Prepared for:

Dr. Na Lu
University of North Carolina at Charlotte 9201 University City Boulevard Charlotte, North Carolina 28223-001

Final Lab Report

Lab 06, Lab 07, & Lab 08 Laboratory Evaluation of Batch, Sampling, Slump, Air Content, and Casting of Portland Cement Concrete Laboratory Evaluation of Capping and Compressive Strength of Portland Cement Concrete Cylinders Laboratory Evaluation of Flexural Strength of Portland Cement Column Beams

Prepared by:

Tyler Freeze Parker Dixon Carter Dold Austin Davis University of North Carolina at Charlotte 9201 University City Boulevard Charlotte, North Carolina 28223-001

November 8, 2013

Table of Contents Cover Letter Cover Page Table of Contents Introduction Lab 06 ............................................................................................................... 1 2

J
/J
gqahoroVrd For"q

3 ~ 4 5

tJ/'ecpr/~ ~r

i4lo6C -$

,Background J Testing Programs ,est Results Iv Analyses

rI

Conclusion Lab 07 Lab 08 Closure

V
10

Background V Testing ProgramsV Test Results V Analyses t./ Conclusion

14 Background V Testing Programs LTest Results Analyses Conclusion ~ 16

Lab 06 was authorized by Dr. Na Lu for ucational purpose for Batching, Sampling, Slump, Air Content, and Casting of Portland Cement Concrete t mee certain specifications, which were created by Dr. Tara Cavalline. The scope of this lab is to crr.ate a batch of Portland Cement Concrete and sample the batch using the slump test 0 finp the consistency of the mixed concrete and the pressure method to find the air content. After the concrete reached its required specifications it was then casted into nine 4 in. diameter by 8 in. tall cylinder mOlds\ and two 6 in. by 6 in. cross sectional beams with a length of 20 in. /j)
I

(Yl)rM
Lab 07

C_ )

Lab 07: Capping and Compressive Strength of Portland Cement Concrete Cylinders was linked to Lab 06. The scope of this lab was to determine the compressive strength of the nine cylinders, by loading them into the compression machine and applying a force to the cylinder under the supervision of Dr. Na Lu, over a 28 day span. The cylinders were capped before placed in the compressor to help distribute the load. Due to UNCC's Fall Break Dr. Na Lu had to compress the first 3 cylinders to find the cylinder's 7-day strength. The class conducted the testing for the following 14-day and 28-day compressive strength in the following labs. Dr. Tara Cavalline supervised the lab on the 28-day compressive strength test of cylinders. The concrete cylinders were tested in the lab Smith 133.
Lab 08

Lab 08 was also linked to Lab 06 and wanted to find the Flexural Strength of Por land Cement Concrete Beams. Dr. Na Lu supervised the laboratory test used in this lab. The wo concrete beams were placed on supports in the compression machine to apply a force 0 the center of the beam after 21-days. This test is known as the Third-Point Loading Metho which finds flexural strength of beams. The Modulus of Rupture could then be found from the maximum load applied and where of the beam the fracture was. The concrete beams were tested in the lab Smith 133.

Lab 06

Backgrou ~ting~d

of f

fV\ Cft(JId{.,
t(~)

~V"(\Q~S

Preparation for the concrete mixture will consist of: Temperature Slump Unit Weight and Yield Air Content (., " v '" Casting and .Quring of eoncrete e'ylinders and Beams

-t

yv\

For this lab the following Test$1andards and Methods were used: ASTM C 31/C 31M - Standard Practice for Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in the Field ASTM C 12S - Terminology Relating to Concrete and Concrete Aggregates ASTM C 138/C 138M - Standard Test Method for Density (Unit Weight), Yield, and Air Content (Gravimetric) of Concrete ASTM C 143/C 143M - Standard Test Method for Slump of Hydraulic-Cement ASTM C 172 - Standard Practice for Sampling Freshly Mixed Concrete ASTM C 173/C 173M - Standard Test Method for Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by the Volumetric Method Concrete

ASTM C 231- Standard Test Method for Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by the Pressure Method

ASTM C 470/C 470M - Standard Specification for Molds for Forming Concrete Test Cylinders Vertically

e..
Apparatus and.Equipment required for the lab were:

Various safety equipment Wheelbarrow Empty buckets,

I?

J..

Temperature Measuringffevice Scales and Balances Mold in form of lateral surface of frustum with a top diameter of 4in., a bottom diameter of 8in., and a height of 12in. Tamping rod with a length of 24in., diameter of S/8in., and rounded ends Measure- a rigid metal watertight container with a known volume and handles Air meter Type B, consisting of a measuring bowl of a capacity at least 0.006 m3 and cover assembly fitted with air valves, air bleeder valves, petcocks, and a suitable hand pump

~----

Air meter, consisting of a bowl and a top section. The bowl should have a diameter of 1 to 1.25 the height and a minimum capacity of 0.002 m3. The capacity of the top section should be 1.2 times the capacity of the bowl. Cylindrical molds made of nonabsorbent 4in. in diameter and Sin. in height. and nonreactive material. The molds should be

Beam molds made of nonabsorbent and nonreactive material. The molds should have an inside dimensions of 6in. by 6in. cross section and a length of 20in. Mold release oil Miscellaneous items including strike-off plate, mallet, trowel, measuring cup, syringe, pouring vessel, scoop, isopropyl alcohol, and optional internal vibrator

Testing Program For each test many procedures were followed: Batching

ttfWl ~
CA.

a.;k(..\
(\~lDA \~ ~
V'*U-tU1 1Y'-L~~V~

W
l

WQ.u1
-j

\IU.Ql to b'svvt
~ ~

~ ~vo~~

~~(..U-~

Before mixing all the aggregates in.ee the mixerGJhad to separately weigh each to meet tpe sp.ectfi.Gattons. The cement was weighed to 56.0 Ibs. while the target was 56.5 Ibs. The.Ptne ,Aggregates, ,oarse Aggregates, and Water were each measured in five gallon buckets which were previous weighed at 2.0 Ibs. and subtracted from the final weight of each material. The fine aggregate was supposed to weigh 115.7 Ibs. but actually weighed 116.0 Ibs. The coarse aggregate was supposed to weigh 93.9 Ibs. but actually weighed 94.0 lbs. The water was supposed to weigh 20.2 Ibs. but actually weighed 25.0 Ibs. due to the lack of slump. The cement mix, aggregates, and water were all placed in the concrete mixer and allowed to rotate for 3 minutes. The mixture was quickly moved from the mixture into a metal pan to be used in the slump test. Slump & Temperature
() r1..l ty...ur cj...

'vJo.f r.r

1/3' of the slump cone was filled and then tamped 25 times to compact the mixture. Another third of the cone was then filled and tamped again 25 times into the first third to compact the concrete mixture and blend the two layers together. Next the last third was placed in the slump cone and tamped repeatedly 15 times making sure it mixed the second and third layer. After this process the cone was lifted and the length between the top of the cone and the metal handle of the slump base was measured. This measure was known as slump and showed if the amount of water or cement mix was needed. In this lab the slump testing was preformed four times until we reached a slump of 3 in. while the specifications wanted a 4in. slump. While the slump test was being conducted the temperature wasiilaeiz& found by placing a thermometer into the concrete batch and recorded.
Air Content

Cc)"n~. , \d,ttt-

The concr:ture

was placed into the bottom third of the air meter bowl and tamp 25

strokes to t the concrete. The next third was filled with concrete and tamped 25 times with the metal tamping rod to uniformly distribute the mixture. The next third was filled and the steps were repeated again. A rubber mallet was used to tap the sides of the bowl to release the trapped air bubbles. Slowly the excess was scraped off in a sawing motion and the rim was carefully cleaned to be able to place the cap on. Water was injected into the bowl' using a syringe through the petcock until water emerges from the opposite petcock. Slowly air was pumped into the bowl while the mallet slightly tamped the sides. Finally, the percentage is read off the gauge and was recorded. Casting and Curing Release oil was rubbed on the insides of the cylindrical and beam molds to allow the mixture to not stick to the molds. The concrete was placed in the nine cylinder molds in three equal layers and tamped with a rod 25 times for each layer. The excess concrete was scraped off the top of the cylinders with the rod in a sawing motion. For the two beam molds, the concrete was placed in two equal layers and tamped 60 times with a metal tamp to blend the layers together. The excess amount of concrete was scraped off using a metal bar in a sawing action. Once completed the molds were covered in plastic to prevent evaporation and left for one week to allow the mixture to harden. Testing Results Batching the concrete mix involved mu~e in _ edients to rm a concrete batch that was workable to the specifications. Water, ~se A, regates, . e 'A' gregates, Admixtures, and Cement mix was all included in the batch. To find the right amount of each ingredient to incorporate it took a lot of guess and check. The class members that were responsible for getting the correct amount of coarse aggregate, had to keep weighing the material in order to get the 93.9 pounds that were specified in the design mix. The coarse aggregate weight that was put into our design mix was 94 pounds. Fine aggregates had to be weighed multiple times as well. The required amount that was needed was 115.7 pounds but the actual amount that was put into the mix was 116 pounds. The design mix called for Sacrete dry mix to be used, but unknowingly masonry cement mix was used and not realized until afterwards. The target weight of the sacrete dry mix was 96.5 pounds, but the actual weight of themix in the bag was only 96.0 pounds. Water was included in the concrete mixture to act as glue to hold the aggregates to the cement and help start hydration in the cement mix. We started the mixture with 15 pounds of water included and added according to the slump test. 1,0 pounds of water total was added by the end of the lab to bring the actual amount of water used to 25.0 pounds while the target was 20.2 pounds. Under Dr. Na Lu's supervision the concrete batch was ~ in the concrete mixer for 3 minutes to thoroughly mix the ingredients together. Fr,?m the mixer the slump test was performed to see if the workability was to specifica ions. Making sure to complete the slump test in less than 15 minutes for more accurate results he first 3 slump test attempts failed to meet specifications. The fourth test still failed to reach e required 4 inches of slump, but due to time restraints the slump was recorded at 3 inches. After the slump was

'fl't"'J.4

/"

5\~
A.lV'~

<;.
recorded the temperature was taken by a thermometer
fl.A.i<>08f1F1~'l!

t1

/"'"

'Be 78F. Quickly after

the slump test all of the concrete mix was placed in a five gallon buckrt and weighed on the scale, which read 136.0 pounds per cubic foot. Using the Pressure Me hod the Air Content of the freshly mixed concrete was found. By placing the concrete in the m . asuring bowl, placing a lid on the bowl, adding water and pressurizing it, it created enough pre sure to force remaining air the was trapped in the concrete mixture to be forced to the top a d cause the concrete to slowly lower. This change in pressure is transferred to the gauge when it was recorded. The air content of this batch of concrete was at 9.5 %. Once all the test wer performed the concrete mix was placed in cylindrical and beams mold were covered nd I ft for 16 to 32 hours until removed by Dr. Na Lu. \UM ~ U H\ ~lt\ ~~ fU~ {Oi"h.M-J a.....v

f\

of ~

'( v

<S~y\

,J ~

TCJ?lD.. "'~.

The data was recorded and transferred into the chart below along with other class's lab data. Our lab results are listed under Lab S!~tiEI] L92- Lu (FriQjlY): _
.,..
Summary of Target and Actual Concrete Design Mixes for Each Laboratory Section - Fall 2013

Lab Section LOl- Vasil (Thursday) Property Water (lb) Cement (lb) Fine Agg. (lb) Coarse Agg. (lb) Air Entrainment (mI) Target 21.3 49.4 118.7 93.9 44.0 00 4000 4 Actual 28.0 50.0 119.0 94.0 44.0

Lab Section L02 - Lu (Friday) Target 20.2 56.5 115.7 93.9 50.0 0 5000 4 Actual 25.0 56.0 116.0 94.0 50.0 0

Lab Section L03 - Lu (Tuesday) Target 19.9 70.6 104.4 93.5 62.0 41.0 Actual 25.0 710 100.0
\

94.0 62.0 41.0 See strength data 3.5 10.0

j
,.-(

o !
-:

Water Reducer (mI)

<,

DeJign Stfengtlt.(psi) -stump (in.)

--

-I--

0.0

See strength data 5.75 10.2 136.02.14 77.4

See strength data 3 9.5 136.0 2.14 78

--

6000 4

---<,
...
/

( \
'-Unit

Air Content(%) Weight (pCF) Yield (cu. ft) Temp (degF)

-r~~
2.10
78.4 ./

J
<

--.

..

ilSf

vd cJ Its
ses

,f..-

UlVV\-(hl

OS \vt ~

Anal

As s own above the graph includes two other lab specifications and results alongside our lab. Lab ction L01 had a lower required strength to meet than ours with 4000 psi which explains why eir amount of cement is low than-our r risingly the weight of both theirs and ours

f,

V.

are equal due to ours ha ngJo hold more 12SI. ab LO! had an error is their batch by adding too much water into their mix and went over their target amount by 6.7 pounds which explains why their slump is 5.75 inches when there target slump was only 4 inches. For Lab Section L03 the design strength was 6000 psi. As the chart depicts all of the actual measurements were reached or very close to the target amount. The only significant measurement than went over the target was the amount of water they included, which was 25.0 pounds. This shows the amount of water needed in these design requirements were under rated. Conclusion The reported results and test data were used exclusively for educational purposes and should not be used in the construction field. The concrete mix that we created did not reach the required design requirements and failed in later testing of the cylinders and beams. The data should not be used due to human errors that deemed the concrete batch unfit for work. Possible errors that would alter our results could include the use of masonry concrete mix instead of the sacrete dry mix that allowed more water to be used and not meet strength in later tests. Due to this error the slump test was altered and we were not able to reach the required 4 inch slump. Not being able to reach the designated slump in the field results in poor workability into tight areas and have too many air voids. Under the supervision of Dr. Na Lu though we made the errors work and attempted to still reach the design requirements given.

r:

Lab 07 Background Testing of the concrete in this lab will include: Compressive Strength of Portland Cement Concrete Cylinders Capping of the Portland Cement Concrete Cylinders

For this lab the following Test Standards and Methods were used: ASTM C 39/C 39M - Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens ASTM C 125 - Terminology Relating to Concrete and Concrete Aggregates

ASTM C 617 - Standard Practice for Capping Cylindrical Concrete Specimens ASTM C 1231/C 1231M - Standard Practice for Use of Unbonded Caps in Determination of Compressive Strength of Hardened Concrete Cylinders

Apparatus and Equipment required for the lab were: Scales and Balances Pi Tape Plastic Ruler Alignment device consisting of a frame with guide bars and a cup Mold release oil Melting pot to be used for melting sulfur mortars or other capping compounds. Thermometer Reusable Polychloroprene Pads Loading machine with two hardened steel breaking blocks with the upper block being spherically seated and the bottom block being a solid surface

Testing Programs For this lab 3 concrete cylinders were tested over a span of 28-days. The concrete cylinders were tested 7-days after hardened, 14-days after hardened, and 28-days after hardened. The three cylinders each over this span was measured and weighed, while the data was recorded. The cylinders were measured three times, once at the top, once in the middle, and once at the bottom by Pi Tape. These measurements gave the diameter of the concrete cylinders and the three measurements were averaged together to receive the average

diameter. Using a plastic ruler the height of the concrete cylinder was measured three times around the cylinder and average to find the average height of the cylinder. Once measured the concrete cylinder was weighed in pounds once on a scale and the results were recorded. The concrete cylinders were then capped on each ends with metal caps with polychloroprene pads on the insides. The caps helped distribute the weight and give a more accurate reading. The beams were then placed into the loading machine carefully making sure to be aligned in the center. The loading machine compressed at a constant rate of 20 to 50 psi/sec. The cylinder once reaching its ultimate strength would break. The max load carried would be recorded. From the cylinders fracture pattern it would be placed in one of five types of failure categories. The cylinder was then removed and the loading machine would be cleaned for the next cylinder to be compressed. Test Results Lab 07 testing was done over a 28-day span. 7-Day Test The testing of the first 3 concrete cylinders after 7-days was performed by Dr. Na Lu during the

Fall Break holiday and her results were recorded. Dr. Na Lu had to measure the diameter, weight, and height of the three cylinders before putting them into the compression machine where she found the maximum load. The chart below shows her data: Property
c:
VI VI Q)

Specimen 1
I

Specimen 2 4.023 8.063

spec-imen--3----....
,

Avg. Diameter (in.) Avg. Length (in.) Weight (lb) Maximum Load (Ibs) Strength (psi) Failure Mode

4.023

4.025 7.937

a.

...

<,

8.000 sm

~ Av
~IQ

u >co 0 I r-,

35640.00)

--35335.00

1')

_L9~, __

) (' 34640.00

- -

From there Dr. Na Lu calculated the strength of the concrete cylinders in psi using the formula below: Compressive Strength (f c) (psi) = Pmax
/

Where: Pmax = maximum applied load (Ib) A = cross-sectional area (in2)

Dr. Na Lu also referenced the facture pattern of the concrete cylinder after being compressed to the typical facture pattern of hardened concrete cylinders in the Construction Laboratory Manual. She then recorded her data in the chart below: Property Avg. Diameter (in.) Avg. Length (in.) Weight (Ib) Maximum Load (Ibs) Strength (psi) Failure Mode Specimen 1 4.023 8.000 8.10 35,640.00 2,805 2 Specimen 2 4.023 8.063 8.12 35,335.00 2,805 3 Specimen 3 4.025 7.937 7.96 34,640.00 2,802 Materials

c
VI VI Q)

...

Q.

u >ro 0
I

I'-

14- Day Test After another week of waiting the 14-day compressive strength test was performed by the class

under the supervision of Dr. Na Lu. For this test the same procedures were followed as above and the same formula was used to find the compressive strength. The data recorded is shown in the chart below:

Property
c::
0
Q) ... VI VI

Specimen 1 4.033 8.159 7.99 42,085 3,350 5

Specimen 2 4.038 7.750 8.14 44,115 3,211 4

Specimen 3 4.030 7.910 8.11 41,315 3,239 5

Avg. Diameter (in.) Avg. Length (in.) Weight (Ib) Maximum Load (Ibs) Strength (psi) Failure Mode

Q.

E 0 u >ro 0
I

<::t
M

28-Day Test Two weeks later in lab, we returned to find the compressive strength after the ASTM standard 28 days. Again the concrete cylinders were prepared and measured exactly the same than above in the previous labs. The same procedures and formulas remained the same as well. Dr. Tara Cavalline substituted for Dr. Na Lu and supervised the testing for this lab. The test was performed and the following data was recorded:

c:
0
If) If) Q)

Property Avg. Diameter (in.) Avg. Length (in.) Weight (Ib) Maximum Load (Ibs) Strength (psi) Failure Mode

Specimen 1 4.010 8.00 8.06 41,675 3,302 5

Specimen 2 4.083 7.938 8.10 45,570 3,481 5

Specimen 3 4.030 8.00 7.93 46,140 3,254 5

... a.
E 0 u > I'll
:)
I

00
N

Analyses Compared to Lab Section L01 and L03 the average diameter, average length, and weight are all relatively the same due to the fact that the same cylindrical molds were used during each testing session. Lab L01 started out with their maximum load and strength being lower than expected which is probably due to the fact that they added too much water to the mix and resulted in a lower stiffness. By the 28-day compressive test Lab section L01 was just under their required 4000 psi with an average strength of 3954.33 psi. Lab Section L03 reached a high maximum load and strain for the 7-day test averaging 5328.67 psi when their target was to reach 6000 psi. Lab (03 exceeded their target by the 14-day compression strength and by the 28-day compression test their average strength was 6307.67 psi. This ability to exceed the specifications could have been caused from admixtures that helped the concrete batch make strength or lack of water in the mix. Our compression strength (Lab L02) was always falling short ofthe target strength each week due to the fact that the wrong cement mix was used. Masonry mix was accid-ently used in place of Sacrete Dry mix which could not carry the same strength as the other labs. After 28-day compression testing our strength fell well-short of the design specifications with an average strength of 3345.67 psi when the target was 5000 psi. The strength of each test cylinder in each lab sections from week to week however increased in strength and was able to carry a heavier load. Conclusion The data recorded above are accurate to the test used in the lab. The data recorded should not be used in the construction field and primarily used only for educational purposes. Under the accurately to ASTM supervision of Dr. Na Lu and Dr. Tara Cavalline the labs were performed standards and beneficial to the understanding

of compressive strength in concrete. Although

under supervision human errors occurred in the process. The test cylinders in Lab Section L02 did not reach target strength due to the use of masonry cement mix instead of Sacrete dry mix. This error could have been a big problem on the job site and would have to be torn down and

replaced. The best thing for our concrete mix to be used for would be a sidewalk which only needs a required strength of 3500 psi.

Lab 08

Background Testing of the concrete in this lab will include: Flexural Strength of Portland Cement Concrete

For this lab the following Test Standards and Methods were used: ASTM C 78 - Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete ASTM C 125 - Terminology Relating to Concrete and Concrete Aggregates

Apparatus and Equipment required for the lab were: Scales and Balances Plastic Ruler Loading Machine capable of applying loads at a uniform rate Loading Apparatus

Testing Programs Lab 08 was conducted 14-days after the curing of the concrete beams. Before testing the concrete beams measurements had to be taken and recorded. The height spots along the beam, were then averaged to give

and width were both measured with a plastic ruler in three different once at both ends and once in the middle. The three measurements

us the average height and the average width of the beam. The weight of each beam was then found using a scale. We weighed the beam once in pounds and the data was recorded. The beam was carefully placed onto the supports in the loading machine making sure it is centered and aligned with equal amount of overhang off the two supports. Once aligned the machine slowly applied a continuous load (125 to 175 psi/min) onto the concrete beam. The machine continued to apply the load until the beam ruptured and the maximum load carried was recorded. Once the data was recorded the beam would be removed and the loading machine would be cleaned for the next beam.

Test Results The flexural strength of the two concrete beams casted from lab 06 was tested 21-days after leaving to harden. Before placing the beams in the compression machine the beam height and width was measured in three different locations along each face of the beam. Each beam was also placed on a scale and weighed. The following Properties
.L:

results were averaged and recorded: Specimen 1 Specimen 2 6.060 6.020 19.960 57.4

bo

Avg. Width (in.) Avg. Height (in.) Avg. Length (in.) Weight (Ib) Maximum Load (Ibs) Failure Location

6.100 6.080 19.820 57.6

.. ....
Q)

Vl

'iii ..
::J
X
Q)

u:::

ro 0

>-

After the beam was measured, it was placed in the compression machine. The beam was carefully aligned in the center of the machine with an equal amount of overhang off the beam on each side. The first beam was compressed and the maximum load along with the failure location was recorded. The machine was then cleaned and the second beam was placed in the machine and the procedures were repeated. The data is recorded below: Properties
.L:

Specimen 1 Avg. Width (in.) Avg. Height (in.) 6.100 6.080 19.820 57.6 4,606 Middle Third

....
bO

Specimen 2 6.060 6.020 19.960 57.4 7,350 Middle Third

.. ....
Q)

ro ..
::J

Vl

Avg. Length (in.) Weight (lb) Maximum Load (Ibs) Failure Location

u:::

X Q)

ro 0

>-

Because both fracture on the beams were with the middle third of the beam the following formula was followed to find the Modulus of Rupture: Modulus of Rupture (R) (psi) = (3 x Pmax
X

a) / (b x d2)

Where: Pmax = maximum applied load (Ib) a = average distance between the line of fracture and the nearest support on the tension surface of the beam (in.)

b = average width (in.) d = average depth (height) (in.) The Modulus of Rupture for the first beam tested came out to be 404.847 psi while the Modulus of Rupture for our second beam reached 668.009 psi. Analyses At the end of the 21 day period, all of the lab sections tested their concrete beams. Lab section 01 had a similar width, height and length compared to our section because the beam mold was the same for all classes. Another similar trend for all labs was the fracture locations which occurred in the middle third of the beam. Lab LOl had reached a heavier maximum load than our lab, due to the fact that we used the masonry cement. Lab LOl reached the maximum load of 7,900 pounds for their first beam and 6,395 for their second. Lab L03 carried a maximum load of 11,410 pounds for the first beam and 10,665 pounds for the second. Again, this strength was probably reached through the correct amount of aggregates, water, cement and admixtures. Our beams were unreliable when carrying a load. Our first beam was low with a maximum load of 4,606 pounds and our second beam carried a load of 7,350 pounds. Conclusion The following laboratory test were primarily used for educational purposes for Construction

Material Lab. The concrete mix that we designed would not be suitable for design purposes. Due to the fact that our class used the incorrect cement, the maximum load that it could withhold was significantly lower. The average load for the two beams was 5978 pounds. Besides using the incorrect cement we could have included too much water as well, which would result in a weaker beam.