Bubble Deck Technology

CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 General
In building constructions, the slab is a very important structural member to make
a space and the slab is one of the largest member consuming concrete. Bubble Deck
is the invention of Jorgen Bruenig in 1990’s, who developed the first biaxial hollow
slab (now known as Bubble Deck) in Denmark. This new prefabricated construction
technology using Bubble Deck slab is recently applied in many industrial projects in
the world. Bubble deck comprises a hollow, flat slab that spans in two directions, in
which plastic balls are incorporated to replace, and therefore eliminate the concrete
in the middle of a conventional slab which does not contribute to its structural
performance.
Bubble Deck is much more than a revolutionary flat slab floor and deck system
but is a whole structure solution that releases building designs from the limitations of
short spans rectilinear layouts, load-bearing walls or beams and restricted column
positions. Advanced engineering of the system comprises a hollow flat slab, into
which recycled Plastic ball ‘void formers’ are incorporated to eliminate concrete that
does not contribute to the structural performance of a slab. This results in a dramatic
reduction of dead weight by as much as 50% allowing much longer spans and less
supporting structure than traditional solutions.

When the Bubble Deck slabs are completed, it is a strange experience to walk
below the floor, with the joints between the elements now redundant and of no
structural effect, seeming to ‘hang’ in free air without any nearby support. This
technique is totally unfamiliar to the British tradition of creating structures with one
way spanning slabs supported on load bearing beams or walls, but is a technique that
has been widely used in European buildings for the last 40 years – known as
‘filigree’ slabs. Extensive testing has proved the splice reinforcement laid across the
semi pre-cast element joints acts in concert with the top and bottom mesh
reinforcement to form a seamless mesh reinforcement across the whole floor plate,
rendering the joints irrelevant to the completed structural performance.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 1

 Bubble Deck Technology

1.2 THE BASIC PRINCIPLE

 Reinforcing mesh, top
 Air bubble (hollow ball) made of (Recycled) plastic


Reinforcing mesh, bottom

Fig 1.1: Bubble with top and bottom reinforcement

 It
is the geometry of the two well-known components. Welded reinforcing mesh and
hollow plastic balls

 Reinforcing mesh catches, distributes and locks the balls in exact position.

 The balls shape the air volume, control the level of the reinforcing meshes, and at the
same time stabilize the spatial lattice.

 When the steel lattice unit is concreted, a "monolithic" hollow slab is obtained.
Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 2
 Bubble Deck Technology

CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE SURVEY
Brief review of literature relevant to the study is presented below:

1] “Arati Shetkar” et al., [2]: - In this project they presented about “Experimental
Study on Bubble Deck Slab System with Elliptical Balls” in 2005.
The behaviour of Bubble Deck slabs is influenced by the ratio of bubble diameter
to slab thickness. The reinforcements are placed as two meshes one at the bottom part and
one at the upper part that can be tied or welded. The distance between the bars are kept
corresponding to the dimensions of the bubbles that are to be embodied and the quantity
of the reinforcement from the longitudinal and the transversal ribs of the slab. The
bubbles are made using high density polypropylene materials. Bubble diameter varies
between 180mm to 450mm. Depending on this; the slab depth is 230mm to 600mm. The
distance between bubbles must be greater than 1/9th of bubble diameter. The bubbles may
be of spherical or ellipsoidal in shape. In this experiment, the applied force is provided
from the bottom to the top of the slab, which is opposite to the direction of gravity using
hydraulic jack. By applying that kind of force, it is easier to record the strain and
deformation of concrete and rebar from the top side of the slab. Until the cracks are found
in the slabs and the failure modes are appeared. It shows the better load bearing capacity
in Bubble Deck, to reduce the overall costs. Besides that, it has led to reduce deadweight
up to 50%, which allow creating foundation sizes smaller.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 3

 Bubble Deck Technology

2] ‘Harishma K R” et al., [4]: - They studied about “The Effectiveness and Feasibility
of the Application of Bubble Deck in the Construction”.
It proves a wide range of cost and construction benefits. It also proves combines the
benefits of factory-manufactured elements in controlled conditions along with on-site
completion with the final monolith concrete, resulting in a completed floor slab. Steel is
fabricated in two forms - the meshed layers for lateral support and diagonal girders for
vertical support of the bubbles. The distance between the bars are corresponding to the
dimensions of the bubbles that are to be used and the quantity of reinforcement from
transverse ribs of the slab. Grade Fy50 strength or higher is used.

3] “Amer M. Ibrahim” et al., [1]: They studied about “Flexural Capacities of

Reinforced Concrete Two-Way Bubble Deck Slabs of Plastic Spherical Voids” in
2013.
It has been verified the flexural behaviour of this Bubble Deck slab such as ultimate
load, deflection, concrete compressive strain and crack pattern, two-dimensional flexural
tests were tested by using special loading frame. In that six test of specimens were used.
Two were a conventional RC slab and four were Bubble Deck slabs having void diameter
to slab thickness ratios of (0.51, 0.64 and 0.80). It shown that the crack pattern and
flexural behaviour depend on the void diameter to slab thickness ratio. The ultimate load
capacities for Bubble Deck slabs having bubble diameter to slab thickness of (0.٥1 and
0.64) were the same of solid slabs, while when bubble diameter to slab thickness of (0.80)
the ultimate capacities were reduced by about (10%). The slab was simply supported at all
edges by four steel beams which had a hinge in the upper surface to minimize fixed end
moment and other errors from support condition during the test. This Specimens were
tested under a five-point load system using a five hydraulic jack and a five loading plate
to satisfy the actual loading condition.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 4

 Bubble Deck Technology

CHAPTER-3

TYPES, MATERIALS AND SPECIFICATIONS

3.1 Bubble Deck Types:
Following are the Bubble Deck types:

3.1.1 Type A – Filigree Elements:

 Bubble Deck Type A is a combination of constructed and unconstructed elements.
 A 60 mm thick concrete layer and part of the finished depth is precast and brought
on site with the bubbles and steel reinforcement unattached.
 The bubbles are then supported by temporary stands on top of the precast layer
and held in place by interconnected steel mesh.
 This type of Bubble Deck is optimal for new construction projects where the
designer can determine the bubble positions and steel mesh layout.

Fig 3.1: Type A – Filigree Elements

3.1.2 Type B – Reinforcement Modules:

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 5

 Bubble Deck Technology

 Bubble Deck Type B is a reinforcement module that consists of a pre-assembled

of steel mesh and plastic bubbles.
 These components are brought to the site, laid on traditional formwork, connected
with any additional reinforcement, and then concreted in place by traditional
methods.
 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.

Fig 3.2: Type B – Reinforcement Modules

3.1.3 Type C – Finished Planks:

 Bubble Deck Type C is a shop-fabricated module that includes the plastic spheres,
reinforcement mesh and concrete in its finished form.
 The module is manufactured to the final depth in the form of a plank and is
delivered on site.
 Unlike Type A and B, it is a 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
schedule.

Fig 3.3: Type C – Finished Planks

3.2 MATERIALS:
The following materials are used in Bubble Deck slab construction:
3.2.1 Concrete:

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 6

 Bubble Deck Technology

The concrete used for joint filling in the Bubble Deck floor system must be
above class 20/25. Usually self-compacting concrete is used, either for the casting of
prefabricated filigree slab, or for the joint filling on the site. Self-Compacting concrete
can be poured into forms, flow around congested areas of reinforcement and into tight
sections, allow air to escape and resist segregation. The nominal maximum size of the
aggregate is the function of thickness of the slab. The size should be less than15mm. M30
Grade and above should be used.

Fig 3.4: Concrete Filled In Bubble Deck

3.2.2 Hollow bubbles:
The bubbles are made using high density polypropylene materials. These are
usually made with nonporous .material that does not react chemically with the concrete or
reinforcement bars. The bubbles have enough strength and stiffness to sup between
180mm to 450mm. Depending on this; the slab depth is 230mm to 600mm. The distance
between bubbles must be greater than 1/9th of bubble diameter. The nominal diameter of
the gaps may be of: 180, 225, 270, 315 or 360 mm. The bubbles may be of spherical or
ellipsoidal in shape.

Fig 3.5: Hollow spherical and elliptical bubbles Fig 3.6: Recycled polyethylene
Hollow spheres

3.2.3 Reinforcement bars:

The reinforcement of the plates is made of two meshes, one at the bottom part and
one at the upper part that can be tied or welded. The steel is fabricated in two forms, the

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 7

 Bubble Deck Technology

meshed layers for lateral support and diagonal girders for vertical support of the bubbles.
The distance between the bars are corresponding to the dimensions of the bubbles that are
to be used and the quantity of reinforcement from transverse ribs of the slab. Grade Fy50
strength or higher is used.

Fig 3.7: Reinforcement bars

3.3 SPECIFICATIONS:
Bubble Deck demands more from the detailer than normal flat slab design – of this
there is no doubt. The geometrical discipline required to coordinate the layering and
spacing of factory fixed and site fixed rebar as well as the bubble module is far more
demanding and requires an attention to detail greater than ordinary detailing.
The Bubble Deck geometry is founded on the module size which, until recently
comprised 200mm, 250mm, 300mm, 350mm, and 400mm. Larger sizes have been added
but the rules applying to the geometry still apply.
 The ball diameter is always 0.9 of the module.
 The effective depth, except with heavy reinforcement may be approximated as
equal to the module.
 The cover to the bubbles should be at least one ninth of the ball diameter.
The cover to the bubbles and to the reinforcement may vary, of course and this may
require adjustments to be made. Slightly more concrete that standard may be poured to
achieve a range of sizes intermediate to those imposed by the fixed module sizes. The
filigree or ‘biscuit’ standard thickness is 60mm or 70mm depending on size of bottom
steel. The bottom edges have a 6mm x 6mm bevel. At least two edges of every unit must
have 25mm x 25mm bevel on the top to ensure that the splice bar has a filet of site
concrete to seal it against attack by fire.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 8

 Bubble Deck Technology

Although the edge distance of the balls to the edge of the units at internal edges that
will be concreted, may follow the natural module; the cover to the bubble may be
insufficient at the outside of the slab so it may be necessary to leave out a row of balls or
otherwise plan the spacing with this in mind. Fixings are frequently made to edges of
slabs so a slightly wider solid edge zone is often no bad thing.
Mesh will generally need to be custom mesh and it should be noted that machine made
meshes usually have one or more of the following restrictions:
 Max. bar size 16mm
 Longitudinal bar spacing increments of 50mm c/c
 Min. distance from last bar to end 25mm
 Cross wire spacing sometimes in 25mm increments but may be unrestricted
according to machine type.
Girders are supplied in height increments of 10mm but some suppliers may supply
any size. The diagonals should be 63° approximately and must be welded securely to the
longitudinal bars (See CUR86 for a useful specification). The standard girder spacing, as
outlined in CUR86 is two balls maximum. Greater spacing than this is possible but the
unit may be too flexible and crack more easily during transit or handling. The
longitudinal girder bar should be 10mm minimum for the 200 and 250 modules and at
least 12mm for 300 modules and above. The girder web bar may usually be 7mm or 8mm
and 8mm is preferred except in light applications.
The section should be drafted so that the correct ball spacing is produced and so
that the bubbles are restrained against movement laterally or vertically by at least two
bars at the bottom and two bars at the top. It is usually sufficient to have two long bars in
the bottom mesh controlling the position and two transverse bars at the top. The top mesh
should be low enough in the section to permit the top site steel to be placed allowing for
some tolerance.
The detailer should note that the ball will float up, during casting in the factory,
until it is in contact with the closest top mesh bars. This means that the top mesh will
usually control the height of the ball. The top mesh does not usually fulfill an important
function in the permanent state, except for a crack purposes, and is more significant in the
temporary state when it has the important purpose of stabilizing the top of the girder
against lateral buckling. Clearly it also traps the bubbles in place. Loose bars, not welded
in the mesh, may be detailed to fit between the mesh bars, secured by tying wire, to

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 9

 Bubble Deck Technology

achieve localized increases in steel area. Splice bars are placed on top of the filigree and
should be detailed so that they have adequate clearance, spacing and anchorage. It will
generally be more efficient to provide more of smaller bars than few of larger ones. Anti-
progressive-collapse bars will also pass through columns in two directions and lay
directly on the filigree

Bubble Deck Span / Depth ratios (R):

L/d = 30 for simply supported floors (Single Bay Rows) *1

L/d = 41 for continuously supported floors (Multiple Spans) *2

L/d = 13.0 for cantilevers.

 Single Bay Rows refers to primary single span in one direction with multiple
spans in other direction
 Multiple Spans refers to multiple bays in both directions.

CHAPTER-4
EXECUTION AND INSTALLATIONS
4.1 EXECUTION:
The overall floor area can be divided down into a series of planned individual
elements, up to 3 m wide dependent upon site access, which are manufactured off-site
using MMC techniques. These elements comprise the top and bottom reinforcement
mesh, sized to suit the specific project, joined together with vertical lattice girders with
the void formers trapped between the top and bottom mesh reinforcement to fix their
optimum position. This is termed a ‘bubble-reinforcement’ sandwich, which is then cast
into bottom layer of 60 mm pre-cast concrete, encasing the bottom mesh reinforcement,
to provide permanent formwork within part of the overall finished slab depth.

On site the individual elements are then ‘stitched’ together with loose
reinforcement simply laid centrally across the joints between elements. The splice bars
are inserted loose above the pre-cast concrete layer between the bubbles, and purpose
made mesh sheets tied across the top reinforcement mesh to join the elements together.
After the site finishing, concrete is poured and cured. This technique provides structural
continuity across the entire floor slab – the joints between elements are then redundant
without any structural effect – to create a seamless biaxial floor slab.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 10

 Bubble Deck Technology

Fig 4.1:
Fitting of Elements

4.2

INSTALLATIONS:

The Bubble Deck concept simplifies the placement of installations like ducts and
heating/cooling systems directly in the slab. This enhances the nature of the slim flat slab
structure. The tubes can either be placed in the bubble-lattice as prefab, or onsite before
concreting. Thermal heating/cooling in slabs can substantial reduce the energy
consumption.

Fig 4.2: Installations of Cooling or Heating Systems

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 11

 Bubble Deck Technology

CHAPTER-5
TESTS ON BUBBLE DECK SLAB
5.1 BENDING STRENGTH AND DEFLECTION BEHAVIOUR:
Bubble Deck where compared to a solid deck both practically and theoretically.
The results showed that for the same deck thickness the bending strength is the same for
Bubble Deck and for a solid deck and that the stiffness of the Bubble Deck is slightly
lower.

5.2 SHEAR STRENGTH AND PUNCHING SHEAR:

The results of a number of practical tests confirm that the shear strength depends
on the effective mass of the concrete. The shear capacity is measured to be in the range of
72-91% of the shear capacity of a solid deck. In calculations, a factor of 0,6 is used on the
shear capacity for a solid deck of identical height. This guarantees a large safety margin.
Areas with high shear loads need therefore a special attention, e.g. around columns. That
is solved by omitting a few balls in the critical area around the columns, therefore giving
full shear capacity.

5.3 SOUND:
A comparison was made between Bubble Deck and one-way prefabricated hollow
deck of similar height. The noise reduction with Bubble Deck was 1 dB higher than the
one way prefabricated hollow deck. The main criterion for reducing noise is the weight of
the deck and therefore Bubble Deck will not act otherwise than other deck types with
equal weight.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 12

 Bubble Deck Technology

The Bubble Deck construction is following every usual criteria, and can be
calculated according to usual principles. The construction is not deviating, in any way,
from what is already known and used. The construction is analogous to an equivalent
solid deck.

5.4 DEFLECTION:
Due to the bubbles a Bubble Deck slab is not as stiff as a solid slab – but this
effect is small. Studies and tests have shown that Bubble Deck has approximately 87% of
the flexural stiffness of a solid slab. If no other measures were taken, this would mean
marginally higher deflections at SLS than in an equivalent solid slab in direct proportion
to this ratio. However, the effect can be compensated for by adding a modest amount of
steel even though the deflection is significantly mitigated by the fact that Bubble Deck is
lighter and in long term
SLS, where frequently the load combination comprises 100% permanent load and a
proportion such as 33% imposed load, the permanent weight saving maximizes Bubble
Deck’s effect. Long term SLS is frequently the governing criteria for flat slab designs.

5.5 DURABILITY:
The durability of Bubble Deck slabs is not fundamentally different from ordinary
solid slabs. The concrete is standard structural grade concrete and; combined with
adequate bar cover determined in accordance with EC2 or BS8110; is what provides most
control of durability commensurate with normal standards for solid slabs. When the
filigree slabs are manufactured, the reinforcement module and balls are vibrated into the
concrete and the standard and uniformity of compaction is such that a density of surface
concrete is produced which is at least as impermeable and durable, arguably more so, to
that normally produced on site.
Bubble Deck joints have a chamfer on the inside to ensure that concrete surrounds
each bar and does not allow a direct route to air from the rebar surface. This is primarily a
function of the fire resistance but is also relevant to durability.
Cracking in Bubble Deck slabs is not worse, and probably better, than solid slabs
designed to work at the same stress levels. In fact Bubble Deck possesses a continuous
mesh, top and bottom, throughout the slab and this ensures shrinkage restraint is well
provided for and that cracking is kept to a minimum whether it is intrinsic or extrinsic
cracking.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 13

 Bubble Deck Technology

5.6 PRESENT & FUTURE:

Fig 5.1: Difference between traditional buildings and buildings with Bubble Deck
Bubble Deck gives an exceptional degree of freedom in architectural design – choice
of shape, large overhang, larger spans / deck, areas with fewer supporting points – no
beams, no carrying walls and fewer columns results in flexible and easy changeable
buildings. Interior design can easily be altered throughout the buildings lifetime.
The cross section of Bubble Deck is similar to ordinary prefabricated one-way
hollow decks that have been used during the last 40 years. Unfortunately, such deck
structure has the disadvantage of transmission forces in one direction only, why such
slabs need support at the full length of both ends by beams or walls, which result in rigid,
inflexible and unalterable buildings.

Fig 5.2: Deck made of one-way prefabricated hollow deck, supported by beams on
both ends

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 14

 Bubble Deck Technology

Fig 5.3: The same deck made of Bubble Deck, i.e. two-way hollow deck, without
beams

CHAPTER-6
ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES AND
APPLICATIONS
6.1 ADVANTAGES:
a) Superior Statics:

 Reduced weight
 Increased strength
 Larger span
 Fewer columns
 No beams or ribs under the ceiling; pillars have no capital

b) Production & Carrying out:

 Higher quality through automated production of prefabricated units
 Less work in situ ; employment of unskilled labor
 Easier and more simple erection
 Less storage space
 Light and cheap lifting equipment

c) Transportation:
 Transportation of materials is reduced considerably - lower costs and
environmental improvement

d) Economic Savings:

 Savings in materials (slabs, pillars, fundaments) are substantial (up to 50 %)

 Manual mounting of reinforcement meshes on the building site is avoided

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 15

 Bubble Deck Technology

 Transportation costs are heavily reduced

 Subsequent work (installations) are simplified
 Buildings are more flexible
 Changes are much less costly
 Life span of buildings is longer

e) Safety:
 Fire – Fireproof construction
 Earthquake - Safety will benefit significantly alone from the weight reduction
 Moisture - Condensation-safe construction

f) Environmental Improvement:
 Savings in materials up to 50 % , 1 kg of plastic replaces more than 100 kg of
concrete
 Less energy consumption - both in production, transport and carrying out.
 Less emission - exhaust gases from production and transport, especially CO2
 No waste generation - 100 % recycling

g) Better Social Environment:

 Improvement of working conditions
 Reduced building time means less disturbance of surroundings
 Less emission of noise - in production, transport and assembly
 The reduction in energy consumption and emission is in the same order as the
savings in materials up to 50 %

h) Heating/Cooling:
An energy saving way to heat and/or cool a building is to use thermo active slabs.
Piping are placed either at the pre-casting or onsite.

i) Explosions Safe:
Bubble Deck’s biaxial flat slab system and columns is ideal for structures with
high resistance against explosions. Get rid of heavy facades and rigid walls, suppressing
an air pressure which in worst case leads to collapse of the structure.
Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 16
 Bubble Deck Technology

6.2 DISADVANTAGES:
a) Skilled labors
b) The potential for any contact is only theoretical because balls do not perfectly fit
between reinforcement bars and moves slightly during assembly in site concrete
compaction.

6.3 APPLICATIONS:
The Biaxial deck can be implemented in three versions according to degree of
prefabrication:
 “Reinforcement modules”: Comprising prefabricated “bubble-lattice” sandwich
elements to be placed on traditional formwork. Building time is reduced compared
to conventional on site construction. Suitable for the majority of new-build
projects, also suspended ground floor slabs and alteration / refurbishing projects.

 “Filigree elements”: Where the bottom side of the 'bubble-lattice' unit is

furnished with a pre-cast concrete layer which replaces the horizontal part of the
formwork on the building site, optimizing both building time and quality by
prefabrication. Acts directly like a seamless ceiling. Suitable for the majority of
new-build projects.

 “Finished elements”: Finished panels, complete precast slab elements. These can
be used for limited areas such as balconies or staircases.

 The Bubble Deck technology can benefit most buildings. However, as it is a

biaxial deck technology, the use will focus on biaxial slab designs.

 “Functional applicability”: Residential living, offices, utility and industrial

buildings. Used in offices, apartments, villas, hotels, schools, parking, hospitals,
laboratories and factories.

 As a consequence of the reduced load, it is possible to achieve larger spans than a

solid slab. Depending of the design, spans of 20 to 40 times the deck height are
possible. Cantilevers can be made 10 times the deck height. By incorporating PT
cables, these spans can be further enhanced.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 17

 Bubble Deck Technology

 The effect of PT cables in a Bubble Deck slab is enhanced, because of the relative
high deck height compared to the moment strength. This combination could seem
like the perfect match for several applications.

CHAPTER-7
COST ANALYSIS
In relation to the savings in material and time, cost reductions are also typical with the
Bubble Deck system. The decreased weight and materials mean lower transportation
costs, and would by more economical to lift the components. With less on-site
construction from the full and semi-precast modules, labour costs will decrease as well. In
addition, money can be saved downstream in the design and construction of the building
frame elements (columns and walls) for lower loads. There is a slight rise in production
costs for the Bubble Deck slab due to the manufacturing and assembly of the HDPE
spheres. However, the other savings in material, time, transportation and labour will offset
this manufacturing price increase.

Table 7.1: Comparison between Raw Materials

Materials Solid Concrete Floor Bubble Deck Floor
(thickness 280mm) (thickness 230mm)
Sand 202 kg/m2 107 kg/m2
Gravel 336 kg/m2 178 kg/m2
Cement 90 kg/m2 48 kg/m2
Water 45 kg/m2 24 kg/m2
Reinforced Steel 26 kg/m2 21 kg/m2
Plastic - 5 kg/m2

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 18

 Bubble Deck Technology

CHAPTER-8
CASE STUDY
8.1 Millenium Tower Rotterdam:
The first high rise building erected with Bubble Deck filigree-elements and the
second highest building in Netherlands, 34 stories and 131 meter high and is originally
designed with hollow core plank. Bubble Deck was chosen, in spite of being a completely
new product, because of its advantages in cost, construction time and flexibility and
because of environmental issues. Bubble deck would allowed to consider another aspect
was it has a lack of storage space on the building site which is located in the heart of
Rotterdam. The floors were finished in half the time and also number of floors was
increased by 2 to 34 levels while the same overall building elevation was maintained.
Beams could be excluded resulting in two more stories than planned in the beginning for
the same building height. The building was completed in April 2000.

Fig 8.1: Millenium Tower (Rotterdam)

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 19
 Bubble Deck Technology

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 20

 Bubble Deck Technology

8.2 More Medical at McCourt:

McCourt Street Medical Centre comprises 32 medical consulting rooms over six
floors with a net lettable area of basement car park offering a total of 128 cars bays, the
building uses a total of approximately 6,000 square meters of bubble deck lightweight
slabs.
“This is the second medical use building by meyer shircore to use bubble deck,” said
bubble deck design engineer pete adams, “ the architects find the flat plate slab greatly
simplifies the coordination of services, which is a particular challenge, and we have now
developed a good body of knowledge about the specific requirements of these buildings”.
Although using bubble deck for the first time, built environs experience of
installing the prefabricated panels fulfills bubble decks promise of simple construction
and reduced risk.

Fig 8.2: More Medical at McCourt

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 21

 Bubble Deck Technology

CHAPTER-9
CONCLUSION
 Bubble Deck will distribute the forces in a better way than any other hollow floor
structures.
 Because of the three-dimensional structure and the gentle graduated force flow,
the hollow spheres will have no negative influence and cause no loss of strength.
 Concrete usage is reduced as 1kg of recycled plastic replaces 100kg of concrete.
This avoids the cement production and allows reduction in global co2 emissions.
 This technology is environmentally green and sustainable.
 This method reduces dead weight up to 50%, which allows to reduce the
foundation size.
 Bubble Deck behaves like a spatial structure as the only known hollow concrete
floor structure.
 The tests reveal that the shear strength is even higher than presupposed. This
indicates a positive influence of the balls. Furthermore, the practical experience
shows a positive effect in the process of concreting. The balls cause an effect
similar to plasticizer additives.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 22

 Bubble Deck Technology

REFERENCES
1. AMER M. IBRAHIM, NAZAR K. ALI, WISSAM D. SALMAN- “flexural
capacities of reinforced concrete two-way bubble deck slabs of plastic spherical
voids” Diyala journal of engineering sciences, ISSN 1999-8716, vol.06,No.02,
June 2013.
2. ARATI SHETKAR AND NAGESH HANCHE- “an Experimental Study of
Bubble Deck Slab System with Elliptical Balls”, NCRIET-2015 Indian j.sci.res.
12(1):021-027, Bheemanna Khandra institute of technology Bhalki, Bidar, India,
2015.
3. BHAGYASHRI G. BHADE AND S.M. BARELIKAR – “An experimental study
on two way bubble deck slab with spherical hollow balls”, vol 7, issue 6,
pp.11621-11626, June 2016, jspm’s imperial college of engineering & research,
Wagholi, Pune.

Department of Civil Engineering, BIET, Davanagere Page 23