1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

With the vast growth in complexity of designs of buildings, the existence of new

and improved structural systems is needed to let safety stays the top priority on these

advancements. One of such advancements is the expansion of span between columns,

posting higher dead load to be carried by structural components. To abide with this

change, bubble deck system had been patented to reduce the dead loads by the removal

of non-carrying part of the concrete and replacement of hollow spheres with them.

Bubble deck slab system is a revolutionary biaxial concrete floor system that was

developed in Europe on the 1990’s by Jorgen Breuning (BubbleDeck- UK 2008). The

traditional bubble deck technology uses spheres made out of recycled materials to

achieve a significant reduction of dead weight by as much as 50%, allowing longer spans

and lesser supporting structure than traditional solutions. Therefore, bubble deck slabs

possess handful advantages compared to traditional concrete slab, such as lower total

cost, reduced material use, and enhanced structural efficiency, decreased construction

time, and is a green technology.

Yet despite this breakthrough in the field of engineering, people never cease to

ponder on this system and innovate for its optimization. One of such movements is the
 2

proposal of the replacement of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bubbles with locally

available high strength plastic, say Cellulose Acetate (CA).

From the website of Science Omnexus (2019), Cellulose Acetate has toughness

of 400 J m 2 while HDPE only has maximum toughness of 220 J m 2 . CA is also non

porous and corrosion inhibitors, characteristics that are ideal as alternative for HDPE.

Inspired by the challenged imposed by this breakthrough, the researchers

decided to utilize locally commercialized cellulose acetate spheres alongside an aim of

designing new patterns of sphere allocation in the bubble deck slab.

Objectives of the Study

This study aims to evaluate the flexural strength of different bubble deck slab

designs utilizing hollow cellulose acetate.

Specifically, it tends to address the following:

1. Test the flexural strength of the bubble deck slabs;

2. Determine the strength-weight ratio of the bubble deck slabs; and

3. Analysis of the cost in the fabrication of the slabs.

Significance of the Study

 3

The researchers believed that this study could be beneficial to different

stakeholders.

Although the manifest function of this study is restricted to academic purposes

only, this study could ignite a breakthrough in local businesses should the concept be

adopted. On the 600 plus bubble deck projects in the world, no known construction

industry in the Philippines has this technology but with the promising results of this

study, people could see better days.

Hypothetically, should the Philippines undergo this big leap in construction

system, the community could have wider array of safe and strong building designs with

longer spans between columns while enjoying a cut down in the expenses in the

construction of these buildings.

To future researchers, this study could provide them with accessible

information valuable in the fabrication of bubble deck slab. Should they gain the

interest on this system, the recommendations indicated in the last part of this paper

shall enable them to eclipse the study and bring this technology in greater heights.

Researches as this are ways by which those endowed with intellectual prowess

can better the construction technologies that the world has been using until now. It is

therefore the end goal of this study that the information presented in this paper serve as

guide for the innovation of new technologies that shall solve the hindrances and

restrictions that complex buildings presently have.

 4

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study focuses on the use of commercially available cellulose acetate

spheres in the construction of bubble deck slab. Three designs were devised that come

with codes as BO, BI, and BA. As control sample, a batch of conventional slabs (CS)

were also manufactured.

After 28 days of curing period, the researchers recorded the flexural strength of

the samples, took their respective weight and solved for their strength-weight ratios.

Expenses listed during the manufacture of the slabs were also analyzed.

At the finale, the researchers chose the best design of bubble deck slab

considering both the strength-weight ratio and the cost.

Definition of Terms

ASTM C78. This test method which utilizes third-point loading is used to determine the

flexural strength of simple beams or slabs.

BA. This serves as code for the bubble deck slab with bubbles scattered along its entire

span. See Figure 3.

BI. It is a representation for the bubble deck slab with bubbles allocated at the sample's

inner area. See Figure 4.

BO. This refers to bubble deck slab with bubbles patterned at the sample's outer area.

See Figure 5.
 5

Cellulose Acetate or CA. This is a nonflammable thermoplastic polymer made by

acetylating celluose, used as basis of artificial fibers and plastic.

BDS or Bubble deck slab. This is an engineered floor system with an aim of reducing

the dead load carried by the structure by the removal of non-carrying concrete and the

replacement of hollow spheres or bubbles.

Flexural Strength. It is the measure of the tensile strength of the slabs. Flexural

strength identifies the amount of stress and force an unreinforced concrete slab, beam

or other structure can withstand such that it resists any bending failures.

Hollow spheres or hollow bubbles. These are, obviously, hollow spheres made from

specified kind of plastic. The removed non-carrying concrete from the slab are replaced

with these hollow spheres or bubbles.

Strength-Weight Ratio. This is the quotient of the flexural strength and weight of

each of the slab. This will be used in the assessment of the pattern allocations used.

UTM. This stands for Universal Testing Machine that is used in testing of the flexural

strength of slab samples.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

 6

Evolution of Concrete Flooring System

In Maryland, according to Maryland State Highway Administration, it is not known

when the first slab small structure was erected in Maryland, however, the first reinforced

concrete bridge in the state dates to 1903. Consequently, small slab structures were most

assuredly built in the first decade of the twentieth century. By 1912, the State included the

reinforced concrete slab in their Standard Plans for structures from 6 feet to 16 feet in length.

Between 1912 and World War II, the concrete slab was specified as Maryland’s standard

structure type for small spans from 6 feet to 18 feet. Consequently, many of these small slab

workhorse structures were built on the state’s roadways.

Concrete plays a major role in the construction field. The usage of concrete is high

in slab construction. Slab which is one of the largest structural member consuming it

because of its good durability and it has been used for many years to build a variety of

structures.

Types of Reinforced Concrete Slabs

Reinforced concrete slabs are structural components that are commonly used in

floors, ceilings, garages, and outdoor wearing surfaces. According to Lai (2010), there are

several types of concrete floor systems that are in use today. Some of these are:

a. Two-way flat plate (biaxial slab) – There are no required beams that shall support

the floor in between columns. Instead, the slab is heavily reinforced with steel in

both directions and is connected to the columns in order to successfully transfer the

loads.

b. Two way flat slab with drop panels – This system differs from the two-way flat

plate system by the drop panel, it is used to provide an extra thickness around the
 7

column. This strengthens the column and floor connection in respect with the

punching shear.

c. One-war beam and slab – This is the most typical floor system used in construction.

The slab loads are transferred to the beams, which are then transferred to the

columns.

d. One-way joist slab – The joists act like small beams that support the slab. This

system is economic since the formwork is readily available and less reinforcement

is required.

e. One-way wide module joist slab – This system is variation on the one0way joist

slab with wider spaces between joists.

f. Two-way joist slab (waffle slab) – This floor system is the stiffest and has the least

deflection of those aforementioned since the joists run in two direction.

Figure. 1 Types of Reinforced Concrete Floor System

Garber, G. (2006) said that a concrete slab is a common structural element of modern

buildings. Horizontal slabs with steel reinforced concrete, typically between 4 and 20 inches

thick, are most often used to construct floors and ceilings. On the other hand, thinner slabs can
 8

also be used for exterior paving. Sometimes, the thinner slabs which range from 2 inches to 6

inches thick are called mud slabs, particularly when used under the main floor slabs. Lafarge

Holcim also specified the desirable properties of industrial floors which are its high water

resistance, good compressive and flexural strength, overall dimensional stability, zero cracking

and zero curling or warping. According to Lafarge Holcim, the following are the advantage of

industrial floor concrete: high performance floor; increased abrasion resistance; increased

ability of load transfer at saw cut joints; reduced potential for plastic shrinkage cracking;

reduced potential for drying shrinkage cracking; lower risk of curling; increased dimensional

stability; and overall lower maintenance costs.

In a study conducted by Kabir, A. et. Al (2012), the concept of early prediction of

concrete compressive strength is entertained. That is, this prediction enables to know quickly

about the concrete and its probable weakness for the engineers to go full gears in the

continuation of the construction or management of the destruction program. Therefore,

prediction of the compressive strength of concrete has been an active area of research. Several

methods for early estimation have been introduced in some previously published studies.

These attempts were made to predict the 28 days concrete compressive strength from early

days test results but those had some limitations. Going further, as cited by Selcuk, L. & Gökçe,

H. S. (2015), the Point Load strength Test (PLT) is also intended to be used as index for

strength classification of earth materials. PLT may also be used to predict uniaxial tensile

strength and compressive strength of intact rock (Broch and Franklin, 1972). However, a study

of Yao, W. et. al (2017) strongly disagrees with this. They protested that the real value of the in

situ tensile and compressive strengths of concrete deteriorated under authentic environments

for long time provides a necessary basis for the evaluation of structures, especially for those

that have existed for long period.

 9

Bubble Deck Slab

With the evolution of construction, in 1990’s Jorgen Bruenig invented the first

biaxial hollow slab, known popularly as the Bubble Deck Slab which originated in

Denmark. This innovatory floor system of reinforced concrete leads to a 30 to 50 percent

lighter slab which reduces the loads on the columns, walls and foundations, and of the

entire building allowing heavier loads than a solid slab. Also, the innovative floor system

have many numerous advantages such as it lowers the total cost, use of material is reduced,

structural efficiency is enhanced, construction time is decreased, and is a green technology.

It offers a more sustainable construction option by using less concrete than tradition

concrete floor systems.

Figure 2. Typical Lay-out of Bubble Deck Slab

Advantages of Bubble Deck Slab

The advantages of Bubble Deck become apparent when it comes to the deformation

calculation; bending-strength design; penetration design; load transfer to supports, walls

and foundations; crack-reinforcement design; earthquake design; determination of

 10

resonant frequencies and determination of auxiliary supports during the construction

phase.

The concept of bubble-voided flat slabs involves placing hollow recycled plastic

shapes typically spheres in-between two layers or rebar, in the middle of a concrete slab.

Due to the replacement of concrete with air, the slab will have a lower dead load and a

higher allowable span up to 55 feet without using beams.

Figure 3. Stress Diagram of Bubble Deck Slab

Bubble Deck Slab contributes less CO2 to the atmosphere in the manufacturing

process. It meets sustainable goals through the use of recycled plastic spheres. Therefore,

even after the building has been demolished or renovated the spheres could be recycled.

According to the Bubble Deck, 100 kg of concrete is replaced by 1 kg of recycled plastic.

The reduction in dead load makes the long-term response more economical for the building

while offsetting the slightly increased deflection of slab.

Bubble Deck Slab was proven to be superior to the traditional solid concrete slab.

Thus, in the study of Tina Lai (2009), the structural behavior of Bubble Deck Slab is

verified through the application to a bridge deck. After verifying the validity of the prior

research through a finite element analysis of an office floor in SAP 2000, the Bubble Deck

Slab was tested for a pedestrian bridge deck. It is stated that a bridge design is dominated

by the dead weight of the structure and by concentrated stresses from vehicular traffic.
 11

Hence, the Bubble Deck Slab can solve both of the problems by reducing weight with the

plastic spheres and by applying to limit the high stress.

The Bubble Deck Slabs is influenced by the ratio of bubble diameter to slab
thickness. The effects of various factors to the behavior of Bubble Deck Slab are
considered such as concrete strength, the shape and diameter of plastic balls, the size of
reinforcing mesh at top and bottoming order to demonstrate the superiority and advances of
mentioned technology (L.V. Hai, 2009). It was concluded by using the hollow elliptical
balls, the better load-bearing capacity in the Bubble Deck Slab can be achieved. M.A.
Terec et al conducted also a study on the Bubble Deck floor system. It was concluded that
the Bubble Deck Slab obtaining a much improved flexural capacity and stiffness and a
shear capacity of at least 70 percent from that of a solid slab realizing 30 to 50 percent
concrete economy in comparison with the solid slab.

Types of Bubble Deck Slab

As such innovations improved overtime, types of Bubble Deck Slab have been
developed like filigree elements, reinforcement modules, and finished planks.

Fig. 4 Types of Bubble Deck Slab

Filigree Elements or called Type A Bubble Deck is a combination of constructed

and unconstructed elements. This type of Bubble Deck is optimal for new construction

projects where the designer can determine the bubble positions and steel mesh layout.
 12

Moreover, Bubble Deck Type B or also known as Reinforcement Modules, is a

reinforcement module that consists of a pre-assembled sandwich of steel mesh and plastic

bubbles, or bubble lattice. This category of Bubble Deck is optimal for construction areas

with tight spaces since these modules can be stacked on top of one another for storage until

needed. A shop-fabricated module that includes the plastic spheres reinforcement mesh in

its finished form is the Bubble Deck Type C. Unlike Type A and B, it is one-way spanning

design that requires the use of support beams or load bearing walls. This class of Bubble

Deck is best for shorter spans and limited construction schedules.

Flexural Strength of Bubble Deck Slab

A study of Salman, W. D. (2013) presented the flexural capacities of reinforced concrete two-way

bubble deck slabs with common plastic spherical voids. It has been verified that the flexural behavior of the

bubble deck slab such as good ultimate load, small deflection, and significantly low concrete compressive

strain and few crack pattern.

Also, according to seminarsonly.com published at their website, Bubble Deck Slab is conceived to

omit a significant volume of concrete (compared to solid slab) in the central core where the slab is principally

un-stressed in flexure. In slabs, the depth of compressed concrete is usually a small portion of the slab depth

and this means that it almost always involves only the concrete between the ball and the surface so there is no

sensible difference between the behavior of a slid slab and Bubble Deck. The only elements working are the

outer shell of concrete on the compression side and the steel on the tension side. In terms of flexural strength,

the moments of resistance are the same as for the solid slabs provided this compression depth is checked

during design so that it does not encroach significantly into the ball.

Cellulose Acetate

Cellulose acetate butyrate (CAB) is a mixed ester of cellulose. CAB, commonly

known as butyrate, is resistant to ultraviolet rays, has a lower moisture absorption

than cellulose acetate, and has an extremely high-impact strength (McKeen, 2012).
 13

Physical Properties of Cellulose Acetates is as follows:

a. Soft, smooth, natural feel

b. High Flexibility

c. High Gloss

d. Good chemical resistivity

e. Biodegradable

f. Moderate ability to protest friction

g. Good elongation at break

h. Protective against insect

i. Poor abrasive ability

j. Poor breaking tenacity

Table 1 Material Property of Cellulose Acetate

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

 Ping-pong balls
(Cellulose
Acetate) as
Hollow Spheres  Flexural  Flexural Strength
 Steel Strength Test of Voided Slab
reinforcement (ASTM C78) using Ping-pong
o 8-mm Ø of Voided balls as Hollow
RSB Slab Beam Spheres
o #16 Samples  Light-weight
Tie-wire concrete
 Concrete mixture
 14

Figure 5. Research Paradigm

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents a discussion of the research design, locale of the study,

research procedures, and statistical treatment of the data gathered.

Research Design

This study followed the experimental type of research. Thus, an actual batch of

slabs was made and had been evaluated in consonance with the objectives included such as

the flexural strength, strength-weight ratio and the cost in the manufacture of such samples.
 15

Locale of the Study

The fabrication and curing of slabs as well as the weighing and testing are

conducted in cooperation with Viking Construction and Supplies at Brgy 53 Rioeng, Laoag

City. A total of 12 samples were subjected to this study.

Research Procedures

The study followed four principal procedures. These are the designing of bubble

deck slab, purchase of needed materials, fabrication and curing of the samples, weighing

and testing of the samples.

I. Designing of Bubble Deck Slab

The researchers prepared three designs of BDS. Each design differs in the number

and allocation of the sphere or bubbles along the span of slab, but the number of

reinforcements present in them are of the same number and installed in the same manner.

Figure 6.Proposed Design of BA

 16

This design, BA, consists of 36 spheres in total, 18 each for the top and bottom

of the reinforcing bars. This is nearly similar to the the design used by construction

industries in actual BDS projects, yet the latter only have one layer of spheres.

Figure 7.Proposed Design of BO

Figure 5.Proposed Design of BI

The other two designs of BDS are patterned on the first but the second design, BO,

only has bubbles at the outer area of the slab while the third, BI, has bubbles in its inside or

inner area. BO consists of 24 bubbles while BI has 20.

Aside from designing the bubble deck slab, the researchers adopted the design for

conventional slab but with the same number of reinforcing bars that are installed in the

same manner as the BDS.

 17

Figure 8.Proposed Design of CS

II. Purchase of Materials

All the needed materials in the fabrication of slabs such as the bubbles, reinforcing

bars, tie wire, cement, sand and gravel are purchased from the New India General

Merchandise and Viking Construction and Supplies both at Laoag City.

III. Fabrication and curing of slabs

 18

The four batches of conventional and bubble deck slab were fabricated on

February 16. Steps included in this procedure are slump test of the concrete used, and

tamping for a much solid and less unwanted voids in the sample. After which, the

manufactured slabs underwent a 28-day curing process.

 19

IV. Weighing and Testing of Samples

After the curing stage, the samples were subjected to third point loading to

determine each ultimate yielding load and flexural strength. The machine used in the

testing is the Universal Testing Machine. Also, the weight of each samples were recorded

after the testing.

 20

Statistical Treatment of Data

The data gathered from both

weighing and flexural strength testing of the

samples underwent simple averaging.

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter of the study focuses on the discussion of the results obtained during

the testing of the samples along with the other objectives that this research had addressed

to. Detailed figures and tables as well as summarized ones are provided to better present

the data gathered.

Evaluation of the Flexural Strength of the slabs

As previously discussed in the previous chapters, aside from the 3 batches of

bubble deck slabs to be tested, the researchers also fabricated conventional slabs that
 21

served as the control sample and basis in the interpretation of the results of the bubble deck

slab designs.

35.72
BA 37.98
37.12

45.02
BI 48.82
SLAB CODE

45.76

42.16
BO 40.72
38.65

47.32
CS 57.33
55.67

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
ULTIMATE LOAD, KN

Sample 3 Sample 2 Sample 1

Figure 9. Summary of Ultimate Loads that the Slabs can Carry Before Yielding
After subjecting the slabs to loads on its 28th day of curing, the data in Figure are

obtained. CS resisted the highest ultimate load as much as 57.33KN. It is followed by BI,

BO and BA with highest resisted loads of 48.82KN, 42.16KN and 37.98KN respectively.
 22

10000

9000 8389.18
8000 8639.33

FLEXURAL STRENGTH, MPa

6895.79
7000 7356.92
5824.35
6000 5593.79
6136.29
5000 5723.82

4000
7130.88 6784.28
3000 6353.29
5382.82
2000

1000
8053.13 6104.64 7011.83 5566.66
0
CS BO BI BA

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 10. Summary of Flexural Strength of the Slabs

Consequently, Figure 10 reveals that the conventional slabs recorded the highest

flexural strength with the ceiling of 8639.33MPa and mean strength of 8053.13MPa.

Following the CS are the Bubble deck slabs II - Inner with the top strength reading of

7356.92MPa and mean strength of 7011.83MPa.

This result is often the case for bubble deck slab as the conventional slabs obtain

higher strength since the former undergoes stiffness reduction as a result of the bubbles in

the slab.

Determination of the weight reduced by BDS

Table 2. Summary of Mean Weight of the Slabs

 23

Sample Code Weight, Weight Reduced,

kg %
CS 29.17 -
BO 26.3 9.84
BI 27.67 5.14
BA 25.97 10.97

From the above figure, it can be observed that there is a drastic reduction in weight

of the bubble deck slabs compared to the conventional one. The reduction in weight for

BO, BI and Ba are recorded to be 9.84%, 5.14% and 10.97% respectively of the original

weight of conventional slab.

Determination of Strength-Weight Ratio of the Slabs

Aside from recording the strength of the slabs, the researchers also determined the

strength-weight ratio as manifestation that the slabs had achieved the deduction of self

weight without huge reduction in its flexural strength.

Table 3. Individual and Mean Strength-Weight Ratio of Conventional Slab

CONVENTIONAL SLAB
Sample Code Flexural Strength, Weight, Strength-Weight
MPa kg Ratio
CS1 8389.18 29.5 284.38
CS2 8639.33 29.0 297.91
CS3 7130.88 29.0 245.89
Mean 8053.13 29.17 276.08

Deducing from the table above, despite being heavier compared to the bubble deck

slab which have voids within them, the mean strength-weight ratio of conventional slab,

276.08, remains the highest since it recorded higher flexural strength than the bubble deck

slab. This figure served as the target ratio for the bubble deck slabs. As discussed, higher

ratio implies better strength and weight correlation.

 24

Table 4. Summary of Strength-Weight Ratio of Bubble Deck Slab

BUBBLE DECK SLAB
Sample Code Flexural Strength, Weight Strength-Weight
MPa kg Ratio
BO1 5824.35 27.0 215.72
BO2 6136.29 25.5 240.64
BO3 6353.29 26.4 240.65
MEAN 6104.64 26.3 232.12
BI1 6895.79 27.5 250.76
BI2 7356.92 28.0 262.75
BI3 6784.28 27.5 246.70
MEAN 7011.83 27.67 253.41
BA1 5593.79 26.0 215.15
BA2 5723.39 25.5 224.45
BA3 5382.82 26.4 203.89
MEAN 5566.66 25.97 214.35

Comparing the summarized data of strength-weight ratio of the three designs of

bubble deck slab in the above table to the CS's, it can be observed that the weight of the

slabs do not reach 28 kg. This is the expected result for this study since the bubble deck

slab is at most a light-weight technology.

Table 4 also shows that despite being the heaviest design, BI acquired the highest

mean flexural strength, 7011.83MPa, resulting to the highest mean strength-weight ratio,

253.41.

However, BA, the design nearly similar to what construction companies have been

using is recorded to have the lowest strength and strength-weight ratio despite recording

the lowest mean weight.

 25

Cost Analysis in the Fabrication of the Slabs

According to the man who patented this slab technology, the use of bubble deck

slab is advantageous in terms of the total cost of projects as compared to conventional slab.

In this section of this chapter, the researchers conducted an analysis of the expenses

allocated in the fabrication of each batch of three samples.

Total Cost,
per batch

BA 1,896.95

BI 1,183.74
SAMPLES

BO 1,363.62

CS 325.741

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
MANUFACTURE COST, Php

Figure 11. Summary of Flexural Strength of the Slabs

Obviously from the figure, conventional slab recorded the lowest manufacture

cost amounting to Php325.741. This is the most economical slab design among the four as

the other three reached cost of higher than Php1,000.00.

However, this data do not imply that bubble deck slabs are much more expensive

compared to the conventional slabs. In this study, the researchers utilized commercially

available cellulose acetate in forms of pingpong balls which are costly.

 26

The cut down in expenses with the use of bubble deck slab technology could be

greatly felt in actual construction projects. As cited in www.bubbledeck.com, savings in

the materials by up to 50%, transportation cost, and concrete consumption by as much as

35%.

Detailed in the tables that follow the breakdown of expenses in both conventional

and bubble deck slab. Also included in the attached appendices the computations in the

amount consumption of cement, sand and gravel.

Table 5. Breakdown of Expenses Used for Conventional Slab

CONVENTIONAL SLAB
Unit price Amount Actual Price
Ordered
RSB, pcs Php 85.00 2 Php 170.00
TIE WIRE, pcs 20.00 1 20.00
CEMENT, bag 245.00 0.5 122.50
SAND, cubic meter 365.00 0.0106 3.869
GRAVEL, cubic meter 440.00 0.0213 9.372
Bubbles, pcs 15.00 0 0
TOTAL Php 325.741

Referring to the breakdown of expenses for the three designs of bubble deck slab,

conventional slab used more amount of cement, sand and gravel because they are solid

slab, thus, consuming higher cost in these materials but at minimal rise. However,

conventional slab still recorded the lowest total cost of Php 325.741.

With the spheres used as costly material, it is observed that the more spheres

needed in the slab, the total cost increases. Thus, it is safe to say that in this study only, the

total cost of the fabrication of slab is sphere-dependent.

Table 6. Breakdown of Expenses Used for Bubble Deck Slab I

BUBBLE DECKS SLAB I (OUTER)
Unit price Amount Actual Price
 27

Ordered
RSB, pcs Php 85.00 2 Php 170.00
TIE WIRE, pcs 20.00 1 20.00
CEMENT, kg 6.25 13 81.25
SAND, cubic meter 365.00 0.0099 3.614
GRAVEL, cubic meter 440.00 0.0199 8.756
Bubbles, pcs 15.00 72 1,080.00
TOTAL Php 1,363.62
With 24 bubbles or spheres used in each sample or 72 bubbles for the whole batch, the

expense tallied for the bubbles only reached the Php1,000.00 mark with total cost

amounting to Php1,363.62. However, this design of bubble deck slab can be observed to

had used lesser amount of cement, sand and gravel compared to CS but only in minimal

amount.

Table 7. Breakdown of Expenses Used for Bubble Deck Slab II

BUBBLE DECKS SLAB II (INNER)
Unit price Amount Actual Price
Ordered
RSB, pcs Php 85.00 2 Php 170.00
TIE WIRE, pcs 20.00 1 20.00
CEMENT, kg 6.25 13 81.25
SAND, cubic meter 365.00 0.01 3.65
GRAVEL, cubic meter 440.00 0.0201 8.844
Bubbles, pcs 15.00 60 900.00
TOTAL Php 1,183.744

The above table shows that this design used the least total number of bubbles

with 60 pcs. With this factor, it is expected that compared to the first design of bubble deck

slab, this BI is more economical.

Table 8. Breakdown of Expenses Used for Bubble Deck Slab III

BUBBLE DECKS SLAB III (ALL)
Unit price Amount Actual Price
Ordered
RSB, pcs Php 85.00 2 Php 170.00
 28

TIE WIRE, pcs 20.00 1 20.00

CEMENT, kg 6.25 12 75.00
SAND, cubic meter 365.00 0.0096 3.504
GRAVEL, cubic meter 440.00 0.0192 8.448
Bubbles, pcs 15.00 108 1,620.00
TOTAL Php 1,896.952

With this design of putting spheres in all the span of the slab, BA used the greatest

number of bubbles, causing its total cost to rise to nearly Php2,000.00. But also because of

the design,

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents the summary of the findings generated, the conclusions

drawn from these findings and the recommendations offered through this study.

Summary

The findings in this study are summarized below.

1. Conventional slab resisted load as much as 57.33KN while BI, BO and BA

resisted loads with magnitudes of 48.82KN, 42.16KN and 37.98KN

respectively.

2. After a 28-day curing, the conventional slab recorded a mean flexural strength

of 8053.13MPa, while BI, BO, and BA obtained 7011.83MPa, 6104.64MPa, and

5566.66MPa .
 29

3. BI, BO and BA recorded a reduction in weight of 9.84%, 5.14% and 10.97% of

the weight of the conventional slab.

4. For the mean strength-weight ratio, conventional slab obtained 276.08 while BI,

BO and BA recorded 253.41, 232.12 and 214.35 respectively.

5. Batch CS tallied an expense of Php325.741 while BI, BO and BA have total

fabrication cost of Php1,183.744, Php1,363.62, and Php1,896.952 respectively

for a batch of three samples per design.

Conclusion

In the light of the findings, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. The bubble deck slabs were not as efficient as the conventional slabs in terms of

the ultimate load resisted. However, BI or Bubble Deckd Slab II - Inner

recorded the highest ultimate load among the other BDS designs with

48.82KN.

2. As for the flexural strength, the conventional slab registered the highest value

with 8053.13MPa, while BI obtained 7011.83MPa.

3. BA design is the most satisfactory in terms of weight reduced.

4. Despite being heavier than the bubble deck slabs, the conventional reinforced

slab gives the highest strength-weight ratio of 276.08 while BI registered

253.41.

5. In this experiment alone, the conventional slab costs lesser compared to the

bubble deck slabs due to the high cost of the bubbles used in them.
 30

6. With all the criteria siding with conventional slab, CS performed better than

Bubble Deck Slab. However, BI is the most ideal for Bubble Deck Slab

construction projects.

Recommendation

Based from the results of the study, the following recommendations are offered:

1. To achieve economical advantages and eco-friendly product, the utilization of

manually recycled plastics in the manufacture of the bubbles is highly advised.

2. More designs of bubble deck slab should be created.

3. The utilization of finer coarse aggregate is recommended to lessen chances of

having unwanted voids and improve the strength of the slabs.

4. Using mesh in the bubble deck slabs is also suggested to have improved

restriction and stability and in the placement of the bubbles during the pouring of

concrete.

5. The concept of using bubbles as replacement to concrete to achieve

weight-reduction might also be adopted in the manufacture of walls.