Comparison Between One Way Joist Slab

Structure Using Lightweight Foam Concrete and

Two Way Solid Slab Structure Using Normal
Concrete

BY

MUHAMAD FA’IZ BIN JAMALUDIN

A final year project report presented to the School of Housing Building and
Planning
in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE

In

BUILDING TECHNOLOGY

I
 MAY 2016

Comparison Between One Way Joist Slab

Structure Using Lightweight Foam Concrete and
Two Way Solid Slab Structure Using Normal
Concrete

BY

MUHAMAD FA’IZ BIN JAMALUDIN

A final year project report presented to the School of Housing Building and
Planning
in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE

In

BUILDING TECHNOLOGY

MAY 2016

II
 DECLARATION

I declare that this project report entitled ―Comparison between One Way Joist Slab

Structures Using Lightweight Foam Concrete and Two Way Solid Slab
Structures Using Normal Concrete‖ is the result of my own research except as cited in the
references. The project report has not been accepted for any degree and is not concurrently

submitted in candidature of any other degree.

Signature : …………………………………….

Name :

Date: …………………………………….

Verification by:

……………………………….

DR.NORIZAL BIN NOORDIN,

Senior Lecturer Building Technology,

School of Housing, Building and Planning,

Universiti Sains Malaysia

III
 ABSTRAK

Objektif kajian ini adalah untuk menggalakkan kaedah sehala papak tetulang

atau sistem tetulang sehala dengan konkrit busa ringan sebagai menyokong pemutus

untuk penebat tetulang boleh digunakan untuk mengurangkan beban mati pada papak

struktur konkrit. Ini akan membolehkan pereka bentuk struktur untuk mengurangkan

saiz tiang, asas dan elemen galas beban lain. Di samping itu, skop kajian ini adalah

untuk mereka membentuk satu hala papak tetulang dan dua hala papak pepejal yang

dianalisis oleh Prokon Software Consultant 3.0. Kaedah yang digunakan dalam

kajian ini terdiri daripada dua bahagian, bahagian pertama adalah ujian makmal

untuk kekuatan ketumpatan dan mampatan manakala bahagian kedua adalah analisis

data dibuat dengan menggunakan Prokon Software Consultant 3.0. Hasil kajian ini

menunjukkan bahawa satu cara papak tetulang dengan rasuk yang digunakan dalam

bangunan kediaman adalah lebih lebih baik dari sudut ekonomi kerana ia adalah

lebih murah daripada dua hala papak padu dengan rasuk. Tambahan pula, satu hala

papak tetulang dengan konkrit semula jadi adalah lebih cekap. Kesimpulannya, ia

seolah-olah bahawa salah satu cara-tetulang papak boleh dianggap sebagai alternatif

bagi menggantikan sistem konvensional yang lain yang sering digunakan kerana

kemampuan untuk mengurangkan berat bangunan itu. Sebaliknya, Prokon Software

Consultant 3.0 dianggap sebagai kaedah yang cekap dan tepat membuat analisis dan

pengoptimuman struktur bangunan.

IV
 ABSTRACT

The objective of this study is to promoting that one-way Joist slab or one-way

joist system with lightweight foam concrete as supporting casting for joist insulation

can be used to minimize the dead load on slab concrete structure. This would allow

the structural designer to reduce the size of column, foundation and other load

bearing elements. In addition, the scope of this study is to design one-way joist slab

and two-way solid slab by Prokon Software Consultant 3.0. The methodology

employed in this study consists of two parts; the first part is the Lab tests for the

density and compression strength while the second part is the analysis of the data

made by using Prokon Software Consultant 3.0. The result of this study shows that

one-way joist slab with beam used in residential building is more preferable from the

economical point of view since it is less expensive than the two-way solid slab with

beam. Furthermore, one-way joist slab with natural concrete is more efficient. As a

conclusion, it seems that one way-joist slab could be considered as an-alternative in

place of other frequently used conventional cement due to its capability to minimize

the weight of building. On the other hand, Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 is

considered as an efficient and accurate method of making the analysis and the

optimization of building structure

V
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost I would like to sincerely thank to my supervisor, Dr Norizal

Noordin for his guidance, generosity to share his tremendous knowledge, for giving

continuous and unlimited motivation from the starting of the research until the end of

the program. Dr Norizal Noordin has given me a lot of suggestion and the guideline

for me to finish the report using appropriate approaches. I gained a lot of knowledge

and experience in research process of the final year project. Besides that, my

appreciation and gratitude is extended to Ir.Dr. A. Naser Abdul Ghani who has given

me a lot of suggestions and comments which are very useful for me to finish the

report.

My next gratitude will to all the staffs, Mr Part and all the staff who always

assist and advise me in completing the task. Last but not least, I would like to thank

to my family and my colleagues who have gave me advices and their comforting

supports.

Thank you.

Best,

Muhamad Fa’iz bin Jamaludin

VI
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Research Title i

Declaration iii

Abstrak iv

Abstract v

Acknowledgements vi

Table of Contents vii

List of Tables x

List of Figures xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Problem Statement 6

1.3 Objective of Research 6

1.4 Hypothesis of Research 6

1.5 The Scope of Work 7

1.6 The Research of Workflow 8

1.7 Significance of Research 9

VII
 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 One Way Joist System 10

2.2 Characteristic Of Joist Design 10

2.3 The Distribution of Rib Spacing 13

2.4 The Distribution of Joist Used In Construction (BS:8110) 13

2.5 Formwork Consideration of One Way Joist Slab System 16

2.6 The Lightweight of Concrete Properties 18

2.7 The Lightweight concrete as air entraining agent 24

2.8 Lightweight Foamed Concrete 33

2.9 The density of Foamed Concrete 35

3.0 Compressive Strength of Foam Concrete 36

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction 38

3.2 Researh Process 38

3.3 Material: Cement 40

3.4 Mix Proportions 40

3.5 The Calculation of Weight Cement, Sand 41

3.6 Lightweight Foamed Concrete 43

3.7 Mixing and Testing Method 46

3.7.1 Flow Table Test 48

3.8 Density Test 49

VIII
3.8.1 Mortar 49

3.8.2 Density of Sample 51

3.8.3 Heating and Drying Oven 52

3.9 Compression Test 53

3.9.1 Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 54

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULT DISCUSSION

4.1 Flow Test 55

4.1.1 Density and Compression Test 56

4.1.2 The Lab Result 56

4.2 Analysis of One Way Joist Slab Structure 57

4.3 Analysis of Two Way Solid Slab 71

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Disscussion 85

5.2 Conclusion 86

REFERENCES 88

IX
 LIST OF TABLE

2.1 British Practice Code:8110 Condition on Joist Dimension 10

2.2 The Standard of ACI code of Form Dimension (one way) 15

2.3 The Standard of ACI code of Form Dimension (two way) 16

2.4 Indicative values for compressive strength and Modulus 27

3.1 The Calculation of weight Cement, Sand and Water 41

3.2 Weight of Cement, Sand and Water 47

3.3 The Weight of Foamed Concrete 50

4.1 Fresh Density Sample 56

4.2 Result of The Calculation moment for One way joist 59

4.3 Result Of the Calculation Slab Thickness, Formwork,X-Y direction 62

4.4 Result of the Calculation Beam Width,Depth Concrete volume and formwork

63

4.5 Result of major and beam top and bottom steel bar and link bar 69

4.6 Result of the calculation moment for solid slab 72

4.7 Result of the calculation slab thickness,volume formwork, Weight 74

4.8 Result of calculation of beam,width, Depth,concrete volume,formwork 76

4.9 Result of major and beam top and bottom steel bar and link bar 79

4.9.1 Comparison of concrete volume, Formwork and Bottom bar 81

4.9.2Comparison beam in concrete volume, formwork,main steel and R6 and R10

and beam link steel R6 82

4.9.3 Cost Comparison between Total cost, slab cost and beam cost 83

X
 TABLE OF FIGURE

2.1 The Standard of Design Joist System 10

2.2 San Diego Aiport 13

2.3 The Standard of ACI code of Form Dimension (one way) 15

2.4 The Standard of ACI code of Form Dimension (two way) 15

2.5 Transfer of Force 27

2.6 Failure Pattern 28

2.7 Behavior of Lightweight Concrete under Compression Force 28

2.8 Behavior of Natural Concrete under Compression Force 28

3.1 Mould (100mmx100mmx100mm) 40

3.2 The protein of a stable Foamed 43

3.3 The chemical Foaming Agent, Water and Air by Compressor 44

3.4 Portafoam PM-2 Advance 45

3.5 Pumping Stable Foam Norait SA-1 45

3.6 The Mixer Machine 46

3.7 The flow Test Table 48

3.8.1 The hardened Cup used For Dimension 49

3.8.2 The Density of Sample Mortar 51

3.8.3 The Heating and Drying Oven 52

3.9 The Mechanical of Compression Test 53

4.1 The Plan for Building which consists of Joist Slab, Beam, Column 58

4.2 Bending Schedule of One Way Joist Slab by Prokon 61

XI
4.3 The section and Distribution of steel bars at the bottom and top 63

4.4 Section and Distribution of steel Bars for the maximum beam 66

4.5 Section and distribution of steel bar for maximum moment major beam 67

4.6 The Plan for Building which consists of Solid Slab, Beam, Column 71

4.7 Bending Schedule of Two way solid Slab by Prokon 73

4.8 The section and Distribution of steel bar (bottom/top) solid slab 75

4.9 Distribution of steel bar for maximum moment in major beam 3 77

XII
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Now, The Malaysian’s residential housing has increase demand by market. But

the price is too high cause the cost of material and including taxes (5%) for housing

properties. Additionally, the crisis of economic has down and people can’t buy the

house in average prices are Rm 524, 260 (US$121,835) or Rm 602,232

(US$ 165,392) about 150-200 square meter and 12-14 meters depth. The most used

material in construction industry is natural concrete and steel reinforcement.

Normally, the designer used the system of two ways solid slab in construction. But,

the using of that system need more concrete for the beam and the slab

(150mm-300mm) and it will need more reinforcement steel to support the concrete.

If more concrete on slab, it will transfer their load into the lower structure and it

made other structure will more need the material. The construction industry needs to

minimize the cost of material especially concrete and steel reinforcement and it bring

to sustainable building. Mostly the system of one way joist slab used for the

commercial building such as airport building because more efficiently .So, I’m

suggested to using the system of one way joist Slab and compared with solid slab

(two way system ) where the distance area are same to promote the efficient cost.

Advantages of one way joist slab are where the slab has the void block on the beam

and its can minimize the use of concrete and save energy
1
 Structure is a system formed from the interdependence structural members or the

shape or form that avoids buildings from being failure. A structure supports the

building by using a framed adjustment known as Structure (1). There are two

important steps for the construction of a building, Structural Analysis and Structural

Design. Structural analysis is the strength acting on other parts of the structure that

can be determined through structural analysis. Movements and shear forces are

considered as the most common forces which are calculated. Arduous formula and

charts will be used in this calculation works and this requires the use of computer

software as well as trained and experienced engineers. However, basic understanding

of the concept of the design and structural analysis is significantly required. In order

to ensure that the design is reasonable and the calculation is also correct, a computer

is used. The result produced by the computer will be very accurate but the error

might be in the input parameters (1).

At this phase, correct structural members are selected or designed. The

reinforcement steel and member sizes (i.e. in the case of RC structures) are proposed

and chosen. A specific code of practice is considered as a base for the design works.

In this case, the compliance with local requirements and the design will be

standardized. The British code of practice BS8110 is widely used in Malaysia while

other codes such as from US, Japan, Germany and Australia are used by some other

designers (1). For the design structure, the following precautions should be taken into

consideration, (i) The 2structure design is a normal problem for all physical objects

2
and (ii) An intelligent manner in making decisions cannot be achieved by building

designers regarding the form and fabric of a building without some understanding of

basic concepts of structures (2).

There are two important types of slabs, solid slab and flat slab but the loads and

span will determine largely the choice of slab type. Solid slab is of two categories,

one-way slab and two way slab (3). The one-way slab is one of the quietly forms of

solid slab. It is considered economical for small span only (up to 4.6m) due to its low

efficiency and weight. Sometimes and in special cases, the reduction of the weight

can be achieved by using some forms of elements in order to create hollow voids of

the slab (2).

On the other hand, the two-way slab is usually used for heavy loading and large

spans (4). The reinforcement in two-way slab should be designed in order to facilitate

the slab to act in both directions. The ratio of long to short side of the floor panel

would determine the load proportion taken by each set of reinforcement. However,

there are three types of two way slab, two way slab with edge support ( edge supports

may be bearing walls or monolithic beams ), two way slab without beams ( it could

be called flat plate system or the flat slab. Only the column supports and slab can be

of this type ), two-way ribbed slab (waffle) where a ribbed gives considerable extra

strength in one direction while a waffle slabs gives added strength in both directions.

This possible only in monolithically cast concrete (5) which is the two way grid of

3
beams. In comparison to solid slab, the span limits of ribbed slabs are considerably

longer. So longer span and light to moderate live load (less than 3 KN/M2) can be

used for this type of slab. It is considered more economical than the order types

because it provides a ribbed slab is constructed by using removable form, hollow

block or permanent or removable void formers (5).

Lightweight concrete is a type of concrete which has an expanding agent to

increase the volume of the mixture. This in turn gives some additional properties,

such as reducing the dead weight. Additionally, it is lighter than the conventional

concrete with a dry density of 300 kg.m-3 up to 1840 kg.m-3, 23% to 87 lighter (6).

Lightweight was introduced by the Romans during the second century, where the

pantheon is still being used until now (for about 18 centuries) and it is constructed

from lightweight concrete. Of course, the main advantage of lightweight concrete is

that is economical over the use of other types of concrete (7). Since the beginning of

the nineteenth century, cellular concrete was first developed in Stockholm, Sweden.

―Gas concrete‖ was known to be the original material and it was used as insulated

building material. In 1920, Dr Axel Eriksson had succeeded in making aerated

concrete, and factory production of reinforced lightweight roof slabs started in

Sweden in 129. After thirty years, foamed slab was used in Great Britain. It is an

excellent aggregate but it is mostly used at blast furnaces and with all other

aggregates. On other hand, lightweight concrete was used in Great Britain. Later, this

led to the Shabbar et al. Concrete Research Letters Volume 1(1) 2010, 21

4
development of lightweight concrete in many forms as cellular concrete, aerated

concrete, autoclaved concrete, or foamed concrete. This technology spread quietly

(after 1940) to different parts of the world, especially, the Soviet Union and Europe.

This technology was applied for the production of economical large-size

structural panel units. These were used in low-rise structures, and in site

reconstruction. During the late 1950s, this technology was introduced to the US as

foamed or cellular concrete. The applications were for wall units, floor and roof. The

low compression strength make the use of this type of concrete restricted to fills and

insulation only. After that, the development of cellular concrete continued in Sweden

but different lightweight concrete. However, In Europe, lightweight concrete was

known as ―Gasbetong‖ and in the United States it was known as ―Foamed concrete‖.

Now days, lightweight concrete become stronger now, concrete increased many fold

in recent years because of its inherent economies and over conventional concrete in a

variety of structural applications. Numerous lightweight concrete structures, ranging

from low-rise bungalows to multi-storey buildings, bridges and flyovers to marine

and offshore structures can now be found in many parts of the world (8). Lightweight

concretes are cementations conglomerates with a bulk density (ranging between 300

and 2000kgm-3) sensibly lower than that of an ordinary concrete (usually between

2200 and 2600 kgm-3) (9).

5
1.2 Problem Statement

Statement of Problem is that the increment of dead load represents one of the

most critical problems in the present research under which the sizes of foundations

have to be increased and this leads to the addition of more materials making the

building more expensive. Hence, an alternative lightweight concrete to reduce the

dead loads is needed. As a result, the total cost would be reduced.

1.3 Objective of Research

The objective of this study is to prove the use of Lightweight Foamed concrete is

purposeful for the reducing of dead load on slab concrete structure, so that it would

allow the structural designer to reduce the size of columns, footings and other load

bearing

1.4 Hypothesis of Research

The hypothesis of the study is to design one way joist slab by using Prokon

Software Consultant 3.0 is to be used to make a comparison between one way joist

slab with lightweight foam concrete and two way solid slabs with normal concrete in

order to find out which one is more economical.

6
1.5 The scope of work

In this phase, the Lightweight foamed concrete will be testing in the lab for the

compressive strength and density. The cement will be mix with water and sand and

will be additional of foamed protein. For the compressive strength test, the casting

was carried out by using steel molds. The method of testing will be used by The flow

table test to find out the workability of mortar. The mixture concrete will be dried in

oven at 7 until 28 day. On 7 and 28 days, the sample will be measure their density

and make compression test only on 28 days. Then data and result in the lab will be

used for the detail of prokon software consultant 3.0. Additionally the sample

building will be analysis and design which produced by prokon software consultant

3.0 as bending moment, deflection, depth, width and loading of structure such as slab

and beam. Then the Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 will be analysis the volume of

concrete usage, Formwork, detail of steel reinforcement and the raw of price

considerable.

7
1.6 Research Of Workflow

Through this study, a number of research methodologies were used in the process

determination of dissertation title, identify the objective and scope studies, collection

of data, data analysis, recommendation and conclusion.

I. Determination of Dissertation Title

II. Identify the Objective and Scope

III. Literature Review (Journals, articles, reference of thesis, books)

IV. Data Collection (Compression Test, Flow Table test)

V. Data Analysis (Lab Result and The sample of building by Prokon Software

Consultant 3.0).

VI. Recommendation and Conclusion

8
1.7 Significance of the Research

Lightweight Foamed concrete is of utmost importance to the construction

industry. The advantages of lightweight concrete are its reduced mass and improved

thermal and sound insulation properties, while maintaining adequate strength. The

marginally higher cost of the lightweight concrete is offset by size reduction of

structural elements, less reinforcing steel, timber Formwork and reduced volume of

concrete, resulting in overall cost reduction. The reduced weight has numerous

advantages is reduced demand of energy during construction. Foamed concrete does

have good thermal insulation property therefore useful for roof and floor screeds in

high temperature locations. Lightweight concrete is preferred for thermal insulation

and sound barrier wall as it does have good thermal property due to availability of air

voids.

9
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 One Way Joist System

Joists (Ribs) are closely spaced T-beams. The space between the beams may be

left void or filled with light hollow blocks called ―Hourdis‖. This type of floor is very

popular and offers many advantages (lighter, more economical, better

isolation).Through of Profesor A.Charif (2102) from King Saud University on her

article One way joist slab system showed that the design of joist system has be

calculated and it shouldn’t be assumed as standard because it may be failed over

deflection and shear strength on calculation or other programmed.

Figure 2.1: The Standard of Design joist system

2.2 The Characteristic of Joist Design

Web width Bw ≥ 100mm

Web thickness Hw  3.5 bw

Flange thickness Hf  50mm or S/12

Spacing S  800mm

10
 The flange width S Bw  Bf

Table 2.1: British Practice Code: 8100 Conditions on joist dimensions

Based on table 2.1 British Practice Code: 8100 specify that concrete shear

strength may be increased by 10 % in joists. Usually stirrups are not required in joists,

but are used to hold longitudinal bars. It is therefore recommended to consider

stirrups when computing longitudinal steel depth. Analysis and design of joist slabs

is equivalent to analysis and design of joist as T-beams. Shrinkage reinforcement

must then be provided in the secondary direction.

Concrete pan joist, also known as one-way joist floor systems, consist of evenly

spaced concrete joists spanning in one direction. A reinforced concrete slab is cast

integral with the joists to form a monolithic floor system. The one way joists frame

into beams that span between the columns, perpendicular to the joists. These systems

are effective for column layouts short span in one direction and long span in the

orthogonal. It is preferable to span the joists in the short direction in rectangular bays,

to achieve maximum economy.

They are cast in a controlled environment which increases their quality over cast

in place concrete. They are also pre-stressed which gives them a higher capacity and

span length than normal weight concrete. Also, being concrete, the system is

inherently fire resistant, but the wide flange beams they rest on, are not. They must

11
be fireproofed, or replaced with inverted tee beams as the structural support. The

planks also offer superior durability, natural sound attenuation, and vibration control.

The one way joist system is ideally suited for commercial construction where

small column free areas are desired. This system takes advantage of the interaction

between concrete slab and steel joists through shear studs like the original steel

system, resulting in smaller members. Floor to floor height is reduced because

mechanical systems can be routed through the open webs of the joists. However,

shear stud installation is labours intensive and expensive to the project. Erection and

connections are simplified due to standard end bearing seats which mean faster

construction. Weight savings over large W-shapes reduces building weight, which

reduces foundation size and cost. It also reduces the overall base shear and seismic

reaction on the lateral system. Floor vibrations can be a problem with steel structures,

but over the long spans provided by the joists, it is reduced.

12
2.3 The Distribution of Rib Spacing

Figure 2.2: San Diego Airport

Through by Medan Mehta (2010) on the book of building construction showed

that Joist System of roof, San Diego Airport, Not heavily loaded as a roof structures,

the joist slab system could be extended into the overhang where the moments are

negative. Note also the supporting columns with a built-in point of zero moment at

two-thirds height. (San Diego, California).

2.4 The Distribution of Joist (Cross over joist) typically used in construction

followed by British Practice Code: 8110:

(1) Placed perpendicular to joists

(2) Spans < 6.0 m: Use None

(3) Spans 6.0-9.0 m: Provided at mid-span

13
 (4) Spans > 9.0 m: Provided at third points

(5) At least one con one continuous φ12 bar is provided at top and bottom of

distribution joist.

Through on Portland Cement association (2014) , based on A.C.I code Practice

described a standard one-way joist floor system consists of evenly spaced concrete

joists (ribs) spanning in one direction, a reinforced concrete slab cast integrally with

the joists, and beams that span between the columns, perpendicular to the joists. The

joists are formed by using pan forms that are 700 mm. wide and range in depth from

200 mm to 600mm (Figure 1). The varying depths provide flexibility to satisfy a

wide range of span and loading conditions.

For the 1300 mm pans, the pan depth varies from 400 mm to 600 mm, and for

the 1600 pans, the range is 355 mm to 600 mm (Figure 6). The advantages of the

wide-module system are the same as those listed above for the standard joist system.

However, the wide-module joists are more economical for very long span lengths,

and provide large, column-free spaces for maximum flexibility in space

planning—all without concerns for vibration. The overall depth of the joists is

governed by the deflection requirements in ACI 9.5.2. For 760 mm pan form

systems, the thickness of the slab spanning between the joists is usually controlled by

fire resistance requirements, since the structural requirements for the slab are

minimal.

14
 Figure 2.3: The Standard of ACI code of Form Dimension of One way joist System

Pan Width (mm) Pan Depth (mm)

760 200,250,300,353,406,508 and 609

1300 406,508 and 533

1600 353,406,508 and 609

Table 2.2: The Standard of ACI code of form Dimension of One way joist system

Figure 2.4: The Standard of ACI code of Form Dimension of Two Way joist System

15
 Pan Width (mm) Pan Depth (mm) Rib Width (mm)

762 200,250,300,353,406,508 and 609 150

1041 406,508 and 533 177

1320 353,406,508 and 609 200

Table 2.3: The Standard of ACI code of form Dimension of Two way joist system

2.5 Formwork Consideration of One way joist slab

Maximum overall economy in concrete joist construction, as in any cast-in-place

reinforced concrete design, is achieved by considering the relatively high cost of

formwork and construction time versus material costs. Almost invariably overall

economy is achieved by the maximum reuse of the same forms throughout the

project, not only throughout each floor but also the same layout and size of forms for

all levels of the structure.

The use of the joist steel one-way pan system is probably one of the most

efficient methods of reinforced concrete construction ever devised in terms of spans

and applied loads versus volume of concrete and weight of reinforcing steel Plum

Grove Rd., Schaumburg, Illinois (1932). Sectional steel pan forms can adjust to

varying site conditions without extensive detailing and fabricating of special shapes.

The Architect/Engineer is allowed great freedom in varying joist widths for

16
accommodating concentrated loads by slightly adjusting the center-to-center spacing

of the ribs. Clearing block-outs, drops and other interferences is accomplished by

workers simply starting and stopping pan runs as required. Steel pan forms are a

proper forming system to consider when evaluating design choices because they

provide inherently stiff floor systems for the volume of concrete and reinforcing steel,

and the forms are economical to obtain and erect when concrete aesthetics are not a

concern (21).

Project specifications are often vague with reference to laps and single one-piece

voids. The Architect/Engineer’s expectations are generally different from those of the

Contractor. The Contractor should be very sensitive to the Class of finish for which

the pan forms are intended. Lap pans are generally inappropriate for exposed work.

The Architect/Engineer’s attention should be focused on the end product results

during pre-construction meetings as to the finish that these forms are and are not

capable of producing. For instance, when pans are lapped, both the joist width and

slab thickness vary slightly. The Contractor needs to ensure that the erection of the

formwork is performed with a reasonable degree of accuracy. Finally, the

Architect/Engineer may want to recognize the challenges with this type of forming

and specify a joist width one inch larger than required by design. While it is usually

better to cast an onsite mock-up section, it may be more practical and prudent to have

the Architect/Engineer and Owner participate in a site visit to a structure of similar

construction and application to measure both aesthetics and performance.

17
2.6 The Lightweight Concrete Properties

The lightweight concrete are used to been an element in the construction

industry for centuries, but like more material the expectations of the achievement

have increased and now we are expecting a fixed, reliable material and predictable

characteristics. Structural lightweight has an in-place density (unit weight) on the

form of 90 to 115 lb/ft3(1440 to 1840 kg/m3) compared to natural concrete a density

in range of 140 to 150 lb/ft3(2240 to 2400kg/m3). The lightweight concrete should

be greater than 2500 psi (17.0 Mpa) in structural application. The concrete mixture is

made with lightweight coarse aggregate. In some method a portion or the integrated

fine aggregates may be a lightweight product. Lightweight aggregates are generally

expanded shale, clay, or slate materials that have burned in a rotary kiln to develop a

porous structure in structural lightweight concrete. Air-cooled blast furnace slag is

also used in secondary product in lightweight material. There are other categories of

non-structural lightweight concrete with lower density made with secondary

aggregates materials and higher air voids in the cement paste matrix such as in

cellular concrete.

Usually the properties of the lightweight concrete can be determined by work in

laboratory testing, but the overall achievement of the material can only be

demonstrated adequately by its performance in filed by testing LWC structure under

service. The marine applications and in shipbuilding are component successfully in

18
that material. In 1914-1981 war in USA, lightweight concrete were produced and

production of the USS Selma (a war ship) are main achievement. In both 1953 and

1980the Selma’s durability was estimated by taking cored samples from the water

line area .Then occasion little corrosion was noted.

In 1948, Thomas A. Holm (10) were assessed that there were over 400

lightweight bridges throughout the world especially in USA and Canada. This study

proved that the most of the bridges were existed to be in good condition which

carried out by The Expanded Clay and Slate Institute. Based on the ACI Material

Journal by Diona Marcia, Andrian Loani, Mihai Filip and Ian pepenar (1994), were

identify in Japan (1983) that lightweight material had been used for railway station

platform. The research shown on durability has proven that lightweight concrete

presented similar carbonation depths as natural concrete. By the way, same cracks

were represented, but those posed no structure problem problems. A other structure

comprising between lightweight concrete with normal concrete which was examining

for salt penetration in sea water for 13 years.

The use of lightweight concrete has been achieved for well over two millennia

with widespread use in the past eight years. In this study that proved the performance

that important to the design community, owners and researchers. Lightweight

concrete aggregates consider to sustainable development by maximizing structural

efficiency, lowering transportation requirements, conserving energy, and increasing

concrete durability. Based on ―sustainable development‖ were presented by the 1987

19
UN World Commission on Environment and Development ―sustainable development

are needed in future without the effort of future generation to meet their own needs‖

John P. Ries and Thomas A. Holm (2002)(11).

All products should optimize structural efficiency by improving the strength to

weight ratio. But the lightweight concrete are more considerable for weight reduction

which often enhances the functionality, architectural expression or constructability of

a structure. In building this is achieved by thinner fire resistant slabs, longer spans,

expressive roof "design, taller buildings, additional floors added to existing structures

and when building on locations with poor soil conditions. Weight reduction

optimizes land use by affording a smaller footprint, which allows surrounding space

to be more people friendly. The material also bring the kindness such as the

reduction in foundation loads may result in smaller footings, fewer piles, smaller pile

caps, and less reinforcing, reduced dead loads may result in smaller supporting

members ( decks, beams, girder, and piers), reduced dead load will result in reduced

inertial seismic forces.

Specified density concrete is becoming increasingly used to enhance design

flexibility and project economics. Specified density is defined as concrete containing

limited amounts of lightweight aggregate that result in equilibrium concrete

densities greater than 120 lb/ft3 (1920 kg/m3) but less than concrete composed

entirely of normal weight aggregates. The increasing usage of specified density

concrete is driven by engineers' decisions to optimize the concrete density to improve

20
structural efficiency (strength to density ratio), to reduce concrete product

transportation and construction costs, and to enhance the hydration of high

cementitious concrete with very low w/cm (ACI 213R-03).

The Centre for Infrastructure Research, University of Nebraska at Lincoln

reported that long-term problems stem from heavyweight concrete masonry units.

"Concrete masonry is a dominant material in wall construction. Over $10 billion

worth of masonry walls are constructed in the United States every year. However, the

industry is facing a shortage of qualified masons, and the average age of active

masons has been gradually increasing due, in part, to the hard work they have to do

in lifting heavy concrete masonry units. The load of lifting these blocks, day after

day, can make drudgery out of a day's work for a mason, especially after many years.

Some masons must retire early due to the heavy lifting, and many masons experience

crippling back and shoulder injuries before retirement", this continual loss of skilled

labor is expensive to replace and may ultimately make masonry non-competitive.

By reducing the weight of concrete masonry and other concrete products that

must be physically handled by labors we enhance sustainability to our workforce are

common knowledge that lighter components have a positive effect on

constructability , for example at the same strength, lightweight concrete masonry

units are up to 40% lighter than traditional concrete masonry units. Less weight

minimizes the physical demands on masons and equipment, resulting in fewer

injuries and workers' compensation claims. Repeatedly lifting less weight also
21
extends a mason's career, and allows women and men to work efficiently- Concrete

masonry units that weigh less will increase mason productivity up to 21%. Increase

productivity means earlier completion and lower overhead costs. Even though

masonry will lay approximately 20% more wall area in a year, the mason still lifts

15% less weight (about 94 less tons per year). .Less weight extends equipment life

because lighter loads mean less wear and tear and helps insure safer scaffolding and

worker platforms. Less weight means it is easier to meet OSHA weight requirements.

The lightweight concrete may reduce the weight of element structural and

considering to decrease the cost of construction such as material, labors and

transportation cost as well as improving and service life of concrete. Sustainable

development shown the lightweight aggregate can lower the overall energy

consumption of structure throughout their useful lives. It also will be reduce initial

construction cost and importantly, significantly lowers the life cost of structures.

D’Annunzio (2013) (12) reports, that the lightweight concrete can be perform

similar strength with natural concrete and it also produce more efficient

strength-to-weight ratio in structural elements. This research that to identify the

structural performance of lightweight concrete. The use of lightweight concrete as a

roof decking and insulation system has expanded in the past five years. Higher usage

can be considered to the recent industry-wide insulation shortage and delimitation

deficiencies. The increase can also be attributed to the economic and environmental

advantages that lightweight insulating ―lightweight‖ concrete provides in roof

22
assembles.

The lightweight concrete product will be produced from the quality based on the

skill level of the applicator. Lightweight concrete has additional constraints because

the success of the system is based on the proper mix ratio. One of the major problems

with lightweight concrete is if the lightweight concrete is not properly, it may have

empty spaces that can lead to deficient strength. The compressive strength of

lightweight concrete came from additive, when it is mixed correctly, this addictive

mould around the cement which serves an aggregate. It may attribute of foam

collapse and weakens the product’s compressive strength. D’Annunzio (2013) p.2,

One of factors that leads to lightweight concrete failing is the mixing process is

typically done at jobsite, which may lead to human error, Concrecel USA has

develop pumping equipment which can eliminate the problem of human error.

Lightweight concrete can be defined as a type of concrete which includes an

expanding agent in it that increases the volume of the mixture while reducing the

dead weight. It is lighter than the conventional concrete with a dry density of 300

kg/m3 up to 1840 kg/m3. The main specialties of lightweight concrete are its low

density and low thermal.

23
2.7 The Lightweight Concrete as air entraining agent

By Dhawal Desai IIT Bombay (2011) (13) by using Aluminium powder as an air

entraining agent are mainly its reduced mass and improved thermal and sound

insulation properties, while maintaining adequate strength. The marginally higher

cost of the lightweight concrete is offset by size reduction of structural elements, less

reinforcing steel and reduced volume of concrete, resulting in overall cost reduction.

The reduced weight has numerous advantages; one of them is reduced demand of

energy during construction.

The reactants in aerated concrete are lime (which is present in cement) and

aluminum powder. When the aluminum powder is added to slurry of lime, hydrogen

is produced in the form of bubbles. Thick slurry is made with lime/cement along with

aggregates. Aluminum powder is added in the final stage of mixing. The mix is

poured into moulds. The moulds are autoclaved which imparts strength. AAC is

produced using no aggregate larger than sand.

The mixture of aluminum powder was hot just after mixing which confirmed the

chemical reaction in that. Also hissing sound was coming which confirmed the

evolution of gas. Since this is aerated concrete, it should expand. But it did not. The

reason was less amount of water since it did not form slurry and there were gaps

between the particles through which all the evolved gases escaped out from the

24
concrete. These gases should remain there only so that the concrete expands but it

did not happen.

Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC) or Autoclaved Lightweight Concrete (ALC)

is a pre-cast construction material that is made from a variety of aggregate parts no

larger than sand. At roughly one-fifth of the weight of normal concrete, it is an

incredibly lightweight building material. It provides excellent thermal and acoustic

resistance and also protects against household hazards as termites and fire. AAC is

commonly referred to as autoclaved cellular concrete because hydrogen bubbles

form during the production process, resulting in small pockets of air within the

concrete that substantially increase the volume of the final concrete product.

Though the precise composition of autoclaved aerated concrete may vary, it is

generally made up of quartz sand or some other fine aggregate, cement and water or

some other binding component and aluminum powder. The aluminum powder reacts

with the cement and forms hydrogen bubbles to form within the mix, thereby

increasing the volume-to-weight ratio of the concrete mix. After the mix is cast into

the desired form and the volume-increasing chemical reactions occur, the concrete

mix, which is still soft, is autoclaved.

The Aerated concrete is a much lighter concrete and can float on water. It does

25
not contain coarse aggregates. It is composed of cement, sand, high water-cement

ratio and aluminum powder. Just as we mix the aluminum powder in the cement-sand

slurry, the expansion in the volume can be observed. Within 5 minutes it expands by

30%. It consists of many pores and thus is not structurally strong. It is a good

insulator of heat and sound and thus can be used in place of conventional bricks or at

the places which does not bear any load.

Lightweight structural materials are used extensively in building, because they

are cheap, strong (in compression), durable and fire resistant. Some aspects however,

are less well appreciated and sometimes the normal constituents are not available. An

example of one of the less appreciated aspects is the relatively low tensile capacity.

To overcome this, a range of provisions are introduced to obtain improved

performance, like steel reinforcement, fibre reinforcement, pre-stressing and polymer

additions. The difficulties already arising in some areas due to insufficient gravel or

quarry resources will increase in the near future. Solutions by natural or artificial

substitutes--which have at the same time the advantage of solving waste-material

problems (like fly-ash) are considered and becoming common practice.

Deformability and internal equilibrium are to understand or even predict the

parameters expressing the behaviour of (lightweight) concrete, it is important to

understand the transmission of forces in concrete. This depends as mentioned on the

deformability, thus on the rigidity of the components and on the internal adherence

26
(14). Aggregate particles 'softer' than the surrounding mortar do not participate fully

in the transmission of internal forces. Tables 1 give indication of the deformation

moduli of mortar and aggregates. With soft aggregates (E particles ≤ E mortar)

transfer of force is through the mortar matrix.

(particle) Compressive E-value

Strength

Lightweight aggregate 5-30 N/ MM2 5-30 KN/MM2

Cement mortar 20-60 N/MM2 20-30 KN/MM2

Dense aggregate 60-100 N/MM2 60-100 KN/MM2

Table 2.4: Indicative values for compressive strength and modulus of deformation of

aggregate and cement mortar

Figure 2.5: Transfer of Forces

27
 Figure 2.6: Failure Patern

Figure 2.7: Behavior of Lightweight concrete under compression force

Figure 2.8: Behavior of natural concrete under compression force

Failure occurs right through the aggregates (figure 2.7). With stiffer aggregates

the stresses in the mortar are reduced. Failure will occur now by extending initial
28
cracks along the aggregates (figure 2.8). Lack of interface bond will decrease the

load-capacity in both cases considerably. The result of the above is expressed by the

compressive capacity and the shape of the stress-strain diagram of the concrete

and--even more pronounced by the tensile (splitting) strength and E value of the

composite. These consequences are, among others, dealtwith by Grubl (15).

Design of lightweight (aggregate) concrete structures will be based on the same

principles as design for dense concrete structures. There are no reasons whatsoever to

divert from that principle, but for each application the relevant characteristics, of the

modification used, must be known. Structural behavior of lightweight concrete is

governed by the deformability of the particles or better by the ratio of the stiffness’s

of mortar and aggregate. An approach to predict or direct the characteristics is given

by Grubl.

The benefit of LWC as structural material was recognized as far back as Roman

days. Nevertheless, the production of lightweight aggregates began on a larger scale

after the First World War. In fact, it is mentioned in the literature that the first

practical use of lightweight concrete took place at that time, when American

Emergency Fleet Corporation built lightweight concrete ships. Its use has increased

progressively ever since, so that today lightweight aggregates (LWA) represent a

significant part of the total quantity of the aggregates intended for use in construction.

Depending on its density, lightweight aggregate can be used in several ways (15).

29
 Lightweight concrete is generally used to reduce the dead weight of a structure

as well as to reduce the risk of earthquake damages to a structure because the

earthquake forces that will influence the civil engineering structures and buildings

are proportional to the mass of those structures and buildings. The reduction in the

dead weight of a construction by the use of lightweight aggregates in concrete could

result in a decrease in the cross-section of steel reinforced columns, beams, plates,

and foundations. It is also possible to reduce steel reinforcement. Thus, reducing the

mass of the structure or building is of utmost importance to reduce their risk due to

earthquake acceleration (16).

Density is one of the important parameters which can control many physical

properties in lightweight concrete and it is mainly controlled by the amount and

density of lightweight aggregate. The bulk density of the structural lightweight

concretes (ranging between 1400 and 2000 kg/m3 ) were discovered to be sensibly

lower than that of an ordinary concrete (usually between 2200 and 2600 kg/m3 ) and

conform with others works during compressive strength test (16).Air dry densities

are given in experiment. The 28-day density in surface dry condition is 2027 kg/m3

for 50% of replacement of coarse aggregates and 1951 kg/m3 for 100% of

replacement of coarse aggregates. If taken the density of normal weight concrete as

2400 kg/m3, there is a saving in the self-weight 16% for 50% of replacement of

30
coarse aggregates and 19% for.

Generally, for structural lightweight concrete the compressive strength is over 15

MPa and the flexural tensile strength is over 3 MPa. These results indicate that the

lightweight aggregate using 50% limestone could be applied to structural lightweight

concrete products (17). The increase in the flexural tensile strength has the advantage

that the corrosion resistance of such concrete will be improved. The S. Kitouni et al. /

Cerâmica 61 (2015) 462-468 467 flexural tensile strength of concrete is one of the

parameters that control the rate of reinforcement corrosion. Therefore, increased

flexural tensile strength of concrete indicates the potential for an increase in the

useful service life of the concrete structures (18). There is positive effect of the lower

elastic modulus on the reduction of tensile thermal stress of surface layer of fine

aggregate concrete, which reduces the possibility of concrete cracking. However, it

should be noted that the reduction of splitting tensile strength will decrease the

ability of surface layer of fine aggregate concrete to resist cracking (19). The flexural

strength is more sensitive to inner structure characteristic (such as porosity and

microcracks) than to compressive strength (20).

S. Kivrak, Anadolu, M. Tuncan, Anadolu, M. I. Onur, Anadolu , G. Arslan,

Anadolu, O. Arioz*, Anadolu of University Turkey (2006)(26), according to the

analysis of sample buildings, it was found that if the centre of gravity does not

coincide with the centre of rigidity of the buildings, higher amount of reinforcement

31
steel was required by using normal weight concrete when compared to LWC. It

should be noted that changes in the amount of slab reinforcement steel were found

negligible. In each analysis minimum reinforcement steel according to the codes was

used in slabs therefore no changes in the amounts of reinforcement steel in slab

elements were observed.

Reductions in the amount of reinforcement steel were generally observed in

columns and beams, especially in longitudinal steels of columns of car park,

shopping centre and residence. It is clearly seen from the percentages that amounts of

total reinforcement steel are lowered by using LWC in these structures. LWC

reduced the dead load of the structures result a decrease in reinforcement steel.

Savings in reinforcement steel also bring about savings in total construction costs.

According to the results of the analyses of this study, total reductions in

reinforcement steel were found to be 5.4, 2, and 1% for residential building,

shopping centre, and car park, respectively. It is obvious that using LWC will also

reduce the dimensions of the structural elements of these structures and therefore

reduce the volume of concrete if further analysis would be performed. It should also

be marked that the cost of soil improvement for the buildings when using LWC will

be significantly reduced.

32
2.8 Lightweight Foamed Concrete

Foam concrete (22) is a mixture of cement, fine sand, water and special foam

which once hardened results in a strong, lightweight concrete containing millions of

evenly distributed, consistently sized air bubbles or cells. The density of FC is

determined by the amount of foam added to the basic cement and sand mixture.

Foam concrete is both fire and water resistant. It possesses high (impact and

air-borne) sound and thermal insulation properties. Foam concrete is similar to

conventional concrete as it uses the same ingredients. However, foam concrete

differs from conventional concrete in that the use of aggregates in the former is

eliminated. A foam aeration agent is used to absorb humidity for as long as the

product is exposed to the atmosphere, allowing the hydration process of the cement

to progress in its ever-continuing strength development.

The difference between (23) foam concrete and normal concrete is the use of

aggregate in the foam concrete is eliminated and been replaced by the homogeneous

cells created by air in the form of small bubble which utilize a stable air cell structure

rather than tradition aggregates. It can be categorized as cellular material because it

contains a higher amount of pores. Based on its morphology, foam concrete can be

easily known as cellular material and the behavior must be same as cellular solid

behavior.

33
 Mahesh-kumar H.Thakrele (2014) (24), Improved structural efficiency in terms

of strength/weight ratios resulting load reduction on the structure and substructure,

fewer structural components resulting in more usable space in the structure, a

reduction in the number and size of reinforcements, increased flexibility in absorbing

strains and improved thermal properties minimizing the effects of differential

temperatures resulting in building energy conservation.

Based on Compressive strength foamed concrete are low for lower density

mixture and increases with density increases. The increment of voids throughout the

sample caused by the foam in the mixture will lower the density. It is observed that

the use of flay ash in Foam Concrete, either as fine aggregate (Fly ash 1:1 ratio) or as

cement (Fly Ash: Sand in 1:0.5:1.5 Ratio) replacement can be greatly improves its

properties. Fine aggregate in Foamed Concrete increases its density (Fly Ash: Sand

in 1:0.5:1.5 Ratio) but it has beneficial effect on significantly increase in compressive

strength and can reduce the construction cost.

As a result, compressive strength will reduces with the increment of those voids.

It is observed that the remolding of high density foamed concrete is possible after 24

hours but for low density foamed concrete could not be possible, it required

minimum 3 days for remolding period because their strength is very low and the

cube shape can be change.

34
2.9 The Density of Foamed Concrete

The density of mix can be measured in two phases; fresh and dry densities. The

difference between values of fresh and dry density is recommended to be limited to

100–120 kg/m3 (25). The actual fresh mix density is usually measured by filling and

weighing a pre-weighted standard container of known volume with the produced

foamed concrete. Then, the variation between the design and achieved densities

should be assessed. The most acceptable tolerance for dry density is limited to be

±50 kg/m3 which might reach the difference up to ±100 kg/m3 for high density

foamed concrete mixes (i.e. 1600 kg/m3). The method is described in BS EN 12350:

Part 6: 2000. The purpose to determine the fresh density is to prepare the actual

volume for the design mix and the casting control while the dry density rigorously

controls the mechanical, physical and durability properties of hardened foamed

concrete.

So far, the effect of mix constituents such as foam agent volume and

supplementary cementations materials on the density has been reported in the

literature. For example, it is reported that the foamed concrete fresh density

commonly decreases with an increase in the foam volume content. On the other hand,

the addition of fly ash reportedly increased the dry density of the foamed concrete at

a given foam agent volume (10%), nonetheless, the changes in the density as a result

of ash inclusion could be controlled with foam agent volume. In general, the

lightweight foam concrete obtains up to 50 MPa of strength when the fresh density

35
volume is only up to 65% of normal concrete (the surfactant solutions are foam agent

having a density between 20 and 90 kg/m3). The density could also be affected by the

types of fine aggregates and aggregate gradation. McCormick (27) reported that as

the proportion of aggregates increases the density would be higher.

3.0 Compressive Strength of Foam Concrete

One of the major controlling factors in compressive strength of the mix is the

volume/density of foam agent by which the amount of air-voids in the hardened

foamed concrete varies and. For example, when the plastic densities of foamed

concrete were 1800 kg/m3 and 280 kg/m3, the associated compressive strength at

28 days were 43 MPa and 0.6 MPa, respectively. The excessive addition of foam

agent depleted the compressive strength because the higher volume of foam agent

commonly created air-voids and resulted in a lower density.

Water/cement ratio is another controlling factor which influences the

compressive strength of the foamed concrete. Appropriate content of water enhances

the consistency and stability of the mix and reduces the large size foam bubbles

which increases the compressive strength. The production of high-strength foamed

concrete was reported when 0.19 and 0.17 of water/cement or binder ratio were used.

Not only did water to cement ratio affects the compressive strength, but the

amount of sand with respect to the binder is also influential in the strength obtained

36
by the foamed concrete. Generally, in Europe foamed concrete is produced with

sand/binder proportions of 1:1 to 4:1. McCormick (27) reported that the influence of

the sand content seemed insignificant with respect to compressive strength when a

sand/cement ratio of 1.0–2.0 was used.

The compressive strength is considered as the primary function of the desirable

density design, as a main consideration for this lightweight concrete, which can

finally be used to fabricate structural, non or semi-structural components. Meanwhile,

durability is another property of foamed concrete that needs to be at a level which

can effectively allow it to resist the aggressive environments. This can be achieved

by selecting the most suitable type of foam agent added. Foam agents produce a

uniformed distribution of pores, where they decrease the segregation problem in an

early state, prevent the ingression of chloride, prohibit sulfate attack and increase the

time range during fire while enhancing its fire resistance.

37
 CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter highlights the chronological order of research methodology, and

discusses on how the research methodology was conducted in order to achieve the

objectives of this research. The methodology will be process to approve the

lightweight foamed concrete through by workability and compressive strength with

the normal concrete. An analysis is conducted to study the data that have been

gathered and through the sample of building by Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 and

design calculation by British Practical Code (BS: 8110).

3.2 Research Process

To carry out the study, several research methodologies were used, which includes

determination of the title, identify the objective and scope of study, literature review,

data collection, data analysis, recommendation and conclusion. Describe the flow

chart of Research Methodology used to accomplish the objectives that have been

carried out during the study.

38
 Introduction

- Background of the One way joist structure

- Identifying problem of the weight of structure

- Research Objective

Literature Review

- Lightweight Foam Concrete

- One Way Joist System

- Journal, Book, Articles and others

Laboratory and data collection

- Preparation of foamed concrete

- The Weight of density

- Flow test Table

- Compression test

Data Analysis

- Analysis data of sample building

- Lab Test Result

Recommendation and Conclusion

- The recommendation of material and method

39
3.3 Material

Cement (SIMEN SINGA BIIRU®) was purchased from CIMA GROUP OF

COMPANIES Sdn. Bhd. (Perak, Malaysia). Sand (BOON TIN®) was purchased

from Guan Seng building trading co. Foam (Noraite PA-I) was purchased from

USAINS HOLDING. Sdn.Bhd. (Penang, Malaysia) and the water used was tap

water.

3.4 Mix proportions:

The cement was mixed with sand and water was mixed in the mixer for a few

minutes. Then foam was added gradually until the required density 1400 kg/m 3,

1700 Kg/m 3 and 2000 kg/m 3 was obtained. The ratio of cement, sand and foam

mixture was 1:1:0.45. For the compressive strength test, the casting was carried out

by using steel molds, with the (Selangor, Malaysia) of 100 × 100 × 100 mm.

Figure 3.1: Mould (100mmx100mmx100mm)

40
The molds in Figure 9 were founded to be well sealed, free from rust and had smooth

surfaces. These mold had molds to be brushed with oil to prevent from sticking to the

moulds.

3.5 The Calculation of Weight of Sand, Cement, water and Foamed:

The Volume:

= 0.04 m3

Wet Density:

1700 kg/m3 + 130 kg/m3 = 1830 kg/m3

Foam Weight:

( 1- wet density/ mortar density) x (total volume x foam density)

(1-1830/2100) x (0.04 x 65) = 0.334 kg

Solid Weight:

Total Mass – Total Foam Mass

( 1830 x 0.04) 73.2 kg – 0.334 kg = 72.886 kg

Weight of Cement, Sand and Water:

Total Ratio 1:1:0.45, Where 1+1+ 0.45 = 2.45

Formula: 1 / 2.45 x Solid weight

Cement: 29.74 kg

Sand: 29.74 kg

Water: 13.38 kg

Table 3.1: The Formula of Weight of Cement, Water and Sand

41
 Table 3.1 shows the proportion of each material that used for the design mix of

the Foamed concrete. The proportion of each mix is calculated from the table 3.1 is

to find the weight of Sand, Cement and Water. Through that, each material in the mix

design can be calculated according to the ratio given. Material like cement, sand,

water and foamed had fixed in all the design mix. All the weight of material will be

mixture in the mixer machine in 20 minutes are accepted.

42
3.6 Lightweight Foamed Concrete:

Figure 3.2: The protein of a stable Foamed

Lightweight foamed concrete is normally made from mixing a stable (figure 3.2)

foam to slurry of cement, sand & water. This action incorporates small-enclosed air

Bubbles within the mortar thereby making it lighter and possessing special properties

Such as low thermal conductivity and high fire resistance. Its density ranges from as

low as 400kg/m3 to as high as 1700kg/m3 therefore allowing it to be used in a variet

yof applications such as pre - cast wall blocks and panels, cast in-situ lightweight wal

ls floor & roof screeds, trench reinstatement, road foundations and void-filling. 1 kg

of protein it will be same like 29 litres of beakers

43
 Figure 3.3: The chemical Foaming agent, water and air by compressor

The port foam foam generator or is a machine that produces stable foam a mixture

of chemical foaming agent, water and air (figure3.3). This foam generator, which runs

from an air compressor consist of components such as the mechanical delivery unit,

foaming and a lankruit. These components allow great flexibility to the user in terms

of the scale of production of foam concrete since it can a accommodate to future

production requirements

44
 Figure 3.4: Portafoam PM-2 Advance Figure3.5: Pumping Stable Foam, Norait SA-1

Portafoam is lightweight, modular; transport able may be used on-site or adapted

to existing concrete production plants. It size, output, and mobility are also well suited

for small to medium scale production and laboratory work on foam concrete. Several

control devices on portafoam enable the adjustment of foam properties and allow it to

work with different foaming agents (example protein or synthetic) such as (figure 3.5)

which has been tested and are compatible with portafoam

The portafoam foaming generator (figure 3.4) can be attached to several other

devices such as an auto-timer control pressure tank delivery unit and valve junction

box which makes foam concrete production much more efficient. Portafoam is

expandable, adjustable, easy to use and maintain and is one of the most competitively

priced foam generators in the building industry today.

45
3.7 Mixing and Testing Method

Figure 3.6: The Mixer Machine

A concrete mixer is a device that homogeneously combines mortar, such as

cement, sand and water - a powered device that mixes concrete with water such as

sand or cement to make mortar. Concrete mixers range from the very large

commercial mixing truck to the smaller, portable concrete mixer sometimes called a

mini mixer. A concrete mixer is comprised primarily of a motor, a rotating drum, and

often a chute. Inside the drum, the materials used to make concrete spin around,

mixing together evenly and remaining soft for application and forming. The timing

of spinning is 20 minutes are acceptable. The weight of bowl is1.452 kg will be

measured and the weight of material will be put into it.

46
Density Required Cement Sand Water

Foam

2000 Kg/m3 33.54 kg 33.54 kg 16.78 kg

1700 Kg/m3 29.74 kg 29.74 kg 13.38 kg

1400 Kg/m3 25.21 Kg 25.21 kg 10.22 Kg

Table 3.2: weight of Cement, Sand and Water

Firstly, the cement and water will be put into the mixer and some of scope of

water will be blended until become the mortar. The sample of mortar or fresh density

will be recorded as mortar concrete to make comparison with additional foam using a

steel cup to estimate the weight. Then the foamed will be put by using the pumping

stable foam and directly on the bowl. Flow test table will be tested to workability of

mortar concrete.

47
3.7.1 Flow Table Test

Figure 3.7: The flow table test

ASTM C 1437, the Standard Test Method for the flow of Hydraulic-Cement

Mortar was carried out to measure the workability of the mortar by using the flow

table test, and the soil test Company (USA). The flow is repeated by using a fresh

batch of mortar each time until the desired flow is achieved. The material used for

flow table test such as steel ruler, steel cup, plastic bowl and flat steel. All the

material should be touching on the water to ability flowing of the mater. The

requirement diameter of mortar is 22 cm until 24 cm are acceptable.

48
3.8 Density test

Figure 3.8.1: The hardened cup used for measurement

3.8.1 Mortar:

The density of concrete according to the BS1881: Part 114:1983 was measured

to determine the density of hardened concrete by using a cup with a known volume

(1 L) and weight (568.3g) which was filled with mortar. Then the weight of the

mortar was measured by using the Top pan balance, the vibra shinko deashi (Japan).

The density was controlled by adding foam to the mixture. The bulk density of the

structural lightweight concretes (ranging between 1400 and 2000 kg/m 3) were

discovered to be sensibly lower than that of an ordinary concrete (usually between

2200 and 2600 kg/m 3). The fresh density of concrete will be recorded.

49
Result of Flow table test: 22 cm or 220 mm

Solid weight = 72.886 kg

(-) water needed = 0.901kg

New mortar weight : 71.985 kg

The mortar Density concrete are (cup) = 2100.7 kg/m3

Mortar Volume :71.985 /2100.7 = 0.04m3

Foam Volume : 0.04– 0.03 = 0.01

The total of foam concrete will be putting into the mixer are 10 liters.

Foamed are need in mixture 10 liter

Density Foamed Foamed Required

2000 kg/m3 16 liter

1700 kg/m3 10 liter

1400 kg/m3 6 liter

Table 3.3: The weight of Foamed concrete (in liter)

After Flow Table Test, The density of mortar will be test for workability by Flow

table test. After the mortar achieved requirement of British Practice Code: 8110 and

some of water has less water are not required. Then the balance of water will be

recorded and will be calculated to find out the weight of foamed. The weight of

mortar is 10 kilograms (10 liter) are needed and put into the mixer machine. The

50
testing mixture of cement, sand, water and foamed showed that the long time of mix

will be decreased the density because the air bubbles of mortar will exploded after

collide all the chemical material.

3.8.2 Density for sample

Figure 3.8.2: The Density of Sample Mortar

The first density of the mortar was measured (fresh density) by using a cup with

a known volume (1L) and weight (568.3g) which was filled with mortar. The second

measurement was held 24hr after casting (wet density) while the third measurement

was carried out after 7th days (dry density) and 28th days. The samples had to be

submerged under water for 7days and 27 days and dried by using an oven where

51
the standard temperature are 95 Celsius until 105 Celsius (Locasi E40-007, member

854 schwabach, WGermany) before proceeding with the next measurement. The

experiment was replicated in quadricate and then the average was taken.

3.8.3 Heating and Drying Oven

Figure 3.8.3: The Heating and Drying Oven

Oven Dry density is defined as the density reached by structural lightweight

concrete after placing the concrete in oven at 230 ± 5˚F (110 ± 5˚C) for a period of

time in 14 and 27 days to reach decreased weight. The density of structural

lightweight aggregate concrete will decrease as it dries and will eventually reach

equilibrium with its environment. The absorption and moisture content of the foamed

concrete are the principal factors that impact the difference between the fresh bulk
52
density of foamed concrete and its equilibrium density. To measure it, It can take 7th

day and 28th days in drying the environment for typical of lightweight concrete.

3.9 Compression test

Figure 3.9: The mechanical of Compression Test

Foamed concrete mixtures can be designed to provide a wide range of

mechanical and durability properties to meet the design requirement of a structure.

The compressive strength of concrete is the most common performance measure

used by the engineer in designing buildings and other structures. The compressive

mechanical strength for structural lightweight concrete was >20MPa. Axial

compression testing is useful for the measurement of elastic and compressive fracture

properties of brittle materials or low-ductility materials the compressions of the dry

53
samples were taken by using an automatic compression machine (ELE automatic

compression machine, MS INSTUMENTS SON.BHO). This test was carried out

only on 28. The measurement was carried out in quadric ate and the average was

then taken.

3.9.1 Prokon Software Consultant 3.0

Prokon 3.0 is a commercial software application for finite element method and

structural engineering analyzing and designing of structures, available since 1990s as

a desktop application marketed as Prokon Structural Analysis and Design. A version

with software consultant 3.0 solution structures was used for analyzing the structure.

The data was collected from the result of the density and compression tests for the

concrete and were fed to the software. This software was designed according to

British standard. It can analyze and calculate the volume of concrete, amount of steel

and formwork, and produce the drawing of the sections and amounts of shears,

moments and deflections. Furthermore, this software is able to calculate the raw cost

and placement cost for the floor plan. There are two type system to analysis the

detailing of reinforcement steel are Autopadd and Padds.

54
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULT DISCUSSION AND DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Flow test

The flow of the mortar was discovered to be 22 cm or 220 mm which is

considered acceptable because more than 200 mm.

4.1.1 Density and Compression Test

The result showed that the density of the sample after the mixing and before the

foam was added was 2100.7 Kg/m 3 (normal concrete). The densities of samples

after the foam added were then measured. After 24hr, the molds were opened and the

density of the samples was measured. The average value of these samples was taken

based on the result of this test. On 7 day and 28th day, the samples were removed

from the oven and the oven dry densities of the samples were taken. The average

value of these samples was taken as the result of this test. The average value for each

fresh density of sample after the addition of the foam, the wet density after 24hr, the

dry density after drying oven, and the compression strength after 28 days are shown

in Table 4.1.

55
 Fresh Fresh Wet Density Dry Dry Density Compressive

Density Density (24 hours) Density (28 day) Strength

before after ( 7 day) (Mpa)

foam foam

2000 2100 2000 1889 1721 1701

1700 2100 1700 1670 1665 1651

1400 2100 1400 1389 1341 1311

Table 4.1: Fresh Density of Sample before and after the addition of Foam, The wet
Density after 24 hour, and The Dry Density after Drying in oven on 7 days and 28
days and the compression strength after 28 days only.

4.1.2 The lab results

The result of the flow test within the acceptable range according to ASTM C

1437, the Standard Test Method for the Flow of Hydraulic-Cement Mortar for Flow

Table Test, was noted. While the bulk density of the structural lightweight concrete

was within acceptable range, additional to the result of compressive strength was

discovered to be within the acceptable range of structural lightweight concretes.

56
4.2 The Analysis of One Way joist Slab Structure

The plan for the building which consisted of ribbed slab, beam, and column is

shown in Figure 4.1, and the result of this analysis which was done by using Prokon

Software Consultant 3.0 for one way joist slab which produced the result of the

calculations of moments for joist slab, are listed in Table 4.2 which shows the

maximum moments in the slab (FS11) whether at support short span, long span,

support short span, or at support long span.

57
Figure 4.1: The Plan for Building which consists of Joist Slab, Beam, and Column

58
 The result of the calculations of moments for ribbed slab

Slab Mark MX.a(KN/M2) MY.b(KN/M2) MSX.c(KN/M2) MSY.d(KN/M2)

FS 1 0.5 0.2 0.66 0.27

FS 2 0.5 0.2 0.66 0.27

FS 3 0.35 0.16 0.47 0.22

FS 4 0.35 0.16 0.47 0.22

FS 5 0.5 0.2 0.66 0.27

FS 6 0.34 0.14 0.45 0.19

FS 7 0.35 0.16 0.47 0.22

FS 8 0.35 0.16 0.47 0.22

FS 9 0.34 0.14 0.45 0.19

FS 10 0.35 0.16 0.47 0.22

FS 11 0.5 0.2 0.66 0.27

FS 12 0.48 0.16 0.64 0.22

FS 13 0.35 0.16 0.47 0.22

FS 14 0.42 0.2 0.56 0.27

FS 15 0.3 0.16 0.4 0.22

FS 16 0.3 0.16 0.4 0.22

FS 17 0.3 0.16 0.4 0.22

FS 18 0.42 0.2 0.56 0.27

Mx.a : Short Span Moment

59
Mx.b : Long Span Moment
Msx.c : Support Short Span Moment
Msy.d: Support Long Span Moment
Noted: Area = 360mm2 and Rebar = R10 mm2

The result of the analysis Deflection One Way Joist Slab which was done by

using the Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 generated by Autopadd and The Figure 4.2

showed that the bending moment of FS5, FS6 and FS7 are more considerable because

that area are not exceeding the specified deflection as 6.23 and absolutely are not may

be to cracking which produced by Prokon Software Consultant 3.0.

60
Figure 4.2: Bending Schedule of One Way Joist Slab by Prokon

61
 The result of the analysis which was done by using the Prokon Software

Consultant 3.0 and the calculations of the thickness of slab, volume, formwork,

X-Direction bar, Y-Direction bar, and weight for joist slab are as listed in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Result of the calculations of Slab Thickness, Volume, Formwork,

X-Direction Bar, Y-Direction Bar and Weight for Joist Slab

X-Direction Y-Direction Weight

Slab Volume,m3 Formwork,m2
Bar Bar kg
mm
Mark mm

FS 1 0.127 2.54 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 2 0.128 2.553 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 3 0.125 2.497 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 4 0.125 2.51 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 5 0.128 2.553 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 6 0.125 2.497 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 7 0.125 2.51 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 8 0.125 2.51 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 9 0.125 2.497 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 10 0.125 2.51 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 11 0.128 2.553 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 12 0.127 2.54 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 13 0.128 2.553 14R6-75,3200 41R6-75,1200 20.9

FS 14 0.086 1.71 27R6-75,1200 41R6-75,1200 14.1

62
 FS 15 0.084 1.681 27R6-75,1200 41R6-75,1200 14.1

FS 16 0.084 1.681 27R6-75,1200 41R6-75,1200 14.1

FS 17 0.86 1.71 27R6-75,1200 41R6-75,1200 14.1

FS 18 0.86 1.71 27R6-75,1200 41R6-75,1200 14.1

Total 2.066 41.316 341.8

Noted: Thickness slab are 50mm

The section and the distribution of steel bars at the bottom and top of ribbed slab are

shown in Figure 4.3

Figure 4.3: The section and the distribution of steel bars at the bottom and top of joist

slab

63
 The material costs for the concrete (volume= 2.1m3) and Formwork (area= 41.3

m 2 ) were RM310 and RM826 respectively while the total material cost for Bottom

bar R6 with weight 341.8Kg was RM 376. The total was RM 1888. In addition to this,

the result of the calculations of beam, depth, concrete volume, and formwork for

beams are listed in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4: Result of the calculation of Beam Width, Depth, Concrete Volume and

Formwork for Beams

Beam Name Width, mm Depth, mm Concrete Formwork

Volume

M3

Bottom,m2 Side,m2

R1 100 260 0.16575 0.6375 3.315

R2 130 150 0.12027 0.8015 1.8495

R3 100 260 0.08775 0.3375 1.755

R4 130 150 0.124312 0.8288 1.9125

R5 130 150 0.178425 1.1895 2.745

R6 130 150 0.178425 1.1895 2.745

R7 100 260 0.24375 0.9375 4.875

R8 100 260 0.13975 0.5375 2.795

R9 100 260 0.08775 0.3375 1.755

64
 R10 130 260 0.181675 0.6988 2.795

R11 100 260 0.0598 0.23 1.196

R12 100 150 0.03225 0.215 0.645

R13 130 260 0.249275 0.9588 3.835

R14 100 150 0.03225 0.215 0.645

R15 100 150 0.03225 0.215 0.645

R16 100 260 0.19175 0.7375 3.835

Total 2.10538 10.067 31.063

The distribution of steel bar for maximum moment in beam 11 (joist) after the

calculation by using Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 (Autopadd) and the section for

the beam joist is shown in Figure 4.4.

65
 Figure 4.4: Section and Distribution of steel Bars for the maximum in beam 11

(joist). The result of analysis, which was done by using Prokon Software Consultant

3.0 (Autopadd) showed the section and the distribution of steel bars for maximum

moment in major beam13 is as shown in Figure 4.5.

66
 Figure 4.5: The section and the distribution of steel bars for maximum moment in

major beam 6

From the above analysis, it can be seen that the software had calculated the total

volume of concrete beam (for one joist) which was 2.10538 m 3 and its cost was RM

315.8. This is considered as a raw cost. Furthermore, the total area of formwork for

the bottom and the top of the plan were 10.067 m 2 and 31.063 m 2 respectively, and

the total cost of formwork for the bottom and the top was RM 1028.3 which is also

considered a raw cost while the weight of the main beam steel (R6 and R10) were
67
39.8 Kg and 247.8 Kg respectively. On the other hand, the raw cost of R6 and R10

was RM 34.8 and RM 272.6 respectively (the total cost was RM 316.3).The total raw

cost for Beam link steel of Diameter 6 mm weighting 79.9 Kg was RM 87.8.

Furthermore, the total cost for the beam of joist slab was RM 1748.2. This is

considered as a raw cost and the total cost for the building which consisted of joist

slabs and beams was RM 3636.2.This is also considered a raw cost.

68
 Table 4.5: Result of major and joist Beam Top Steel Bars, Bottom Steel Bars and

Links Bars

Beam Steel (Bar Reinforcement) Link

Name

Top Bar Bottom Bar

Bar,m Length Weight, Bar,m Length Weight, Length Weight,

m ,m kg m ,m Kg ,m Kg

Gb1,m R6 23.16 9.1 R10 12.85 8 22.8 5.1

1 R10 6.4

Gb1,m R10 15.92 9.9 R10 17.18 10.7 27.4 6.1

Gb1,m R6 14.54 3.3 R10 6.85 4.3 10.7 2.4

Gb1,m R10 17.45 10.8 R10 17.45 10.8 26.4 5.9

Gb1,m R6 4.11 15.1 R10 23.15 14.3 41.1 9.2

5 R10 22.84

Gb1,m R6 4.11 16.3 R10 25.58 15.8 41.1 9.2

6 R10 24.9

Gb1,m R6 30.82 41.8 R10 18.85 11.7 34.8 7.8

7 R10 12.8

69
Gb1,m R6 19.16 8.3 R6 7.82 9.4 20.2 4.5

8 R10 6.4 12.34

Gb1,m R6 14.54 3.3 R10 18.33 11.4 17.7 4

Gb1,m R10 23.69 14.7 R10 27.1 16.8 27.7 6.2

10

Gb1,m R6 9.73 2.2 R10 4.7 3 7 1.6

11

Gb1,m R6 4.2 1 R10 4.11 2.6 8.2 1.9

12

Gb1,m R10 29.28 18.1 R10 23.81 14.7 29.1 6.5

13

Gb1,m R6 4.2 1 R10 4.11 2.6 8.2 1.9

14

Gb1,m R6 4.2 1 R10 4.11 2.6 8.2 1.9

15

Gb1,m R6 22.82 13 R6 15.63 8.7 28.4 6.4

16 R10 R10 8.44

Noted: Link Rebar is R6mm

70
4.3 The analysis of two way solid slab:

The result of this analysis, which was done by using the Prokon Software

Consultant 3.0 for two way solid slab, produced the result of the calculations of

moments for solid slab and is listed in Table 4.6 which shows the maximum

moments which are in slab (FS2) whether at support short span, long span, support

short span, and support long span.

Figure 4.6:.Building Plan which consists of Solid Slab, Beam, and Column

71
Table 4.6: Result of the calculation moment for Solid Slab

Slab Mark Mx.a (Kn/m2) My.b (Kn/m2) Msx.c (Kn/m2) Msy.d (Kn/m2)

FS 1 4.77 3.03 2.4 3.3

FS 2 5.59 3.01 7.46 4.02

FS 3 3.01 3.86 3.42 5.14

FS 4 1.4 1.34 1.87 1.79

FS 5 2.3 1.34 3.07 1.79

Mx.a : Short Span Moment

Mx.b : Long Span Moment

Msx.c : Support Short Span Moment

Msy.d: Support Long Span Moment

Noted: Area = 360mm2 and Rebar = R10 mm2

The result of the analysis Deflection of Two Way Solid Slab which was done by

using the Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 (Autopadd) and The Figure 4.7 showed

that the bending moment of FS3 and FS1 are more considerable because that area are

not exceeding the specified deflection as 8.33 and absolutely are not may be to

cracking which produced by Prokon Software Consultant 3.0.

72
Figure 4.7: Bending Schedule of Two way solid slab System By Prokon

73
 The result of the analysis, which was done by using Prokon Software Consultant

3.0, gave the calculations of the thickness of slab, volume, formwork, X-Direction

bar, Y-Direction bar, and weight for solid slab as listed in Table 4.7. The section and

the distribution of steel bars at the bottom and top of solid slab are shown in Figure

4.8.

Table 4.7: Result of the calculation of Slab Thickness, volume, formwork,

X-direction bar, Y-direction bar and weight of solid slab

Slab Volume,m Formwork,m X-direction Bar, X-direction Bar, Weight,k

Mar 3 2 Mm2 mm2 g

FS 1 2.073 13.823 26R10-200,320 16R10-200,520 102.8

0 0

FS 2 2.073 13.823 26R10-200,320 16R10-200,520 102.8

0 0

FS 3 1.218 8.123 16R10-200,320 16R10-200,320 63.3

0 0

FS 4 0.513 3.422 11R10-200,320 11R10-75-2200 29.9

FS 5 0.791 5.273 11R10-200,320 16R10-200,220 43.5

0 0

Total 6.669 44.463 342

74
Noted: Thickness slab are 150 mm

Figure 4.8: The section and the distribution of steel bars at the bottom and top of

solid slab

The material cost for the concrete (volume= 6.669 m 3 ) and Formwork (area=

44.463 m 2 ) was RM1000 and RM889 respectively while the total material cost for

the Bottom bar R6 weighting 342 Kg was RM 379. Finally, the total amounted to Rm

2642. The result of the calculations, which was done by using the Prokon Software

Consultant 3.0 for the beam the width, depth, concrete volume, formwork, individual

beam loadings, reactions and shears for the beams, are listed in Table 4.9.

75
Table 4.8: Result of the calculations of Beam Width, Depth, Concrete Volume and

Formwork for Beams

Beam Name Concrete Volume, M3 Formwork

Bottom,m2 Side,m2

R1 0.3825 1.275 3.825

R2 0.2025 0.675 2.025

R3 0.5625 1.875 5.625

R4 0.3225 1.075 3.225

R5 0.2025 0.675 2.025

R6 0.3225 1.075 3.225

R7 0.141 0.47 1.41

R8 0.4425 1.475 3.425

R9 0.4425 1.475 4.425

Total 3.021 10.07 21.51

Noted: Width is 200mm and Depth is 300mm

76
 It shows the maximum concrete volume of beam (r 3). The result of the analysis,

which was done by using the Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 (Autopadd), illustrated

the distribution of steel bars for the maximum moment in major beam3 and the

section for the beam as shown in Figure 4.9.

Figure 4.9: Distribution of Steel Bars for Maximum Moment in Major Beam3 and

Section for Beam

77
In addition to this, the result of the calculations of major and joist beam top steel bars,

bottom steel bars, and link bars are listed in Table 4.9.

The software had calculated the total volume of the beam concrete (solid slab) as

3.021 m 3 and its cost was RM 453.1. This is considered as the raw cost.

Furthermore, the total area of steel bar formwork for the bottom and side of the plan

were 10.07 m 2 and 21.51 m 2 respectively, and the total cost of steel bar for the

bottom and the side was RM 789.5. This is also considered a raw cost while the

weight of the main beam steel R10 was 199Kg and for beam link R6 was 72.6Kg.

Thus, the raw cost of R10 and R6 was RM 218.9 and RM 79.8 respectively (total

cost was RM 298.7) while the total cost for the beam of (solid slab) was RM1541.3.

This is considered as a raw cost. Furthermore, the total cost for the building which

consisted of solid slabs and beams was RM 4183.3. This is also considered a raw

cost

78
 Table 4.9: Result of Major and Joist Beams Top Steel Bars, Bottom Steel Bars and

Links Bars

Beam Steel (Bar Reinforcement) Link

Name

Top Bar Bottom Bar

Bar,m Length Weight, Bar,m Length Weight, Length Weight,

m ,m kg m ,m Kg ,m Kg

Gb1, R10 19.16 11.9 R10 20.40 12.6 42.0 9.4

m1

Gb1, R10 7.36 4.6 R10 18.00 11.2 21.0 4.7

m2

Gb1, R10 32.08 19.8 R10 31.49 19.5 62.9 14.0

m3

Gb1, R10 14.85 9.2 R10 13.36 8.3 34.7 7.8

m4

Gb1, R10 7.36 4.5 R10 18.00 11.2 21.0 4.7

m5

Gb1, R10 19.96 12.4 R10 20.90 13.0 34.7 7.8

m6

Gb1, R10 5.18 3.2 R10 4.96 3.1 13.7 3.1

79
m7

Gb1, R10 28.08 17.4 R10 20.10 12.5 48.3 10.8

m8

Gb1, R10 23.48 14.5 R10 17.56 10.9 48.3 10.8

m9

Total

The comparison between ribbed slab and solid slab in concrete volume,

formwork and bottom bar R6 clarifies that the quantities which were mentioned

above for joist slab was less than that of the solid slab as shown in Figure 4.9.1.

Table 4.9.1: Comparison between Joist Slab and Solid Slab by Concrete Volume,

Formwork and Bottom Bar

400
350
300
250
Concrete Volume,M3
200
Formwork,M2
150
Bottom Bar (R6) Kg
100
50
0
Joist Slab Solid Slab

80
 The quantities of formwork, Concrete and steel reinforcement are play role

important to saving the cost of construction. The table 4.9.1 showed that the two way

solid slab are 342 kilograms of bottom bar (R6) are needed and the one way joist slab

are 341.8 kilograms of bottom bar (R6) are needed for reinforcement steel in

constrcution. It means that the total weight of steel reinforcement of solid slab are

more than one way joist slab for requirement. For formwork, the area for one way

joist slab are 41.316m2 and for two way solid slab are 44.463m2.All the areaare

needed for the installation of concrete. It means the total areas of formwork of solid

slab are more than one joist lab requirement area. The concrete volume proved that

the volume of one way joist slab are 2.066m3 and the two way solid slab are

6.669m3 is needed. It means the total quantities of volume concrete solid slab are

more than the one way joist slab.

The comparison between the beams for ribbed slab and solid slab in concrete volume,

form work, main beam steel bar R6 and R10 and beam link steel R6 clarifies that the

quantities which were mentioned above for joist slab was more than that of the solid

slab as shown in Figure 4.9.2.

Figure 4.9.2: The comparison between the beams for joist slab and solid slab in

concrete volume, form work, main beam steel bar R6 and R10 and beam link steel

R6

81
 300

250 Concrete Volume,M3

200 Formwork,M2

150 Main Beam Steel (R6) Kg

Main Beam Steel (R10) KG
100
Beams link Steel (R6)
50

0
Beams for Joist Slab Beams for Solid Slab

Based on the table 4.9.2 showed that the concrete volume of beam for one way

joist slab are 2.10m3 and for two way solid -slab are 3.021m3. It means the highest

of total usage of concrete is solid slab than joist slab. For formwork beam, the one

way joist slab are 31.58m2 and the solid slab are 41.13m2. It means the highest of

total quantity of beam formwork are solid slab. The weight of Main beam steel (R6)

of joist slab are 39.8 kilograms and solid slab are not required because they are more

need R10 as main beam steel for their strength requirement of Prokon Software. The

weight of main beam steel (R10) of joist slab are 247.8 kilograms and solid slab are

199 kilograms. It means the highest of total weight of main beam steel (R10) are

solid slab. The beam link steel (R6) of one way joist are 79.9 kilograms and solid

slab are 72.6. It showed the highest of total weight for beam link steel (R6) are solid

slab

82
Finally, a comparison of the cost of one way joist slab and the beam with two-way

solid Slab and beam is shown in Figure 4.9.3.

Figure 4.9.3: Cost Comparisons between One Way joist Slab and Beam with Two

Way Solid Slab and Beam. Lightweight foam concrete; Normal concrete

4500
4000
3500
3000
2500 Total Cost
2000 Slab Cost
1500 Beam Cost
1000
500
0
Joist Slab (FC) Solid Slab(NC)

Based on the table 4.9.3 showed that the total cost of beam, slab and overall cost

between one way joist slab using lightweight foam concrete with solid slab using

normal concrete. The cost of beam of joist slab are Rm1748.2 and the cost of beam

solid slab are Rm1541.3 and it means the cost of beam joist slab are expensive

because the joist system has more ribbed on the beam. The cost of slab of joist is

Rm1888 and for solid slab are Rm2645 and it proved that the cost of joist slab is

more cheap and economical. The total cost of One way joist structure are Rm3636.2

and Solid slab are Rm4183.3 and it means the One way joist structure are more

cheap and economical to construct because the weight of material are low.

83
 CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Discussion

Foam concrete is an economical material to be used as effective and efficient

concrete for construction projects. It is known as lightweight concrete within the

range of 300-1840 Kg/m 3. The result of the flow test reveals that the flow of mortar

is acceptable. This means that the mortar has good workability. In addition the

density of mortal was within the range for structural lightweight concrete. Finally it

is reliable for good compression strength to resist the loads. The analysis was

performed by using the Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 regarding the cost of one

way joist slab with beams method and two way solid slabs with beams method.

The calculations revealed that the cost of concrete in joist slab was less than that

in solid slab. This is because the joist slab requires less quantity of concrete

compared to solid slab. Furthermore, the cost of formwork for joist slab is less than

that at solid slab because the cost of installing the timber moulds was less. In

addition, the dimensions of the moulds were smaller in joist slabs compared

Comparison between One Way Joist Slab Structure using Lightweight Foam

Concrete and Two Way Solid Slab Structure using Normal Concrete to that of solid

84
slabs. Furthermore, the cost of the bottom bars R6 in ribbed slabs is not of difference

than that in solid slab.

On the other hand, the cost of concrete beams for joist slab was also less than

that of solid slab because the dimensions of the beam moulds were less compared to

that of solid slab. The formwork for the bottom and the top of the plan were much

more in joist slab compared to that of solid slab because the joist slab has more

beams than the solid slab. Moreover, the cost of the main steel bars in joist slab was

much more than that of solid slab because joist slab used a lot more quantity of steel

bars of different diameters (R6, R10), while solid slab used only steel bars (R10).

Finally, the beam links were not of much difference in joist slab compared to that of

solid slab.

5.2 Conclusion

The result of the analysis, which was done by using the Prokon Software

Consultant 3.0, shows that Foam concrete can be designed to meet the criteria of

compressive strength of load bearing concrete and Foam concrete is a suitable

solution in the construction of multi-storey buildings. Besides, foamed concrete has

been identified as a suitable material to replace the normal concrete used for this

purpose. At the same time, the density of foamed concrete can be designed and

controlled according to the ratio of the mixture and the stability of the foam used.

85
Furthermore, the construction cost of one-way joist slab with beams is more

economical than that of the two- way solid slabs with beams. Furthermore The

Prokon Software Consultant 3.0 appears to be an efficient and accurate instrument

that is reliable to be used in making the analysis and calculations.

The two-way solid slab with beams is not cost efficient in loading on buildings

for low-cost residential building project. In other words, two-way solid slabs with

beams might be more expensive than the one-way joist slab with beams with some

quantities of steel bars used in the building. This main reason contributes to the

above conclusion which is mainly due to the high cost of steel bars used in two-way

solid slabs with beams compared to one-way joist slab with beams. Furthermore, the

cost of the material of steel formwork in solid slab is more than that of the joist slab.

Only for formwork steel in beams, the cost of the material for solid slab is slightly

lower than that of the joist slab.

86
REFERENCES

(1) Chandrasekar, S., Satyanarayana, K.G., and Raghavan, P.N (2003),

Processing, Properties and Applications of Reactive Silica from Rice Husk an
Overview. Journal of Materials Science, 38:p. 3159.

(2) Maeda, N., Wada, I., Kawakami, M., Ueda, T., and Pushpalal, G.K.D (2001).
Development of a New Furnace for the Production of Rice Husk Ash. The
Seventh CANMET / ACI International Conference on Fly ash, Silica
Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete. Vol. 2, Chennai, India.

(3) Mehta, P.K. (1992) Rice Husk ash a unique supplementary cementing
material. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Advances in
Concrete Technology, CANMET/ACI, Athens, Greece, pp. 407–430.

(4) Mehta, P. K. Siliceous (1973) Ashes and Hydraulic cements prepared there
from Belgium. Patent 802909, U.S. Patent 4105459 (1978).

(5) Pitt, N. (1976) Process for preparation of siliceous ashes. U.S. Patent
3959007.

(6) Yu, Q., Sawayama, K., Sugita, S., Shoya M., and Isojima, Y (1999), The
reaction between rice husk ash and Ca(OH)2 solution and the nature of its
product. Cem. Concrete. Res, 29(1):p. 37- 43.

(7) Yamamoto, Y., and Lakho, S.M (1982), Production and utilization of rice
husk ash as a substitute for cement. In Proceedings of the Japanese Society
of Civil Engineers, vol. 322, pp. 157- 166.

87
(8) Boateng, A.A., and Skeete (1990), D.A. Incineration of rice hull for use as a
supplementary cementing material. The Guyana experience. Cement.
Concrete. Res. 20: p.795–802.

(9) Singh, N.B., Sarvahi, R., Singh, S.P., and Shukla (1994), A.K. Hydration
studies of RHA blended white port-land cement. Adv. Cement. Res. 6
volume (21): p.13– 18.

(10) Thomas A. Holm (1948) ,A article, The constructor Civil Engineering

Home, All about the light weight concrete by, were published on Thursday,
March 31, 2016

(11) John P. Ries and Thomas A. Holm (2002 and 1996) , Case study of A
Holistic Approach to Sustainability for the Concrete Community, lightweight
Concrete- Two Millennia of Proven Performance, ESCSI info sheet 3650.3,
1996 and Information Sheet 7700.1

(12) D’Annunzio A report (2013), Structural performance of lightweight

concrete construction essay, New Lightweight concrete Technology, volume
12 p.2,

(13) A paper of Civil Engineering Portal (2011), Development of lightweight

concrete (Successfully made two types of lightweight concrete first using
Aluminium powder) as an air entraining agent, by Dhawal Desai IIT Bombay
, Intership During winter vacation.

(14) V. Ducman, B. Mirtic (2009), ―The applicability of different waste materials

for the production of lightweight aggregate”, Waste Manage. Volume 29

pages-2361-2368
88
(15) E. Yasar, C.D. Atis, A. Kilic, H. Gulsen (2003), ―Strength properties of

lightweight concrete made with basaltic pumice and fly ash‖, Mater. Lett.

Volume 57, pages- 2267- 2270.

(16) K.J. Mun (2007), ―Development and tests of lightweight aggregate using
sewage sludge for nonstructural concrete‖, Constr. Build. Mater. Volume 21
pages-1583-1588.

(17) M. Mouli, H. Khelafi (2008), ―Performance characteristics of lightweight

aggregate concrete containing natural pozzolan‖, Build. Environ. volume 43
pages-31-36.

(18) Z. Shunbo, L. Na, L. Lixin, S. Li, Y. Su (2011), ―Experimental study on

mechanical properties of fine aggregate concrete made after wet-sieving
coarse aggregate‖, Adv. Mater. Res. volume 2 Pages 168-170 and
2200-2203.

(19) P. Turgut (2010), ―Masonry composite material made of limestone powder

and fly ash‖, Powder Technol. 204 pages 42-47.

(20) Mohd. Zairul Affindy Abdul Rahman (2010) ―Analysis of Comparison

between Unconfined and Confined Condition of Foamed Concrete Under
Uni-Axial Compressive Load - American J. of Engineering and Applied
Sciences 3 (1): 68-72, 2010 ISSN 1941-7020, Science Publications‖.

(21) Mahesh-kumar H.Thakrele (2014), a report Experimental Study On Foam

Concrete, Vol. 4, Issue 1, pages-145-158.

89
(22) Sylva G.S., Breen J.E., Burns N.H (2002), Research Report Feasibility of
utilizing high-performance lightweight concrete in pretension bridge girders
and panels, Texas Department of Transportation, pages 1852-2.

(23) Ries J.P., Holm T.A (2012), A holistic approach to sustainability for the
concrete community, Lightweight concrete – two millennia of proven
performance, Expanded shale, clay & slate institute (ESCSI), volume 2 pages
23-87.

(24) S. Kivrak, Anadolu, M. Tuncan, Anadolu, M. I. Onur, Anadolu , G. Arslan,

Anadolu, O. Arioz (2006), A article online An Economic Perspective of
Advantages of Using Lightweight Concrete Construction, by, Anadolu of
University Turkey on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES:
Singapore, 100031028.

(25) R.W Steiger, and M.K Hurd (2012), A article Lightweight insulating
concrete for floors and roof decks, page 2, PUBLICATION #C780411.

(26) W.A. Thanoon, M.S. Jaafar, M.R.A. Kadir, A.A.A. Ali, D.N. Trikha, A.M.
Najm (2004), Development of an innovative interlocking load bearing hollow
block system in Malaysia, Constr. Build. Mater, 18 volume 6, pp. 445–454.

(27) F.C. McCormick (1967), Rational proportioning of preformed foam cellular

concrete ACI J. Proc, 64 volume 2, pp. 104–110

90