Nauki Techniczne

Archives of Civil Engineering

Zawartość

Archives of Civil Engineering | 2017 | No 4 |

Abstrakt

The problem described in this paper deals with construction project scheduling for multi-object projects. The use of the flow shop model allows for quick execution through optimal, simultaneous means of production. The correct order of tasks according to assumed criteria is the subject of a lot of research. In this paper, we have focused on the aspect of multi-project work crews. In practice, we often observe cases where overburdened crews are supported by ones with downtime. This paper presents a newly developed model used to smoothe out schedules in terms of maintaining crew work continuity. A full description of the algorithm and example usage are presented.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

M. Krzemiński

Abstrakt

The paper presents a method of priority scheduling that is useful during the planning of multiple-structure construction projects. This approach is an extension of the concept of interactive scheduling. In priority scheduling, it is the planner that can determine how important each of the technological and organisational constraints are to them. A planner's preferences can be defined through developing a ranking list that defines which constraints are the most important, and those whose completion can come second. The planner will be able to model the constraints that appear at a construction site more flexibly. The article presents a general linear programming model of the planning of multiple-structure construction projects, as well as various values of each of the parameters that allow us to obtain different planning effects. The proposed model has been implemented in a computer program and its effectiveness has been presented on a calculation example.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

E. Radziszewska-Zielina
B. Sroka

Abstrakt

This paper presents the capabilities of ABAQUS finite-element program [1] in modelling sandwich beams and plates resting on deformable foundations. Specific systems of sandwich beams and plates separated by an elastic core layer were subjected to the action of point and distributed moving loads. A few theoretical examples are provided to present different techniques of modelling the foundations and the moving loads. The effects of the boundary conditions and of the foundation parameters on the deflections of the analysed structures are also presented.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

A. Zbiciak
M. Ataman
W. Szcześniak

Abstrakt

The authors studied the fracture mechanical properties under half-symmetric loading in this paper. The stress distribution around the crack tip and the stress intensity factor of three kinds of notched specimens under half symmetric loading were compared. The maximum tensile stress σmax of double notch specimens was much greater than that of single notch specimens and the maximum shear stress τmax was almost equal, which means that the single notch specimens were more prone to Mode II fractures. The intensity factors KII of central notch specimens were very small compared with other specimens and they induced Mode I fractures. For both double notch and single notch specimens, KII was kept at a constant level and did not change with the change of a/h, and KII was much larger than KI. KII has the potential to reach its fracture toughness KIIC before KI and Mode II fractures occurred. Rock-like materials were introduced to produce single notch specimens. Test results show that the crack had been initiated at the crack tip and propagated along the original notch face, and a Mode II fracture occurred. There was no relationship between the peak load and the original notch length. The average value of KIIC was about 0.602 MPa×m1/2, and KIIC was about 3.8 times KIC. The half symmetric loading test of single notch specimens was one of the most effective methods to obtain a true Mode II fracture and determine Mode fracture toughness.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Zhi Wang
Jiajia Zhou
Long Li

Abstrakt

The durability characteristics of Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECC) with various fibers such as polypropylene and glass were investigated in view of developing composites with high resistance to cracking. ECC offer large potential for durable civil infrastructure due to their high tensile strain capacity and controlled micro-crack width. In this study, fibre volume fractions (0.5%, 1%, 1.5%, and 2%) of both polypropylene and glass fibers varied and durability measures such as a rapid chloride penetration test, sorptivity, water absorption, acid attack, and sulphate attack were measured. Increasing the fiber content up to 1.5% improved the durability properties of ECC. The test results indicate that the glass fiber-reinforced Engineered Cementitious Composites have better durability characteristics than polypropylene fiber-reinforced ECC.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

S. Ranjith
R. Venkatasubramani
V. Sreevidya

Abstrakt

Underground spaces having features such as stability, resistance, and being undetected can play a key role in reducing vulnerability by relocating infrastructures and manpower. In recent years, the competitive business environment and limited resources have mostly focused on the importance of project management in order to achieve its objectives. In this research, in order to find the best balance among cost, time, and quality related to construction projects using reinforced concrete in underground structures, a multi-objective mathematical model is proposed. Several executive approaches have been considered for project activities and these approaches are analyzed via several factors. It is assumed that cost, time, and quality of activities in every defined approach can vary between compact and normal values, and the goal is to find the best execution for activities, achieving minimum cost and the maximum quality for the project. To solve the proposed multi-objective model, the genetic algorithm NSGA-II is used.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

S.A. Hosseini
A. Akbarpour
H. Ahmadi
B. Aminnejad

Abstrakt

The present study has been taken up to emphasize the role of the hybridization process for optimizing a given reinforced concrete (RC) frame. Although various primary techniques have been hybrid in the past with varying degree of success, the effect of hybridization of enhanced versions of standard optimization techniques has found little attention. The focus of the current study is to see if it is possible to maintain and carry the positive effects of enhanced versions of two different techniques while using their hybrid algorithms. For this purpose, enhanced versions of standard particle swarm optimization (PSO) and a standard gravitational search algorithm (GSA), were considered for optimizing an RC frame. The enhanced version of PSO involves its democratization by considering all good and bad experiences of the particles, whereas the enhanced version of the GSA is made self-adaptive by considering a specific range for certain parameters, like the gravitational constant and a set of agents with the best fitness values. The optimization process, being iterative in nature, has been coded in C++. The analysis and design procedure is based on the specifications of Indian codes. Two distinct advantages of enhanced versions of standard PSO and GSA, namely, better capability to escape from local optima and a faster convergence rate, have been tested for the hybrid algorithm. The entire formulation for optimal cost design of a frame includes the cost of beams and columns. The variables of each element of structural frame have been considered as continuous and rounded off appropriately to consider practical limitations. An example has also been considered to emphasize the validity of this optimum design procedure.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

Sonia Chutani
Jagbir Singh

Abstrakt

The steel pipe umbrella is a widely used technology when tunnelling in weak soils in order to create pre-support ahead of the tunnel face. The design of steel pipes is frequently done through simplified analytical approaches which are easy to apply but require proper assessment of the loads acting on the pipe. To provide information on this key design aspect, the results of the comparison between a three-dimensional numerical model developed with the code FLAC 3D and an analytical model based on the approach of a beam on yielding supports is presented and discussed. The comparison refers to a shallow tunnel with an overburden of three times its diameter for two different types of weak rock masses. The obtained results provide suggestions about the load that has to be applied in the analytical model for the design phase.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

D. Peila
C. Marchino
C. Todaro
A. Luciani

Abstrakt

This paper investigates the behaviour of axially-loaded tubular columns filled with M20 grade concrete and partially replaced concrete. The parameters varying in the study are slenderness ratio (13.27, 16.58 & 19.9), and normal M20 grade concrete, partially replaced quarry dust and concrete debris. The effects of the various concrete mixes and composite action between the steel tube and the concrete core are studied and a graph visualizing the differences between the load carrying capacity and the axial deflection is plotted. Some of the performance indices like the Ductility Index (DI), Concrete Contribution Ratio (CCR), Confinement Index (θ) and Strength Index (SI) are also evaluated and compared amongst the CFST columns. From the results it has been noted that an increase in the L/D ratio decrease the behaviour of the composite columns irrespective of the in filled materials. The composite action was achieved in the CFST columns filled with partially replaced quarry dust and concrete debris when compared with hollow steel columns. The load carrying capacity of the CFST column increases by 32 % compared with the hollow tubular columns.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

P. Sangeetha
R. Senthil

Abstrakt

Buckling and postbuckling response of thin-walled composite plates investigated experimentally and determinated analytically and numerically is compared. Real dimension specimens of composite plates weakened by cut-out subjected to uniform compression in laboratory buckling tests have been modelled in the finite element method and examined analytically based on P-w2 and P-w3 methods. All results were obtained during the experimental investigations and the numerical FEM analysis of a thin-walled composite plate made of a carbon-epoxy laminate with a symmetrical eight-layer arrangement of [90/-45/45/0]s. The instrument used for this purpose was a numerical ABAQUS® program.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

K. Falkowicz

Abstrakt

This study focuses to develop a new hybrid Engineered Cementitious Composite (ECC) and assesses the performance of a new hybrid ECC based on the steel short random fiber reinforcement. This hybrid ECC aims to improve the tensile strength of cementitious material and enhance better flexural performance in an RC beam. In this study, four different mixes have been investigated. ECC with Poly Vinyl Alcohol (PVA) fiber and PolyPropylene (PP) fiber of 2.0% volume fraction are the two Mono fiber mixes; ECC mix with PVA fiber of 0.65% volume fraction hybridized with steel fiber of 1.35% volume fraction, PP fiber of 0.65% volume fraction hybridized with steel of 1.35% volume fraction are the two additional different hybrid mixes. The material properties of mono fiber ECC with 2.0 % of PVA is kept as the reference mix in this study. The hybridization with fibers has a notable achievement on the uniaxial tensile strength, compressive strength, Young’s modulus, and flexural behavior in ECC layered RC beams. From the results, it has been observed that the mix with PVA fiber of 0.65% volume fraction hybrid with steel fiber of 1.35% volume fraction exhibitimprovements in tensile strength, flexural strength, andenergy absorption. ThePP fiber of 0.65% volume fraction hybridized with steel of 1.35% volume fraction mix has reasonable flexural performance and notable achievement in displacement ductility overthe reference mix.

Przejdź do artykułu

Autorzy i Afiliacje

A.R. Krishnaraja
Dr.S. Kandasamy

Zasady etyki publikacyjnej

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.

Procedura recenzowania

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.

Ta strona wykorzystuje pliki 'cookies'. Więcej informacji