Steel-concrete-steel (SCS) structural element solutions are rising due to their advantages over conventional reinforced concrete in terms of cost and strength. The impact of SCS sections with various core materials on the structural performance of composites has not yet been fully explored experimentally, and in this work, both slag and polypropylene fibers were incorporated in producing eco-friendly steel-concrete-steel composite sections. This study examined the ductility, ultimate strength, failure modes, and energy absorption capacities of steel-concrete-steel filled with eco-friendly concrete, enhanced by polypropylene fiber (PPF) to understand its impact on modern structural projects. Eco-friendly concrete was produced by the partial replacement of cement with waste material such as ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS) to reduce carbon dioxide emitted as one of the by-products of cement which harms the environment. A constant rate of cement replacement with GGBS was used. Polypropylene fibers were used as a fill material in the structural elements to enhance the performance. Seven specimens of SCS were analyzed for their mechanical properties using push-out monotonic loading. The control specimen was constructed with a conventional concrete core, even as testing specimens had different amounts of polypropylene fiber added to the core. The current investigation indicates that the impact of polypropylene fiber (PPF) material filling concrete on SCS performance is somewhat smaller than that of ordinary concrete (less than 10 percent). Applying PPF to concrete can increase its tensile strength, slow the spread of cracks, and strengthen the material overall. The compressive strengths of the samples were affected by the proportion of PPF, with the strength increasing from 47.6 MPa to 56.43 MPa as the PPF levels increased from 0 to 2 percent. Compared to the control sample, the PPF SCS specimens had an increased energy absorption. On the other hand, in comparison to PPF SCS specimens, the ductility level of the control sample was smaller.
