Punching shear capacity of flat slabs with recycled aggregate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Punching can trigger catastrophic failures in flat slabs because of its sudden nature resulting from exceeding the shear capacity of slabs. Effect of using recycled aggregate, as an environmental-friendly alternative to traditional RC structures, on punching behavior of these slabs was not sufficiently investigated in the literature. Hence, this paper aims to experimentally study the effect of using recycled coarse aggregate (RCA) on the punching shear capacity (PSC) of RC flat slabs. The RCA is produced by crushing of waste of concrete standard cubes obtained from compression tests. Design/methodology/approach A total of 12 slab-column connection specimens with different slab thicknesses (140, 160 and 200 mm) and different RCA percentages (0%, 30% and 70%) were prepared and tested under a central point load, to test its effect on the behavior of flat slabs. The punching failure loads of the tested specimens were compared with those obtained according to the provisions of different international building codes. Findings Compared with natural aggregate concrete, mixes with 30% and 70% RCA experienced reductions in the compressive that did not exceed 4% and 21%, while reductions of 4% and 13% were observed for the tensile strength, respectively. The increase in the amount of RCA reduced the PSC by 0%–7%, 0%–4% and 4%–10% for slabs with a thickness of 140, 160 and 200 mm, respectively. For slabs with punching shear reinforcement (PSR), ACI 318 provided the closest estimation for the PSC by 9%, whereas EURO 2 overestimated the PSC by 25% and ECP 203 underestimated the PSC by 41%. Research limitations/implications The provided conclusions are obtained from the conducted experimental work where a constant W/C ratio, aggregate type and a maximum aggregate size of 19 mm for the RCA were adopted. Originality/value Enhancement in the behavior of flat slabs with various thicknesses and amounts of RCA because of introducing PSR is experimentally evaluated. The failure loads of the tested slabs with recycled and normal coarse aggregates were compared against different code provisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".