Applied sciences

Archives of Civil Engineering

Content

Archives of Civil Engineering | 2015 | No 1 |

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

These joints are used when the designer and contractor anticipate difficulties during the construction of overlap joints. They were not included in the PN EN 1993‒1‒8 in full scale. Resistance assessment of such joints is presented in accordance with standard rules. The results were compared with the experimental studies carried out at the “Mostostal” Centre; while the former research activities and the legitimacy of the proposed method of assessing the resistance of these joints was confirmed. This is an example of an overlap joint calculation.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

J. Bródka
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In calculating the resistance of welds within the connections between hollow sections in EN 1993‒1‒8, very general information is given without presenting specific calculations. The chief recommendations indicate that the resistance of the welds connecting the wall to the second element should not be less than the resistance of the cross section of the wall. In addition, assessment of the welds’ resistance based on the effective lengths is viable in cases when forces in the braces are smaller than the resistance of the joint, though the detailed method was not specified. The objective of this paper is to present the most up-to-date information about the design of overlap welded joints with a reinforcing rib plate.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

J. Bródka
M. Broniewicz
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper describes an experimental behaviour of the basalt fibre reinforced polymer composite by external strengthening to the concrete beams. The BFRP composite is wrapped at the bottom face of R.C beam as one layer, two layers, three layers and four layers. The different characteristics – are studied in – first crack load, ultimate load, tensile and compressive strain, cracks propagation, crack spacing and number of cracks etc. To – investigate, total of five beams size 100×160×1700 mm were cast. One beam is taken as control and others are strengthened with BFRP composite with layers. From this investigation, the first crack load is increased depending on the increment in layers from 6.79% to 47.98%. Similarly, the ultimate load carrying – capacity is increased from 5.66% to 20%. The crack’s spacing is also reduced with an increase in the number of layers.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

A. Chandran
M. Neelamegam
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Concrete is the most widely used construction material because of its specialty of being cast into any desired shape. The main requirements of earthquake resistant structures are good ductility and energy absorption capacity. Fiber reinforced concrete possesses high flexural and tensile strength, improved ductility, and high energy absorption over the conventional concrete in sustaining dynamic loads. The aim of this paper is to compare the properties of concrete beams in which three types of fibers are added individually. Steel fibers, polypropylene fibers and hybrid fibers were added to concrete in the weight ratio of four percentages in the preparation of four beam specimens. The fourth specimen did not contain fibers and acted as a control specimen. The dimensions of the beam specimens were 150 × 150 × 700 mm. The reinforced concrete beams of M30 grade concrete were prepared for casting and testing. Various parameters such as load carrying capacity, stiffness degradation, ductility characteristics and energy absorption capacity of FRC beams were compared with that of RC beams. The companion specimens were cast and tested to study strength properties and then the results were compared. All the beams were tested under three point bending under Universal Testing Machine (UTM). The results were evaluated with respect to modulus of elasticity, first crack load, ultimate load, and ultimate deflection. The test result shows that use of hybrid fiber improves the flexural performance of the reinforced concrete beams. The flexural behavior and stiffness of the tested beams were calculated, and compared with respect to their load carrying capacities. Comparison was also made with theoretical calculations in order to determine the load-deflection curves of the tested beams. Results of the experimental programme were compared with theoretical predictions. Based on the results of the experimental programme, it can be concluded that the addition of steel, polypropylene and hybrid fibers by 4% by weight of cement (but 2.14% by volume of cement) had the best effect on the stiffness and energy absorption capacity of the beams.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

M. Tamil Selvi
T.S. Thandavamoorthy
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Currently, a worldwide dynamic rise of interest in using soil as a construction material can be observed. This trend is evident in the rapid rise of the amount of standards that deal with soil techniques. In 2012 the number of standards was larger by one third than five years prior. To create a full standardization of the rammed earth technique it is necessary to take into account the diversity of used soil and stabilizing additives. The proportion of the components, the process of element production and the research methods must also be made uniform. The article describes the results of research on the compressive strength of rammed earth samples that differed from each other with regards to the type of loam used for the mixture and the amount of the stabilizer. The stabilizer used was Portland cement CEM I 42.5R. The research and the analysis of the results were based on foreign publications, the New Zealand standard NZS 4298:1998, the American Standard NMAC14.7.4 and archival Polish Standards from the 1960’s that dealt with earth material.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

P.L. Narloch
P. Woyciechowski
P. Jęda
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper considers method of determination of solar radiation amount falling on arbitrarily oriented surface of a structure. Provided method allows calculation of influence of structure’s geographical coordinates, spatial orientation of structure’s surface, day of year and time of day on received amount of solar radiation. The method is intended for determination of thermal stresses and deformations of sheet steel structures caused by action of direct solar radiation. Examples show usage of provided method.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

O.I. Kordun
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aim of the study is to compare flexible pavement design lifespans and the main factors which create their values for a standard structure and one with an anti-fatigue course AF at different parameter values of pavement and its load, relevant to their design processes. Depending on the mixture used for the anti-fatigue course or the course thickness, durability improvement of the pavement (compared to the durability of a standard structure) can be obtained by extending the design lifespan of the asphalt base course or by extending the design lifespan of the AF course. On sections with predominantly slow traffic, the lifespan decreases significantly compared to sections with typical vehicle speed – the relative decrease is greater if anti-fatigue course is applied.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

M. Nagórska
R. Nagórski
K. Błażejowski
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Hard bitumens are used in the construction industry primarily in it’s unmodified form, for instance for the production of the so-called traditional roofing felt. Due to the low price of these types of membranes, the use of a popular but expensive modifying agent, SBS copolymer, is not justified economically. Research carried out by the authors has shown that chemical organic compounds belonging to a group of imidazolines may potentially be used as much cheaper bitumen modifier. It was demonstrated that a new type of modifier based on oleic imidazoline, developed by the authors, has a significant impact on improving the physical properties of bitumen. The use of this modifier results in a significant increase in the bitumen plasticity range, both before and after laboratory ageing .In addition, there was a considerable increase of bitumen’s resistance to aging. Its use can help improve the quality and durability of popular waterproofing products manufactured with the use of hard bitumen.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

K. Zieliński
M. Babiak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Missing traffic data is an important issue for road administration. Although numerous ways can be found to impute them in foreign literature (inter alia, the most effective method, that is Box-Jenkins models), in Poland, still only proven and simplified methods are applied. The article presents the analyses including an assessment of the completeness of the existing traffic data and works related to the construction of SARIMA model. The study was conducted on the basis of hourly traffic volumes, derived from the continuous traffic counts stations located in the national road network in Poland (Golden River stations) from the years 2005 – 2010. As a result, the proposed model was used to impute the missing data in the form of SARIMA (1.1,1)(0,1,1)₁₆₈. The newly developed model can be used effectively to fill in the missing required days of measurement for estimating AADT by AASHTO method. In other cases, due to its accuracy and laboriousness of the process, it is not recommended.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

M. Spławińska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper presents methods of determining the location of cost buffers and corresponding contingency costs in the CPM schedule based on its work breakdown structure. Application of correctly located cost buffers with appropriately established reserve costs is justified by the common overrunning of scheduled costs in construction projects. Interpolated cost buffers (CB) as separate tasks have been combined with relevant summary tasks by the starttostart (SS) relationship, whereas the time of their execution has been dynamically connected with the time of accomplishment of particular summary tasks using the “paste connection” option. Besides cost buffers linked with the group of tasks assigned to summary tasks, a definition of the cost buffer for the entire project (PCB) has been proposed, i.e. as one initial task of the entire project. Contingency costs corresponding to these buffers, depending on the data that the planner has at his disposal, can be determined using different methods, but always depend on the costs of all tasks protected by each buffer. The paper presents an exemplary schedule for a facility and the method of determining locations and cost for buffers CB and PCB, as well as their influence on the course of the curve illustrating the budgeted cost of work scheduled (BCWS). The proposed solution has been adjusted and presented with consideration of the possibilities created by the scheduling software MS Project, though its general assumptions may be implemented with application of other similar specialist tools.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

M. Połoński

Publication Ethics Policy

ETHICS POLICY

”Archives of Civil Engineering” respects and promotes the principles of publishing ethics. Being guided by COPE’s Guidelines ( https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) we ensure that all participants of the publishing process comply with these rules, the journal pays special attention to:

Editor Responsibilities
1. Qualifying individual manuscripts for publication only on the basis of: (a) compliance with the guidelines provided to the authors, (b) substantive value, (c) originality, (d) transparency of presentation
2. Deciding whether the paper fulfills all requirements i.e. formal and scientific and which articles submitted to the journal should be published. In making these decisions, the editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board as well as by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
3. Evaluating manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s).
4. Ensuring scientific accuracy and complying with the principle of authorship; making sure that individual authors who contribute to the publication accept its form after the scientific editing
5. Providing a fair and appropriate peer review process.
6. Withdrawing manuscripts from publication, if any information about its unreliability appeared, also as a result of unintentional errors, features of plagiarism or violation of the rules of publishing ethics were identified.
7. Requiring all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
8. Maintaining the integrity of the academic record, precludes business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and is always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
9. Not disclosing any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the editorial board members, as appropriate.

Reviewer Responsibilities
1. Cooperating with the scientific editor and / or editorial office and the authors in the field of improving the reviewed material;
2. Being objective and expressing the views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
3. Assessing of the entrusted works in a careful and objective manner, if possible with an assessment of their scientific reliability and with appropriate justification of the comments submitted;
4. identifying relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors
5. calling to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge
6. Maintaining the principle of fair play, excluding personal criticism of the author (s)
7. Maintaining confidentiality, which is not showing or discussing with others except those authorized by the editor. Any manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents.
8. Performing a review within the set time limit or accepting another solution jointly with ACE in the event of failure to meet this deadline.
9. Notifying the editor if the invited reviewer feels unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible.
10. identifying relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors
11. Not considering evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.

Author Responsibilities
1. Results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
2. The authors should follow the principle of originality, which is submitting only their own original works, and in the case of using the works of other authors, marking them in accordance with the rules of quotation, or obtaining consent for the publication of previously published materials from their owners or administrators;
3. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study and phenomena such as ghostwriting or guest authorship in the event of their detection must be actively counteracted.
5. All authors should report in a Reliable manner the sources they used to create their own study and their inclusion in the attachment bibliography;
6. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section.
7. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
8. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
9. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editor or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.

Publisher’s Confirmation
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.

Peer-review Procedure

Manuscript Peer-Review Procedure

”Archives of Civil Engineering” makes sure to provide transparent policies for peer-review, and reviewers have an obligation to conduct reviews in an ethical and accountable manner. There is clear communication between the journal and the reviewers which facilitates consistent, fair, and timely review.

-The model of peer-review is double-blind: the reviewers do not know the names of the authors, and the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript (but if the research is published reviewers can eventually know the names of the authors). A complete list of reviewers is published in a traditional version of the journal: in-print.
-It is the editor who appoints two reviewers; however, if there are discrepancies in the assessment the third reviewer can be appointed.
-After having accepted to review the manuscript (one-week deadline), the reviewers have approximately 6 weeks to finish the process.
-The paper is published in ACE provided that the reviews are positive. All manuscripts receive grades from 1-5, 5 being positive, 1 negative, the authors receive reviews to read and consider the comments.
-Manuscript evaluations are assigned one of five outcomes: accept without changes, accept after changes suggested by the reviewer, rate manuscript once again after major changes and another review, reject, withdraw.
-Manuscripts requiring minor revision (accept after changes suggested by the reviewer) does not require a second review. All manuscripts receiving a "Rate manuscript once again after major changes and another review " evaluation must be subjected to a second review. Rejected manuscripts are given no further consideration. There are cases when the article can be withdrawn, often upon the request of an author, technical reason (e.g. names of authors are placed in the text, lack of references, or inappropriate structure of the text), or plagiarism.
-The revised version of the manuscript should be uploaded to the Editorial System within six weeks. If the author(s) failed to make satisfactory changes, the manuscript is rejected.
-On acceptance, manuscripts are subject to editorial amendment to suit house style.
-Paper publication requires the author's final approval.
- As soon as the publication appears in print and in electronic forms on the Internet there is no possibility to change the content of the article.

Editor’s responsibilities
-The editor decides whether the paper fulfills all requirements i.e. formal and scientific and which articles submitted to the journal should be published.
-In making these decisions, the editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board as well as by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
-The editor maintains the integrity of the academic record, precludes business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and is always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
-The editor evaluates manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s).
-The editor does not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the editorial board members, as appropriate.

Reviewers' responsibilities
Any manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review is kept confidential and not used for personal advantage Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments. All reviews must be carried out on a special form available in the Editorial System.

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more