U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

D. Y. PATIL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, AKURDI, PUNE

SAVITRIBAI PHULE PUNE UNIVERSITY, PUNE

CERTIFICATE

This is to Certify that Mr. AVINASH SHIVAJI MORE has satisfactorily carried out and
completed the seminar work titled “U BOOT TECHNOLOGY”. It is submitted in the partial
fulfillment of the prescribed syllabus in third year Civil Engineering of Savitribai Phule Pune
University, Pune for the academic year 2016-2017.

Mr. B.K.BHONDE Dr. Mrs. ALKA KOTE

(Seminar Guide) (H.O.D Civil)

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 1 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I owe many thanks to my guide Mr. B. K. BHONDE, Civil Engineering Dept, D. Y.

Patil College of Engineering, Akurdi, Pune, for his immense support and valuable suggestions to
conduct this seminar work.

I am thankful to Mrs. ALKA KOTE, H.O.D Civil Department for her timely support
and advice in my endeavour.

Dr. B. S. Balapgol, Principal, D. Y. Patil College of Engineering, for rendering all

sorts of facilities and sound encouragement throughout this work.

Mr. AVINASH SHIVAJI MORE

(Exam Seat No.T150080132)

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 2 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

A
Seminar Report on
“U BOOT TECHNOLOGY”
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for
Third year in Civil Engineering

SUBMITTED BY
Mr. AVINASH SHIVAJI MORE
Exam Seat No: - T150080132
Under the guidance of
Mr. B.K.BHONDE

Department of Civil Engineering

D.Y.PATIL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, AKURDI
SAVITRIBAI PHULE UNIVERSITY OF PUNE
[2017-2018]

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 3 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Numbers Page No.

Figure 1: The properties of hollow spheres 8

Figure 2: The structural model 19

Figure 3: The realized structure 19

Figure 4: Flat slab with U-Boot Beton 20

Figure 5: Total Realization Cost 21

Figure 6: The construction cost of lightweight slab construction except 22

of cost of material – all the variant
Figure 7: The total construction cost 23

Figure 8: The cost of material 23

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 4 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Title Page

Certificate 1

Acknowledgement 2

Table of Figure 4
Table Of Figure 5

Abstract 6

1. INTRODUCTION 7

2. LITERATURE SURVEY 8

3. THEORETICAL CONTENT 9
RELEAVANCE TO PRESENT NATIONAL AND GLOBAL
4. SCENARIO OF CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY 14

5. ADVANDAGES AND LIMITATION 16

6. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 17

7. CASE STUDY 18

8. IMPLIMATATION 24

9. CONCLUSION 26

10. REFERENCE 27

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 5 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

ABSTRACT

The current construction market offers many construction methods and solutions. Some of the
methods take into consideration numerous factors including use of less energy and material, less
time and construction cost, resistance against earthquake and wind, more accuracy and so forth.
During the past years there have been many developments in lightweight construction. In new
methods, an attempt is made to use the precast components so as increasing execution speed and
decreasing construction time. The voided slab construction refers to modern technologies with
favourable features from economic, architectural and structural point of view. The aim of the
study is focused on comparison of several variants of lightweight slab solutions from
construction cost point of view. In the comparative case study, the following lightweight slab
solutions are compared: the voided slab system Cobiax, the voided slab system U – Boot
Beton®, the voided slab system Quad – Deck, the monolithic beam slab and the Spiroll slab.
Based on two-criteria optimization problem, an optimal variant of the slab solution is
determined. Moreover, the goal of the study was aimed at confirmation or disproof of the widely
presented reduction of construction cost through lightweight slab construction.

Keywords: lightweight construction, lightweight slab, voided slab system, construction cost,
U-Boot Beton® , Quad-Deck

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 6 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

1. INTRODUCTION
The construction industry is one from permanently advancing and rapidly evolving sectors.
Therefore, high demands on construction process in case of new buildings as well as
refurbishments are typical for the branch. The refurbishments of buildings are usually limited by
characteristics of built-in material. However, in newly built constructions, the use of new modern
technologies is more relevant. The modern technologies and the new construction methods offer
various benefits, such as reduction of material and hence weight of structure reducing, less
environmental impact through reduction of CO2 emissions, reduction of construction time,
reduction of construction cost etc. One from possibilities to reach the mentioned benefits consists
in application of lightweight construction. The aim of the study presented in the paper rest in
exploration of benefits of the modern lightweight constructions that have been long term
declared by various producers. It was done through case study of a real construction project in
Slovakia. The study focused especially on reduction of construction cost as one from the most
emphasized benefits.
In the past, the lightening of the slabs has been realized, for example, by inserting voided
elements into slabs. The building of Pantheon in Roma, built in the year 125 AD, belongs to first
references of lightweight slab structures. The building is one from the most significant examples
in history. The slabs were not reinforced and voided elements were used to lighten the structures.
Several research studies presented in literature have focused on lightweight constructions.
Reinforced concrete, in its many forms, is a versatile building material that can provide many
sustainable benefits by virtue of its economic construction, thermal mass, durability, acoustic
performance, adaptability and recyclability. Choosing the appropriate method of
concrete construction for the type of building will ensure these benefits are combined to deliver
the most sustainable outcome having a perfect equilibrium between the economic, environmental
and social impacts of the resulted building. the well-known essential requirements have to be
completed with a new one: sustainable use of the prime materials in order to achieve sustainable
structures as proper results, taking into consideration possible energy reduction,
sustainability of the used materials, limiting the water use and emission of pollutions of any state
as well as possible recycling at the end of the structure lifetime.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 7 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

2. LITERATURE SURVEY:

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 12, Number 24
(2017) pp. 14279-14286 © Research India Publications.

For Several research studies presented in literature have focused on lightweight constructions.
For example, W.K. Hatt in the U.S. in 1907 performed experiments on one-directionally
reinforced lightweight slab structures. Similarly, the American project Ida B. Wells Homes,
constructed from 1939 to 1941, is among other things known for lightweight slabs construction
[1]. From recent research studies dealing with lightweight construction, the studies of [2, 3] are
truly rewarding. They made the analysis of geometric shapes of bodies suitable for slab
structures lightening. The numerical simulations through non-linear finite element method were
applied to derive the optimal shapes of hollow spheres(Fig. 1).

Figure 1: The properties of hollow spheres

The invention of the hollow slabs, also known as biaxial voided slabs, was in 1950s [4].
The lightweight construction systems applied in Europe, the U.S.A. and in Japan have
acknowledged reduction of slab weight by 25 – 30 %. Mota, M. [1] has indicated the advantages
and disadvantages of lightweight slabs through real construction projects. The advantages

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 8 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

involve mainly longer spans between columns, increase of clear floor height, less consumption
of material, reduction of construction time, improved construction safety.

Generally, the buildings with recycled material in lightweight slabs are characterized by lower
carbon emissions and have more potential to reach credits in environmental assessment systems,
such as for example the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). Several
research studies on reinforced concrete slabs have focused on development of hollow plane slabs
with properties and benefits comparable to traditional monolithic structures but with significantly
reduced weight [4 - 6]. The modern architecture is increasingly known by excessive
requirements on enhanced spans and on flat ceilings without any projections. This may be
achieved by application of the modern lightweight slab structures.

The best known lightweight slab systems include bi-axial voided slab system and Bubble Deck
slab. The several research studies [7 - 11]. were aimed at advantages and disadvantages of the
system Bubble Deck. Compared to traditional monolithic concrete slabs, the Bubble Deck slab
system declares 40% larger area of slab structure and 15% reduction of construction cost while
using the same amount of steel and concrete. Moreover, the Bubble Deck system indicates 33%
less concrete usage and 30% reduction of construction cost for the same area of roof structure.
The research studies focused on lightweight construction system Bubble Deck concluded that
hollow elements of slabs do not make any strength reduction of slab structures.

Moreover, based on the results of the studies, the shear strength is higher compared to
expectations. This comes from positive shape of ball elements, applied to reduce the weight of
slab structures. In practice, the ball shape of weight-reducing elements affects positively the
concreting process as the effect is similar to application of plasticizing admixtures. Many test,
statements and practical experiences have confirmed the Bubble Deck lightweight slab structure
works as a traditional monolithic concrete slab and is therefore governed by the same rules [12].
Its application points to significant savings in labour, material and cost.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 9 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

3. THEORETICAL CONTENTS
3.1 The voided slab system U – Boot Beton®
is based on recycled polypropylene formwork elements that were designed to create voided
slabs and rafts. The U-Boot Beton® formworks are positioned using the lateral spacer joints to
place them at the desired centre distance that will determine the beam width. The construction
method is used to create slabs with large span or that are able to support large loads without
beams [15]. The dimensions of U-Boot Beton® elements are 520 x 520 mm and are produced
with different heights from 100 to 280 mm (single elements) and from 200 to 560 mm (double
element). The most significant economic, practical and operational advantages provided with U-
Boot Beton® for the entire structure include less use of reinforcement in slabs, columns and
foundation up to a total of 15%, less concrete usage, reduced building weight, the architectural
freedom of the structure and possibility of slimmer columns and foundations and thus lower cost
related to excavation for foundations.
In the presented comparative case study, the depth of the monolithic concrete slab is 500 mm and
based on this the height of double formworks is 360 mm with 70 mm high foots.
D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 10 Department of Civil Engg.
 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

3.2 Properties of U-BOOT

B.Shear strength
The results of a number of practical tests confirm that theshear strength depends on the effective
mass of concrete. The shear capacity is measured to be in the range of 72-91% of the shear
capacity of a solid deck. In calculations, factor of 0.6 is used on the shear capacity for a solid
deck of identical height. This guarantees a large safety margins. Areas with high shear loads
need therefore a special attention, e.g. around columns. That is solved by omitting a few balls in
the critical area around the columns, therefore, giving full shear capacity.
Shear strength of slab mainly depend on effective mass of concrete, as the special geometry
shaped by the ellipsoidal voids acts like the famous roman arch, hence enabling all concrete to be
effective. This is only valid when considering the bubbledeck technology. ; Due to use of plastic
bubbles, the shear resistance of bubble deck greatly reduces in comparison of solid slabs. In any
flat slab, design shear resistance is usually critical near columns. The shear stresses removed
from the columns diminishes rapidly outside the column zones it has been demonstrated by
testing and calculation and longitudinal shear stresses are within the capacity of the bubbledeck
slab system. Near the columns, bubbles are left out so in these zones a bubbledeck slab is
designed exactly the same way as the solid slab.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 11 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

B) Bending strength
Bubble Deck when compared to a solid deck, both practically and theoretically. The results in
the table below shows that for the same deck thickness, the bending strength is same for Bubble
Deck and for a solid deck and that the stiffness of the Bubble Deck is slightly lower. Bending
stresses in the Bubble Deck slab are found to be 6.43% lesser than that of solid slab. The ultimate
load value obtaining bending tests were upto 90% greater than the ultimate load value. The
bottom reinforcement steel and the top compressive portion of stress block contributes to flexural
stiffness in the bending.

C) Deflection
The deflection of the test specimens was measured at theirmid-span beneath the lower face of the
tested slabs. When the slab reached advanced stage of loading, smaller increments were applied
until failure, where the load indicator stopped recording anymore and the deflections increased
very fast without any increase in applied load. Span depth ratio calculations for deflections are
very approximate and are not appropriate in flat slabs of irregular layout except for the most
simple or unimportant cases. FE modelling, including non-linear cracked section analysis is
used to calculate the deflection using normal structural concrete with a Young’s Modulus Ecm ,
multiplied by 0.9 and the tensile strength, fctm multiplied by 0.8 (to reduced the crack moment).
Deflection of BubbleDeck is 5.88% more than solid slab as the stiffness is reduced due to the
hollow portion.
Strengthened BubbleDeck has low deflection compare to un strengthened Bubble B Deck slab.
Conventional slab carried the stress of about 30.98 MPa by applying the udl load of about 340
kN and causes deflection of 12.822 mm. The BubbleDeck slab carried the stress of about 30.8
MPa by applying the udl load of about 320 kN and causes deflection of 14.303mm. The
BubbleDeck slab can withstand 80% of stress when compared with conventional slab. Slide
variation occurs in thedeformation when compared to conventional slab.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 12 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

D) Punching Shear
Punching shear capacity of bubble deck slab is a major problem because of its reduced weight
strengthened slabshave higher punching capacity compared with controlled bubble deck slab.
The average punching shear is calculated to 91% in comparison to solid slab. It must be firstly
analyze that whether the applied shear is lesser or greater than the shear capacity of bubble deck
slab. Firstly it is determined by the designer whether the applied shear is greater or less than the
bubble deck capacity. if it is found to be lesser than no further check is required but if it is found
to be greater, the sphere should be omitted surrounding the column and then check the shear in
newly solid section. Then if shear resistance of solid concrete portion is lesser than applied shear,
than shear reinforcement is required.

E) Behaviour under seismic loads

A non-linear dynamic analysis was conducted by Gislason at Sigillum Universitatis Islandiae, on
a 16-storey office building structure, planned to be build in Reykjavik, Iceland. The building was
designed with floor system, as the first one in Iceland, having biaxial hollow slabs with spherical
bubbles. Additionally, a comparison on the earthquake effects on buildings for several floor
systems was conducted, and the impact of placing the building in Selfoss, a stronger earthquake
zone in South-Iceland, was studied.
The main conclusions have evidenced the following aspects:

- two floors can be added for a fixed total height of the building, if Bubble Deck are used instead
of normal slabs;

- the building will sustain considerably smaller earthquake forces, as a result of using Bubble
Deck instead of normal slabs;

- due to large wall surfaces, wind load is dominant for lateral load design.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 13 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

4. RELEAVANCE TO PRESENT NATIONAL AND GLOBAL

SCENARIO OF CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
The construction industry is one from permanently advancing and rapidly evolving sectors.
Therefore, high demands on construction process in case of new buildings as well as
refurbishments are typical for the branch. The refurbishments of buildings are usually limited by
characteristics of built-in material. However, in newly built constructions, the use of new modern
technologies is more relevant. The modern technologies and the new construction methods offer
various benefits, such as reduction of material and hence weight of structure reducing, less
environmental impact through reduction of CO2 emissions, reduction of construction time,
reduction of construction cost etc. One from possibilities to reach the mentioned benefits consists
in application of lightweight construction. The aim of the study presented in the paper rest in
exploration of benefits of the modern lightweight constructions that have been long term
declared by various producers. It was done through case study of a real construction project in
Slovakia. The study focused especially on reduction of construction cost as one from the most
emphasized benefits.

In the past, the lightening of the slabs has been realized, for example, by inserting voided
elements into slabs. The building of Pantheon in Roma, built in the year 125 AD, belongs to first
references of lightweight slab structures. The building is one from the most significant examples
in history. The slabs were not reinforced and voided elements were used to lighten the structures.
Several research studies presented in literature have focused on lightweight constructions.

In building constructions, the slab is a very important structural member to make a space. And
the slab is one of thelargest member consuming concrete. The main obstacle with concrete
constructions, in case of horizontal slabs, is the high weight, which limits the span. For this
reason major developments of reinforced concrete have focused on enhancing the span reducing
the weight or overcoming concrete's natural weakness in tension. In a general way, the slab was
D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 14 Department of Civil Engg.
 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

designed only to resist vertical load. However, as people are getting more interest of residential
environment recently, noise and vibration of slab are getting more important, as the span is
increased; the deflection of the slab is also increased. Therefore, the slab thickness should be
increase. Increasing the slab thickness makes the slabs heavier, and will increased column and
foundations size. Thus, it makes buildings consuming more materials such as concrete and steel
reinforcement. To avoid these disadvantages which were caused by increasing of self-weight of
slabs, the voided slab system, was suggested.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 15 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

5. ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS

1. INCREASED NUMBER OF FLOORS

Possibility to gain floors at the same building height (towers) and building volume.

2. LARGE SPAN AND GREAT ARCHITECTURAL FREEDOM

Larger spaces.

3. REDUCED SLAB THICKNESS

Thinner slabs but with equal loads and clearances, or bigger clearances with an equal thickness.

4. NO BEAMS BETWEEN PILLARS

Flat soffit for greater flexibility when installing systems.

5. REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF PILLARS – OPTIMISATION OF THE

SECTION OF PILLARS
Facilitated use reallocation. Wider bays.

6. REDUCTION IN THE OVERALL LOAD OF THE STRUCTURE WEIGHING ON

THE PILLARS AND THE FOUNDATION.

7. REDUCED FOUNDATIONS – LESS DEEP FOUNDATION EXCAVATION

Lower costs for foundation excavations. Less excavation.

8. IMPROVED ACOUSTIC BEHAVIOUR

Less acoustic transmittance.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 16 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

6. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

review presents the different types of hollow core slab technology that have appeared over last
twenty years. The voided slabs are reinforced concrete slabs in which voids allow to reduce the
amount (volume) of concrete. The invention of the hollow slab was in 1950s. But it was used
only in one way spanning construction, and must be supported by beams and / or fixed walls.
The idea was to create a hollow biaxial slab with the same capabilities as a solid slab, but with
considerably less weight due to the elimination of excess concrete.

In building constructions, the slab is a very important structural member to make a space. And
the slab is one of the largest member consuming concrete. The main obstacle with concrete
constructions, in case of horizontal slabs, is the high weight, which limits the span. For this
reason major developments of reinforced concrete have focused on enhancing the span reducing
the weight or overcoming concrete's natural weakness in tension. In a general way, the slab was
designed only to resist vertical load. However, as people are getting more interest of residential
environment recently, noise and vibration of slab are getting more important, as the span is
increased; the deflection of the slab is also increased. Therefore, the slab thickness should be
increase. Increasing the slab thickness makes the slabs heavier, and will increased column and
foundations size. Thus, it makes buildings consuming more materials such as concrete and steel
reinforcement. To avoid these disadvantages which were caused by increasing of self-weigh of
slabs, the voided slab system, was suggested.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 17 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

7. CASE STUDY:

ATTILA PUSKAS, JACINT VIRAG

Department of Structures
Technical University of Cluj-Napoca
25 G. Baritiustreet, 400027, Cluj-Napoca
ROMANIA.

The relationship between the realization cost and the energy consumption for a reinforced concrete
structure of a hospital building is presented in the following.

Problem Formulation
The design theme for the building having 25000 sqm developed on 9 levels, contained some
supplementary challenges in establishing the appropriate structural solution. These challenges
occurred due to the medium capacity but active clayey soil as founding layer for the building
without underground level, due to the limited total height and as consequence the reduced slab
height, due to short execution time requested by the beneficiary, due to the settlement and drift
limitations imposed by the use of ventilated ceramic and glass facades and due to the inclined
facade and floors built with cantilevers of up to 5 m, maintaining the reduced slab height [4].On
the top of all the previous challenges - if possible - a “no cost” structure should be designed,
since the architecture of the structure is often not appreciated.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 18 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

Fig.2: The structural model Fig.3: The realized structure

All the presented imposed/requested limitations have to be combined with the code provisions and
the attempt of the designer to obtain a low energy consuming structure. In order to obtain the final
structural solution (fig. 2 and fig. 3) for the several most probable winner solutions detailed comparison
have been performed, which took into consideration the cost and time impact of each structure.

Description of the general structural

requests
The footprint of the building is rectangular, having approximately 4000 sqm, with maximal
dimensions of 116.5 x 52.0m. Structure of the university hospital needs to be extremely safe
(becauseincludes emergency department), allowing maximal flexibility for departments and
support units.
Functional flexibility requires frame structure, while for drift limitation diaphragms are needed.
For fire safety reasons its height was limited to 37 m above the ground, to fit 9 stories, having
heights between 3.80 and 4.80 m. Even with a partial underground level, still low floor thickness
was necessary in order to respect height limitation. Flat slab is the common structural solution
D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 19 Department of Civil Engg.
 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

providing minimal floor depth, fast construction and functional flexibility. However, the large
amount of concrete ads up to buildings weight and cost. For reducing non-working dead weight
from slabs, several void former solutions are presented in the following subsection.
The building's proximity to water table would make the construction of basement level
uneconomical; however in active clayey soil relatively deep foundations are required. Therefore
two probable-winner direct foundation solutions were analyzed, in order to establish cost and
energy efficient infrastructure.

Suitable slab solutions

Common concrete frame structure with flat slabs would meet the design specifications and
enforcements. Completing the design criteria with sustainabilityprinciples, search for optimized
solutions is a must. As alternative, three void former slab solutions were analyzed, and a waffle
slab with fast erection formwork technology, in order to keep construction time minimal. Slab
types were chosen in such way to obtain similar bidirectional bending stiffness.
Using the recycled polypropylene formwork UBoot Beton to remove the non-working dead load
from the slab, a 38 cm lightened flat slab can be obtained, made of two 7 cm thick top and
bottomplates closing a perpendicular gridwork ribs resulted
between the voidformers (fig. 4).

Fig.4. Flat slab with U-Boot Beton

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 20 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

Energy efficiency analysis of the possible structural solutions

The energy efficiency calculation as part of a complete life cycle analysis for the different
structural variants has been performed using the software Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings
4.2
for the [6]. Table 8 and table 9 are presenting the total cost and total primary energy consumption
comparison for the presented slab and infrastructure solutions. The total primary energy
consumption
includes the necessary energy for the whole life cycle of the proposed structure, including
manufacturing, construction, maintenance, end-of life and operating energy, composed by hydro,
coal,
diesel, feedstock, heavy fuel oil, LPG, natural gas and nuclear energy

Slab solution Total Total Primary

Realization Energy
Cost Consumption
VOIDED SLAB 8,084,800 59,400,000

SOLID SLAB 7,739,660 53,000,000

Fig; 5 Total Realization Cost

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 21 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

Figure 6: The construction cost of lightweight slab construction except of cost of material – all
the variant

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 22 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

Figure 7: The total construction cost

Figure 8: The cost of material

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 23 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

08. IMPLETATION

LOCATION: ITALY

DESCRIPTION: CENTRO EVENTI MULTIFUZIONALE (THEATRE)

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 24 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

LOCATION: MONTENEGRO

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 25 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

9.CONCLUSION

The purpose of the broad case study, the partial results of which are presented in the paper, is
focused on modelling and comparison of the variants of lightweight slab construction in terms of
structural weight, cost of material and labour resources as well as in term of the total
construction cost. The study results related to comparison of construction cost of innovative
lightweight slab systems versus traditional lightweight slabs as the beam slab and Spiroll slab are
much useful in construction practice. It can be concluded that the modern voided slab systems
are suitable mainly for specific cases of construction projects where construction cost is not
decisive or traditional solution may not be used. The modern lightweight slab solutions use
recycled material and are characterized by less CO2 emissions mainly due to less concrete usage.
This can guarantee better assessment of a building in environmental assessment procedures. The
analysis from construction cost and structural weight point of view could be performed in each
of intended construction projects. Based on the analysis, the real construction cost of lightweight
slab solutions could be determined. As the cost of material inevitable to construct the modern
voided slab system is in Slovakia relatively high, the widely presented benefit of lightweight slab
solutions related to construction cost reducing cannot be entirely confirmed.

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 26 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

10. REFRENCES

[1] Mota, M., 2013, “Innovative Structural Slab Practices – Voided Slabs,” Responsibility in
Concrete Construction, Mineapolis

[2] Chung J.H., Ahn H.K., Choi H.K., Chang C.S., 2009, “An analytical study of optimal hollow
sphere shapes in hollow slab,” Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance, pp. 159-
162.

[3] Chung J. H., Choi H. K., 2011, “Shear Capacity of Biaxial Hollow Slab with Donut Type
Hollow Sphere,” Procedia Engineering EASEC12, Vol. 14, pp. 2219-2222.

[4] Churakov A., 2014, “Biaxial hollow slab with innovative types of voids,” Construction of
Unique Buildings and Structures, Russia, Vol. 6 (21), pp. 70–88.

[5] Larusson L.H., Fischer G., Jonsson J., 2013, “Prefabricated floor panels composed of fiber
reinforced concrete and a steel substructure,” Engineering Structures, Vol. 46, pp.104-115.

[6] Schnellenbach-Held M., Pffefer K., 2002, “Punching Behavior of Biaxial Hollow Slabs,”
Cem Concr Compos, Vol. 24(6), pp. 551-556.

[7] Brown, J.L, 2005, „Construction: Plastic Bubbles Lighten Concrete Deck,“ Civil Engineering
– ASCE, Vol. 75 (12), pp. 18-18.

[8] Hai, L.V., Hung, V.D., Thi, T.M., Nguyen-Thoi, T., Phuoc, N.T., 2013, „The experimental
analysis of BubbleDeck slab using modified elliptical balls,“ Proc. of the 13 East Asia-Pacific
Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction (AESEC-13), Sapporo, Japan, p. G-6-1

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 27 Department of Civil Engg.

 U BOOT TECHNOLOGY

D Y P C O E, Akurdi, Pune-44 28 Department of Civil Engg.