PREFABRICATED CAGE SYSTEM

INTRODUCTION
A modern composite construction concept was initially developed in North
America and is now used extensively in India. It has been further developed and
refined. Early application involved concrete encase steel beams for which the
concrete served primarily as fire protection. However it was recognized that both
the strength and stiffness of the encased member were increased compared to
the bare steel. The greatest impetus for the composite construction was the
development headed studs provide mechanical shear connection between the
top flange of a steel beam and a cast in place concrete floor slab.

PREFABRICATED CAGE SYSTEM

Many improvements to composite system have occurred during the past
40 years. Among these is the introduction and wide spread use of composite
steel decks that serve initially as work platform and concrete hardens. Secondary
beams initially support it. Metal deck, the concrete, the secondary and the
primary beams work efficiently leading to economy. The reduced mass of building
reduces foundation costs.

PCS may be an excellent alternative to conventional rebar reinforced

system for easier, more reliable, and faster construction. Three issues affecting
construction are reviewed; ease of making and preparing the reinforcement cage;
construction time; and reliability or factor of safety the cost of protection to the
beam and columns has been dramatically reduce from 30 percent.

In steel-concrete composite system steel profiles are placed inside

concrete to carry most of the axial compressive load. Steel concrete composite
systems are typically used in column. This system provides high axial-load
carrying capacity with relatively small cross-sections, where the spacing of the
longitudinal bars may be less than the allowable amount due to space limitations.

APPLICATION OF PCS IN VARIOUS STRUCTURAL MEMBERS

PCS can be used as the longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in
beams. The shape, dimensions, and spacing of the openings can be changed
depending on the desired amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. In
this case, PCS automatically provides double reinforcement along the length of
the member resulting in a larger flexural capacity. The openings on the sides are
much larger than the openings at the top and bottom of the member. PCS used
to reinforce concrete beams. The PCS longitudinal strips at the top and bottom of
the beam are a greater distance apart in comparison to a beam reinforced with
rebar, resulting in higher flexural strength. The longitudinal strips are at the same
level as the transverse reinforcement resulting in a larger effective depth and
higher flexural strength.

PCS IN BEAMS
PCS can be used as reinforcement for beams, such PCS can be formed
by perforating steel plates to the required dimension connecting them by welding.
The perforation of required dimension was made in the cold formed steel sheets
using CNC cutting. Then the perforated plates was bent to the required size and
connected by welding.

Figure 3.1 PCS Reinforcement for beams

PCS REINFORCEMENT FOR FOUNDATION

PCS can be used to reinforced spread footings, strapped footing, or mat
foundations. The PCS used in foundation can be fabricated out of a steel plate as
in shear walls. Figure shows a planar PCS used in a heavily reinforced single
footing foundation, where large bars are used with small spacing. The opening
dimension and spacing can be chose to match the required reinforcement in two
perpendicular directions.
 Figure 3.2 PCS used to reinforced single footing foundation

PCS USED AS REINFORCEMENT IN SLAB

The application of PCS in slabs is similar to the application in foundations.
The application of PCS is more advantages with heavily reinforced slabs, where
the reinforcement spacing is smaller. Especially when slab thickness is limited by
architectural purposes or deflection considerations, PCS is a logical choice for
reinforcement.

PCS AS REINFORCEMENT FOR COLUMNS

PCS can be used to perform the role of both longitudinal and transverse
reinforcement in rectangular and circular column. The opening dimensions and
spacing does not have to be same over the height of the column. Large openings
can be used near the mid-height of the column, where usually less transverse
reinforcement is required. The opening dimensions can gradually changed to
have smaller openings with less spacing near the top and bottom of the column,
where flexural demand is higher under lateral loads
 Figure 3.3 PCS reinforced member

ADVANTAGES OF PCS
 Provides a higher axial capacity than rebar reinforced concrete
allowing for a larger tensile or compressive load to be applied to the
member along the axis.

 Provides better confinement than rebar reinforced concrete reducing

the risk of concrete sections breaking off from the member and causing
failure or personal injury.

 Provides higher flexural, shear and torsion capacities than rebar

reinforced concrete which aids in the concrete members ability to
withstand the forces of an earthquake or other major forces.

 Provides better ductility, thus, handling higher deformation during

stress such as earthquakes or other major forces. Is a more efficient
use of the provided steel than rebar reinforced concrete due to the
improved properties per unit of steel used

 Reduces the total construction time compared to rebar reinforced

concrete as cages can be quickly manufactured off-site, thus
minimizing on-site welding of each rebar structure leading to overall
cost savings.
  Has a higher factor of safety on shear resistance than rebar reinforced
concrete meaning that concrete with PCS is less likely to fail from
shear stress (earthquakes, wind, etc.) than reinforced concrete.

FABRICATION OF PCS REINFORCEMENT

There are different ways to produce PCS reinforcement. The opening can
be cut out of a plate and then formed to a rectangular or circular shape and
welded at the edge. Alternatively, the openings can be produced on a steel tube.
With both methods, there are three main procedures for fabricating the PCS
reinforcement: 1) Punching of steel plate or tube, 2) Cutting the steel plate or
tube, 3) Casting of cage using casting steel.

FLEXURAL CAPACITY
Reinforced concrete beams are members with high flexural capacity.
Rebar reinforced systems can be designed to provide high flexural capacities.
Using composite sections or CFT to provide high flexural capacity is not very
efficient as the reinforcement is not concentrated near the extreme tensile fiber.
The main reason is that the reinforcement is usually uniformly distributed over the
section and therefore only a portion is used to resist tension forces. PCS can be
designed to provide high flexural capacity. By providing large openings on the
sides of the beam and smaller openings at top and bottom, PCS reinforcements
suitable for beams can be fabricated. Welded wire systems are usually not
designed to have high flexural capacity.

EFFICIENCY
Efficiency is evaluated in terms of how proficient the steel reinforcement is
placed to provide flexural capacity. For columns, rectangular CFT and PCS may
be the most efficient system as the reinforcement is furthest from the center and
closest to the perimeter of the section. In a structural member reinforced with
PCS, the steel material is efficiently used to provide maximum flexural strength.
The longitudinal strips are at the same level as the transverse reinforcement
resulting in a larger effective depth and higher flexural strength. The effective
depth is equal to the column height minus the clear cover and half the plate
thickness in PCS reinforced columns. In comparison, effective depth is the
column height minus clear cover, stirrup diameter and half the longitudinal
diameter in rebar reinforced columns. Composite sections are the least efficient
system for flexure resistance as the reinforcement is usually placed near the
center.

CONSTRUCTION
PCS may be an excellent alternative to conventional rebar reinforced
system for easier, more reliable, and faster construction. Three issues affecting
construction are reviewed, ease of making and preparing the reinforcement cage,
construction time and reliability or factor of safety.

EASE OF CONSTRUCTION
CFT is the easiest reinforcement system to place and cast concrete for
reinforced concrete columns. PCS can also easily be placed in the formwork
before casting concrete. The welded wire fabric and composite sections are easy
to put together. However, if additional transverse reinforcement is required in
composite sections, additional work will be required. The rebar reinforced system
requires the most effort to cut, bend, and tie the rebar. In some cases, especially
in special moment resisting frames, it may be extremely difficult to assemble the
rebar reinforced cage because of stringent detailing requirements given in code
standards such as ACI 318 (2005).

CONSTRUCTION TIME
Total construction time is very important as it affects the total present
worth value of the project. In some projects, such as bridge construction in areas
with heavy traffic, project completion time is extremely important. Shorter
construction times open the structures earlier and provide more benefit due to
early structure availability. CFT and PCS require the least amount of time for
construction. PCS can be built in a factory ahead of time and transferred to the
construction site for placement. PCS can be placed inside the formwork before
casting concrete easily as no additional work for forming the reinforcement cage
is required. The time required for assembling composite sections and welded
wire mesh systems before casting is usually more than the previously mentioned
systems. Additional time is required if more transverse reinforcement is needed.
Rebar reinforced systems require the most amount of time to cut, bend, place,
and tie the bars.

CONSTRUCTION COST
As discussed earlier, the construction of PCS is much easier and faster
than the other systems, resulting in lower construction costs. The welded wire
system requires additional workmanship to prepare the reinforcement cage, and
therefore costs more to construct. In composite sections, if extra transverse
reinforcement is required around the perimeter of the cross-section, the
construction costs will be higher as a result of the additional workmanship. The
construction or labour cost of the rebar reinforced system is the highest as it
requires the most workmanship for preparing the reinforcement cage.
The production cost of PCS may be more than the production cost of
regular rebar. However, the total cost of PCS may be lower due to the lower
construction cost. Also, the financial savings of a project being finished in a
shorter time period has to be considered in the economic evaluation.

CORROSION RESISTANCE
Assuming that the steel reinforcement is similar in all systems, i.e., coated
or uncoated, and environmental conditions, including exposure to salt or sulphate
is similar, the corrosion resistance of a member will be proportional to the
thickness of the cover concrete. Although the type of cement and environmental
conditions affect the resistance, cover thickness is an important factor. As
discussed in the previous section, composite sections are the most corrosion
resistant system. Regular rebar systems, composite sections with transverse
steel, welded wire systems, and PCS have similar corrosion resistance.

RELIABILITY AND FACTOR OF SAFETY

The reinforcement is prefabricated in PCS members, therefore increases
the factor of safety over the other systems, where onsite workmanship is
required. PCS permits a high degree of quality control through uniform transverse
steel spacing, which matches the specified design values. Welded wire fabric
systems and composite sections are also reliable and have relatively high factors
of safety as not much workmanship is required on site. In contrast, rebar
reinforced systems require onsite work to assemble the reinforcement cage and
therefore, is subjected to inaccuracies. In rebar reinforced system construction,
there is always a possibility of having detailing problems, such as nonconforming
or non-uniform stirrup spacing, because of poor workmanship during the
fabrication of the steel cage or construction.