International Journal of Engineering Innovations in Advanced Technology

ISSN: 2582-1431 (Online), Volume-4 Issue-2, June 2022

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION ON THE

FLEXURAL BEHAVIOUR OF CHANNEL
SLABS
Borusu Bhanu Prakash
M. Tech student (SE), Department of Civil Engineering, Aditya College of Engineering andTechnology, Surampalem, AP.
Email: [email protected]
C. Naga Dheeraj Kumar Reddy
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Aditya College of Engineering andTechnology, Surampalam, AP

Abstract: The construction of the slab ensures that it is capable

However, slabs have a number of drawbacks. Because it
of withstanding vertical load in general. On the other hand, noise
and vibration from the slab are becoming increasingly crucial causes an increase in the size of all the other structural
aspects to take into consideration because of the recent uptick in components, such as beams, columns, and footings, the high
people's interest in the living environment. This is something that weight-to-strength ratio is the most critical concern.
should be considered. In addition to this, the amount that the slab
is deflected will expand in proportion to the length of the span II PRECAST CHANNEL SLABS
that it is spanning. As a direct consequence of this, the slab's
thickness will need to be raised. A heavier slab is the result of Precast Channel Unit is a full span precast RCC unit, trough
increasing the thickness of the slab, which in turn produces an shaped in section (Fig. 1). It can be used for floors and roofs
increase in the size of the columns and the foundation. Because supported on suitable structures like brick/stone walls and
of this, the building industry uses a greater quantity of its raw
materials than usual. In order to reduce the overall quantity of
RCC beams. It does not require any intermediate temporary
material that was being used, it was necessary to make use of props or supports, since the unit will be strong enough to
slabs that had a lower overall weight. As a consequence of this, support the load.
in this specific piece of study, we have sought to carry out an
investigation into the precast closed channel slabs. Although the In the present study, the Closed Channel slabs are studied.
reinforcement in the web of the channel slabs varied, the flange Each channel panel is of size 305mm X 1525mm X 64mm
reinforcement was made up of welded mesh with a 2.2 mm casted with M20 grade concrete. Each Rectangle Flat panel
diameter and 32 mm x 32 mm spacing. There was not a consistent
is ofsize 305mm X 1525mm X 12mm. The Closed channel
amount of reinforcement in the web of the channel slabs. The
many different web reinforcements consist of 2.2mm diameter slab consists of 5- single channel panels welded together in
double-layered welded mesh with 32mm x 32mm spacing, the longitudinal direction to form the bottom portion of Closed
vertical bars with 6mm diameter HYSD bars spaced at 50mm Channel slab and 5- single rectangular flat panels welded
c/c, as well as vertical and diagonal bars with 6mm diameter bars together in the longitudinal direction to form the top portion
spaced at 100mm c/c. It has been found that the performance of of the Closed Channel Slab of size 1525mm X 1525mm X
closed channel slabs is much better than that of traditional slabs. 76mm as shown in Fig. 1.

Keywords: HYSD bars, Spanning, Reinforcement, Traditional

slabs

I INTRODUCTION

Reinforced Concrete slabs are a kind of component that is

often employed in the building of a broad range of different
regions, including floors, ceilings, garages, and a great many
other places. It is easy to mould reinforced concrete into any
shape or size, it provides resistance to high compressive and
bending loads, and it is a highly cost-effective material to
produce and build with. When it comes to floor solutions,
reinforced concrete provides a wide variety of advantages,
some of which are listed below.
Fig 1 Cross section of C-channel
Manuscript received May 29, 2022; Revised June 05, 2022; Accepted June
15, 2022

54
 International Journal of Engineering Innovations in Advanced Technology
ISSN: 2582-1431 (Online), Volume-4 Issue-2, June 2022

The Slabs are Designated as follows. S0: Conventional

Slab of size 1524X1524X76mm.
S1P: Individual Closed Channel panel of size
305X1524X76mm consisting of two layers of welded mesh in
web of C-Channel.(Fig 6(a))
S2P: Individual Closed Channel panel of size
305X1524X76mm consisting of vertical bars of 6mm
diameter in web of C-Channel. [Fig.6(b)]
Fig.2 Bottom Portion of Closed Channel Slab S3P: Individual Closed Channel panel of size
305X1524X76mm consisting of vertical and diagonal bars of
6mm diameter inweb of C-Channel. [Fig.6(c)]
S1: Closed Channel Slab which consist of five individual
closed channel panels of S1P, welded together. S2: Closed
Channel Slab which consist of five individual closed channel
panels of S2P, welded together. S3: Closed Channel Slab
which consist of five individual closed channel panels of S3P,
welded together. (Fig. 7)

III CASTING PROCEDURE

Fig.3 Top Portion of Closed Channel Slab

First the MS metal strip of 12mm X 5mm is Welded to form a

Metal Frame of 305mm X 1525mm X 12mm. Next the welded
mesh of size 2.2mm dia and 32mm X 32mm spacing is welded
to the mild steel frame to form the rectangular flat panels.
Later to form the C-channel panels the welded mesh was cut
Fig.4 Cross section of Closed Channel Slabs. to a height of 52mm and length of 1515mm and welded
vertically to the Metal frame along the length with the vertical
The behavior of Closed Channel Slabs is compared with the height of 52mm to form rectangular channel panels. Similarly,
Conventional slab of size 1525mm X 1525mm X 76mm, the skeletal frames for five C-channel and five Rectangular
Gradeof concrete-M20, Reinforcement- HYSD bars of 6mm flat panels were prepared.
diameter at 200mm c/c. After preparing these skeletal frames, they are placed on the
The Web Reinforcement in the closed channel slab is varied flat surface with polythene membrane and wooden planks are
in this study. placed in between each frame to form the formwork for the
web of C-Channel panels.
Then, concrete is poured on the flat part of the C-Channel slab
and compacted using the custom-made tamping rod which has
the surface dimension of 100mm X 100mm. Once the concrete
is poured in flat part of the C-Channel panel, the two more
wooden planks are placed either side of C-Channel Panel in
Fig. 5 Flange Reinforcement in C-Channel & Rectangle Slabs order to form the 20mm thick web of the C-Channel panel.
The Rectangular flat panels are also casted in the same manner
as the flat part of the C-Channel panel.
After 24 hours the form work of the C-Channel panels are
striped and membrane cured for another 24 hours after which
the panel are carefully lifted and placed in water tank for 28
days to cure.
After curing five C-Channel Panels are kept side by side and
Fig.6 Web Reinforcements in C-Channel Panels welded together to form a single member of size 1525mm X
1525mm X 64mm. Five Rectangular flat panels are welded in
the same manner to form a member of size 1525mm
X1525mmX12mm.
The above procedure is repeated for other two parameters of
different web reinforcements.

IV TESTING PROCEDURE

After the specimens(slabs) were ready for testing, the

Fig. 7 Typical Closed Channel Slab specimens were coated with white wash so that the cracks
55
 International Journal of Engineering Innovations in Advanced Technology
ISSN: 2582-1431 (Online), Volume-4 Issue-2, June 2022

will be clearly visible. Loads vs Deflections

➢ Fig 9 presents the variation of load vs deflection of
Once the white wash is dried, the centre of the slab on the the closed channel slabs S1, S2 and S3and the
bottom surface and on the web portion of C-Channel (centre conventional slab S0.
panel) in the longitudinal direction are marked to fix the ➢ From table 1 and fig. 9 The Closed Channel Slab S3
strain gauge. Before fixing the strain gauge, the surface is has the highest load Carrying Capacity than the
polished with the emery paper to obtain a smooth finish. Conventional Slab S0 and Closed Channel Slab S1 &
After polishing the surface, the Strain Gauges were fixed S2.
with the help of adhesive. The electrodes are then soldered ➢ The performance of the Closed Channel Slab S3 with
with the wire which is later connected to Strain Indicators. respect to load is 16% higher compared to the
Conventional Slab S0.
The Specimens are placed on the open square frame of ➢ The performance of the Closed Channel Slab S1 with
dimension 1650mm X 1650mm which acts as Simply respect to load is 4% higher compared to the
Supported. The specimen is placed on the open square frame ConventionalSlab S0.
for testing and the dial gauge is placed at the centre of the ➢ The performance of the Closed Channel Slab S2 with
bottom portion of slab to measure the deflection. respect to load is 36% less compared to the
Conventional Slab S0.
The slab is tested for uniformly distributed load, so the ➢ Area under the Load vs Deflection Graph shows the
loading is done by placing 2’ X 2’ slabs in layers. Each layer Stiffness of the Slab. From Fig.9,it is evident that the
consists of 4 slabs placed one beside the other to form a area under Closed Channel Slab S3is more which
square platform of 4’X4’. Each layer consists of four slabs indicates closed channel slab S3 is Stiffer compared
weighing 200kg±10kg. Six layers of these slabs were placed to other closed channel slabs and also conventional
one above the other. It was observed that there was no slab.
yielding of slabs after placing six layers of slabs, further ➢ With respect to the ultimate deflection all the three
placing of slabs was found to be difficult. slabs i.e. S1, S2 and S3, the PEF is 19%, 25% and 23%
more compared to Conventional Slab S0.[Table 1].

Fig 8 Testing Arrangement

Hence over these slabs a box shaped channel section of
Fig 9 Load vs Deflection Curve.
dimension 1m X 1m is placed at the top of the sixth layer of
slab. Above this box type channel section, a steel beam of
Table 1 Ultimate load, Deflection and PEF of Slab Specimens
200mm depth is placed diagonally. The hollow section
between steel beam and the box shaped channel section, sand
bags were placed to transfer the load uniformly onto the slab.

On the Steel beam a hydraulic jack and load cell of weight

50kg is placed. The loading is carried out and the readings of
Dial gauge and strain gauge were noted down at regular
intervals of loading. (Fig 8)
Table 2 PEF with respect to Ductility
V RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Result of Closed Channel Slabs is discussed by comparing

with Conventional slab in terms of Load-Deflection
Behaviour,Stress- Strain Behavior, Performance Evaluation
Factor (PEF) of Load vs Deflection and Ductility. Stress vs strain
Ductility is defined as the ratio of ultimate deflection to ➢ Fig. 10 presents the stress vs strain variation at the
deflection at yield. bottom of slabs S0, S1, S2 and S3.
Ductility of Slab =Ultimate Deflection / Yield Deflection ➢ The Strain at the bottom surfaces of the Closed
PEF for any quantity = Load or Deflection of Channel Channel Slab S1 and conventional slab S0 are 592 X
Slab / Load or Deflection of Conventional Slab 10-6 and516 X 10-6 respectively.
➢ The Strain in the Closed Channel SlabS2 and

56
 International Journal of Engineering Innovations in Advanced Technology
ISSN: 2582-1431 (Online), Volume-4 Issue-2, June 2022

conventional slab S0 at bottom surfaces are 568 X 10-

6
and 516 X10-6 respectively
➢ The Strain in the Closed Channel slab S3 and
conventional slab S0 at bottom surfaces are 738 X 10-
6
and 516 X10-6 respectively.
➢ Strain in bottom portion of S3 is higher by 43%, 25%
and 30% when compared to the strain in bottom
portion ofS0, S1 and S2 respectively.
➢ Area under the Stress vs Strain Graph denotes the
Toughness of the slab. So it is seen that the Closed
ChannelSlab is tougher compared to all other closed
channel slabs and also conventional slab.
➢ Fig 10,11 and 12 RepresentStress vs strain variation Fig 12 Stress vs Strain variation in S3
in the web and at the bottom of Closed Channel
Slabs S1,S2 andS3respectively. Crack Pattern
➢ Strain in bottom portion of S1is higher by 33% ➢ In the Closed Channel Slab S1, vertical cracks were
compared to the strain in web portion of S1.(Fig.10) seen on the web portion of the C-Channel.
➢ Strain in bottom portion of S2is higher by 27% ➢ In the middle panels of the C-channel Slabs the
compared to the strain in web portion of S2.(Fig.11) cracks were prominent in the web.
➢ Strain in bottom portion of S3is higher by 32% ➢ There were no cracks developed on the Bottom of the
compared to the strain in web portion of S3.(Fig.12) channel slab nor on the top rectangle flat slab.
➢ Area under the Stress vs Strain Graph denotes the ➢ Crushing of web portion was not observed in this
Toughness of the slab. So it is seen that area under the slab.
stress vs strain at bottom portion of S1 is more than ➢ The cracks observed on the web portion were few in
area under the stress vs strain in web portion which number (fig 13).
indicates that bottom portion of Closed Channel Slab ➢ In the Closed Channel Slab S2, vertical cracks
S1 is tougher compared to web portion of S1. were seen on the web portion of the C-Channel
and there werecracks observed at the junction of the
web and the bottom slab.
➢ There were no cracks formed at the bottom of the C-
Channel closed slab nor on the top rectangle flat
slab.
➢ The number cracks on the web portion were more
on slab S2 compared to S1.(fig 14)
➢ In the Closed Channel Slab S3, vertical cracks and
also diagonal cracks were seen on the web portion of
the C-Channel.
➢ No cracks were observed on the bottom of the
channel slab nor on the top rectangle flat slab.
➢ Crushing of web portion in central panel was
Fig 9 a Stress vs Strain at Bottom of Slabs
observed.
➢ In the middle panels of the C-channel Slabs the
cracks were prominent. (fig 15)
➢ On the conventional slab S0, cracks were developed
at the bottom surface, extended from the centre to
edges(diagonal cracks). (fig. 16)

Fig 10, 11 Stress vs Strain variation in S1 and S2

Fig. 13 Crack pattern on Web of Closed Channel Slab S1

57
 International Journal of Engineering Innovations in Advanced Technology
ISSN: 2582-1431 (Online), Volume-4 Issue-2, June 2022

Engineering, Vol. 112, No. 12, December, 1986.

3. Longmei Shentu, Dahua Jiang and Cheng-Tzu Thomas
Hsu, “Load-Carrying Capacity for Concrete Slabs”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE/ January1997.
4. Zhaohui Huang, Ian W. Burgess and Roger J. Plank,
“Modelling Flexural actionof Concrete composite Slabs”,
Journal Of Structural Engineering © ASCE / AUGUST
2003
5. R. Ian Gilbert and Zafer I. Sakka, “Effect of
Reinforcement type on Ductility of Suspended Reinforced
Fig.14, 15 Crack pattern on Web of Closed Channel Slab S1 and S2 Hollow Concrete Slabs”, Journal Of Structural
Engineering, ASCE / June 2007
6. R Ian Gilbert, “Tension stiffening in lightly Reinforced
Concrete Slabs”, Journalof Structural Engineering, ASCE
/ June 2007.
7. W. A. Elsaigh1, E. P. Kearsley and J. M.
Robberts3,“Modeling the Behavior of Steel-Fiber
Reinforced Concrete Ground Slabs. II: Development of
Slab Model”, Journal of Transportation Engineering,
ASCE / DECEMBER 2011
8. S. Dhanidharan, “Flexural Behaviour of Hollow
Composite Slab”, International Journal of Engineering
Fig. 16 Crack Pattern on Conventional Slab at the Center Span.
Sciences and Research Technology, 5(10): October, 2016.
9. Dhasarathan, Dr. R. Thenmozhi, Mrs. S. Deepa Shree,
CONCLUSIONS “Experimental Study On The Ductile Characteristics Of
Hybrid Ferrocement Slabs”, International Journal of
➢ Closed Channel Slabs have shown considerable Engineering Sciences and Research Technology.
reduction in dead load. The Dead load of Closed Channel
AUTHORS PROFILE
slab is about 52% less when compared with the
conventional slab.
➢ The Closed Channel slab S3 has the highest load
carrying capacity of all other slabs which are casted with Borusu Bhanu Prakash is persuing M-
the Load of 49.14kN/m2. tech (SE) Department of Civil
➢ The performance of Closed Channel slab S1 with respect Enginnering in Aditya College of
to Load carrying capacity is higher by 3.40% when Engineering and Technology,
compared to Conventional Slab S0. Surampalem, AP.
➢ The performance of Closed Channel slab S2 with respect
to Load carrying capacity is less by 36.50% when
compared to Conventional Slab S0.
➢ The performance of Closed Channel slab S3 with respect
to Load carrying capacity is higher by 15.30% when
compared to Conventional Slab S0.
➢ Pattern of Load carried by individual panel of Closed
Channel Slabs(1’X5’X3”) is found to be similar to the
Pattern of Load carried by Closed Channel
Slabs(5’X5’X3”).
➢ Closed Channel Slabs are found to be more ductile
compared to Conventional Slab.
➢ The Closed Channel Slabs is more Safe as compared to
the Conventionalslab.

REFERENCES

1. Mahmoud Lasheen , Amr Shaat , Ayman Khalil, “

Behaviour of lightweight concrete slabs acting
compositely with steel I sections”, Construction and
Building Materials 124 (2016) 967–981.
2. Da-Hua Jiang and Jing-Hua Shen, “Strength of Concrete
Slabs in Punching Shear”, Journal of Structural
58