comparable or better results.

Response: Thank you for your careful review. Regarding your question “The selection of the optimal bamboo fiber length (12 mm) and doping amount (1.0%) lacks a clear explanation of whether other combinations might provide comparable or better results.” we have revisited the experimental design and provided an explanation.

In the experiment, the variation in length of bamboo fibre was set at 4mm, 8mm, 12mm, and 16mm, with the fibre amount for each length set at four levels (0, 0.50, 1.0, 1.5wt%), as evidenced by the experimental results:

�1� A bamboo fibre length of 12 mm has been shown to optimise the properties of the composite while maintaining adequate mechanical strength and stability. The addition of longer bamboo fibres (16 mm) has been found to enhance the strength to a certain extent, however, it has also been observed to affect the dispersion of the fibres and the homogeneity of the material. In contrast, shorter fibres (4 mm) have been found to be ineffective in providing the desired reinforcing effect of bamboo fibres. Consequently, the 12 mm length is regarded as a balanced choice.

�2� At a doping level of 1.0 wt%, the bamboo fibres were found to enhance the mechanical properties of the composites to a significant extent, without exerting an excessive negative impact on the processing properties of the materials. Conversely, higher (1.5 wt%) or lower (0.50 wt%) doping levels resulted in a decline in mechanical properties.

�3� Following the experimental study, it was determined that the optimal mechanical properties of BFRGCs were attained with a bamboo fibre length of 12 mm and a doping level of 1.0 wt%, as illustrated below:

Fig. 5. Variation of flexural strength of BFRPGCs.

Fig. 6. Variation of compressive strength of BFRPGCs.

3. Comment: The one-way experimental design is appropriate but limits the exploration of interactions between parameters. A factorial design could provide deeper insights.

Response: Thank you for your careful review and valuable comments on our work. We appreciate your suggestions regarding the experimental design. We agree with your observation that “the one-way experimental design is appropriate but limits the exploration of interactions between parameters, and a factorial design could provide deeper insights.” Due to time and resource constraints in the current study, we chose a one-factor experimental design to focus on the effects of bamboo fiber length and dosage on the mechanical properties of phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials. This limited our ability to perform ANOVA or explore interactions between parameters. We understand that a factorial design would offer a more comprehensive understanding, particularly in terms of multi-parameter interactions. We apologize for not being able to implement a factorial design in this study. However, in future research, we plan to expand the experimental design to incorporate a factorial approach, which will allow us to better explore the interactions among factors and conduct the relevant statistical analyses. This will provide deeper insights into the combined effects of individual parameters on the experimental results.

4. Comment: The study does not mention the use of statistical tools to validate the significance of observed trends in mechanical properties. Adding ANOVA or regression analysis could strengthen the reliability of findings.

Response: Thank you for your careful review of our study. We greatly appreciate your questions regarding the statistical analysis tools (e.g., ANOVA and regression analysis). We fully recognize the value of these methods in verifying the significance of trends in mechanical properties and in enhancing the reliability of the study. In the current study, statistical methods such as analysis of variance (ANOVA) or regression analysis were not employed because our experimental design was based on a one-way approach, focusing primarily on the effect of each individual variable (such as the length of raw bamboo fibers or the amount of blending) on the mechanical properties. Although we performed multiple repetitions in our experiments and observed relatively consistent trends across the experimental groups, which led us to believe that the results were reliable, we did not use statistical tools to quantify the significance of these trends.

We apologize for this omission and fully acknowledge the importance of your suggestions in further enhancing the rigor and credibility of our study. For future research, we plan to adopt more comprehensive experimental designs, including multifactorial and factorial approaches, which will enable us to apply statistical tools (such as ANOVA and regression analysis) to validate the significance of the results and strengthen the overall credibility of our findings.

Once again, we are grateful for your valuable comments, which have provided crucial direction for the improvement of our future research. We will incorporate your suggestions into our experimental design and ensure that appropriate statistical analyses are conducted in future studies. We look forward to receiving your guidance again in the future.

5. Comment: The mechanical properties of control specimens are referenced but not thoroughly analyzed to demonstrate the incremental benefits of bamboo fibers.

Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We appreciate your identification of the issues related to the analysis of the mechanical property control samples. We agree that this section requires further discussion to better highlight the positive effect of bamboo fibers. In the current study, while we did mention the mechanical properties of the control (blank) samples, the primary focus was on evaluating the impact of bamboo fibers on the mechanical properties of phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials. As a result, our description of the control samples was relatively brief. We now recognize that a more detailed analysis of the matrix strength without the addition of bamboo fibers is crucial to more clearly demonstrate the benefits provided by the bamboo fibers. We apologize for this omission and will provide a more comprehensive analysis of the control samples in the revised version.

Specifically, we will include a detailed data analysis of the control samples, focusing on mechanical property indices, and compare these with the samples containing bamboo fibers to better illustrate the gain effect of the bamboo fibers. This will not only make the results more thorough and persuasive, but will also clarify the actual contribution of bamboo fibers to the material properties.

Once again, we greatly appreciate your insightful comments. We have added the necessary analyses to the manuscript, and these additions are highlighted in red. The revised sections are provided below:

�1� Fig. 5 illustrates the variation in flexural strength of bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum composites (BFRPGCs) as a function of bamboo fiber length and doping amount. Without the addition of bamboo fibers, the 7-day and 28-day flexural strengths of PGCs were 4.31 MPa and 4.95 MPa, respectively. After the incorporation of bamboo fibers, the flexural strength of BFRPGCs gradually increased with the increase in fiber content, while the length of the bamboo fibers remained constant.

�2� Fig. 6 illustrates the relationship between the compressive strength of Bamboo Fiber Reinforced Geopolymer Composites (BFRPGCs), the length of bamboo fibers, and the amount of doping. Without the addition of bamboo fibers, the 7-day and 28-day compressive strengths of PGCs were 16.20 MPa and 23.43 MPa, respectively. After the addition of bamboo fibers, the 7-day compressive strength of BFRPGCs increased gradually with the increase in fiber content, provided that the length of the bamboo fibers remained unchanged and did not exceed 12 mm.

6. Comment: The SEM analysis is informative but would benefit from quantitative metrics, such as porosity measurements or fiber-matrix adhesion strength, to substantiate qualitative observations.

Response: Thank you for your valuable comment. We greatly appreciate your suggestion to incorporate quantitative metrics into the SEM analysis. While SEM images provide important qualitative information, we agree that including quantitative analyses (e.g., porosity measurements or quantification of fiber-matrix bond strength) would enhance the credibility of our findings and better support our observations. In this study, the SEM analysis focused on examining the microscopic morphology of the samples and describing the fiber-matrix interface. However, due to the limitations of the experimental design, we did not conduct quantitative measurements of porosity or fiber-matrix bond strength. We apologize for this limitation and recognize that your suggestions are essential for improving the rigor of our study.

As you pointed out, porosity is an important factor influencing the mechanical and adhesive properties of the phosphogypsum matrix. In future studies, we plan to extend our analysis by incorporating porosity measurements, tests of fiber-matrix bond strength, and other relevant quantitative metrics. These additional analyses will allow us to validate the trends observed in the SEM images more comprehensively and further strengthen the reliability of our conclusions.

Thank you again for your professional guidance. We have revisited the paper and made improvements to the SEM images. The revised version, with changes marked in red, is shown in the figure below:

Fig. 9. SEM images of BFRPGCs specimens at different doping levels.

7. Comment: The long-term performance and durability of BFRPGCs under environmental conditions (e.g., moisture, freeze-thaw cycles) are not addressed, which is critical for construction materials.

Response: Thank you for your valuable comments. We take your question regarding the long-term performance and durability of bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials (BFRPGCs) under environmental conditions (e.g., humidity, freeze-thaw cycles, etc.) very seriously. We fully agree that these factors are critical for the practical application of building materials.

In the current study, we only conducted short-term performance tests, primarily focusing on a 28-day curing period. The main objective of these experiments was to evaluate the initial impact of bamboo fibers on the mechanical properties of phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials and to provide a preliminary assessment of the material's performance. Due to the limitations of the experimental design, we did not address long-term durability aspects (e.g., freeze-thaw cycles, humidity effects, etc.) or environmental adaptability in depth. We apologize for this limitation and fully understand your concerns regarding the long-term performance and durability of the material. These factors are indeed crucial for the practical use of building materials, especially in varying environmental conditions. As such, we plan to extend our future research to include long-term durability testing, specifically focusing on the performance of BFRPGCs under the influence of humidity, freeze-thaw cycles, and other environmental factors. These follow-up experiments will allow us to more comprehensively assess the long-term stability and durability of bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based materials and provide stronger support for their practical application in engineering projects. In addition, we intend to adopt standardized durability testing methods (e.g., freeze-thaw cycles, hot and humid enviro

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

pone.0323011.s002.docx (1.7MB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Solomon Oyebisi

1 Apr 2025

Mechanical properties of raw bamboo fiber-reinforced phosphogypsum-based composite cementitious materials and their strengthening mechanism

PONE-D-24-56170R1

Dear Dr. Liu,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Solomon Oyebisi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Upon reviewing the authors' responses and the revised manuscript, the paper has been significantly improved and now meets the publication criteria of the journal. Acceptance of the manuscript is recommended.

Reviewer #2: Since the authors have revised their papers as comments I have given previously, the journal could put their paper into its current archive.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Solomon Oyebisi

PONE-D-24-56170R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Liu,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Solomon Oyebisi

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pone.0323011.s002.docx (1.7MB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All experimental data files are available from the Figshare database (accession number 10.6084/m9.figshare.28130249).


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES