This looks to me as if it's part of a class assignment by some instructor who wants to give new students some sort of "think outside the box and don't worry about whether it works in the real world" thought process. This forum gets those from time to time.
All the points raised by everyone else are spot on, but I will come in and belabor the point (if only to overstir the pot).
There are two types of cleavers - the western, butcher type of cleaver and the asian cleaver, more accurately called a "broad knife". (to avoid confusion, I will refer to the western version only as a "cleaver" and will call the asian version a "broad knife").
Cleavers are instruments of mass impact destruction. The entire purpose is not to slice your way through tissue, but to concentrate a tremendous amount of force into the edge during the impact with the food. Cleavers do that not just with the edge behind them, but with the metal in the blade and with a longer handle. More mass (weight) being swung down + more speed at the time of impact = more force upon impact.
Take a look at these two cleavers and a comparative basic chef's knife. (I am keeping it to Dexgter Russell, since they make a wide enough range of knives so you can get a good scope of cleavers vs chef's knives.
The first, the Dexter Russell 5096, is extremely light weight, as cleavers go - it weighs about 12 ounces. The tang extends only about halfway down the handle. For anyone wanting to seriously use it as a cleaver, it would be extremely fustrating.
The second, the Dexter Russell S5288, is truly a cleaver you would find commercially used. It's a heavy beast - 2.75 pounds, or 44 ounces. And yes, it should be called a "beast" - I will accept that description. And it needs a serious chopping block as a work surface (none of your puny plastic boards). In short, it's a serious cleaver and it CHOPS!
The third is a stock, standard entry level 10 inch basic Dexter Russell chef's knife. The shipping weight is 9.3 ounces. It's a lot more handy for slicing than the 5096.
In short, a light cleaver is an oxymoron. It won't work as well as a chef's knife, and it's just too difficult to get enough force into a swing to be able to chop through even chicken bones.
Now, compare each of those to your proposed bamboo backed knife. Neither the S5288 nor the Basic 10 inch chef's knife are in for much competition to your bamboo cleaver. Heck, even the 5096 will work better. You won't be able to exert enough force to use it as a cleaver.
There is another factor to consider if the intended market is as a chopping cleaver - safety. I have three concerns - attachment of the metal to the bamboo, use of cast steel for a blade material and use of bamboo for impact force transference.
There's a good reason that cleaver blades are traditionally one piece - the amount of force that your blade will end up with will be substantial. In a composite knife with a bamboo spine and metal cutting blade, any impact force will be concentrated directly to the singular points of attachment. You will also need to factor in the issue of twist and the forces of that twist, if the impact does not come down directly onto the blade. My worry is that one whack, and the blade will separate from the bamboo and go flying around.
Next, about casting a steel blade. Not a good idea. In each of the knives above, the blade is from metal that has been rolled from sheet steel, cut, machined and then annealed, quenched and tempered. Yes, the steel probably started out as molten in the crucible, but that was a long time before. The history of small batch molten metal production, especially by first-time amateurs, is not good, either in terms of product quality (think voids and hidden flaws in the metal) and in terms of safety. If only for your own safety, drop the idea of casting a steel blade.
Third, bamboo as a structural material leaves a great deal to desire about localized impact forces in the tons per square inch. Again, there's a good reason that knives are made out of thick metals such as steel - it's just a lot stronger than bamboo.
(STRONG SUGGESTION: FOR THE FIRST EVER CHOP WITH ANY PROTOTYPE, SET UP VERY STRONG SAFETY PROCEDURES, INCLUDING EYEWEAR PROTECTION, HEAD PROTECTION AND TORSO PROTECTION. MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS IN THE VICINITY. AND KEEP FIRST AID SUPPLIES NEARBY!).
What about as a basic slicing knife? Well, the competition here is the traditional chinese broad knife. These are not knives involving chopping. Think instead of the broad knife as a, well, very broad bladed slicing chef's knife. Take a look as this one from Dexter
Here, the most glaring problem of your design is the wedging.issue. Instead of slicing cleanly through the food, your knife design will get significantly slowed down simply by its own thickness.
And finally, there's production price. Here, I will introduce the Kiwi knife, beloved by all cheap knife lovers
Here's what one ChefTalk reviewer had to say about the Kiwi:
Kiwi knives have changed my life. My teeth are whiter, my clothes brighter , my car runs faster, girls throw themselves at me and I just won a lottery.
When I used just my MACs and Wusthofs my wife left me , my dog would bite me whilst I slept and my house caught on fire..
No more now that I own a light as air sharper than sharp Kiwi .
(Thanks to and a shoutout to ChefTalk member Snappy Hat. This is from Post #26 in this thread: http://www.cheftalk.com/t/64354/kiwi-brand-knives )