PSI - Issue 70

Vijaya Sundravel K et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 70 (2025) 485–492

490

Fig.4. Deformation of the nominal beam

Figure 4 shows the deflection of a nominal concrete beam, demonstrating its distortion under applied loads. In contrast, Figure 5 illustrates the deflectional behavior of a beam containing 0.2%Bacillussps, showcasing its improved performance and resilience under the same loading conditions. These images emphasize the higher structural stability and load-carrying ability of bacterial concrete over regular concrete. This image underscores its enhanced load-bearing capacity and minimal deformation when compared to nominal concrete, further demonstrating the improved structural performance and long-term performance of bacterial concrete.

Fig. 5. Beam Deflection with 0.2% of bacillus bacteria with 20% of Zeolite

3.5. Analytical and Experimental Comparison To assess the accuracy of analytical methods in predicting failure behavior, the theoretical and practical failure loads of concrete beams were analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the accuracy of analytical methods in predicting failure behavior by comparing theoretical and practical failure loads of concrete beams. Table 3 provides a detailed comparison of theoretical and practical failure loads deflections (in millimeters) for various concrete mixes. The results include standard concrete (SHM-CC), beams containing different concentrations of Bacillus bacteria (SHM BC-02 and SHM-BC-03), and zeolite-enhanced bacterial concrete beams (SHM-B1Z20, SHM-B2Z20, and SHM B3Z20). The data underscores the precision of analytical techniques in estimating deflection behavior across different mix types. Table 3. Comparison of Experimental and Analytical Deflections for Concrete Beams

Experimental Deflection (mm)

Analytical Deflection (mm)

Sl.No.

Type of Beam

SHM-CC

1. 2.

12.5

8.29 9.67

SHM-BC-01

9.5