Areca Reinforced Concrete

A Project Report
on
A STUDY ON THE USE OF ARECA STEM BATTENS AS

REINFORCEMENT IN CONCRETE
Submitted to Karnataka State Council for Science and Technology
38th series Student Project Programme: 2014-2015
Submitted by
Project reference number 38S0483 A

NAME
USN
AJAYAKUMARA K
4VP11CV004
Comment to: ajayakumara1@gmail.com MOB: 8722821428
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
VIVEKANANDA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

[Sponsored by Vivekananda Vidyavardhaka Sangha, Puttur ]
Nehru Nagar, Puttur 574 203, DK, Karnataka

Phone :+91-8251-235955, 234555 Fax : 236444, Web:
www.vcetputtur.ac.in, E-Mail: principal@vcetputtur.ac.in
A study on the use of areca stem battens as reinforcement in concrete
ABSTRACT
In this study the possibility of using areca stem battens as reinforcement in concrete has been
dealt in detail. We have conducted different laboratory test and confirmed that areca can
successfully replace the steel in many respects as far as reinforced cement concrete is
concerned.
We have done many tests and gone through various literatures to study the tensile strength,
tensile strain, volumetric changes with respect to water content, bonding with concrete and
actual load carrying capacity of reinforced concrete member. Here we have represented the
method of preparation of reinforcement, precautions to achieve the sufficient bond between
concrete and reinforcement, method of design of structural members and merits and demerits
of the present proposal. This study may open a new branch of reinforcements in RCC
construction.
Dept. of Civil Engineering VCET, Puttur
Page 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Particulars
Page No
Abstract
ii
Acknowledgement
iii
Table of contents
List of Tables
vii
List of Figures
viii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
01-05
1.1 Biological classification of areca
02
1.2 Availability of areca
03
1.3 Areca used in present study
03
1.4 Part of the tree useful as reinforcement
03
1.5 Reinforcement in concrete
05
CHAPTER 2: REQUIRED TESTS
06-06
2.1 Tension test
07
2.2 Test regarding bond strength
07
2.3 Study on durability
08
2.4 Test on reinforced concrete member
08
CHAPTER 3: TENSILE PROPERTIES
09-11
3.1 Tensile test
10
3.2 Result and discussion
10
CHAPTER 4: BOND BETWEEN REINFORCEMENT AND CONCRETE
11-15
4.1 Test conducted
13
CHAPTER 5: DESIGN OF FLEXURAL MEMBERS
16-22
5.1 Design principles and procedure
17
5.1.1 Design considerations to bond length
20
5.1.2 Cover requirement and self-weight
21
5.2 Design example
21
CHAPTER 6: TABLES FOR DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED ONE WAY SLAB

LOADED WITH UNIFORMLY DESTRIBUTED LOAD
23-32
Page 3
6.1 Table to determine the minimum depth requirement
24
6.2 Table to determine area and perimeter
27
6.3 Design example
31
CHAPTER 7: STUDY ON PRACTICAL ARECA REINFORCED SLABS
33-42
7.1 Discussion on the result
37
7.1.1 Discussion on slab-5
27
37
38
38
38
7.1.6 Essence of the discussions
39
7.2 Pictures
40
CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION
SCOPE FOR FUTURE STUDYS
BIBRIOGRAPHY
43-45
46
47
PERSONAL PROFILES
48-49
Page 4
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Particulars
No.
Page No.
1.1
Biological classification of areca plant
02
4.1
Moisture content verses percentage shrinkage
14
6.1
Minimum depth requirement of simply supported one way slab
25
6.2
Minimum depth requirement of simply supported one way slab
26
6.3
6.4
6.5
Area and perimeter of reinforcement for simply supported one way

slab
slab
slab
28
29
30
7.1
Type of reinforcement provided in each type of the slab
34
7.2
Specifications of slabs and results of their loading
36
Page 5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No.
Particulars
Page No
1.1
Pictures of areca plantation
1.2
Cross sectional of stem
3.1
Typical stress-strain graph for areca bar in tension
10
5.1
Stress block diagram and strain block diagram for general case
18
5.2
Stress block diagram and strain block diagram for balanced section
18
7.1
Mould for slab with reinforcement before casting of concrete
40
7.2
Mould filled with concrete
40
7.3
Loading on slab (slab-2)
41
7.4
Dial gauge placed to measure deflection
41
7.5
Collapsed slab (slab-1)
42
7.6
Cross section of slab after failure
42
Page 6
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Page 7
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
In coastal Karnataka areca plantation is very common. This long slender branchless tree is
grown in thousands of numbers in every plantation. The stem can be easily broken into
the form of bars which has good tensile strength. This drown our interest to use areca
stem as reinforcement in concrete instead of steel bars. We gone through literatures and
found a lot of papers regarding the bamboo reinforcement in concrete. Even areca also
has similar mechanical property like bamboo there were no research works done on this
till a team of researchers from Kerala published Feasibility Study of Areca Reinforced
Concrete in 2014. We have under taken the work of studying suitability of areca as
reinforcement in reinforced concrete members and have studied the tensile properties of
areca, tested practical areca reinforced slabs and gone through many literatures to come to
conclusion regarding durability and bond strength. We hope this study may open a new
branch of reinforcement materials in the field of reinforced concrete construction.
1.1 Biological Classification of Areca:

The areca plant falls in following biological classification:
Kingdom
Plantae
(unranked)
Angiosperm
(unranked)
Monocots
(unranked)
Commelinids
Order
Arecales
Family
Arecaceae
Genus
Areca
Species
Catechu
Scientific name
Areca catechu
Table 1.1: biological classification of areca plant
Page 8
The species has many common names including the areca palm, areca nut palm, betel
palm, Indian nut, Pinang palm, etc.
1.2 Availability of Areca:

The species Areca catechu grows in much of tropical Pacific, Asia, and parts of east
Africa. It is wide spread in cultivation and is considered naturalized in southern China
(Guangxi, Hainan, Yunnan), Taiwan, India, Bangladesh, the Maldives, Sri Lanka,
Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, New Guinea, many of the
islands in the Pacific Ocean and also in the West Indies. In India Karnataka, Kerala,
Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh states have areca plantations.
1.3 Areca Used in Present Study:

Areca tree is grown in many parts of world. The characteristics of the tree vary from
region to region. In this report the term Areca in proceeding sentences refers to the
traditional areca plant grown in Dakshina Kannada region of Karnataka which has
following outlook.
The plant grows straight to about 15 to 25m height with a trunk 10 to 20cm in diameter. It
bears a crown of long, feathery leaves at summit of its slender, branchless stem. The slim,
grey colour stem is ridged with the scars of fallen leaves. The stems form a good staging
pole. It is very flexible plant that sways in the wind.
1.4 Part of the Tree Useful as Reinforcement:

In the cross section areca stem two distinct parts can be observed.
Zone 1: Central white portion comprising living fibres which transports nutrition.
Zone 2: Outer hard shell reddish brown in colour made up of dead cells which is about
2cm thick at bottom and reduces to zero at top which gives strength to plant.
For the purpose of reinforcement only the second one should be used. The tables,
formulas, suggestions etc. given in this report applies only for sample from zone 2. But
samples used in this study for different tests such as specimen of tensile strength test,
Page 9
reinforcements in practical slabs etc. are do not confirm exactly to zone 2, but it may
comprise parts from zone 1 also unless otherwise specified.
Figure 1.1: Pictures of areca plantation
Figure 1.2: Cross section of stem
Page 10
1.5 Reinforcement in Concrete:

The basic idea of reinforced concrete is if any material inserted inside the concrete
member behaves as an integral part of the member without relative slip between the
concrete and the material, strength (tensile or compressive) of the reinforced concrete
member becomes summation of strength of individual materials at that section.
After the innovation of Portland cement people developed concrete. Then idea of placing
steel meshes inside the concrete to prepare flower pots etc. were came into practice. Then
reinforcement of steel bars in slabs, beams etc. were widely practiced all over the world.
People have also tried with some other reinforcing materials such as glass fibres, polymer
fibres, bamboo etc.
For strong, ductile, and durable construction reinforcement needs to have following
properties.
High relative strength.
High toleration of tensile strain.
Good bond to concrete, irrespective of PH, moisture, and similar factors.
Thermal compatibility, not causing unacceptable stresses in response to changing
temperature.
Durability in concrete environment irrespective of corrosion or sustained stress for
example.
Steel is unique material which is most suited for reinforcement but it is costlier and nonrenewable. Now our proposal is using bars prepared from stem of areca tree for the
discussed deal.
Page 11
CHAPTER 2
REQUIRED TESTS
Page 12
Chapter 2
REQUIRED TESTS
2.1 Tension Test:
Minimum depth requirement of flexural members depends on the strain in the
reinforcement, area of tensile reinforcement required is decided based on the tensile
strength and Young's modulus is required to inter relate stress and strain whenever
required. Therefore these three parameters i.e. tensile strain, tensile strength and the
elastic modulus are need to be solved out to design a structural member with areca
reinforcement. By conducting simple tensile test in universal testing machine we can
obtain these values.
2.2 Test Regarding Bond Strength:

The concept of reinforced concrete has its meaning as long as there is no relative slip
between concrete and reinforcement. This is achieved by bond between concrete and
reinforcement. A quantitative representation of this bonding phenomenon is done by the
term bond strength. To determine the bond strength between concrete and steel a
standard pull out test is recommended. But in case of areca the bond strength is
suspected to vary from season to season as areca may subjected volumetric changes with
respect to change in its inherent moisture content. For example in summer season the
moisture content in the reinforced bar may reduce which leads to its shrinkage and in
rainy season the reinforcement may swell for some extent by absorbing moisture content
and the shrinkage happened at the summer may be recovered during the rainy season. So
bond strength during summer and rainy season may be different. So the bond strength
value obtained in pull out test at the age of say 28 days may not represent bond strength
exhibited during the service life of areca reinforced concrete member. Because of this
reason and also due to lack of time the pull out test kept out from our study. Instead we
have concentrated on the volumetric variation of areca with respect to moisture content.
Page 13
The bond strength for the design of areca reinforced concrete member may be adopted
from the literature available regarding the bond strength of bamboo with concrete.
2.3 Study on Durability:

Literatures are available regarding the durability of natural fibre such as coir, hay etc. in
concrete environment while used as reinforcement in fibre reinforced concrete technique.
Same thing may be applicable for our proposal. As the concrete environment is basic in
nature because of presence of calcium hydroxide the pH value of about 12 is not
favourable for the development of organisms which cause decay of the areca. The
bamboo reinforced concrete pavement technique adopted in Cambodia is designed for
service life of 40 years. So we hope that areca reinforced may be serviceable up to 10 to
25 years.
2.4 Test on Reinforced Concrete Member:

By the stress block and strain block diagrams drawn based on the design strength and
strain of areca and by having a design bond strength value; one can estimate the moment
carrying capacity of a reinforced concrete flexural member. To check these theoretical
estimations many practical flexural members are needed to be tested. One way slab is a
simple flexural member that can be used for practical analysis. A slab with specific
thickness and area of reinforcement is casted over a definite span. The ultimate moment
carried by the slab indicates the tensile strength of reinforcement if the failure of member
is due to the tensile failure of reinforcement. If the failure is due to lack of bond between
reinforcement and concrete the approximate bond strength can be obtained. These values
of tensile strength or bond strength must resemble the tensile strength and bond strength
determined by mechanical tests.
Page 14
CHAPTER 3
TENSILE PROPERTIES
Page 15
Chapter 3
TENSILE PROPERTIES
3.1 Tensile Test:
The tensile test is conducted in UTM. The test procedure followed is almost same as that
for steel. A typical stress-strain diagram for the sample taken from 45 year aged tree,
seasoned for 50 days in sunlight is given figure 5.1.
200
180
Stress, N/mm2
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
Strain
Figure 3.1: A typical stress-strain graph for areca bar in tension
3.2 Result and Discussion:

Ultimate strength = 180 N/mm2
Youngs modulus = 29507 N/mm2
Ultimate strain = 180/ (29507) = 0.0061
As there was an initial slip in the grip during the test the graph shows strain more than the
actual value. So the strain value is corrected to 0.0061.
Page 16
The material shows perfectly elastic behavior till the failure. There is no plastic
deformation. So this brittle material if used for reinforcement, the member cannot exhibit
the impending failure which is an important requisite of a reinforced concrete member to
prevent sudden collapse. This is one of the major draw backs of areca reinforcement
proposal.
The value of ultimate tensile strength 180N/mm2 is quite sufficient for design of the
members for general loading conditions. For example if tensile strength is 180N/mm2 and
10mm10mm bar is provided at 50mm spacing, a simply supported one way slab of
thickness 152.4 mm spanning over 4 m made up of M20 grade concrete can sustain an
ultimate live load of 6.6kN/m2 ( from table 6.4 with multiplying A by
100
180
).
The ultimate strain value of 0.006 does not make the construction costlier by requiring the
deep flexural member. The depth of member required is quite reasonable as shown in
table 6.1 and 6.2.
Page 17
CHAPTER 4
BOND BETWEEN REINFORCEMENT AND
CONCRETE
Page 18
Chapter 4
BOND BETWEEN REINFORCEMENT AND

CONCRETE
In the study of areca reinforcement proposal the bonding action between concrete and
reinforcement becomes a matter of major importance. It is very difficult to decide the
design bond strength as the bond strength is suspected to be dependent on the moisture
content in reinforcement as discussed in clause 2.2. As using saturated areca bar as
reinforcement and its complete drying in service life is the most severe condition in the
respect of bond failure, we have determined the dimensions of a fully saturated specimen
and dimensions of the same specimen at fully dried condition, to get the maximum
possible shrinkage in an areca reinforcement bar.
4.1 Test Conducted:

The fully saturated specimens of dimensions complying with IS 1708 are weighed
initially and their dimensions are noted. The specimens are kept in oven and their weight
and dimensions are noted at regular time intervals till the moisture content reduces to
zero. By this the percentage shrinkage of the specimen from its saturated condition at
different moisture content is calculated.
Here one typical experimental result is shown. The specimen is taken from zone 2
(described in clause 1.4). The dimensions of the specimen are 16.35mm in radial
direction, 18.82 mm in tangential direction and length 63.4mm.
Page 19
% moisture content
by weight with
respect to the weight
of dry specimen
% shrinkage compared to dimension of

saturated specimen
In Radial direction
In Tangential
direction
28.28
15.63
0.12
0.58
12.39
0.24
0.9
2.1
2.23
4.27
5.68
4.78
1.67
5.99
6.37
12.72
19.92
Table 4.1: Moisture content verses percentage shrinkage

The percentage shrinkage in longitudinal direction is 0.3 %.
In essence the lateral dimension of saturated areca reduces by about 15% when it dries out
100%. For example if a saturated reinforcement bar of size 10mm10mm is used it leaves
a gap of width 0.75mm along its perimeter when it is completely dried out inside the
concrete. However 100% drying will not occur within the concrete, it can be achieved
only in the oven.
So we will suggest seasoning of areca as far as possible. Because if seasoned areca is used
it will be having less moisture content while placing the concrete and thus the amount of
gap produced in future due to drying within concrete environment will be less. This help
to maintain good bond strength with concrete. Reference 1 tells that green, unseasoned
bamboo is not allowed to use as reinforcement. Same may be advised in case of areca.
Areca may absorb the moisture content from the concrete when concrete is molded on it
and may swell before the concrete has developed sufficient strength to resist this swelling
Page 20
resulting in the formation of cracks. A thin coating of water proofing agent can be used to
prevent the absorption of water during the early hardening period of concrete. Native
latex, coal tar, paint, dilute varnish and water-glass (sodium silicate) are suitable coatings.
In any case a thin coating should be applied; a thick coating will lubricate the surface and
weaken the bond with concrete. Many literatures show that 28 days bond strength of the
coated bamboo is double of that of the non-coated bamboo. The test conducted by us on
areca reinforced slab also shown that bond strength is greatly increased by the surface
treatment
A lot of literatures are available which have experimentally investigated the bond strength
between bamboo and areca. While relating the bond strength of the bamboo reinforced
concrete to the areca reinforced concrete proposal following points can be considered.
Areca is supposed to give more bond with the concrete as far as the surface roughness is
considered and long term bond strength may be less as areca is suspected to shrink more
than bamboo.
Literatures regarding bamboo reinforced concrete quantify the bond strength of the
bamboo with the concrete around 0.6 for bamboo with no surface coating and that of
bamboo with surface treatment is around 1 N/mm2. Our tests on areca reinforced slabs
also shown nearly same values. According to reference1 design bond strength of 0.3
N/mm2 can be adopted for the design of bamboo reinforced concrete with surface coating.
The same value may be adopted in case of areca reinforced concrete also.
Page 21
CHAPTER 5
DESIGN OF FLEXURAL MEMBERS
Page 22
Chapter 5
DESIGN OF FLEXURAL MEMBERS

5.1 Design Principles and Procedure:
The design principles of areca reinforced concrete may be similar to that of conventional
steel reinforced concrete with required modifications from steel to areca.
Abbreviations:
fck = Characteristic compressive strength of concrete
b
= Width of flexural member
xu
= Depth of neutral axis under ultimate moment
xulim = limiting depth of neutral axis

ft
= Design tensile strength of reinforcement
At
= Area of tensile reinforcement
= Effective depth of the member
Mu = Ultimate moment of resistance

Mulim= Limiting moment of resistance
T
= Tensile force in reinforced bar
= Compressive force in concrete
= Lever arm
= Bond length
= Bond strength
= Perimeter of reinforcement
Page 23
Figure 5.1: Stress block diagram and strain block diagram for general case
Figure 5.2: Stress block diagram and strain block diagram for balanced section case
Page 24
The stress and strain block diagrams are assumed according to IS 456-2000 with required
modifications from steel to areca. As areca is a natural material its youngs modulus
varies with the age of the tree, part of the tree from which the specimen is taken, period
for which specimen is seasoned and many other factors. So there is an ambiguity in the
adoption of strain value to draw strain block diagram for the determination of minimum
depth of member. For a sample having tensile strength of 180N/mm2 the modulus of
elasticity is 29507N/mm2 the ultimate strain is 0.0061. It is also found that the specimen
having less tensile strength has lower modulus of elasticity. So the strain value remains
around 0.006.
The limiting depth of neutral axis which determines the minimum depth of the flexural
member is derived by the strain block diagram. The design strain in concrete is given in
IS 456-2000. Now it is important to decide a proper value of ultimate strain in the
reinforcement. If we adapt more strain, we will be in safer side. So maximum expected
strain should be adopted. Here we have adopted the strain value of 0.006 to draw the
strain diagram.
The derivation goes as below,
C = 0.36fckbxu
T = ftAt
For equilibrium,
C=T
0.36fckbxu= ftAt
xu =
ft At
0.36fckb
z = d-0.42xu
z = (d-0.42
ft At
0.36fckb
Mu = T z
Mu = (ft At) ( d- 0.42
ft At
0.36fckb
From the strain diagram using similar triangle principle, for balanced section,
Page 25
0.0035
0.0035+0.006
xulim= 0.368d
z = d-0.42xu = d-0.420.368d = 0.845d
Mulim = Cz
Mulim = 0.36fckb0.368d0.845d
Mulim=0.112fckbd2
So the minimum depth of the flexural member required is,
d=
0.112
5.1.1 Design considerations to bond length:

As discussed earlier design bond strength of 0.3N/mm2 may be adopted. The required
bond length L on either side of any cross section is given by,
L=
fAt
P
Where f is the tensile stress developed in the reinforcement at that section by the design
loads.
L=
L=
T
P
M
z
Where M and z are the bending moment and lever arm developed due to design loads
at the section under consideration.
As T and z are inversely related, to be in safer side, adopt a lower value of z. It may
be sufficienty safe to adopt
z = 0.8 d
For simply supported members perimeter of the reinforcement required to achieve
required bonding action can be calculated at the mid span by considering the bond
Page 26
strength half of that allowed for the design. It is because, For a simply supported flexural
member subjected to UDL throughout, the bond stress development near the support is
twice the bond stress calculated by considering the mid span moment and bond length
from mid span to support it is because the decrease in tensile force is parabolic in manner
from centre towards support whereas the decrease in bond length is linear. This applies
when no curtailment of reinforcement is done. (Reference 4).
5.1.2 Cover Requirement and Self Weight:

About the cover requirement we can take the reference of reference 1 which states
bamboo reinforcement should not be placed less than 1-1/2 inches from the face of the
concrete. If we adopt the same thing, the minimum clear cover requirement becomes
38.1mm. However minimum cover requirement is a factor based on durability criteria and
its violence may not affect the structural safety as far as the durability is satisfied up to
design period. So based on the design period, surrounding environment etc. one can adopt
a clear cover satisfying general requirements.
As unit weight of areca is less, the unit weight of reinforced concrete may be taken as
24kN/m3.
5.2 Design Example:

Design a simply supported one way slab with effective span 4m subjected to a live load of
4kN/m2. Strength of areca is 150N/mm2. Adopt M20 grade concrete.
Solution:
Assume 6 inch thick slab, D = 152.4 mm
Effective cover = 40mm
Effective depth = 152.4- 40 = 112.4 mm
Dead load = 0.152424 = 3.66 kN/m2
Floor finish = 0.75kN/m2
Live load = 4kN/m2
Total load = 8.41 kN/m2
Maximum bending moment = 8.4142/8 = 16.82 kNm
Factored moment = 25.23 kNm
Page 27
Minimum depth required = d =
0.112
25.231000000
0.112201000
= 106.13 mm < 112.4
mm
Mu = (ft At) ( d- 0.42
ft At
0.36fckb
25230000 = (150 At) (112.4 - 0.42
150 At
0.36201000
At= 1729 mm2

Design for bond criteria:
Bending moment at mid span M = 25.23 kNm
M = Tension force lever arm
M = (lP)(0.8d)
25230000 = (0.152000P)(0.8112.4)
Prequired = 935 mm
Provide 10mm10mm bars at 42 mm spacing. (A = 2380 mm2 and P = 952 mm)
Page 28
CHAPTER 6
TABLES FOR DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED
ONE WAY SLAB LOADED WITH UNIFORMLY
DESTRIBUTED LOAD
Page 29
Chapter 6
TABLES FOR DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED

ONE WAY SLAB LOADED WITH UNIFORMLY
DESTRIBUTED LOAD
6.1 Table to Determine the Minimum Depth Requirement:
Table 6.1 and 6.2 helps to determine the minimum effective depth required for slabs of
different span and loadings made up of different grades of concrete.
To prepare this table following values are adopted.
Unit weight of RCC = 24kN/m3
Floor finishing load = 0.75 kN/m2
Effective cover = 40 mm
Factor of safety for load = 1.5
Abbreviations used in table 6.1 and table 6.2:

w=Live load in kN/m2
L=Span in meter
fck=characteristic compressive strength in N/mm2
The required effective depth is dependent on self-weight of slab which again dependent
on the effective depth. Here iteration method is used to determine the effective depth.
Some combinations of span and loading and corresponding effective depth are too heavy
that they are not practicable through areca reinforcement. But for the sake of
completeness of the table they are given.
Page 30
L=1
L=2
L=3
L=4
L=5
L=6
L=7
w=0
w=1
w=2
w=3
w=4
w=5
fck=15
15.2
18.8
21.7
24.3
26.6
28.8
fck=20
13
16.1
18.6
20.9
22.9
24.7
fck= 25
11.5
14.3
16.6
18.6
20.4
22
fck=30
10.5
13
15
16.9
18.5
20
fck=15
33.5
40.5
46.4
51.5
56.1
60.3
fck=20
28.3
34.3
39.5
43.9
47.9
51.6
fck= 25
24.9
30.3
34.9
38.9
42.7
45.7
fck=30
22.45
27.4
31.6
35.2
38.5
41.5
fck=15
55.2
65.6
74.2
81.9
88.7
95
fck=20
46.1
55.1
62.7
69.3
75.2
80.7
fck= 25
40.2
48.3
55
61
66.3
71.2
fck=30
35.5
43.4
49.6
55.6
59.9
64.4
fck=15
80.7
94.2
105.6
115.6
124.6
132.9
fck=20
66.6
78.4
88.3
97.1
105
112.2
fck= 25
57.6
68.2
77.2
85
92.1
98.62
fck=30
51.2
61
69.3
76.4
82.9
88.8
fck=15
110.2
126.57
140.5
152.9
164
174.3
fck=20
90.2
104.3
116.6
127.4
137.2
146.2
fck= 25
77.3
90.3
101.4
111.1
119.9
128
fck=30
68.84
80.44
90.59
99.5
107.5
114.9
fck=15
143.8
162.7
179.4
193.9
207
219.3
fck=20
116.9
133.5
147.5
160.5
172.2
182.9
fck= 25
99.4
114.7
127.7
139.3
149.7
159.6
fck=30
87.2
101.7
113.7
124.3
133.9
142.7
fck=15
182.6
203.7
222.4
238.9
254.1
268.1
fck=20
146.9
165.5
182.1
196.6
209.9
222.3
fck= 25
124.1
141.5
156.5
161.8
181.8
192.9
fck=30
108.7
124.9
138.8
150.9
162
172.1
Table 6.1: Minimum depth requirement of simply supported one way slab
Page 31
w=6
w=7
w=8
w=9
w=10
L=1 fck=15
30.9
32.5
34.3
35.9
37.5
fck=20
26.4
28
29.5
31
32.3
fck= 25
23.5
25
26.3
27.6
28.8
fck=30
21.4
22.7
23.9
25.1
26.2
fck=15
64.3
67.9
71.4
74.7
77.9
L=2 fck=20
55
58.2
61.2
64
66.8
fck= 25
48.8
51.6
54.3
56.9
59.3
fck=30
44.3
46.9
49.3
51.6
53.9
fck=15
100.9
106.4
111.5
116.5
121.2
L=3 fck=20
85.8
90.5
95
99.3
103.4
fck= 25
75.8
80
84
87.9
91.5
fck=30
68.5
72.4
76.1
79.6
83
fck=15
140.7
147.9
154.8
161.4
167.6
L=4 fck=20
119
125.3
131.2
136.9
142.3
fck= 25
104.6
110.3
115.66
120.74
125.6
fck=30
94.4
99.5
104.4
109.1
113.5
fck=15
183.9
192.9
201.4
209.6
117.3
L=5 fck=20
154.6
162.4
169.8
176.9
183.6
fck= 25
135.1
142.2
149.2
156
161.5
fck=30
121.8
128.2
134.3
140.13
145.6
fck=15
230.7
241.8
251.5
261.2
270.3
L=6 fck=20
192.8
201.8
211
219.4
227.5
fck=25
169.2
176.8
184.6
192.2
119.4
fck=30
150.9
158.6
165.8
172.8
179.4
fck=15
281.2
293.6
305.2
316.4
327
L=7 fck=20
233.4
244.5
254.8
264.5
273.8
fck= 25
203.2
212.9
222.9
230.9
239.4
fck=30
181.6
190.6
199
207.1
214.8
Table 6.2: Minimum depth requirement of simply supported one way slab
Page 32
6.2 Table to determine area and perimeter:

Table 6.3, Table 6.4 and Table 6.5 helps to determine the cross sectional area and
perimeter of tensile reinforcement per meter width of slab required to bear the tensile
force developed due to the bending of the slab by the design uniformly distributed load on
it to keep the tensile and bond stress within design tensile strength and bond strength
respectively.
Here one can choose any thickness of slab which satisfies minimum depth requirement.
Balanced section is economical. But when span is more and live load is heavier the
amount of tension reinforcement required becomes much high resulting in very less
spacing. In such cases thickness more than what is required for balanced section is to be
provided.
For a given span, live load and thickness of slab one can get the perimeter and area of
reinforcement required and maximum reinforcement out of them is provided.
Following points are adopted in preparing this table
Unit weight of RCC = 24kN/m3
Floor finishing load = 0.75 kN/m2
Effective cover = 40 mm
Grade of concrete is M20
Factor of safety for load = 1.5
Design tensile strength of reinforcement = 100 N/mm2
Design bond strength = 0.3 N/mm2
In the calculation of perimeter, lever arm is taken as 0.8d
No curtailment of reinforcement
If the design tensile strength and bond strength are different from what is adopted for the
table, the correction should be done correspondingly as below.
A = Atable
100
f
Page 33
P = Ptable
0.3
Where, A and P are the area of reinforcement and perimeter required when design tensile
strength is f and design bond strength is .
L=1
L=2
L=3
L=4
L=5
L=6
L=7
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
w=0
w=1
A
P
140 152
96
106
84
92
73
81
601
302
395
212
342
186
296
162
1674
452
941
318
794
279
677
242
605
1844
423
1484
372
1241
323
756
3620
529
2511
464
2027
404
*
*
635
4177
557
3118
484
*
*
740
650
4704
565
A
193 208
129
141
106
117
90
100
873
417
514
272
433
233
365
199
626
1287
419
1014
350
840
298
835
2699
558
1932
466
1554
396
*
697
3402
583
2582
497
*
837
701
4076
596
*
*
818
6710
695
w=2
P
*
*
A
251 268
159
174
127
140
107
118
1183
532
666
347
526
282
435
236
799
1669
521
1244
423
1049
367
*
4047
694
2418
563
1878
471
*
867
4560
704
3165
588
*
*
845
5238
706
*
*
985
824
w=3
P
A
306
191
150
123
1553
807
619
505
*
*
*
*
2093
1480
1176
*
2957
2217
*
*
6845
3825
*
*
6850
*
*
*
P
323
208
165
135
647
414
330
273
973
621
494
408
*
828
658
545
*
*
823
682
*
*
987
818
*
*
*
954
Table 6.3: Area of reinforcement and perimeter for one way simply supported slab
Page 34
w=4
w=5
A
L=1
L=2
L=3
L=4
L=5
L=6
L=7
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
366
223
171
140
2047
953
713
575
2587
1726
1348
*
3571
2572
*
*
4562
*
*
*
*
*
P
383
241
188
155
762
482
377
309
1143
724
564
464
*
964
754
620
*
*
943
773
*
*
1131
929
*
*
*
1083
w=6
A
423
255
194
158
1105
810
647
*
3189
1985
1525
*
4301
2946
*
*
5430
*
*
*
*
*
*
P
438
276
212
174
878
549
425
347
w=7
A
486
286
216
174
*
825
638
520
*
1099
851
693
*
*
1062
866
*
*
1275
1037
*
*
*
*
1261
906
719
*
4068
2258
1705
*
*
5261
3343
*
*
6527
*
*
*
*
*
*
P
498
309
236
192
992
616
473
384
A
546
319
249
192
*
927
709
576
*
*
946
767
*
*
1182
960
*
*
1148
1149
*
*
*
*
1425
1006
791
*
2542
1890
*
*
3766
*
*
8366
*
*
*
*
*
*
P
553
343
261
211
1107
685
521
421
*
1027
781
632
*
*
1041
842
*
*
1301
1051
*
*
1563
1263
*
*
*
*
Page 35
L=1
L=2
L=3
L=4
L=5
L=6
L=7
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
t=3
t=4
t=5
t=6
w=8
A
607
351
260
208
1595
1106
864
*
2847
2078
*
*
4221
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
P
607
377
284
229
1222
752
569
458
*
1129
854
685
*
*
1137
916
*
*
1421
1142
*
*
*
1373
*
*
*
*
w=9
A
675
385
283
226
1774
1208
937
*
3171
2273
*
*
4719
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
P
668
411
308
247
1337
820
616
495
*
1230
925
473
*
*
1233
990
*
*
1541
1237
*
*
*
1484
*
*
*
*
w=10
A
744
416
305
242
1962
1312
1012
*
3525
2471
*
*
5274
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
P
728
444
332
266
1452
887
664
532
*
1331
997
798
*
*
1330
1663
*
*
1661
1329
*
*
*
1596
*
*
*
*
Abbreviations used in the tables are:
w = Live load in kN/m2
L = Effective span in meter
t = Thickness of slab in inches
A = Area of tensile reinforcement in mm2 required per meter width of slab
P = Perimeter of the tensile reinforcement in mm required per meter width of slab
Page 36
*The thickness of slab is insufficient i.e. effective depth available is less than what is
required as per table 6.1 and table 6.2. So this combination should not be provided.
Here some boxes corresponding to column A are left blank as our scientific calculator
could not solve corresponding equations and also we did not have time to find alternative
solution. All the combinations of span and loadings and corresponding amounts of
reinforcements shown in table are not practicable, but for the sake of completeness of the
table non practicable amount of reinforcements are also given.
6.3 Design Example:

Example 1: Design a one way slab which is to be cast over a span 3m to bear a live load
of 3kN/m2 on it. Adopt M20 grade of concrete. Adopt f=100 N/mm2 and =0.3 N/mm2.
Solution:
From table 6.1, for span=3m, live load=3kN/m2, fck=20 N/mm2 the effective depth
required d=69.29mm.
Adopt 127 mm (5 inch) thick slab. Effective depth=127-40 = 87mm.
From the table 6.3, for span=3m, live load = 3kN/m2 and thickness=5 inch, the area of
cross section A=1480 mm2 and perimeter P= 494 mm.
Therefore provide 10mm10mm bars at a spacing of 65 mm. (. (Aprovided=1538 mm2 and
Pprovided= 615 mm)
Example 2: Design a one way slab which is to be cast over a span 3m to bear a live load
of 5 kN/m2 on it. Adopt M20 grade of concrete. Adopt f=150 N/mm2 and =0.4 N/mm2.
Solution:
From table 6.1, for span=3 m, live load=5 kN/m2 and fck=20 N/mm2 the effective depth
required d=80.7 mm.
Adopt 127 mm (5 inch) thick slab. Effective depth=127-40 = 87mm.
Page 37
From the table 6.4, for span=3 m, live load = 5 kN/m2 and thickness=5 inch, the area of
cross section Atable=1985 mm2 and perimeter Ptable=638 mm.
Corrected value A =1985100/150 = 1323 mm2
Corrected value P=6380.3/0.4 = 479 mm
Therefore provide 10mm10mm bars at a spacing of 70 mm. (Aprovided=1428 mm2 and
Pprovided= 571 mm)
Page 38
CHAPTER 7
STUDY ON PRACTICAL ARECA
REINFORCED SLABS
Page 39
Chapter 7
STUDY ON PRACTICAL ARECA REINFORCED

SLABS
We have cast five areca reinforced slabs compare the theoretical estimations and practical
behaviour and to check whether the design philosophy, design procedure and design
tables suggested in this report is acceptable from practical point of view. Slab-5 is cast
first. Based on experience got by its loading next four slabs are designed. The description
of the type of reinforcement used in each slab are given in table 7.1.
Notation
for slab
Description of reinforcement
Slab-1
Seasoned areca without surface treatment
Slab-2
Seasoned areca with surface treatment of wood varnish
Slab-3
Non seasoned areca without surface treatment
Slab-4
Non seasoned green areca with surface coating of wood varnish
Slab -5
Seasoned areca without surface treatment
Table 7.1: Type of reinforcement provided in each type of the slab

Some specifications that are common for all slabs are
Simply supported one way slab, supported in two sides
Under reinforced section is maintained
Thickness = 101.6mm (4 inch)
Compressive strength of concrete = 20 N/mm2
Type of curing : Curing with wet gunny bags for 15 days
Loading: Loaded by sand bags, in the form of uniformly distributed load
Page 40
In slab-5 the distribution reinforcements are uniformly spaced with spacing 200mm. In
slab-1 to slab-4 the distribution reinforcements are avoided in around 0.25m from middle
of span on either side.
The specifications of slabs with their notations, loading and the essence of their analysis
is given in table 7.2
The calculation made for slab-1 is given below as a sample calculation to show the
method used for determining some parameters in table 7.2.
Bending moment at collapse Mu =
Wx
2
Bending moment at collapse Mu =
Wxx
2l
self weight per meter lengthlx

2
self weight per meter lengthxx

2
5.881.05
2
5.881.051.05
22.6
1.22.61.05
2
1.21.051.05
2
= 2.816 kNm
Lever arm may be taken as, z = 0.85d = 0.8582 = 69.7 mm
Tension force developed T =
Tensile stress developed =
Bond stress =
T
Plb
M
z
T
A
40600
1411050
2.82
0.0697
40600
300
= 40.6 kN
= 135 N/mm2
= 0.273 N/mm2
Due to the parabolic variation of bending moment the bond stress development near the
support is twice the bond stress calculated by considering the mid span moment and bond
length from mid span.
So maximum bond stress will be at ends, given by max = 20.274 = 0.546 N/mm2
Page 41
Sl.
No.
Description
Unit
Slab-1
Slab-2
Slab-3
Slab-4
Slab-5*
Age of the slab at the time of

loading
b = Width of slab
A = Area of reinforcement
mm2
300
300
360
360
452
4
5
P = Perimeter of reinforcement
d = Effective depth
mm
mm
141
82
141
74
152
72
152
77
151
75
N/mm2
147
147
75
75
150
l = Effective span
lb = Length of the reinforcement
from crack on one side
x = Distance of failure crack from
nearest support
Mcr = Bending moment at first
crack
W = Total load on slab
2.6
2.68
2.3
2.57
1.8
1.05
1.18
1.15
1.15
0.9
1.05
1.18
1.1
1.1
0.8
kNm
2.48
2.85
2.21
2.89
kN
5.88
8.04
4.94
6.1
kNm
2.82
3.72
2.21
2.89
2.48
mm
69.7
62.9
65.45
61.2
63.75
kN
40.46
59.14
33.77
47.22
38.9
N/mm2
135
197
94
131
86
N/mm2
0.273
0.355
0.193
0.27
0.286
N/mm2
0.546
0.71
0.386
0.54
0.572
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Mu = Bending moment at collapse

z = Approximate lever arm,( z =
0.85d)
T = Approximate tensile force
developed
= Approximate maximum tensile
stress developed in the
reinforcement before failure
= Approximate maximum bond
stress developed before failure
considering bond length = lb
max = Approximate maximum
bond stress developed in the
reinforcement (at the ends near the
supports)
day
42
42
42
42
44
0.47
0.47
0.51
0.47
0.6
Bond
Tension Tension Tension
failure
failure
failure
failure
Table 7.2: Specifications of slabs and results of their loading
Failure mode
Bond
failure
Page 42
Where,
f = tensile strength of a sample taken from a part of corresponding reinforcement bars,
determined in UTM, before casting of concrete.
* Accidental impact loads were happened on the slab by the fall of laterite stones on it at
the age of 34 days. A 50mm deep crack was already formed by this impact loading before
the actual testing of the slab by sand bag loading at the age of 44 days.
7.1 Discussion on the result:

7.1.1 Discussion on slab-5:
In this slab the distribution reinforcements are uniformly provided with spacing 200mm.
The failure crack was exactly along the length of a distribution bar 10 cm away from
middle of the span. There were also miner cracks present on either sides of the main crack
which were also formed exactly along the length of distribution reinforcement. Every
flexure crack is developed along the location of distribution bar. The reason being the
effect of presence of the distribution bar is similar to the presence of a hollow space as far
as the flexural cracking is concerned.
From the table 7.2, = 86 N/mm2 and max = 0.572 N/mm2. As f = 150 N/mm2 and
probable bond strength is 0.6 N/mm2 as discussed in chapter 4, the failure of slab can be
judged as caused by bond failure. Also the slip of the reinforcement is observed in the eye
investigation of collapsed slab.

Here the distribution reinforcements are avoided in around 0.25m from middle of span on
either sides to prevent the interference of the effect of distribution bars in the formation of
crack. Even then the slab failed by formation of crack along the length of distribution
reinforcement at 0.25m from middle of the span. From the table 7.2, = 135 N/mm2 and
max = 0.546 N/mm2. As f = 147 N/mm2 and probable bond strength is 0.6 N/mm2 as
discussed in chapter 4, it is difficult to judge the failure made whether by bond loss or by
tension failure. Most probably the failure is by bond failure as per eye investigation. The
Page 43
maximum deflection at the mid-span before cracking of the concrete was observed to be
1.5mm. After cracking, sudden and rapid increase in deflection was observed.

Here also the distribution reinforcements are avoided in around 0.25m from middle of
span on either sides to prevent the interference of the effect of distribution bars in the
formation of crack. As a result, the crack has not formed along the distribution bar,
instead the crack has formed almost at the mid-span. From the table 7.2, = 197 N/mm2
and max = 0.71 N/mm2. As f = 147 N/mm2 and probable bond strength is 1 N/mm2 as
discussed in chapter 4, it can be judged that the failure is by tension failure of the
reinforcement. Slab has carried load well beyond the cracking i.e. crack has developed at
2.85 kNm moment and ultimate failure taken place at 3.72 kNm. The depth of crack was
about 75 mm and the crack was wide. This clearly indicates that the seasoned areca with
surface coating is excellent in behaviour providing enough warning before failure in the
form of crack. The maximum deflection at the mid-span before cracking of the concrete
was observed to be 2.5mm. After cracking, sudden and rapid increase in deflection was
observed.

probable bond strength is 0.6 N/mm2 as discussed in chapter 4, it can be judged that the
failure is by tension failure of the reinforcement. Eye judgment also approved this. There
was no crack observed in the slab before collapse. Failure was absolutely sudden without
any warning.

probable bond strength is 0.6 N/mm2 as discussed in chapter 4, it can be judged that the
failure is by tension failure of the reinforcement. There was no crack observed in the slab
before collapse.
Page 44
probable bond strength is 1 N/mm2 as discussed in chapter 4, it can be judged that the
failure is by tension failure of the reinforcement. Eye judgment also approved this. There
was no crack observed in the slab before collapse. Failure was absolutely sudden without
any warning.
7.1.6 Essence of the discussions:

The theoretical aspects discussed, design philosophy and design procedure suggested
and the tables provided in this report is either followed by the practical behavior of slabs
or they are in safer side. So they can be accepted.
The bond strength of non-seasoned and non-treated bar is very less.
Type-2 reinforcement is excellent option, type-1 is satisfactory and type-3 and type-4
have sufficient load carrying capacity but it is better to avoid that option as they show
sudden failure without warning.
Page 45
7.2 Pictures:
Figure 7.1: Mould for slab with reinforcement before casting of concrete (slab-5)
Figure 7.2: Mould filled with concrete
Page 46
Figure 7.3: Loading on the slab
Figure 7.4: Dial gauge placed to measure the deflection
Page 47
Figure 7.5: Collapsed slab (slab-1)
Figure 7.6: Cross section of slab after failure (slab-4)
Page 48
CHAPTER 8
CONCLUTIONS
Page 49
Chapter 8
CONCLUSIONS
At this stage we can make following conclusions
Only outer hard reddish brown shell should be used. Inner white portion should be
avoided
Bars of rectangular cross section are preferred rather than circular cross section as its
preparation is easy and it gives more surface area to achieve more bond.
The tensile properties of green areca will be improved significantly by seasoning.

Seasoning is also very important to get sufficient bond strength. Use of non-seasoned
areca may not be permitted.
Tensile strength, modulus of elasticity, ultimate tensile strains of well-seasoned areca are
about 180 N/mm2, 29000 N/mm2 and 0.006 respectively.
Areca is non-ductile i.e. no major signs of failure can be seen before collapse. The
remedy for this may be adopting design live load much above the expected service load
so that even if the live load exceeds the designers expectation structure will not collapse.
Design tensile strength of 100N/mm2, and bond strength of 0.3 N/mm2 may be adopted
for seasoned plant.
Estimation of bond strength is difficult as it is supposed to vary with respect to the

moisture content in the areca which is time dependent.
Minimum clear cover of about 35 mm can be suggested.
From the 5 practical areca reinforced slabs it is found that the theoretical aspects
discussed, design philosophy and design procedure suggested and the tables provided in
this report is either followed by the actual behavior of slabs or they are in safer side. So
they can be accepted.
The maximum possible amount of reinforcement in a slab may be 10mm10mm bars at

50 mm spacing i.e. 2000mm2 area or 800mm perimeter. If design strength is 100 N/mm2
and thickness of slab is 150 mm, from the design procedure, about 20kNm moment can
Page 50
be sustained by an areca reinforced flexural members provided bonding criteria is

satisfied.
Areca reinforcement proposal is suited for long span members subjected to low live load
rather than short span members with heavier loadings as bond criteria will be easily
satisfied in long span members and load carrying capacity is governed by the bond
criteria in case of short span members with heavier loadings.
Finally, the proposal of areca reinforced concrete is adoptable.
Page 51
SCOPE FOR FUTURE STUDIES

Due to the time restriction following things could not be completed in the present study
and these have to be carried out in future to get the clear picture of the areca
reinforcement proposal.
1. Study on durability of areca within concrete.
2. Amount of shrinkage of areca take place within concrete due to its drying and
corresponding decrease in bond strength is to be studied. Bond strength at different ages
of the concrete, in different season etc. need to be studied. This study may be a matter of
few years. By this, a permissible bond strength value can be recommended for the design.
3. Study the effect of the different kinds of surface treatments on the bond strength of
concrete at different ages and seasons.
4. Tensile test is to be conducted on the specimens from different trees, different regions,
different portions of the plant and at different moisture contents. This helps to adopt a
suitable stress and strain block diagrams for the design of the flexural members.
5. Study the variation of tensile strength of the reinforcement within concrete at different
ages of concrete due to drying, decay etc.
6. Number of slabs with different span, thickness, and amount of reinforcement are to be
tested for their load carrying capacity to check whether the design philosophy and
procedure follows.
7. In this report table to determine area and perimeter of reinforcement are given for one
way slab. Similarly it can be prepared for two way slab for different ly/lx ratios.
8. In table 6.3, table 6.4 and table 6.5 provided in this report, A the area of reinforcement
cannot be linearly interpolated between two successive spans. The interpolation will
become easy if variation of A with respect to span is represented graphically which is
to be done.
9. This study is mainly focused on simply supported slabs. Applicability for fixed end
conditions, beams, columns have to be studied.
10. Here only tensile properties of reinforcement are investigated. Behaviour of areca under
compression is to be studied.
Page 52
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Francis E. Brink, Paul J. Rush, Bamboo Reinforced concrete construction
U.S.Naval civil engineering laboratory, Port Hueneme, California, Feb. 1966.
[2] IS 1708, Methods of Testing Small Clear Specimens of Timber, Beuro of Indian
standards, Manak Bhavan, Delhi, 1986.
[3] ISO/DIS 22157, Determination of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Bamboo
International Organization for Standardization, 1999.
[4] P Purushothaman Reinforced Concrete Structural elements, Tata McGrow-Hill
publishing company limited, pp. 155-166, 1984.
[5] Masakazu Terai & Koichi Minami Research and development on bamboo reinforced
concrete structure, Fukuyama University, Japan.
[6] Lovely K.M, Jithesh K, Laju Kottalil and Jaleen George Feasibility study of areca
reinforced concrete, IJIRSE, volume 2, issue 2, February 2014.
[7] Mustafa I. Azam, Samer Al-Fayadh, Fergus Gleeson and Robert Petts Bamboo
Reinforced Concrete Pavement Road Construction in Cambodia, low cost road surfacing
project, paper no.7, June 2002.
Page 53
Author: Ajayakumara K
Address:
E-mail ID:
S/O Prabakara Rao K

Kallugundi,
Sampaje, Sullia
D.K, Karnataka,
iNDIA
Pin 574234
ajayakumara1@gmail.com
MOB :
+918722821428
Page 54

Areca Reinforced Concrete

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Areca Reinforced Concrete

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Project Report

A STUDY ON THE USE OF ARECA STEM BATTENS AS

Project reference number 38S0483 A

Comment to: ajayakumara1@gmail.com MOB: 8722821428

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

VIVEKANANDA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

Nehru Nagar, Puttur 574 203, DK, Karnataka

www.vcetputtur.ac.in, E-Mail: principal@vcetputtur.ac.in

A study on the use of areca stem battens as reinforcement in concrete

Dept. of Civil Engineering VCET, Puttur

A study on the use of areca stem battens as reinforcement in concrete

1.1 Biological classification of areca

1.2 Availability of areca

1.3 Areca used in present study

1.4 Part of the tree useful as reinforcement

1.5 Reinforcement in concrete

CHAPTER 2: REQUIRED TESTS

2.1 Tension test

2.2 Test regarding bond strength

2.3 Study on durability

2.4 Test on reinforced concrete member

CHAPTER 3: TENSILE PROPERTIES

3.1 Tensile test

3.2 Result and discussion

CHAPTER 4: BOND BETWEEN REINFORCEMENT AND CONCRETE

4.1 Test conducted

CHAPTER 5: DESIGN OF FLEXURAL MEMBERS

5.1 Design principles and procedure

5.1.1 Design considerations to bond length

5.1.2 Cover requirement and self-weight

5.2 Design example

CHAPTER 6: TABLES FOR DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED ONE WAY SLAB

A study on the use of areca stem battens as reinforcement in concrete

6.1 Table to determine the minimum depth requirement

6.2 Table to determine area and perimeter

6.3 Design example

CHAPTER 7: STUDY ON PRACTICAL ARECA REINFORCED SLABS

7.1 Discussion on the result

7.1.1 Discussion on slab-5

7.1.2 Discussion on slab-1

7.1.3 Discussion on slab-2

7.1.4 Discussion on slab-3

7.1.5 Discussion on slab-4

7.1.6 Essence of the discussions

Dept. of Civil Engineering VCET, Puttur

A study on the use of areca stem battens as reinforcement in concrete

Biological classification of areca plant

Moisture content verses percentage shrinkage

Minimum depth requirement of simply supported one way slab

Minimum depth requirement of simply supported one way slab

Area and perimeter of reinforcement for simply supported one way

Type of reinforcement provided in each type of the slab

Specifications of slabs and results of their loading

Dept. of Civil Engineering VCET, Puttur

A study on the use of areca stem battens as reinforcement in concrete

Pictures of areca plantation

Cross sectional of stem

Typical stress-strain graph for areca bar in tension

Mould for slab with reinforcement before casting of concrete

Mould filled with concrete

Loading on slab (slab-2)

Dial gauge placed to measure deflection

Collapsed slab (slab-1)

Cross section of slab after failure