Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Keywords: Building
Lim Guan Tiong
2007/2008 Bu
Composite Reinforced Concrete (CRC)
Conventional reinforcement
Impact resistance
Industry adoption
Steel bars
Unreinforced concrete
Issue Date: 15-Oct-2010
Abstract: Background Composite Reinforced Concrete is defined in this dissertation to mean two or more dissimilar but complementary reinforcement materials that are being placed strategically within the concrete core itself for the purposes of reinforcement. The costs, effectiveness and efficiency of reinforced concrete members and structural systems have been the subject of intense scrutiny, research and development since the innovation of concrete and subsequently, its steel reinforcing material. Steel bars as reinforcing materials are causes in contributing to the collapse of some structures because of its weaknesses such as corrosion of steel and the loss of bonding between steel and the surrounding concrete. In the cost and benefit analysis, the evaluation of efficiency, effectiveness as well as performance of in the use of composite reinforcement for concrete is critical. Research comprises a survey of the inclination to adopt composite reinforcement in Singapore; the resistance capacity of composite reinforced concrete slabs as well as initial cost analysis of 1m3 of composite reinforced concrete is further discussed in this dissertation. Results From the survey conducted, construction companies showed keen willingness to try out new types of reinforcement but the main drawback factors listed were the lack of confidence from high costs and, furthermore, acceptance and promotion by overseas concrete institutes like the American Concrete Institute, national boards - Building & Construction Authority of Singapore has not given the green light as yet. Experimental results proved that the impact resistance of composite reinforced concrete is far better than normal concrete and even conventional reinforced concrete. For normal concrete without any reinforcement, the average number of strikes before cracks were formed from repeated ball hammering is 2. For conventional reinforcement, it is 3 and finally for composite reinforced concrete, it is 5. The number of cracks and crack widths are generally found to be smaller on the surface of the composite reinforced concrete than other types of reinforcement. Cost data analysis showed that the initial costs of composite reinforced concrete to be $20.71/m3 more than the conventionally reinforced concrete. The net worth of the feasibility from the costs benefits analysis is that it is viable to implement it, with some restrictions to certain type of structures. Conclusions Theoretical, human centric and experimental results clearly advocate composite reinforcement concrete based on their more effective shield against impact compared to normal concrete and conventionally reinforced concrete, as well as other benefits such as increased fatigue and weather resistance. A better quality reinforced work in composite reinforcement for concrete shows promise for defensive building structures, lasting landmarks/buildings, government and document/people sensitive buildings, as well as buildings of particular interest by the public in the future.
Appears in Collections:Bachelor's Theses

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
Cheng Xin Mei Marie 2007-2008.pdf3.65 MBAdobe PDF


NoneLog In

Google ScholarTM


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.