Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AD-A234 566
-P- 3, 1991
March 1991
Final Report
Approved For Public Release; Distrlbution Unlimited
pPrepared
91 4
*2-09
The following two letters used as part of the number designating technical reports of research published under the Repair,
Evaluation, Maintenance, and Rehabilitation (REMR) Research Program identify the problem area under which the report
was prepared:
Problem Area
CS
GT
Geotechnical
HY
Hydraulics
CO
Coastal
Problem Area
EM
El
Environmental Impacts
OM
Operations Management
COVER PHOTOS:
TOP -
Form AppOved
0MB No. 0704-0188
udn oWsigo
eadquarterServices.Ogretorae
Infor.monOperatinsan
March 1991
-TFinal
report
S. FUNDING'NUMBERS
Thomas W. Kahl
Joseph L. Kauschinger
WU 32310
Edward B. Perry
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADORESS(ES)
B. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPOUT NUMBER
Technical Report
REMR-GT-15
10.SPONSORINGIMONITORING
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER
20314-1000
A report of the Geotechnical problem area of the Repair, Evaluation, Maintenance, and Rehabilitation (REMR) Research Program. Available from National
Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.
12a. DISTRIBUTION I AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Remedial seepage control of earth dams is a critical problem. A concrete cutoff wall may be used as a remedial measure in some situations. Since
the wall in its simplest structural form is a rigid diaphragm, deformations of
earth embankment due to increase in reservoir level or seismic activity could
cause its rupture which would greatly decrease the flow efficiency of the
cutoff wall and jeopardize the safety of the dam.
In response to this dilemma, engineers in Europe, Asia, and South
America have used plastic concrete, which has deformation characteristics
similar to the earth dam, to construct cutoff walls. Plastic concrete consists of aggregate, cement, water, and bentonite clay mixed at a high watercement ratio to produce a ductile material. Geotechnical engineers in the
United States have been reluctant to specify the use of plastic concrete
(Continued)
14. SUBJECT TERMS
186
Cutoff wall
Diaphragm wall
17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
OF REPORT
Unclassified
NSN 7540-01-28O.5500
Ductile behavior
Earth dam
Plastic concrete
Remedial seepage control
Unclassified
Unclassified
Standard Form 298 (Rev 2-89)
13.
(Concluded).
for cutoff walls due to limited documentation of field performance of existing cutoff
walls and lack of laboratory test data on plastic concrete under test conditions which
approximate field behavior.
This research was conducted to quantify the stress-strain-strength behavior and
permeability of plastic concrete, and to develop design data for specifying plastic concrete for use in a diaphragm cutoff wall for an earth dam. The results of this research
indicate that the addition of bentonite clay to conventional concrete significantly
increases the ductility and plastic deformation of the concrete while simultaneously
reducing its shear strength. The permeability of plastic concrete was found to be the
same or less than conventional concrete, and it decreased significantly with consolidation. A design method is given for determining the mix design of a plastic concrete
cutoff wall based upon the unconfined compressive strength and/or modulus of the embankment soil.
PREFACE
under Work Unit 32310, "Remedial Cutoff and Control Methods for Adverse Seepage Conditions in Embankment Dams and Soil Foundations,"
Dr. Edward P
for which
Mechanics Division (S&RMD), Geotechnical Laboratory (GL), was the Problem Area
Leader.
This report was prepared by Mr. Thomas W. Kahl, former graduate student
at Tufts University working as a contract student to WES, and presently with
GEI Consultants, Inc., Winchester, MA; Dr. Joseph L. Kauschinger, former
Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering at Tufts University working under the
Intergovernment Personnel Act to WES, and presently Technical Director, Ground
Engineering Services, Hooksett, NH; and Dr. Perry, S&RMD, WES.
General
supervision was provided by Dr. Don C. Banks, Chief, S&RMD, and D,.
Marcuson III, Chief, GL.
William F.
Technical Director.
44
J ALif leat
on~
UINSP&CTEO
o PTLah
I t
1!r%@
Vb
1L
til
-AV 7
CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE ................................................................
PART I:
INTRODUCTION ...................................................
.5
Purpose ..............................................................
Scope of Work ........................................................
5
6
PART II:
10
24
Materials ............................................................
General Concrete Fabrication Procedure ..............................
Unconfined Compression Test Procedure ...............................
Brazilian Splitting Tensile Test Procedure .........................
Flexural Beam Test Procedure ........................................
Erodability Test Procedure ..........................................
Triaxial Testing Equipment ..........................................
Q Test Procedure .....................................................
CIUC Test Sample Setup and Consolidation Procedure ...............
Permeability Test Procedure .........................................
CIUC Shear Test ......................................................
24
25
31
41
42
43
46
53
55
62
66
PART IV:
67
70
73
74
75
67
79
81
83
85
85
91
92
93
95
Page
Effect of Bentonite Content on Pore Pressure Generation and
Stress Path ........................................................
Relationship Between Triaxial Stress-Strain-Strength
Behavior and Unconfined Stress-Strain-Strength Behavior ........
Comparison of a CIUC Test and a Q Test Having the Same Cement
Factor, Bentonite Content, and Water-Cement Ratio Tested
at the Same Age ...................................................
Influence of Bentonite Content, Confining Stress, Consolidation,
and Age on Triaxial Stress-Strain-Strength Behavior of
Plastic Concrete ..................................................
Permeability of Plastic Concrete ...................................
PART VII:
96
103
107
108
113
APPENDIX B:
APPENDIX C:
APPENDIX D:
APPENDIX E:
APPENDIX F:
118
Al
Bl
Cl
Dl
El
By
To Obtain
cubic feet
0.02831685
cubic metres
cubic yards
0.7645549
cubic metres
Fahrenheit degrees
5/9
feet
0.3048
Metres
0.004404884
cubic decimetres
3.785412
cubic decimetres
inches
2.54
centimetres
6.894757
megapascals
6.894757
kilopascals
pounds (mass)
0.4535924
kilograms
16.01846
0.5932764
square inches
6.4515999
square centimetres
To obtain Celsius
PART I:
INTRODUCTION
Purpose
1.
plastic concrete for use as a remedial diaphragm cutoff wall material in earth
dams to control seepage.
constructed during the Depression Era of the 1930's and immediately after
World War II.
Today, many of these dams are over 50 years old, and a few have
The potential
catastrophic failure of one of these dams due to piping creates a need for
effective and practical remedial seepage control solutions.
One solution is
to install a deep, relatively thin concrete diaphragm wall along the axis of
an earth dam using the slurry trench method.
quite effective in controlling seepage.
at Clemson Lower Diversion Dam, Mud Mountain Dam, Navajo Dam, and Fontenelle
Dam.
Deforma-
New leakage
America have used plastic concrete to construct cutoff walls which have deformation characteristics similar to dam embankment soils.
Plastic concrete
consists of aggregate, cement, water, and bentonite clay mixed at high watercement ratios to produce a material more ductile than conventional structural
concrete.
reluctant to specify the use of plastic concrete for cutoff walls due to the
limited and/or poorly documented field performance data for plastic concrete
cutoffs.
Scope of Work
3.
Phase I
versus age.
done by the North Pacific Division of the US Army Corps of Engineers (NPDEN)
and to provide a data base for selection of mix designs for Phase II triaxial
testing.
used to develop a design procedure for relating cement factor and water-cement
ratio to compressive strength and Young's modulus.
4.
All the mix designs tested in this research program were propor-
slurry trench.
aggregate ratio (by weight) of approximately one was used for all batches
For ease of comparison with NPDEN data, the following batch
(Tamaro 1988).
design parameters were adopted to quantify all mix constituents (see paragraph 46 for definitions of these parameters):
5.
a.
b.
c.
Given these parameters, the required weights of the fine and coarse
This
method has the advantage of describing the mix design of a given batch with
only three parameters, eliminating the need to include all batch constituents
in the analysis.
6.
45
7.
seepage control are constructed in panels through the embankment (and foundation if required) and keyed into an aquiclude.
is filled with a bentonite slurry which penetrates the adjacent soil and forms
a filter cake on the sides of the excavation (kfilter cake = 10-1 to l0g cm/sec depending on the depth within the cutoff trench and the thickness of
the filter cake (EM 1110-2-1901, Figure 9-9)).
vation, plastic concrete with a 8-in. slump is tremied into the excavation,
from the bottom upward, displacing the bentonite slurry to form the panel.
As
the surface of the tremie plastic concrete rises, it may remove the filter
cake from the sides of the excavation.
bility of the adjacent soil, which was penetrated with bentonite slurry, will
prevent the free (unabsorbed) water in the plastic concrete panel from draining laterally.
concrete.
excavation with stiffening occurring from the bottom of the panel upward.
The
set of the panel will occur within a few hours, generally less than I day
(retarding admixtures can be used to prolong the set).
Consolidation of the
plastic concrete panel under the vertical stress imposed by the weight of the
overlying plastic concrete (some of this stress will be taken by arching if
the sides of the excavation move laterally) will be completed in a matter of
days, the exact time depending on the depth of the plastic concrete cutoff
wall.
The plastic
Due
8.
It was
not feasible (for this study) to form, consolidate, and test tensile strength
samples (Brazilian and Flexural Beam Test) and erodability samples (pinhole
type test) under conditions which would duplicate those existing in the field.
However, for permeability and compressive strength testing, this was feasible,
and plastic concrete specimens were formed in the triaxial chamber after
mixing, isotropically consolidated in the triaxial chamber with
ertical
drainage, and cured in the triaxipl chamber under effective confining pressures typical for existing cutoff walls (50 to 300 psi).
Permeability tests
were conducted in the triaxial device during the curing phase (once gas generation within the sample had ceased).
pore water pressure in the sample was given time to equalize, and the sample
was sheared under undrained conditions.
isotropic undrained compression (CIUC) triaxial tests described above, unconsolidated-undrained triaxial compression (Q) tests were conducted to determine
the effects of consolidation on the stress-strain characteristics and strength
behavior of plastic concrete (previous investigators had suggested that the
effects of consolidation could be simulated by forming a Q test sample at the
cement factor and water-content ratio a CIUC test sample would have at the end
of consolidation).
CIUC Tests
6-in.-diam 12-in.-high sample size
cement factor of 300 lb/cu yd
bentonite contents of 0, 20, and 40 percent
effective confining pressures of 50, 100, 200, and 300 psi
ages of 3, 7, and 14 days
permeability tests
20
Q Tests
6-in.-diam 12-in.-high sample size
cement factor of 300 lb/cu yd
bentonite contents of 0, 20, and 40 percent
total confining pressures of 50. 100, 200, and 300 psi
ages of 3, 7, and 14 days
10.
tensile test were performed on the same material molded for each pair of CIUC
and Q tests.
a.
b.
c.
PART II:
11.
LITERATURE REVIEW
This is
because most previous plastic concrete research was done by contractors and is
therefore proprietary.
A summary
of each test program is then presented containing relevant mix design, stressstrain-strength data, and conclusions.
13.
To make compari-
sons of mix design possible, all of the mix design parameters of the research
programs listed in Table 1 were converted to cement factor, percentage bentonite, and water-cement ratio as previously defined.
reported confining stresses were converted into units of pounds per square
inch.
14.
10
En
Ln
0
0
0r
j-4
C-4
n-l4
C-
0
00
IA W
-4
4-
F.
0
0
sfo
4 -4
54
C4)
CL
40
1i
,4
14141
u
0"
0 CY
%0~
0jU1
'A0
0
f
-4
Z4
c.J
**
1o
0~
-4
O0
0'9.~4
.40
4 04
.0~~
41
~~
14 41
cq %D, C14
-A)0
4"~
12
4 4 1 14e
..
L4444
41 4101
I,,4
0
r0
001
W- -
00
~4)r-.
14
"
0) 41
.AAJn E. 1-
'
04U
Z-'
,4
In4
4-
4 51.
JJ-4-4
004
cli
0)
IA.
U,
to
>'
10
41
4-U
-4
00
wa
4d
'
0)
[-44
,4
Cnen4u
w
0-
bo bo.
u
.4w
41-4
0'
,0
440
)-4U
4C)1
to
0'-
C.
41
Q-
None of the test programs listed in Table 1 prior to the Mud Moun-
tain Dam (MMD) test program consolidated wet (8-in. slump) plastic concrete
under constant confining pressure.
16.
maximum total confining stress evaluated, with the exception of the MMD tests
program, was 71 psi.
stresses present at the bottom of remedial cutoff wall during a tremie placement.
of the fluid times the depth of the fluid, the pressure exerted by wet concrete (unit weight approximately equal to 140 lb/cu ft) can be approximated as
1 ft concrete equals 1 psi.
than 1 year) tests were performed to establish the effects of curing age on
the stress-strain-strength behavior of plastic concrete.
There is a lack of
control mixes with no bentonite to use as a basis for evaluating the influence
of the addition of bentonite on stress-strain-strength behavior.
18.
grams, the exact type and number of triaxial tests that were performed due to
the proprietary nature of these prior research programs.
12
19.
In addition, some of
21.
409 lb/cu yd
63%
1.7
1.0
6 in.
mix and plastic concrete mix was to range between 0.5 and 2.1 *10-6 cm/sec.
Other major conclusions were:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Recommended applications:
(1)
a-a3 (kPa)
..__...
100 kPa
V "..001W.'awo03=
400
w
- ...
..-
200
AV/V or e1(%)
E3
no1
I-
iI
1
10
I .5 I
1.5
Figure 1. Influence of confining stress on the stressstrain behavior of plastic concrete (Habib 1977)
(2)
the six plastic concrete mix designs for use in the Colbun Main Dam cutoff
wall (paragraph 34).
of water, bentonite, cement, silty clay, and sand (sand plus silty clay equals
65 percent).
states that the CIUC samples were consolidated after curing in cylinder molds
for 7 to 10 days.
14
The permeability
a.
b.
C.
25.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
design procedure relating mix parameters to strength and modulus data over a
large range.
Bucknell University research program
26.
This research program (Evans. Stahl, and Drooff 1987) was conducted
Six of
these batches contained either fly ash or bottom ash in addition to the
15
Table 2
Summary of Batches Designs and Corresponding Shear Strength
and Strain Data from Bucknell University Research
Program (Evans 1987)
N
01i
Proortion
4.1
4.2
41
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4A1
40
41.6
41.6
41.6
41 4
41.5
41.3
41.5
41.1
404
33 2
29. 1
24.9
29.0
29.!
29.9
29.0
28.8
4.1
8.3
12.4
6.6
4.1
2.5
6.6
4.1
24
Bottom Ash
Content (%)
1.7
4.1
57
Fly Ash
Content (%)
Bentonite
1.7
4.1
5.7
0.24
025
0 24
0.24
0.24
0 24
0.24
0.23
021
0.24
049
073
0.38
024
0.14
0.39
0.23
0 1--
0.5
08
20
3.2
18
1-
3427
1455
1214
903
1110
545
_t
10.0
55
9.8
54
12.2
168
96
i-EO
Bentonite
Content (%)
Fine
Aggregate(%)
Coarse
Aggregate(%)
Cement
Content (%)
W,'ater ratio
Cement
83
1'ater ratio
Propert0
H draulhc
Conducti' ity (Xt0"'
Shear
Strength (kPa)
Axial Strain
at failure (%)
1I
3.5
Cm 'sec I
338
400
20
37
7
The permeability of plastic concrete ranged between 10- and
10-8 cm/sec.
b.
c.
d.
MMD is a
425-ft high earth and rockfill flood control dam located on the White River
near Enumclaw, WA.
of the center of the dam's clay core showed that the water level within the
core responded very quickly to changes in elevation of the impounded reservoir.
Subsequent borings confirmed zones of soft and loose material having the
potential to allow excessive seepage (Peck 1986).
Table A7 in Appen-
dix A contains a summary of the plastic concrete mix designs examined and the
results of unconfined compression, flexural beam, Q, pressure, and erodability
tests (US Army Engineer Division, North Pacific 1987).
were nonstandard tests conducted in lieu of CIUC tests to evaluate the influence of consolidation on the stress-strain-strength behavior of plastic concrete.
Wet samples were formed in open ended steel cylinders, and pressure
to drain from the samples through vertical slots in the steel cylinder.
When
drainage ended (25 to 45 min), the pressure was removed, and the samples were
cured under atmospheric pressure and later tested in a triaxial chamber.
28.
b.
c.
d.
29.
48-m high earth embankment dam located on the Balder River in Yorkshire
17
England.
The shell is crushed shale and the central core is composed of com-
lvel
oseervoi,
-a.1mom
.23
Cwshod flawoe
flifO,
-:-
Figur
fBleha
Proefil
......-.
reservoir impounding.
dam and 2.5-in deep swallow-holes opened along its crest, it was concluded that
the leakage was due to extensive and continuing erosion of the clay core.
The
remedial solution adopted consisted of grouting the entire core and installing
a plastic concrete diaphragm wall in the most damaged core zone.
Plastic
concrete was chosen because it would prevent cracking of diaphragm wall due to
any additional future embankment settlements (dam was only 2 years old), and
it was felt that grouting alone could not ensure an impermeable cutoff.
32.
thick.
The final diaphragm wall was 200 m long, 43 m deep, and 0.6 m
400 lb/cu yd
18 %
1.7
1.0
Subsequent studies showed seepage through the core was reduced from 60 2/sec
to 5 I/sec.
Convento Viejo Dam
33.
Convento Viejo Dam (Alvarez and Mahave 1982) is a 38-m high earth
18
constructed in 1977.
The original design called for a 14-m deep compacted clay cutoff to be
installed beneath the embankment to control underseepage.
During construction
follows:
Cement factor
Percent bentonite
Water-cement ratio
Fine-coarse aggregate ratio
320 lb/cu yd
55 %
1.7
1.0
Subsequent pump test have determined seepage across the dam to be 29.1 I/sec,
and the hydraulic efficiency of the plastic concrete cutoff to be
93.5 percent.
Z23m
270
260
240
230
20
LEGEND
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
CREST
WORKING PLATFORM
ROCK
COMPACTED CLAY CORE
DIAPHRAGM CUTOFF WALL
200
Figure 3.
8-m
deep plastic concrete cutoff wall was installed during construction through
pervious alluvium to connect the core to bedrock.
to prevent the cutoff from cracking due to embankment settlement and potential
seismic activity.
19
12
30~$
,N
"
..
.", '
'
.1
,/
/ B
PLAN OF DAM
PLAN DU 8kA'-GE
COUPE
-B
LEGEND
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(8)
Figure 4.
CLAY CORE
FILTER ZONE
EARTH-GRAVEL FILL
CONCRETE CUTOFF CAP
PLASTIC CONCRETE CUTOFF WALL
BEDROCK
PERVIOUS ALLUVIUM
20
select the best mix design to meet these criteria (see paragraph 22).
The mix
150 lb/cu yd
20 %
4.5
1.0
6-8 in.
The Verney Dam (Tardieu and Costaz 1987) is a 42-m high earth
embankment dam on the Eau D'Olle constructed in 1982 that creates the downstream reservoir for the pump/turbine station at Grand-Maison, France.
profile of the dam is shown in Figure 6.
phragm wall was installed in the foundation alluvium along the ustream toe as
part of a waterproofing system that also included an asphalt coating on the
upstream face.
Cement factor
Percent bentonite
Water-cement ratio
Fine-coarse aggregate ratio
37.
277 lb/cu yd
71 %
1.9
1.5
high earth and rockfill flood control dam located on the White River in
Enumclaw, WA.
was installed.
21
90 DAYS
a Kg/cm2
32
32
28 DAYS
a Kg/cm2
16
28
24
2
1
0
2
12
2
1
8
20
03
14
20
16
0
123
0.2
0.4
gc
0.6
0.8
AYS
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
C 0rL 3
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1)iaphrurn
m cutoff wall
au'in situ-
Triaisial ts
fI ailtire
V I adiiire
1- 7S I"
mI i
4
415
579 kg/crn'
2,8(0) kg/L.ni'
h, 4ii1 k g. Cin
Triaxial test
0. 20 0. IN) "'a
4,17 W
501 kr' crn
I 7S Oo
920 km utiF
initial 3 , g CttI,
I ll(Ire
I I allure
2,000-5,M(E kg'cn'
22
loin
CAPPING BEAM
*S
DAPHRAGM WELL
.'
t.
FLUVIO
loom,
..
BLANKET DRAIN:...
MORAINIC ALLUVIUM
S'
of
S.
'
TYPICAL SECTION
Figure 6.
o1
a(MP*)
St)- 174 Ps
So
BLOCK 13
li~ePs
4f,
BX
0 (
23
*(%)
PART III:
39.
Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards were used wherever possible to ensure
quality and consistency.
consolidate wet 8-in. slump plastic concrete for the CIUC tests required the
development of some nonstandard procedures.
procedure for each type of tests performed in the research is described, and
where applicable, references to ASTM standards are given.
In addition, where
nonstandard test procedures are described, any related ASTM standards are
referenced.
Materials
40.
b.
Ironclad brand type I portland cement was used throughout the test
Chemical analysis performed by the US Army Engineer Waterways Exper-
iment Station (WES) confirmed that this cement conformed to ASTM designation
C-150 (Appendix B, Table B2).
solids (G_)
24
Bentonite
42.
Index
properties are:
G, = 2.75
LL
530 %
PL
41 %
489 %
PI
Aggregates
43.
used.
MA.
Masonry sand (SP) and minus 3/4 in. well rounded gravel (GP) were
The grain size distribution of both sets of aggregates conformed to ASTM specification C 33-86 and are shown in Appendix B, Figures Bl through B4.
Com-
45.
tremie pipes, and to provide for uniform plastic concrete distribution along
trench bottoms, an 8-in. slump is recommended (Tamaro 1988).
In light of
this, all of the plastic concrete batches produced in this research were
designed for a nominal 8-in. slump.
used for batching, mixing, and wet testing of all of the concrete batches
One ton of clay will yield 90 barrels (42 gallons-US petroleum) of material
with a dynamic viscosity of 15 centipoise.
25
method, the following batch proportion parameters were used to describe the
plastic concrete batches:
Cement factor - The cement factor was defined as the total amount,
by weight, of cement and bentonite in a cubic yard of plastic
concrete:
bentonite content, %
water-cement ratio -
weight of water
weight of cement + bentonite
ratio was estimated from previous experience that would produce an 8-in.
slump.
The
required volume of fine and coarse aggregate was then taken as the difference
between a cubic yard and the sum of the volumes of cement, bentonite, and
water.
The weight of fine and coarse aggregate was then back calculated from
26
their volumes.
hygroscopic moisture content and scaled to produce the desired batch volume.
After the batch was made, the cement factor and water-cement ratio were corrected for any additional water added during mixing (see Paragraph 48).
An
generally followed corresponded to ASTM specification C 192-81, paragraph 6.1.2 (CRD-C 10-81).
49.
a.
b.
The bentonite and the cement were mixed together dry in a 5-gal
bucket.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Total mix time was approximately 10 min for batches with 0 percent bentonite and 45 min for batches with 10 to 60 percent
bentonite.
This
would have been necessary to overcome this problem, but was deemed beyond the
scope of this project.
before being added to the mixer (as described above) to help ensure uniformity
of the mix.
approximately twice the liquid limit, or 100 percent for the bentonite used in
this research program.
27
was necessary to continue to add water to a mix until there was no longer a
loss of slump with increased mixing.
approximately 45 min, but more or less time may be taken if visual inspection
determines that slump loss has ended.
specified in the batch design during this time period was figured into the
recalculation of the batch design (see batch design example, Table B4).
Concrete fabrication equipment
51.
All scales hand tools and mix pans used for concrete fabrication
Calibrations of the
wet concrete
b.
Air content -- Air content tests conformed to ASTM specification C 231-82 (CRD-C 41-84) for a type B air content meter.
Typical air content values ranged between 0.2 percent and
2 percent.
d.
Temperature -- Temperature measurement of wet concrete conformed to ASTM specification C 1064-88 (CRD-C 3-87).
Temperature was usually measured by inserting a thermometer into the
concrete mound left by a slump test. Typical values ranged
between 64 and 700 F.
Fabrication of conventional
plastic concrete test cylinders
53.
unconfined compression, splitting tensile, and unconsolidated undrained compression (Q) tests conformed to ASTM C 192-81 (CRD-C 10-81).
Specimens were
formed using standard 6-in. diam by 1 -in. high molds in three layers of
approximately 4 in. thick.
29
specimens in Phase I.
mens from the plastic molds after the recommended ASTM period of 2 days.
Thereafter, ASTM approved peel-off wax coated cardboard cylinder molds were
used for all high bentonite specimens formed in Phase I.
of use and better specimen quality, it was subsequently decided to use the
cardboard molds exclusively for all Phase II specimens.
Fabrication of flexural beam specimens
55.
by 24-in.-long rectangular steel molds in accordance with ASTM specification C 192-81 (CRD-C 10-81).
30
All plastic concrete test specimens were cured in either a wet room
specimens from the same batches were stored in both locations to evaluate
their performance.
that curing location had no effect on the mechanical properties of the cylinders, as shown in Figure 12.
performance criteria:
a.
Wet room:
Temperature range:
62 - 720 F
>95%
Cure box:
Temperature range:
68 - 720 F
Humidity:
Free water:
>95%
some observed
These criteria conform to ASTM specification C 192-81 (CRD-C 10-81) except for
temperature range (73 +/- 30 F).
58.
31
In
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Six in.
by twelve in.
.1750
E
0
0
X 1500
1250
C
1000
0
7500
0
I-)
L
E
o 500
c) 250-
250
500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000
Ultimate Compressive Strength, Cure Box, psi
compilation of the data is presented in Appendix D, Table Dl and will be discussed more fully in Part IV.
(CRD-C 14-87) and ASTM C 469-83 (CRD-C 19-87) as guidelines, but some
procedure and equipment modifications were made as noted.
After curing in either the cure box or wet room for a specified
amount of time, samples were removed and examined for signs of damage.
mens too damaged to cap were discarded.
(BEN - 40%, 60%) specimens were most likely to be damaged during mold
33
Speci-
Table 4
Summary of Nominal Batch Designs for Phase I Unconfined Compression Tests
Batch ID*
Nominal Cement
Factor, lb/cu yd
Percent
Bentonite
Nominal Water/
Cementq-Bentonite
060387-1
300
0.8
060487-1
300
20
1.4
060587-1
300
20
2.0
061087-1
300
40
1.6
061287-1
300
60
2.6
061687-1
400
1.0
061887-1
400
20
1.2
061887-2
400
40
2.0
062387-1
400
60
2.0
071387-1
250
1.0
071487-1
250
20
1.6
072187-1
250
40
2.2
072787-1
250
60
2.2
102387-1
290
1.4
102687-1
290
20
1.8
110387-1
240
10
1.9
110387-2
280
10
1.8
110387-3
320
10
1.6
111087-1
360
10
1.4
111387-1
330
1.2
111387-2
260
20
2.1
34
Batch ID - date of
61.
a.
b.
62.
example of a capped cylinder are shown in Figures 13, 14, and 15.
63.
toxic sulphur fumes, some Phase I specimens were tested with a neoprene
capping system developed by the New York Department of Transportation (Amsler
and Grygill 1977).
caps failed by vertical splitting, rather than the diagonal cracking typical
of specimens with sulphur end caps.
64.
unconfined test summary (Table DI) by the designation NEOP in the "strain"
column.
In order to use the data from these tests in the general analysis of
35
Figure 13.
Fi gure 1s.
c:appedI
Samnple bei ng
ill
Figi
p1;. ;tc
Fixture1
3"
Exa~mple of
C(onlcrete'c'l
cappcd
ilidel-
The
66.
Range, lb
Precision, lb
0-3,000
0-15,000
0-30,000
0-63,000
0-150,000
0-300,000
5
25
50
100
250
500
assistant from a dial gage attached to the test specimen and hand recorded.
Accurate reading of peak loads was ensured by a dial pointer follower.
In
deflection of the load head of the testing machine as measured by a dial gage
rigidly mounted to the loading platform.
+/- 0.0005 in.
deflection.
+/-0.0005 in.
37
Figure 16.
Figure 17.
Load head of Riehle testing machine
crushing 6- by 12-in. sample (no deflection
measurement shown)
38
LOAD HEAD
NOTE:
G -
12 in.
SPECIMEN
SPECIMEN
Figure 18.
NOTE:
8in.
(A/2)/G
LOAD HEAD
PIVOT
COMPRESSOMETER
41(
SPECIMEN
PV
FIXED
77 7777777
Figure 19.
//77
39
were tested using the gross deflection method, and one sample was tested using
the compressometer.
batch design and age, at least one test was performed using the
compressometer.
70.
and batch design calculated with gross deflection and compressometer data is
shown in Figure 20.
data is greater than any difference caused by the different deflection measurement systems.
. ..
S0.0040
0
Oi 0
00
o
0
c0.002
0.002
U0
0.000
0
00
O
0oOI
0.002
0.004
0.006
rent research program and is not part of the scope of this study.
40
72.
After compression testing, one cylinder from each test group of the
same age and batch design was broken into pieces less than 1 in. in size, and
a water content was performed on pieces taken from the core.
Standard oven-
dry soils testing water content test procedure (ASTM D 2216) was used.
73.
from six batches of plastic concrete to evaluate the effect of bentonite content, cement factor, and age on splitting tensile strength.
designs and test ages for each batch area listed in Table 5.
the tests are discussed in Paragraph 114.
Brazilian splitting tensile test was performed for each of the 20 CIUC tests
performed in Phase II.
74.
Batch ID*
Nominal Water/
Cement+Bentonite
Percent
Bentonite
Nominal Cement
Factor, lb/cu yd
053088-1
250
1.5
060288-1
340
1.2
060288-2
260
20
2.0
061988-1
340
20
1.7
062288-1
260
60
2.4
062288-2
340
60
2.3
Batch ID
date of
Measurement of Brazilian
splitting tensile test specimen
75.
41
the same plane were then drawn across both sample ends to use as guides to
align the specimen with the test apparatus.
Positioning of Brazilian
splitting tensile test specimen
76.
horizontally on the plywood strip so that the lines marked on the ends of the
cylinder were vertical and centered over the plywood strip.
A second plywood
strip was then placed lengthwise across the top of the cylinder and centered
on the lines marked on the ends of the cylinder.
The load head was then brought into contact with the
The peak load was read manually by the operator of the Riehle
testing machine from the dial pointer follower and hand recorded.
Splitting
78.
One 6-in. wide by 6-in. high by 24-in. long flexural beam was cast
in a steel mold for each preliminary Brazilian tensile test batch and tested
in single-point simply supported flexure at an age of 28 days, in accordance
with ASTM specification C 293-79 (CRD-C 17-80).
the Riehle testing machine at a deformation rate of 0.05 in./min. +/0.005 in./min.
Measurement of flexural test sample
79.
width and thickness of the beam at the point of rupture were taken and, if
different from the initial measurements, recorded for use in calculation of
the modulus of rupture.
80.
42
L - 3D
where
L - Span length
D - Beam thickness
Support point marks were then drawn on the beam at distances of L/2 from the
beam center line.
Test beams were placed on the simple supports such that each sup-
port was lined up with a span mark on the beam, and the center point load
block was lined up with the center line of the beam and the center line of the
load head.
Beams were then loaded and the peak load was manually recorded by
82.
Crack
conditions were simulated by casting a 3/16-in. hole through each sample and
flowing water through it at a velocity of 17 ft/sec.
follows:
a.
43
ROD
I I. WIDE ALLWMM
'CENTERING PLATE*
SETS IN SLOTS
IN CARDBOARD MOLD
7-
.DAMTRB
12I.HIHSADR
CADORDCLNDRML
NUT
im
GEL
AO
. SBW
U KHEA
Awv
12in erosio
testl
4AD4R
mw B TTO
STANDARD
YLNE
b.
c.
The piece of aluminum with the pipe thread fitting was then
installed into 1/4-in, slots cut into opposite sides near the
top of the mold. The piece of aluminum was adjusted until both
fittings were on the same axis.
d.
Figure 22.
The modified cylinder was filled with wet concrete using the
same procedure as for unconfined compression cylinders as discussed in Paragraph 53. Care was taken so as not to cover the
threads of the top fitting.
1/4 IN. PLASTIC TUBING
FROM TAP --
SAMPLE
WIRE MESH
MILK CRATE
-.
FLOOR
GRATE/
7,S.777.777
SUMP DRAIN
Figure 22.
45
b.
C.
At the required age, the mold was stripped and the aluminum rod
removed. A 1/4-in.-diam hose carrying city water at 75 psi was
then attached to the top fitting and a No. 200 sieve was placed
beneath the bottom fitting.
d.
e.
The No. 200 sieve was periodically checked for eroded material.
If significant material was observed, the test was stopped and
the material weighed.
f.
The test was continued until it was determined that there was
not change in the erosion rate.
85.
Most of the equipment used in the triaxial test program was stan-
Valve control
46
Figure 23.
Deflection measurement
b.
c.
Filter paper.
e.
f.
Sealing grease. Dow Corning brand high vacuum grease was used
to help seal all O-ring joints, membrane top cap/pedestal connections, and double membranes.
g.
GORINGS
FILTER PAPER
POROUS STONE
HOOD
SAMPLE
o'---
MEMBRANE
POROUS STONE
PEDESTAL "
FILTER PAPER
GRINGS
---
CLAMPING RINGN
S-
BASE
-PORE
PRESSURE TRANSDUCER
PEDEST
VALVES
inside
48
by 12-in.
A photograph and
During con-
solidation, two accumulators were used for each triaxial cell, one controlling
the top cap and the other controlling the pedestal.
(approxi-
OWN
1
Figure 25.
49
boards
I--
Re dout
Section
1 12 8 r'
2
R
c q
Reunto
ofg .3I
1 1'eg
--
Pressure Positions
reo
orc
0
3
R egulator 2 Regulator
Panel
Control
Section
supply press
AQ
master
regulator
Tank
Control
Section
dacD press.
i
both
of
"fi
E
deird
M
,dra
in
off
2o
nqh2o
both
ip.anuli
both
pj
off
anul.
2
P
id,=,
I~.,
off
0drain
in drat
50
88.
Back pressure for CIUC test program was provided by an air compressor
operating at 120 psi delivery pressure.
ways:
89.
a.
b.
For all CIUC and Q tests, cell pressure was applied using a gas
-.*TE-GAS PRESSURE
FROM NITROGEN
GAS BOTTLES
ON/OFF 1/4 IN.
WHITNEY BALL VALVE
GAS-WATER INTERFACE
TO TRIAXIAL CELL
FLUID VALVE
Figure 28.
Schematic diagram of
stainless steel reservoir containing cell pressure gas-water
interface
52
0 Test Procedure
91.
Phase I, it was decided that triaxial tests would be performed on mix designs
with a cement factor of 300 lb/cu yd and bentonite contents of 0, 20, and
40 percent.
Effective confining pressures of 50, 100, 200, and 300 psi were
Percent
Bentonite
0
20
40
Age
Days
50
3
7
14
--
Batch ID
Effective Consolidation Stress, psi
100
200
300
--
080288
030189
102688
091488
*
*
3
7
14
082688
--
080588
081088
091088
082388
--
--
--
091588
090988
091888
101488
--
083188
102888
--
092888
100688
7
14
--
--
--
*
*
-090188
111688
022289
Note:
*
92.
53
93.
through 58.
Q tests
test sample ends did not conform to ASTM planeness requirements for two
reasons:
95.
testing.
a.
Tops of samples could not be adequately leveled off during sample formation in sample molds.
b.
Bottoms of some samples were slightly convex due to the deflection of aluminum bottoms of cardboard molds under weight of
samples.
Seat-
This in turn results in strains which are too high and an elastic
modulus (i.e.,
96.
The first method, used on samples 080288-1 through 102888-1, was to shave the
sample ends with a large knife.
Comparison of
Q samples of the same batch design, age, and total confining stress indicates
that the use of sulphur caps increases initial tangent modulus:
Sample
Cement factor, lb/cu yd
Percent bentonite
Total confining stress, psi
Shear strength, psi
Initial tangent modulus, ksi
54
Uncapped
Capped
102888-1
301
40
100
149
25
022289-1
308
40
100
160
43
A double membrane was placed over the Q test sample. The sample was then positioned on the triaxial cell base, and the
membrane ends were sealed to the sides of the pedestal and top
capped with O-rings and vacuum grease.
b.
The cell hood was placed over the sample and attached to the
base with a clamping collar. Care was taken not to crimp the
top cap water lines. The piston was then seated against the
top cap and locked into place.
C.
The cell was filled with tap water via the stainless steel
reservoir bottle and cell pressure hose. The cell hood bleed
valve was kept open during filling to purge all air from cell.
d.
The cell pressure transducer was attached to the cell base and
purged of air. The triaxial cell was then positioned under the
load head of the Riehle testing machine, and a brass loading
block was placed on top of the piston. This loading block
prevented the piston from stamping the testing machine load
head during loading.
e.
The cell pressure was applied and the pedestal valve was opened
momentarily to check for leaks across the membrane. If no
significant leaks (more than a few drops of water) were
observed, the load head was brought into contact with the
loading block and the piston was unlocked. The deflection dial
gage was then adjusted on the piston to provide maximum travel.
f.
g.
98.
from wet 8-in. slump concrete, it was necessary to partially consolidate the
specimen under a vacuum in a split mold prior to full consolidation in a
triaxial chamber.
similar manner.
Subsequent refine-
ments in procedure made during Phase II testing are also included here.
Nota-
tions are made, when relevant, explaining why and when each refinement was
done.
Setup of CIUC sample formation apparatus
99.
All CIUC samples were formed wet directly on the triaxial pedestal
This sec-
b.
c.
d.
The split mold was put together with two strips of duct tape
wrapped around three times about 3 in. from the top and bottom
of the mold. Strips of duct tape were then placed on each seam
to seal the mold for subsequent application of vacuum inside
split mold (to hold the double membrane against the inside wall
of the split mold consolidometer).
e.
56
Figure 29.
top cap
Figure 30.
formaI.tionI Of CIUC
-,,-MPI(
f.
The inside depth of the membrane/consolidometer was then measured and recorded. The inside diameter of the membrane/
consolidometer was then estimated by filling the
membrane/consolidometer with a known quantity of water, measuring the depth of the water and using the equation:
D = (4V/ifH)
1 /2
where
D = average diameter
V - volume of water
H
height of water
g.
b.
The top cap was seated against the top of the sample. The top
of the membrane was then peeled up from the top of the consolidometer and sealed against the sides of the top cap with
vacuum grease.
c.
Vacuum was then applied to the sample via the top cap and
pedestal. All effluent removed from the sample by vacuum was
collected in 1,000 ml. Erlenmeyer flasks were attached in
series with the vacuum lines. Vacuuming was continued until
approximately 100 ml of effluent was collected from both the
top cap and pedestal, or until observation concluded that the
sample could stand without the consolidometer. An example of
this setup is shown in Figure 32. Vacuumed water is collected
in glass flasks in the foreground.
d.
e.
The cell hood was placed over the sample and attached to the
Care was taken not
base with a clamping collar (Figure 34).
to crimp the top cap water lines. The piston was then seated
against the top cap and locked into place. A dial gage was
then attached to the piston and the initial sample height
reading was taken (Figure 34).
59
%M
60
.01
Figure 34. Dial gage mounted
on triaxial cell piston for
deformation measurement
f.
The cell was filled with tap water via the stainless steel
reservoir bottle and cell pressure hose. The cell hood bleed
valve was kept open during filling to purge all air from cell.
g.
h.
i.
Figure 35.
were drained and resent as necessary. Figure 36 shows a typical consolidation curve, plotted as change in volume versus
square root of time.
101.
off wall is its ability to impede the flow of water, it was essential that the
permeability of plastic concrete be measured.
Gener-
however, because sample gas generation during early curing causes inaccurate
flow readings.
were performed.
102.
The actual procedure used for all tests was developed using "The
62
Table 6
Summary of Changes in Volume of CIUC Samples
During Vacuum and Consolidation
Batch ID
Ben.
%
cc
P..-j
Initial
Total
Volume
of Sample
cm3
Initial Volume
of Water
in Sample
% of
ml.
total
Water
Removed
During
Vacuum
% of
ml.
total
Water
Removed
During
Consolidation
% of
ml.
total
082088-1
100
5478
1488
27.2
279
5.1
163
3.0
091488-1
200
5521
1396
25.3
215
3.9
149
2.7
030189-1
100
5584
1482
26.5
236
4.2
157
2.8
102688-1
100
5564
1492
26.8
225
4.0
159
2.9
082688-1
20
50
5701
1884
33.0
226
4.0
180
3.2
080588-1
20
100
5916
1917
32.4
242
4.1
135
2.3
091088-1
20
200
5394
1900
35.2
121
2.2
359
6.7
081088-1
20
100
5593
1875
33.5
180
3.2
294
5.3
082388-1
20
200
5397
1882
34.9
83
1.5
466
8.6
090188-1
20
300
5518
1943
35.2
77
1.4
428
7.8
111688-1
20
300
5393
1911
35.4
208
3.9
357
6.6
091588-1
40
50
5551
2259
40.7
193
3.5
178
3.2
090988-1
40
100
5449
2151
39.5
128
2.3
546
10.0
091988-1
40
200
5377
2183
40.6
239
4.4
428
8.0
101488-1
40
300
5494
2255
41.0
239
4.4
537
9.8
083188-1
40
100
5790
2247
39.1
136
2.4
232
4.0
092888-1
40
300
5490
2328
42.4
178
3.2
576
10.5
102888-1
40
100
5509
2304
41.8
208
3.8
367
6.7
022289-1
40
100
5714
2291
40.1
64
1.1
406
7.1
100688-1
40
300
5537
2225
40.2
215
3.9
546
9.9
63
CL
-100
*SAMPLE
.10CEMENT
ID:
100688-1
FACTOR:
300 LB/CU YD
.15
40%
LiBENTONITE:
-200
250 -C
0
w -300
>
-350
-400
-55
1.0
Figure 36.
10
15
20
SOUARE ROOT OF TIMIE. F'
25
30
31
Batch ID-
Percent
Bentonite
Age
Days
Effective Confining
Stress, psi
080288-1
100
091488-1
200
030189-1
100
102688-1
14
100
080588-1
20
100
091088-1
20
200
081088-1
20
100
082388-1
20
200
090988-1
40
100
101488-1
40
300
092888-1
40
300
102888-1
40
14
100
64
a guide.
(1)
where
q
coefficient of permeability
=hydraulic
gradient
rearranging
k = q
(2)
qt
(3)
h2 - h
(4)
iA
by definition
q=-
and
i =
where
Q
h2 - h,
=
=
2 - P-
YW
where
P-
P1
65
(5)
k =
103.
Since
L ,
A , and
7w
(6)
QLy
tA(P, - P,)
ence was established by reducing the back pressure on the top cap.
Flow
through the sample was then measured by periodically reading the water level
in the pedestal accumulator and recording the corresponding time.
Approxi-
mately 12 hr prior to shear testing, the permeability test was stopped, and
the top cap back pressure was returned to the original back pressure to allow
the pore pressure within the sample time to equalize.
GIUC Shear Test
104.
All CIUC shear tests were performed with the Riehle testing
The actual
The triaxial cell was positioned under the load head of Riehle
testing machine and a brass loading block was placed on top of
the piston. This loading block prevented the piston from
indenting the test machine load head during loading.
b.
The load head of the testing machine was brought into contact
with the loading block and the piston was unlocked. The
change in height of the sample due to consolidation was measured by loading the piston until it reestablished contact
with the top cap, and then taking a dial reading. The difference between this dial reading and the initial dial reading
taken in Paragraph 100 was the change in height due to consolidation. The deflection dial gage was then adjusted on the
piston to provide maximum travel.
c.
d.
66
PART IV:
105.
pression tests, splitting tensile tests, flexural beam tests, and erosion
tests.
b.
c.
106.
Phase II
20
e.
UC tests
cement factor 300 lb/cu yd.
bentonite contents of 0, 20, and 40 percent.
ages of 3, 7, and 14, days.
d.
UC tests
cement factors 230 to 450 lb/cu yd.
bentonite contents of 0, 10, 20, 40, and 60 percent.
ages of 3 to 660 days.
erodability tests
ratios for all of the plastic concrete batches presented in each test series
summary table are corrected for actual batch composition as described in Paragraph 62 and in the batch design example, Appendix B, Table B3.
107.
Figure 37 shows
67
--
/,)
E
,/1
i//
STRAIN, PERCENT
Figure 37.
All strains were calculated using the general equation for engi-
neering strain:
Al
(7)
where
-
strain, in./in.
1.
1,
connection points.
is measured
Al
Al
68
For
110.
(8)
A,/
(I-e)
where
a
- stress, psi
load, lb
A-
4=
and
ultimate compressive strength = ama,= qu
111.
(9)
eb
-C
where
ab - maximum stress on the linear portion of the stress-strain curve,
psi
a. - minimum stress on the linear portion of the stress-strain curve,
psi
Lb
La -
The ultimate
compressive strength reported in Table DI for tests using neoprene caps are
uncorrected values.
the use of neoprene end caps results in lower ultimate stresses when compared
to specimens tested with sulphur end caps.
In order
113.
A correction
procedure for elastic modulus and ultimate strain could not be developed
because the deformation of the neoprene end caps could not be measured separately.
114.
elastic modulus (E), age, and batch design parameters for each Phase I unconfined compression test specimen are compiled by batch in Table Dl.
In addi-
tion, Table Dl lists the curing location and deflection measurement system
used for each specimen.
cement ratio for bentonite contents of 0, 10, 20, 40, and 60 percent and 8 in.
wet slump.
The straight lines fitted to the data sets for each bentonite
content are parallel and show that, for a given bentonite content, a decrease
in cement factor requires an increase in water-cement ratio to maintain an
8-in. slump.
116.
strength and water-cement ratio for all curing ages and bentonite contents.
70
460-........
44
Slump= 8 +/-
420-
cxxxx
010
3600
60%
t340C
320-
8A
E 300
U8
4059 bentonite
605....bentonite
00
>1 3800
U40
0% bentonite
v400-
I in.
280
00
260-
240
220-, r-1.0
0.8
.4
1.2
Figure 38.
2.6
14
2.8
3.0
3.2
0% bentonite
00000 10% bentonite
20% bentonite
-&a
00000
aL 10004
a.
10%
02esee
V.0
0%)8
0)>
100
00
440
C
C
0
1)
C
60%
10-
081
01
rTT
21
41
7 TV- r--rT-
8 20
61
Witer (-enwerj
2.?
tr',
r r r---
2 42
---
62
303
W ',
Figure 39. Unconfined compressive strength versus watercement ratio for all bentonite contents
71
strength and elastic (Young's) modulus for all ages and bentonite contents.
Separate regression lines are drawn through data points with elastic moduli
calculated from strain values obtained with both the compressometer and by
gross deflection.
CA bentonite
00000
00o0 10%
//
&a&&&20% bentonite
/o
/
C
/4
U.X&
0.
gross deflection /
/',
t(
0)
0
00
/o/
bentonite
40% bentonite
QOO0000
0oo .1000
60%
0/
100
7'
0)compressometer
C/
0
C-)
10
100
1000
Unconfined Elastic Modulus, ksi
elastic modulus (E), age, and batch design parameters for each Phase II
unconfined compression test specimen are compiled by batch in Table D2.
72
Two
pression tests were performed as companion tests to the CIUC and Q tests to
ensure repeatability within a batch (i.e. that batch constituents were uniformly mixed).
tions of batch constituents in CIUC samples were based on the assumption that
constituents were uniformly mixed throughout the batch.
In addition, the
pressive strengths reported in Table D2 shows that the average standard deviation of unconfined compressive strength within batches is 1.7 percent with a
maximum standard deviation of 6.1 percent for batch 080288-1.
The standard
119.
were proportioned to provide three test cylinders for every test age.
Some
batches, however, had only one or two cylinders available at a given age, as
shown in Table Dl.
120.
a.
Batch yields were smaller than designed, leaving fewer cylinder for high curing age tests.
b.
c.
Test cylinders were damaged during capping or curing and subsequently discarded.
tests within test groups (specimens from the same batch tested at the same
age) from test group averages are as follows:
a.
b.
22
(1)
0-60 %
(2)
(3)
ages
3 to 660 days
73
251
(1)
(2)
71
(3)
20
160
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
13
4 % +/-
3 %
14 %
Load
Range
kips
Corresponding
Bentonite
percent
qu
psi
Precision, +/E
Cu
ksi
percent
3-5
60
0.6
0.8
0.0043
5-10
40
2.0
2.8
0.0043
10-20
20
4.1
10.1
0.0041
20-50
10
9.9
35.5
0.0041
50-75
16.4
33.9
0.0041
122.
cement factor, and age on unconfined plastic concrete behavior and batch characteristics as observed in Tables DI and D2 and in Figures 38, 39, and 40.
The effects of each parameter are listed in order of relative influence.
74
a.
b.
c.
d.
(1)
(2)
qu and E increase with increasing cement factor (Figures 38, 39, and 40).
(3)
q,
and
(2)
c,,
(3)
(2)
123.
from six batches of plastic concrete to evaluate the effect of bentonite content, cement factor, and age on splitting tensile strength.
Batches with
nominal cement factors of 250 and 350 lb/cu yd and bentonite contents of 0,
20, and 60 percent were chosen in order to bracket the preliminary unconfined
compression series data as well as possible with a minimum number of tests.
125.
bentonite, 250 lb/cu yd batch (062288-1), were too weak to test correctly and
75
The peak load for all tests recorded and splitting tensile strength
T -2P
7tId
(10)
where
T - Brazilian splitting tensile strength, psi
P - peak load, lb
1 - cylinder length, in.
d - cylinder diameter, in.
127.
b.
One flexural beam was cast from each Brazilian tensile test batch
R =3P1
2bd
where
R - modulus of rupture, psi
P - peak load, lb
76
b.
lated by casting a 3/16-in. hole through each sample and flowing water through
it at a velocity of 17 ft/sec.
factors of 300 lb/cu yd and were tested continuously between ages 3 and
8 days.
131.
For all practical purposes, the tests showed that neither specimen
average approximate rate of 0.05 percent of initial sample weight per day.
This number is a rough estimate, however, because the amounts of material
eroded on some days were too small (<0.1 grams) to measure precisely on the
scale used (precise to 0.1 gram).
77
PART V:
132.
Table 5
examined.
content is 20 percent, effective confining stress is 100 psi, and curing age
is 58 days) test was performed but finished too late to incorporate into this
report.
The results of CIUC test 031889-1 are usEd only in the discussion of
134.
a.
I CIUC test.
b.
1 Q test.
C.
2 UC tests.
d.
1 T test.
consistency within and betweet, batches with the same bentonite content.
Ideally, CIUC tests of the same bentonite content and age but
different confining stresses would have been cast simultaneously from the same
batch into three triaxial chambers and tested as a group.
In prac-
tice, however, thi- procedure was unworkable for two main reasons:
a.
b.
Setup of a single CIUC test typically took 8 hr. The formatfon of multiple CIUC samples simultaneously would have
required more personnel than were available.
78
136.
In addition, com-
137.
Table 8.
defined from a Mohr's circle diagram as one-half of the peak deviator stress
(principal axial stress, a,, mijius the confining stress,
ure (cn)
U3).
Strain at fail-
(a1-a3)u.
ings were taken for three tests, 080288-1, 022289-1, and 031889-1 and are
presented in Paragraph 163 along with corresponding A values.
The cement
factors and water-cement ratios and unit weights listed in Table 8 were corrected for water removed during consolidation, as summarized in Table 6.
138.
same age and effective confining stress but different bentonite contents indicates that CIUC strain at failure increases dramatically with the addition of
bentonite.
bentonite.
79
w1
0000
-
f
0
ON
Y0
0'% 04C
c'J
r*.i
eJ.4
44
a4a
0000
-4 -4
M, .4
a,0
C1
Ln e
.4
OO
4o c
-4 .- 4 ,-4
M, C-4j
V)
4J-
-)
V)00D
n000000
04
u
-4
w
-"-
41
W4.
0)
r.
14
4U40
0
0.
14
41 4]
xU
0141
1.) 01,
o0
40)-)
4-4
r"
l
0000000000000000000
Ln
'4 '
ID
-44- -4'4 4
-40
n t;)-r-C4
4-
40
-. 4
140
CUD
ciU
C2-4
4-
-4'J
-4W
".4
1 1.0 1
00-14O
4wr-m
) 0,)
D-
40
r
C40 )( -4 -
"
-400
1
4
-4
0.
10 bo
4J.. -4
-...
..
r".
-4
N.
mr-
4)
4J."4
.41
-o
4
00 4
-4.I-4
-4-4.-4.-
00
00
00
(A
(D V)
-4
J4
01
0m
U
-4
w-
04
04"
-OO
r- m-
.-I
0000CV0
cc
-Q-C
C00
~-
if
'A
3t
41
u-
4--44
144
4.J1
0+ b
4J
0
b
w0
14
4.)
NN.
C41
>
0. ' -iwa
-:3
Li~ 41)
C0
M0
r.
11
r-0
nr
4~ J Cs
rI
nM0
44 114
40I00r
n0
D1Dr
DIr
Dk
D0
U OQ
0
14C
00
CU
01
0
0
co4cy m
0~~~/
coc
oc
7 (,400
80
0(,
'
4J "
I4W
to
b~j
a
U8
C 4.)
0
E
4-
-.
L,
140
0
e -Strain at falure
E - Young's modulus
I-I
w
I)
/
STRAIN, PERCENT
Figure 41.
139.
Table 9.
batch 101488-1 because the sample was accidentally broken during setup.
In
addition, the strain at failure of the Q test specimen of batch 083188-1 could
not be measured because the dial gage jammed during shear testing.
140.
Preliminary
81
Cn
r4
rCo
00 %o
)%Cr-
Lr)
0
C14
A' -4
42
112 L4n4
0
0c
c
"D%.1
'0r00
r0"a'oo
0\004a' ma'a00
4 -4'J 4
4I
ls '100
14 r-
4J 4
-00
C'0~
ul
D00
,-4
41)
4.344
r*
'0 tn %
bO) r,)
4)
2-4
C4OMC
-4
C
- r.- 4
4 1 o
n - %
Ul -4C4MC1
n0
n
,-,0
0UJ
V .D
4r4r4-
It
)
4-
4)
'-
y C)0
a'D
I %
4-
40-
>0
mC
>C
)C))
04
L
C-4-r
-4
04
2-4
In
C
In
U)
0.)
UY
*-
V.fU)0
En
444
E 1-1
0
40.
'4
lCJC
.4
C4 00C-4 0
0r
m) "42)
4 4---
04
'J4M-.?L
e
mc
r4 -
4 -4-4--44
"C
MUr'.,,4
4)
mCd4
4 r4 -
4- -4-4
4-4
-4
C:4 .
r-4
a\ ul
4)4).
(.3 -4
1
4)
W.440l-.40
4)
E--4
co14
1
44~~~~~~0
4
00
40
-4C
400
4 r40
1r40
.4
4.
4)~ -4
4)
0r
C4141)Ic
Ul
~tI
m0
Dm
0c
j -
NC\m-4
40 ho
mc -4-- -4
4)0
4)ca-4"
0.
4 .)
+
0000
bo
000
0000
000
00
r4
4 -
-4--4
-4
4.
CO
co
44
04. .44 ..
~~I
4-bO
2- -'0A 4) 2-i
E 00-
c
440
" :3
-
>
C
o.4-0mC
0U00
( C4
Wcol
n4r
",
N0t
mmoo0ooC
'
no
w
c\c
(14 t- I
e l)MCJCIe
000000M4C04.-400'-40-4
>04
.4
0.
v2
C-a.
41
-4
-
C14& 0W
co
)
.Q
CL
i r -4
-3 0
bO
4)
4).
4)4- co 14
r.
r0. ca
E
U.co
040
0J
4.3o
4-)
41-l1
41
w
41
-4
tX-C9-4
ooU0
-4
4.34
cz)
)&
Q..r
_(
)ob
-r\
~l4
d-
w .
w l82
141.
This sug-
gests that elastic modulus, and hence, material stiffness decrease with confinement, a conclusion not consistent with the results of the CIUC test
series.
The
tions resulted in higher than actual strains, and thus lower than actual
elastic moduli.
during plastic deformation, at almost constant load, long after sample seating
during elastic deformation.
Q test specimens
Comparison of the
the sulfur caps and the pedestal and top cap of the triaxial chamber.
Thus,
the Q elastic moduli values listed in Table 9 are probably incorrect and
should not be used for design.
Table 9 are probably nearly correct; however, they should not be used for
anything except rough approximation until the Q tests are reproduced and the
seating deflection problems solved.
143.
permeability for each CIUC test on which a permeability test was performed.
83
K =
(12)
QLYw
tA(P 2 - PI)
where
k - coefficient of permeability
Q - quantity of water flowing through cross-section A in time
samples:
145.
a.
111688-1
b.
091588-1
c.
091988-1
d.
083188-1
e.
100688-1
f.
022288-1
Flow readings
from outflow accumulators were therefore inaccurate and could not be used to
check flow readings from inflow accumulators.
contained in Appendix F and Table 8 were calculated from flows read from
inflow accumulators.
84
PART VI:
146.
sented herein were developed to be used in a design procedure for plastic concrete cutoff walls.
plex and time-consuming (expensive) triaxial tests to simple and quick (less
expensive) unconfined tests.
148.
Figures 42, 43, and 44 are companion plots for selecting a plastic
from the Phase I unconfined compression test series data (Figure 38) and was
subsequently used to specify batch designs for the preliminary splitting tensile test series and the triaxial test series.
85
46 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .
440
Slump= 8
..
in.
/-1
420lo 40040%
20%
u380
10%
0_0%
360-
0260
0
S340-
-.
320-
Q)
E 300U
280-
260240220
0.8
1.0
Figure 42.
1.2
1.4
1.6
.8 20 2.2 2.4 2.6
Wter-cement Ratio. W/C
2.8
3.0
3.2
365 +
28
10%
.1000-
3*
28
365+
0%+
V)
(I)
L100-
~40%
Q)
c
10
0-8
60%
'
''
1.0
;121T 141
T1T-T
1111
f1.16
2.6'
* I
2.8'
3.0
Figure 43. Unconfined compressive strength versus watercement ratio for all bentonite contents with lines being
isobars of curing age
86
3.2
I*T
Bentonite=
N%
28
4)1000
(0
0)
0.
E
C
0.8
1.0
1.2
Water-cement
1.4
ratio, W/C
1.6
1.8
Filgure 44. Unconfined compressive strength versus watercement ratio for 0 percent bentonite content with lines
being isobars of curing age
2-
Bentonite= 10%
Slump= 8 in.
In
~ioo
10IT--r-1a
Wae
cmntrto
Fiue4.UcnieCopesiesrnt
ceen
rai
esswtr
oa0pretbnoiecnetwt
benUsbaso
487
ie
urn
Bentonite= 20%
Slump= 8 in.
6365
a-
C
U
0)
D)
0 0
Vi
1.E.
UcnieUopesiesrnt
ceetrtofr2
esswtr
ecn
bnoiecnetwt
sbaso)urn
ben
etrto
0ae-e
Fiue4.
ie
g
C-
C
2
1.C.
.
Wae-eetFto
11um6
24
in2.
Bentonite= 60%
Slump= 8 in.
O)
365t
09
U
C
9
0
5
c0
2.2
2.4
2.6
28
Water-cernent
3.0
3.2
ratio, W/C
Figure 48. Unconfined compressive strength versus watercement ratio for 60 percent bentonite content with lines
being isobars of curing age
values of unconfined compressive strength and water-cement ratio to be
obtained.
Figure 49 is incom-
plete, however, because of the limited number of tensile batch designs and
curing ages.
150.
89
The designer
28
7
3
Slump= 8 inches
S-
Q.
6
C
3
28
1002
1)
4 -
60%
0.8
52
The
designer then moves up to Figure 42 and reads a cement factor of 325 ib/cu yd
corresponding to 40 bentonite content and 2.05 water-cement ratio. The
designer thus has all the mix design parameters necessary to proportion a
batch (see batch design example, Table B3).
specimens from the (triaxial companion) unconfined compression test series and
unconfined compressive strengths predicted using Figure 43 showed that the
actual strengths are, on average, 7 percent greater than the predicted
strengths. This indicates that Figure 43 produces slightly conservative but
end caps were included in Figure 43 after being corrected using Figure 50.
Figure 50 shows that as concrete unconfined compressive strengths go below
3,000 psi, neoprene caps yield progressively lower unconfined compressive
90
50-
4o
3cI
S20
o
~y=_48.53e
_ 10
- 1
I00C
2000
3000
Unconfined Ultimate Stress, neoprene cops
Unconfined compressive strength correction
curve for neoprene end caps
Figure 50.
An example of how
qu
qu,
sulphur caps
1.
153.
In addition to
91
No coirelation was
E/qu
observed between
E/qu
tion of bentonite has an equal effect on both unconfined elastic modulus and
unconfined compressive strength.
However,
E/qu
_-----
(13)
00logtA + 1,000
qu
where
E
compressometer at age
tA
tA
tA
qu/eu , where
failure decreases more slowly with age for increasing bentonite ccntents.
Figure 51 can be used in conjunction with Figure 49 to obtain an escimate of
strain at failure for a specified unconfined compressive strength.
Estimates
obtained using Figure 43, however, must be viewed with caution because of the
high degree of scatter ot
qu/eu
156.
92
1500
1400
1300
S1200
QgQQQ
oQ.SL::P
4A&"
0
Otamt
0
10%
20%
40%
60%
bentonite
bentonite
bentonite
bentonite
bentonite
Slump= 8 in.
1100
1000
u900
800
700
g 6000
U0
400
200 -
o
0-
1M
300
2o
200
~~60
Age, days
Figure 51. Ultimate secant modulus, qu/cu , versus
curing age and bentonite content with all strains (eu)
measured with compressometer
offered by Figures 43 and 49.
tensile strength (T) divided by unconfined shear strength (Su or US, = qu/2)
for each Phase II test plotted against unconfined shear strength.
157.
nate the use of Figure 49 to obtain an estimate of tensile strength corresponding to a given unconfined shear strength.
however, because it was developed only from data with cement factor equaling
300 lb/cu yd and ages 3 to 14 days.
this equation can hold for the full range of cement factors and ages contained
in Figure 43.
158.
93
1.00
... . . . .
8 in.
0.9
Slump=
0.90
0.60
.S
C
Cu050
0.40
-E
~0.30
nr
T/US-
'C
0,26
00
.0.2000
L'. 10
C.
503C
430
303
zoo
100
Unconifined Smear Strengtn, ps'
1500
Note:
),,
,,'"
All data points corrected to Cement FactorAMldata points ore averages of 1-4 tests
bs/yd
50
_1400
cL
1300
or1200
0'0
QC10007
S9000
ID 800
v)
700
P0
"L600
E00
109%
UO500
-o 40020
C
300
00
3O
__
__
__
40__
60%
D10001
27'6'9"
S9
10
31
567,8,91
100
Curing Age, days
54I 769
5
1000
to 4 tests and were corrected to a cement factor of 300 lb/cu yd using FigThe equations for the regression lines are as follows:
ure 43.
where
95.6*log(age) + 340
45.6*log(age) + 280
q., 40-
40.0*log(age) + 100
q.,602
26.1*log(age) + 0
(14)
Bentonite
Content
0%
10%
20%
,to%
60%
159.
90%
58%
36%
85%
300%
Figure 53 does
indicate that mix designs with 60 percent bentonite develop long-term unconfined compressive strength much more slowly than mix designs with bentonite
contents of 0 to 40 percent.
160.
For all CIUC tests the amount of water removed during consolida-
defined as:
95
1 cu vda
o
CF - weight of cement+bentonite in sample * volu
volume of sample
W/C -
161.
CIUC sample is reduced, but the amount of cement is assumed to remain conThus, the cement factor of the sample is increased and the water-
stant.
Figures 54 and 55 are companion plots which show cement factor and
reduction of the compressibility of the sample as the particles in the concrete matrix are squeezed closer together by the consolidation stress.
Fig-
ures 54 and 55 can be used to predict the change in cement factor and watercement ratio which will occur during consolidation under a given confining
stress.
163.
Pore pressure readings were taken for the CIUC tests of batches
Plots of deviator
stress (al-a 3 ), change in pore pressure (Au), and pore pressure coefficient A
(Au/Aal) versus axial strain (c) are shown in Figures 56, 57, and 58.
The
effective and total stress paths for each test are shown in Figures 59, 60,
and 61.
Ama,
less
than 0.1, indicating that pore water carries relatively little of the load
applied during shear.
96
380.
370
360
J:ul
350
2340
01
ZE 330
E0
320
310
50
100
150
200
250
.300
350
Figure 54.
380.........................
All CIuC tests start at CF= 300 lbs/yd'
Ox
3707A
360
20S
350
.2340
U
00
Z 330E0
320
310
300
.T---r1~mTr-T-J
o. 80.9. 1.0U 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1 81.9 2.0 2.1 2.2
Water-cement Ratio
97
1500
1400
..
..
..
..
in1300
1200I
cn
800=
S700
C/)
1.-
600
500
c)
4001
o 200
Bentonite: 0%
3 days
3QQAge:
300
100
000.5
1.01.20
Axial Strain,
000.5
1.01.20
Axial Strain,
10
5
-10
0.0 10
'.0.000
- 0.0 10
000.5
1.0
Axial Strain,
1.52.
1 5
...
..
l....ll
llf
lll
ll
|I
ll
ll
.........
l
ll l l
ll
ll
1400
a 1300
1200
C1100
-1000
900
800
09700
Ln
600
500
Bentonite:
400
3 00
Age:
r. 1 :
r 200
r-"k:
20%
58 days
200 psi
100 psi
100
0.0
0.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3.0
3.5
4.0
Axial Strain, %
25
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
2.0
1.5
2.5
Axial Strain, %
0.05
-0.00
-0.050.0
,I
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Axial Strain, %
4.0
1000
1 1 1 11 11111t
7I
MI
I
to
rr
it1
11 I
Ii
II
I I
if
III,
I I
I I III
III
."
S900
800
I700
600
in
500
0I
0
400
>
200
.300
Bentonite: 40S
14 days
Age:
O',,': 200 psi
.2
C)
100
ab.Ck:
0.0
100 psi
2.0
4.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
Axial Strain,
12.0
14.0
16.0
2.0
4.0
100
80
6.0
Axial Strain,
12.0
140
60
12.0
14.0
16.0
40~i20-
0.0
0.10 -TT__TrT~T
0.06
<~
-0.02
-0.06
0.0
2.0
4.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
Axial Strain, %
1000-
Batch:
080288-1
Bentonite: 0%
900-
Age: 3 days
Auh4~x=
800Aq~x
12.5
psi.
0.01
700
6005
to
500-
400
300200
100
1CO
200'6
30040050'06070
300 900
1-000
p= ac-,-a
3 /2
Figure 59.
1000900-
:Batch: 031889-1
Berntonite: 20%
58 days
-Age:
aCELL=
aa~zx=
Auwm=
aoA,,..
200 psi
100 psij
-44 psi
-. 09
700
600
C'J
t 500
400-
~."effective stress
300
,ctr'
200
100
0~
0 160 2(03,0 '
Figure 60.
5060066
p= a,+j 5 /'2
0 30
C00 00C
101
6OO
Batch:
022289-1
CELL=
200 psi
Bentonite: 405
Age: 14 days
500
400
C-4
300
0
II
200
100
Figure 61.
100
200
400
.00
p= ai+a3/2
500
600
shear for the 20 and 40 percent bentonite content samples are great enough to
cause significant differences between total and effective stress paths.
164.
content.
40 percent failure envelopes, the CIUC data points are the effective failure
points of tests 031889-1 and 022289-1 (Figures 60 and 61).
effective friction angle,
The values of
angles were developed from so few points they are only rough estimates.
They
on pore pressure generation but was unable to be performed because the testing
102
2000 ................
1800
On-
14 days
20%40%-
58 days
14 days
1600
1400
205
1200
C-,
J 1000
CIUC
tests
with
pore
405
pressure m-jasurements
800
/,
2.o =
50 .
T"= 42
600
400
200
00
uCompanionUC
tests
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
p= aT+a 3/2
166.
was one of the reasons that the unconfined companion tests were preformed as
part of the triaxial test program.
167.
with corresponding companion UC shear strength (Table D2, Su=qu/ 2 ) as a function of effective confining stress.
by the normalized shear strength value to obtain the CIUC shear strength.
15.0
....IIIIIIIIIl
O.ap 0% bentonite
-o
P- -0-02 0% b e nt o n it e
40% bentonite
5,14.0
13.0
12.0
5
40X
____
111.0
10.0
A14
C 9.0
C
8.0
Z)
7.0
6.0
C7
a! 5.0
140
S4.0
30
3.
2.0
21.0
0.0
I I I I, , l i ' I l IT I l 250i
i l, I I I300~l,
,l I , I
50
50
200Y
500
168.
350
strains measured by gross deflection and corresponding UC moduli were calculated from strains measured with a compressometer, it was necessary to correct
the UC elastic moduli to gross deflection.
Figure 66 shows a
plot of UC elastic moduli of samples from the same batch designs tested at the
same age with deflection measurements taken with both the compressometer and
by gross deflection (see Paragraph 68).
104
00000o Ox bentonite
0000OC0
AAAAA
6.0
20% bentonite
40% bentonite
5.0
A3
OM
4.0
40
2.0$
1.07cA
0~ 50
101020
230N5
25
12.0
tt
~- 14.0
11.07
950
15
00%
17.0000
05
16.0A14030
20
5.0
4059
14.0
15 3.0
etne
etne
betoit
.S 12.0
Q1.0
80
07.00
00
20
105
20
30
2500
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2000
1500
V 1000.
00
00
.2
500,
0-0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Elastic Modulus. Cornpressometer, ksi.
2500
from the predicted values and any design must take the variability of the
plots into account.
106
3 .5 0
oQQQ
Eo3o
3.00
,, ,, ,, ,
0% bentonite
20% bentonite
5 2.50
44
.7
2.00
03
1.5 0
A7
1 00
o 0.50
0 .0 0
..
0
Figure 67.
.. .. .. .
50
250
200
'50
i00
Confining Stress, psi
300
350
idea that the mechanical effect of consolidation, i.e., the squeezing together
of particles within the soil matrix, has no effect on stress-strain-strength
behavior.
172.
formed at the cement factor and water cement ratio of CIUC test 091488-1 and
tested in shear at the same age and confining pressure as 091488-1.
compared as follows:
107
The tests
a.
b.
0 percent
328 lb/cu yd
1.0
250 psi
50 psi
3 days
8 in.
0.217
Bentonite content
Cement factor
Water-cement ratio
Confining stress
Test age
Slump at mixing
Void ratio
173.
in Figure 68.
Su _psi
Test
CIUC
Q
% difference
174.
1,463
963
-34%
E ksi
719
225
-69%
Ef_%
1.4
5.5
293%
Because they
were not consolidated, the void ratios of the Q tests were higher than that of
the CIUC test.
movement in the Q tests which in turn results in lower shear strengths and
elastic moduli and higher strains at failure.
175.
108
3 00 0 .......
..................
. ..............
. ............
.......
cuC (Son.- O. CF- 328. W/CF- 1 0. slump- 8 in.)
2750
2500
2250
,2000
1750
0
1500
1250
to0
0
a-TEST (Ben'
On0.CF-
1000
S 750
-4
500
250
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7-0
8.0
Axial Strain,
Figure 68.
Deviator stress versus strain, comparison
of CIUC, and Q tests with batch design at same age
with effective confining stress equaling 100 psi
stress-strain-strength behavior discussed in preceding parts of this report.
The effects of bentonite, confining stress, and age are each addressed below.
The effect of consolidation is addressed by comparing CIUC and Q tests within
each section.
curves for each triaxial batch contained in Appendix E and test summaries in
Tables 8 and 9.
The influence of
bentonite content on triaxial
stress-strain-strength behavior
176.
effective consolidation/confinement stress, 3 days age and 0, 20, and 40 percent bentonite shows that shear strength and elastic modulus decline quickly
with the addition of bentonite:
109
Bentonite
percent
S.. Rsi
CIUC
0
0
20
40
695
479
351
450
254
146
From
This
The
cause of this phenomena is most likely the increase in cement factor and
reduction of water-cement ratio that accompanies consolidation.
177.
strain of failure are much more difficult to quantify because of the high
variability of these parameters.
E. ksi
CIUC
e_ percent
CIUC
919
1,517
215
81
54
14
1.28
1.52
3.37
2.65
4.47
13.85
The percent drop in elastic modulus between 0 and 40 percent bentonite content
is 77 percent for CIUC tests and 83 percent for Q tests.
more dramatic than those of shear strength and indicate that the addition of
bentonite reduces stiffness more than it reduces shear strength.
failure generally increases with the addition of bentonite.
Strain at
This increase.
between 20 and 40 percent bentonite where the space between aggregate particles in the concrete matrix becomes great enough to allow particle movement.
In addition, the increase in strain at failure is greater for Q tests than for
CIUC tests, most probably because the Q tests have higher water-cement ratios
and lower cement factors.
110
same age and confining stress shows that the ratios of CIUC shear strength and
Q shear strength to companion unconfined shear strength increase with increasing bentonite content, as shown in Figures 63 and 67, respectively.
This is
also true of the ratios CIUC elastic modulus and strain at failure to companion unconfined elastic modulus and strain at failure as shown in Figures 64
and 65, respectively.
mental gains in shear strength, elastic modulus, and strain at failure are
more a function of confinement than of changes in cement factor and watercement ratio.
tion can occur because the particles in the concrete matrix cannot be pushed
any closer together.
The magnitudes of these changes are larger between 3- and 7-days age than
between 7- and 14-days age.
111
180.
0
20
40
*
**
age. days
7
14
3
695
479
351
1,285
606*
292
fu, percent
E, ksi
SU, psi
Bentonite
percent
1,460
age, days
7
14
919
1,517
215
--
391**
739
661*
228
age, days
7
3
1.28
1.52
3.37
949
--
236**
14
0.65 0.83
0.90*
4.89
8.13**
Age - 8 days.
Average of two tests.
For the Q test, the patterns of behavior are the same as described
For Q tests at
*
**
Bentonite
percent
0
20
40
450
254
146
S', psi
age, days
7
14
511
271*
140
549
--
155**
3
81
54
14
E, ksi
age. days
7
14
307
58*
19
173
--
34**
C", percent
age, days
7
2.65
4.87
13.85
3.68
4.73*
--
14
1.39
--
11.99**
Age - 8 days.
Average of two tests.
The increases in shear strength between 3- and 7-days age are 12 and 6 percent
for 0 and 20 percent bentonite concrete, respectively.
at failure and elastic modulus of the Q tests are too variable to draw any
specific conclusions.
112
182.
The permeability
183.
a.
b.
c.
d.
A
Permeability decreases with increasing age. This is
probably the result of tighter binding which occurs between
particles in the concrete matrix as cement cures with time.
Permeability decreases by a
Permeability
on permeability.
water-cement ratio.
A designer can
113
10~ *-0
0 00 0 2 0% b e n .
AAAAA 40%
ben.
.00
'00
100
1A
Age, days
Figure 69.
114
PART VII:
185.
gram.
Summary
186.
clay to conventional concrete significantly increases the ductility and plastic deformation of the concrete while simultaneously reducing its shear
strength.
b.
C.
Shear strength and elastic modulus increase with age (Paragraph 151 and Figure 53).
d.
e.
f.
g.
115
Permeability and
erodibility of plastic concrete
188.
b.
C.
d.
Permeability does not decrease with increasing bentonite content because of corresponding increases in water-cement ratio
(Table 8 and Paragraph 180).
e.
f.
data:
a.
b.
Cement factor
(2)
Bentonite content
0 to 60 percent of cement
factor
(3)
Concrete age
3 to 660 days
Cement factor
300 lb/cu yd
(2)
Bentonite content
(3)
Effective consolidation/
confining stress
0 to 300 psi
(4)
Concrete age
0 to 660 days
Recommendations
190.
116
angles.
In addition, all of
the Q tests in this test program should be repeated to better evaluate Q elastic modulus and strain at failure.
191.
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
uate the behavior of plastic concrete under different loading and environmental conditions.
a.
b.
C.
d.
117
REFERENCES
1968.
"Balderhead Dam,"
in house
Engineer Manual
Noguera, G. 1985.
"Performance of Colbun Main Dam During Construction,"
Proceedings of Fifteenth International Conference on Large Dams, pp 1049-1059.
Pablo, L. M., and Cruz, A.
1985.
"Performance of Colbun Main Dam During
Construction," Proceedings of Fifteenth International Conference on Large
Dams, pp 1135-1151.
Peck, R. 1986.
"Report on Seepage Control Measures," Mud Mountain Dam for
Seattle District, Corps of Engineers, pp 1-21.
Sliwinski, Z., and Fleming, W. C. K.
1975.
"Practical Considerations Affecting the Construction of Diaphragm Walls," Proceedings of the Conference on
Diaphragm Walls and Anchorages, Institution of Civil Engineers, London,
pp 1-10.
Tamaro, G.
1988.
"Plastic Concrete Cutoff Walls," Proceedings of REMR
Workshop on New Remedial Seepage Control Methods for Embankment-Dams and Soil
Foundations, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Tardieu, B., and Costaz, J.
1987.
"Plastic Concrete Cutoff Wall," Technical
Lecture on Plastic Concrete for Slurry Walls, US Bureau of Reclamation.
118
119
APPENDIX A:
DETAILED TEST DATA FROM COLBUN MAIN DAM LABORATORY
PROGRAM AND MUD MOUNTAIN DAM LABORATORY PROGRAM
Table Al
Summary of Batch Designs for Colbun Main Dam Research
Program (Woodward-Clyde Consultants 1981)
Proposed
Mix
Components
Alternate
Mix B
500 ml
400 ml
500 ml
20 gm
16 gm
20 gm
Cement
100 gm
100 gm
150 gm
Silty Clay**
600 gm
600 gm
600 gm
Concrete Sand*
600 gm
1.000 gm
800 gm
Water
Bentonite*
2,116
1,820
2,070
The batches prepared, and their components and quantities used are as
follows:
Components
Mix
No. 1
Proposed
Mix - AD
Mix
No. 2
600 ml (500)
500 ml
500 ml
20 gm
30 gm
48 gm (40)
Cement
100 gm
50 gm
90 gm (75)
Silty clay**
600 gm
600 gm
720 gm (600)
Concrete sandt
600 gm
600 gm
720 gm (600)
Water
Bentonite*
*
**
0
E0
C:
0
)u0
0
L.
4)
02t
0'
(~
0
'.0
'1:
cc
'0
) 001
0."
II
0*0.
10
(N
a,
I-''
oo
-
.0
.0
'D
coN
(N(N
'0w
ID'.
0~
'
'
co'
00
W
0o'0
L4
4)
0o
&N
.0
0~
0
.00
21
4)d
.00
w
40
'-A4
4)
..... . . ...
00Ccc
- .1
.0
--
O.*L
Go
0.
0
u
-0
--
cc.0~
r--
0
4(N
4D
~0-0
0-
-((N
.--.
V)
-0
01
r-0
.1 Gor
cc~
0.'0
'
c)
0n
In,
04
'
C~
(4
In
4d (A(N
'~-
$4
.--.
w 4-.1a
0
C
MO4
l
3t
-~~0
-.
bo
Nd1
0 (
0
.,
-. ,
41
0
0
0-1C
bo
X".-
(4
r0
u.
..
a,-
14
(4
CU
ID0
.C(
!.4--0
00
4)
.oA5
C'f
00
co
0,(
C,4f
4m.
4(
C->
C0
0,
GoN
0r-
Table A4
Summary of Colbun Main Dam Research Phase I Permeability Tests
(Woodward-Clyde Consultants 1981)
Stage
Hyd.
Identification
Batch
k/cm2
No.
System
Proposed Mix
2.980
2.980
Alternate Mix A
Alternate Mix B
ac
ke 200 C
cm/sec
II-
x 108
Closed
42
43.1
2-1
Open
45
42.9
2.980
2-2
Open
45
43.2
2.980
2-3
Open
45
40.7
2.980
2-4
Open
45
41.0
2.973
3-1
Open
84
41.4
2.973
3-2
Open
84
41.7
2.973
3-3
Open
84
42.3
2.973
3-4
Open
84
41.8
2.973
3-5
Open
84
37.4
2.994
Closed
36
3.7
2.987
2-1
Open
45
4.1
2.987
2-2
Open
45
3.8
2.987
3-1
Open
84
3.6
2.987
3-2
Open
82
3.6
2.973
Closed
35
3.5
2.973
2-1
Open
45
4.0
2.973
2-2
Open
45
3.2
2.966
3-1
Open
84
3.0
2.966
3-2
Open
82
3.2
A6
Table A5
Summary of Colbun Main Dam Research Phase II Permeability Tests
(Woodward-Clyde Consultants 1981)
Batch
ac
Identification
Proposed Mix
Mix No. 1
Mix No. 2
AD
Stage
kg/cm 2
No.
3.001
3.001
2-1
3.001
ke 20oC
cm/sec
Hyd.
System
i,.-
x 10-8
20
17.2
Open
100
17.8
2-2
Open
100
17.5
3.001
2-3
Open
100
17.8
2.994
3-1
Open
200
18.2
2.994
3-2
Open
200
18.1
2.994
3-3
Open
200
17.8
2.994
3-4
Open
200
18.2
2.994
24
17.4
2.987
2-1
Open
100
17.0
2.987
2-2
Open
100
17.3
2.987
2-3
Open
100
17.3
2.994
3-1
Open
200
17.4
2.994
3-2
Open
200
17.4
2.994
3-3
Open
200
17.2
2.994
3-4
Open
200
17.2
3.001
3.001
2-1
3.001
Closed
Closed
Closed
19
9.6
Open
100
9.4
2-2
Open
100
9.7
3.001
2-3
Open
100
9.9
3.001
3-1
Open
200
9.5
3.001
3-2
Open
200
9.8
3.001
3-3
Open
200
9.7
3.001
3-4
Open
200
9.6
A7
Table A6
Summary of Colbun Main Dam Research Phase III Permeability Tests
(Woodward-Clyde Consultants 1981)
Batch
Identification
ac
k/Lcm 2
Mix No. 2
2.99
2.99
2.99
2.99
2.99
2.99
2.99
2.99
2.99
W/C - 5.56
Mix No. 1
W/C
5.97
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
Stage
No.
1-1
2-1
3-1
3-2
3-3
4-1
5-1
5-2
5-3
Hyd.
System
Io
Closed
Closed
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
20
40
100
100
100
200
282
281
282
ke 200 C
cm/sec
X 10 -8
7.3
7.2
7.0
6.9
7.1
7.2
7.9
7.5
7.4
Remarks
Initial
After overnight
After overnight
After overnight
At maximum io
At maximum i.
At maximum io
3.07
3.00
3.00
3.00
1-1
Closed
20
11.9
2-1
Closed
40
11.8
3-1
Open
100
12.1
Initial
3-2
Open
100
11.7
After overnight
4-1
Open
200
12.5
5-1
Open
282
13.5
At maximum io
Took specimen down and installed No. 4 screens
1A-1
Closed
20
11.8
2A-l
Open
100
11.8
3A-1
Open
200
12.2
4A-1
Open
282
13.6
Initial at maximum
3.00
4A-2
3.00
io
Mix No. 3
W/C
6.4
Open
282
10.0
After 24 hr
1-1
2-1
3-1
Closed
Closed
Open
12.9
12.9
15.5
Initial
3-2
Open
3-3
3-4
4-1
5-1
5-2
5-3
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
20
40
100
100
100
100
200
280
280
280
A8
13.7
13.5
13.5
14.1
9.9
15.1
16.0
After overnight
Initial
After overnight
Table A7
Summary of Plastic Concrete Mix Designs and Tests
Mix No
NPDL No.
1.
2.
Mix Characteristics
Cement + Bentonite
(C + B),* lb/cu yd
Unit water, lb/cu yd
W/(C + B) ratio, by weight
Sand content, percent
Slump, in. (measured)
Air, percent (measured)
A
3097
(Control)
300 + 0
B
3098
180 + 120
354.2
1.18
50.0
7 1/2
1.2
535.1
1.78
48.0
8
0.5
60
80
120
230
48.8
51.2
126.5
275.6
**
0.58
0.47
0.35
0.27
C
3099
D
3100
120 + 180
682.6
2.28
48.0
8
0.5
25
35
70
130
60 + 240
1050.0
3.50
48.0
8 1/4
0.6
(15)t
(15)
(25)
(60)
27.1
38.5
44.6
115.9
5
5
10
15
(15.1)
(10.3)
(25.4)
(43.4)
1.6
2.5
3.8
5.4
3.3
(1.9)
5.6
(1.6)
12.4
(3.9)
31.6 (10.1)
0.4
0.6
1.2
2.2
0.72
0.58
0.54
0.39
(0.83)
(0.86)
(0.68)
(0.59)
1.48
0.90
0.83
0.58
A9
Table A7 (Concluded)
Mix No
NPDL No.
3.
4.
A
3097
(Control)
265
Young's modulus,
E x 103 psi
295.7
--
100
--
200
--
25
70
41.2
20.7
233.0
301.5
298.0
67.7
74.0
69.8
9.6
20.3
19.8
102.6
U1
10
3 _PSi**, t
Presure Test **
Consolidation; percent
in.
---
12.5
1.5
17.5
2.1
20.8
2.5
--
7.9
11.0
16.2
--
--
--
D
3100
5.
C
3099
B
3098
--
620
300
15
582.8
161.9
7.6
125.2
1.8
319.7
0.74
0.20
0.24
0.2
0.0
2.6
-- .--
3.8
--
48
A1O
APPENDIX B:
Table BI
ComRarison of Grain Size Distribution of Tufts University
Aggregate to Grain Size Distribution of MUD Mountain
Dam Research Aggregate (NPSEN)
Sieve
Size
Mud Mountain
Sand
Gravel
Tufts Phase II
Sand
Gravel
3/4 in.
--
--
1/2 in.
--
34
--
34
14
29
3/8 in.
--
60
--
60
--
68
97
93
94
16
99
11
98
14
97
16
28
100
26
100
37
100
30
52
--
56
--
65
--
50
79
--
86
--
85
--
100
91
--
96
--
95
--
PAN
100
--
100
--
100
B3
--
Table B2
Chemical Analysis of Cement Used in Research
New Portland Type I Cement
Sample I
Analysis
Si0 2
Specification
Requirements
Result
18.6
A1 20 3
5.9
Fe 20 3
1.8
CaO
62.2
--
MgO
2.5
6.0
SO 3
4.4
3.5
Moisture Loss
0.3
--
Loss on Ignition
1.3
3.0
Na20
0.26
K20
1.09
Total as Na20
0.98
TiO2
0.26
P 20 5
0.26
--
Insoluble Residue
0.25
0.75
Free CaO
0.34
--
--
375 m2 /kg
3.12 Mg/m
Calculated Compounds
C 3A
15
C3 S
52
C 2S
14
6
C4AF
(Continued)
B4
160
--
Table B2 (Concluded)
New Portland Type I Cement
Sample 2
Analys is
Result
Specification
Reguirements
18.9
Si0 2
A1203
6.1
Fe2 03
1.9
-
CaO
63.2
MgO
2.6
6.0
SO3
3.8
3.5
Moisture Loss
0.7
Loss on Ignition
2.1
3.0
Na2 0
0.30
1K20
1.19
Total as Na2O
1.08
T'0 2
0.28
P2 05
0.25
Insoluble Residue
0.27
0.75
Free CaO
0.31
399 m /kg
3.08 Mg/n 3
Density
Calculated Compounds
C3 A
15
C3 S
55
C2 S
13
C4 AF
B5
160
--
Table B3
Chemical Analysis of Bentonite Used in Research
90 Barrel Bentonite
Sample 4
Analys is
Result
Si0 2
55.8
A1 20 3
16.2
Fe2 0 3
3.5
CaO
2.9
MgO
3.0
S03
0.1
Moisture Loss
9.8
Loss on Ignition
3.2
Na 2 0
2.02
K20
0.61
0.5
Free CaO
0.00
B6
Table B4
Batch Design Example
Cement factor, percent bentonite, and water cement ratio were chosen.
b.
Dry weights of cement, bentonite, and sand and gravel were calculated
using the absolute volume method for 1 cu yd of concrete.
C.
Dry weights were corrected for hygroscopic moisture content using water
content data from previous batches.
d.
e.
After batches were made, material weights were corrected for any difference in water added and for actual hygroscopic moisture of constituents.
Actual cement factor, bentonite content, and water-cement ratio were back
figured from final corrected weights.
f.
Percent bentonite:
20 %
Water-cement ratio:
1.9
Batch yield:
b.
300 lb/cu yd
1.4 cu ft
2.75
c.
d.
Weight of cement, bentonite, and water are calculated from definitions of batch parameters:
(Continued)
(Sheet 1 of 6)
B7
Table B4 (Continued)
therefore:
bentonite - 60 lb
Water-cement ratio -
therefore:
weight of water
- 1.9
weight of cement+bentonite
(2)
570 lb
The volumes of cement, bentonite, and water are calculated using the
following equation:
(Bl)
V.
where
W, - dry weight of material
G. - gravity of solids of material
1. - unit weight of water
therefore
Volume cement -
240
3.15 (62.4)
60
Volume bentonite = 2.75 (62.4)
570
Volume water - 62.
62.4
1.22 cu ft
0.35 cu ft
9.14 cu ft
Total = 10.71 cu ft
(3)
16.29 cu ft
16.29 _ 8.15 cu ft
2
(Continued)
(Sheet 2 of 6)
B8
Table B4 (Continued)
(4)
The dry weight of sand and gravel is then calculated using equation
BI to solve for W.:
Ws - N 5 7w
therefore
Weight sand -
(8.15)(2.65)(62.4)
Weight gravel -
(8.15)2.65)(62.4)
1,348 lb
1,348 lb
e.
The dry weights are then corrected for hygroscopic moisture content:
Total weight - dry weight + weight of water
or
WT =
+w
(B2)
by definition
Water content, W
Ws
therefore
w.= w7W.
(B3)
(Continued)
(Sheet 3 of 6)
B9
Table B4 (Continued)
WT -
Wa + Wc Ws
or
WT = W(1+W,)
Corrected weights:
Cement - 240 (1.005) - 241.2 lb
Bentonite = 60 (1.10) - 66.0 lb
Sand - 1,348 (1.03) - 1,388.0 lb
Gravel - 1,348 (1.015)
1,368.0 lb
1.2 lb
60.0
6.0 lb
40 lb
Bentonite
66.0
1,388
1,348
Gravel - 1,368
1,348 = 20 lb
Sand
Total
Corrected weight of water
570
67.2 lb
67.2 - 502.8 lb
502.8 lb
cu ft
Reduction factor - 1.4
1
cu
ft-
1 cu yd
=27
0.052 cu ft
cu ft
(Continued)
(Sheet 4 of 6)
BlC
Table B4 (Continued)
These are the weights of materials that were actually added to the mixer.
g.
After batch was made weights were corrected for any differernce in water
added and for actual hygroscopic moisture content:
Suppose an additional 0.9 lb of water were needed to achieve
an 8-in. slump and that the following actual hygroscopic
moisture contents were calculated for the materials:
Actual Water Content, W c
Cement -
0.3 %
Bentonite -
10.3 %
Sand -
1.9 %
Gravel -
0.8 %
Weight of
Weight of
Components
Weight
Solids, Ws
Water, Ww
Cement
12.51
12.46
0.05
3.42
3.05
0.37
Bentonite
Sand
72.0
70.63
1.37
Gravel
70.9
70.33
0.57
Water
27.0
27.0
--
29.36 lb
h.
The values of the dry weights are then calculated and actual cement
factor, bentonite content, and water-cement ratio back calculated.
Volumes were again calculated using equation Bl.
Weight
lb
Volume
cu ft
12.46
0.063
3.05
0.018
Sand
70.63
0.427
Gravel
70.33
0.425
Water
29.36
0.471
Total
185.83
1.403
Components
Cement
Bentonite
(Continued)
(Sheet 5 of 6)
BI1
Table B4 (Concluded)
185.83 lb
lft
3.05
(12.46 + 3.05)
132.5 lb/cu ft
298 lb/cu yd
0.197 - 20 %
1.893 - 1.89
(Sheet 6 of 6)
BI2
LMO&M AS 8MM3O
AD~ VW
:Izz
oo
CD
a.
0U)i
a)
200
of
mow la
IB13
ZU
w
>
2-
_U
-a
-#IL
&DH
AS-
-n-
00
co
co
CO
L
-
:6O
UO
CD
--
<
-4-
3t
LHW Al NaHDV
zRJ~B14
K:
wL
-0
X,
'
CL
Ln
of ~C*)
00
Z-
<cn,
ca
-4
B15
WU
AWgV4%
At 1US#VOD 1041: li
I
< CD
-a
w-t4
DD
>
C)--i
~C/
00
-4
.00
"-4
B161
APPENDIX C:
CALIBRATIONS OF RIEHLE TESTING MACHINE
AND 1,000 LB BEAM BALANCE SCALE
OMER
Reading
lb
Povi j
Readlng
lb
Mbchine trro-
P. 1k,
Code
lb
xam-
00
03
0
I0
10
10
10
3 F 5
Tufts University
Location
Anderson Hall
Civil Engineering
Div.
MACHINE
_ _
__
_8
4nufacturer
Fairbanks
Platform Balance
Zapaclty
_____
0
Serial No.
1,000 lbs.
20
20
40
40
0
0
00
7
0.25
-1.3
0.33
600
-1.8
0.3
796.6
800
-3.4
0.43
996.2
1,000
-4.9
0.49
80
80
100
100
100
100
199.5
200
-0.5
to
398.7
400
598.2
Toledo scale
PROVING RINGS
P fl Serial
Loading
Code
Nn.
Range
Verif. Date
Lab. No.
6-1-88
SJT.01/03817
1046
18248
3
"
Dead Wts.
0
0
123
Cal. Ind.
0-2,400 i SJT.01/103817
6-1-8 8
0-25
lb
Waltham, City
Bureau of Wts.
A1l--
0-150
lb
Bureau of Wts. ii
&
m___q_
Service Engineer
G. W. 196e
Date
Aug. 29,1988-ASTR
Figure Cl.
Rpec. El
Calibration frequency
C3
I year
CrrtifiraIr of Urrifirntion
Lawrence, Mt, C1E41
Ii
6,
nwmb,,)
Date of V'mfictdion
Mchkle R zi
r)-
30D
,500
11
0
0
Laid,.
,0
,07
1b
3,02D lb
3CO,0D
30,C0
ib
i__,030 - 150,009
".:.-,
l
1 5,0,30 1b
ILb
6,000 - 60,0w lb
0 - 60,OD: ib
0 -
101
hine ReniR,
,a4WdII
-,OOO - 30,0C3
30,03 1b
02155
_,,
7rans. Letter
= 27-E:
52-6
5-2,-866
Date (s) of certification
5-27-86
I 52-3,
C. V. PMCecry
Figure C2.
C4
OWNER
Provi ri
Reading
lb
lb
Reading
wI
University
UTfts
u
C.
1 &2
';0
1 & 2
1,200
.6
,C.I
0."
1 & 2
1 &2
l(
2,404.1
2.400
4.'
C.-7
I &2
:989.0
3.000
-. 1.0
0..37
1 & 3
1,490.0
,500
1
-:0.'
C..E7
1 &I
2,000
0.43
1 s 3
6.00:
-.
61
1 & 3
c.p 6-_
9.74
9,00
9M
,90 6
12,003
-9
' 2,9E7
R-77779
C,3
Czde
.0
2.F
-!
3,800
Riehle
Capaci ty
P. K
11]P02.6
MInufacturr
Tw
.7
1,201.6
M4dford,
Nktbhie bror
3f'3
299.0
Anderson hall
Co.
& 3
_-&
12
1 &3
0.7g
&.utact
urer
EM Electronics, Inc.
1.9
ita-.'
C.
PROVING RINGS
P. n
Code
1
LoadIne
Range
Verif. Date
Lab. No.
Cal. Ind.
5-21-86
18248
0-2,400 lb
3.031OX__
5,9
6,0102
I,944
1
Serial
1046
2,9F7
-1.901
."
SJ7.01 /103221
5-27-8'
SJ.01
/10322!
____
0.52
& 3
&
12,000
-56
C.47
1 &3
100
-9
C.5
I &3
.I
I & 3
23.853
24,003
-147
29,979
30.000
-21
0.0
0.
1 & 3
& 4
-27-8b
10234
0-24,000 1 SJT.01 /103221
40796
0-240,000 1
SJI.01 /10322.
5.994
V
__L__
6.000
9,979
-21
C.21
1 & 3
" 9,907
20,00.
-93
C.47
1 & 3
2-.966
30.000
-?4
C.:1
I & 5
".. 54
40,003
-46
'.0I1
49.942
50,0:%-
-5B
1 & 5
1 & 5
"
le.n
.-
70 F
Service Engineer
..
W.,MCI
J
Date
Mi1y 2;,
1997
992
'___________
AS?"
Figure C2.
-E
10.01,Y
-8
I &
____
Spec.
EA
(Sheet 2 of 3)
(5
0.11
0.03
Cal1bratio-
r:w
-"
I e
rc
2b
lb
Irror
P. R
Code
Raw
Tufts University
1I,0C5
i',Oo-
03
1 & 3
Anderson hall
30,016
3o,000
!6
0.05
1 & 4
6C,052
60,000
V2
0. 0:
TI & 4
' O
'
7.
C.0.)
I & 4
Locat ion
44Miufacturer
1ihe120,058
S 90,07
__Riehle
(6 ranges)
~~
120,000
PI8C
150,087
150,030
606
30,0:6
'
30,000
It,
0.S5
1 & 4
4C,029
40,000
29
0.7
I & 4
80,]95
8
80,000
29?
0.
1 & 4
I
120,000
3 E
0.-5
T & 4
160,333
160,000
333
0.2]
1 & 4
2('0,554
200,000
Ezz
C'.--
1 & 4
'*-7=
1 & 4
n.
R-77779
CALIBRATION APPARATUS DATA
TYpe of Apparatus Uae
Hanufacy 6rer
BL
Electronics, Inc.
P. R
Code
PROVING RINGS
Serial
Loadine
Nn.
Ran e
Verif. Date
Lab. No.
_-
5-27-86
1046
2
Cal. Ind.
18248
0-2,400 lb
SJ1.0] /103221
5-2;-85
Si.-2 1-0822
10234
0-24,000
SJiT.01 /103221
140796
5-21-8b
5-21-Sb
5
I
__
__
---
rean- rJ
7n r
Service Engineer
Date
May 2],
1957
Figure C2.
A SWSpec. Al
Caltrat o- fre:ue-cy :
(Sheet 3 of 3)
C6
f;T
QCrtifirate of Urhrifiration
Awma
01841
Tufts University
""dw
Date of Verification
Machine Range
-
3,000 lb
15,000 lb
1,500 -15,000 lb
_________________
0-30,000 lb
0
3,000 -30,000 lb
______
6,000
60,000 lb
_________________
15,000
150,000 lb
_________________
S0
S
S
300
60,000 lb
150,000 lb
Loading Range
Machine Range
Loading Range
S0
3,000 lb
300,000 lb
30,000
200,000 1,
'0Cal.
(9) of
Ind. Serial No.
1046
Date($) of certificatio
Name
iran "iatua
Compan-s_
C7
& utqn
Qi.
OWNER
Nochne
Proving
Reading
Reading
lb
lb
Machine Zrror
lb
P. A,
Code
0.57
1 & 2
Tufts University
298.3
300
-1.7
Anderson hall
596.7
600
-3.3
0.55
1 &2
1,196.4
1,200
-3.6
0.3
1 & 2
1,793.8
1,800
-6.2
0.34
1& 2
2,389.1
2,400
-10.9
0.45
1& 2
2,985.0
3,000
-15
0.5
1 & 3
1,490
1,500
-10
0.67
1 & 2
2.982
3,000
-18
0.6
1 & 3
5,974
6,000
-26
0.43
1 & 3
8,960
9,000
-40
0.44
l&3
11,942
12,000
-58
0.48
1 &
14,920
15,000
-80
0.53
1&
2,995
3,000
-5
0.17
i & 3
5,986
6,000
-14
0.23
I & 3
11,966
12,000
-34
0.28
1 &3
17,953
18,000
-47
0.26
1&3
23,931
24,000
-69
0.29
1 & 3
29,973
30,000
-27
0.09
1 &.
5F986
6,000
-14
0.23
1&3
9,967
10,000
-33
0.33
1 S 3
19,956
20,000
-44
0.22
963
30,000
-37
0.12
1 &
39,956
40,000
-44
0.11
1 5
Locat ion
Riehle
Type_
Capacity
0 - 300,000 lb
(6 ranges)
Serial No).
R-77779
CALIBRATION APPARATUS DATA
Type of Apparatus Used
With ASr
in Accordance
Specification El4
PROVING RINGS
P. RI Serial
%c.
Code
Verif. Date
18248
Lab. No.
6-1-88
SJT.01/103817
Cal. Ind.
6-1-88
0-2,400 lb SJT.01/103817
10234
6-1-88
0-24,000 11SJT.01/103817
140796
6-1-88
0-240,000 1ISJT.01/103817
1046
Loading
Range
_._
-A
70
Date
Service Engineer
G.
. oCTtv
Aug.
ug 29,1988
2,188
Figure C3.
-55
0.11
50,000
0.11
60,000
-52
59,948
ASIM Spot. El
Calibration frequency
59,948
(Sheet 2 of 3)
C8
1 &
1 &.1year
mahne
Reading
lb
OWNER
Name
Tufts Unviersity
mhine 2
2b
P. P
Code
15,005
15,000
0.03
1 & 3
Location
Anderson Hall
30,027
30,000
27
0.09
1 & 4
60,062
60,000
90,000
62
90
__90,090
0.1
0.1
1 & 4
1 &4
120,114
120,000
114
0.1
1 & 4
150,190
150,000
190
0.13
1 & 4
30,027
30,000
27
0.09
1 & 4
0-300,000 lb
40,031
40,000
31
0.08
1 &
79,985
80,000
-15
0.02
I&
119,864
120,000
-136
0.11
1 & 4
159,673
160,000
-327
0.2
1 &
199,721
200,000
-279
0.14
1 &4
MACHINE
4anu fact urer
iehle
Tye
.apac ty
Serial
(6 ranges)
t4:.
R-77779
CALIBRATION APPARATUS DATA
rype of Apparatus Used
AT ci
neFr
PROVING
P.
Code
Range
No.
Vert. Date
Lab.
Nc,
6-1-88
Cal. Ind.
SJT.01/103817
6-1-88
0-2,400 lb SJT.01/103817
6-1-88
0-24,000 11 SJT.01/103817
6-1-88
0-240,000
SJT.01/103817
1046
18248
3
RINGS
Loading
R!erial
10234
140796
__
5
6
-puted
.emn'n.
70 F
Service Engineer
G. W. momy
Date
Aug. 29,1988
ASY'M SPee.
Figure C3.
Ul
(Sheet 3 of 3)
C9
APPENDIX D:
SUMMARY TABLES OF UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TESTS (PHASES I
AND II), BRAZILIAN TENSILE TESTS (PHASES I AND II), AND
FLEXURAL BEAM TESTS
Table D1
Summary of Phase I Unconfined Compression Test Program
CF
ben
V/c
SL
G
%air
age
storage
strain
water
qu
I
en
AVG
STD
ITs
0 1.43 7.25
SL
0 1.31 8.75
SL
0 0.91
SL
7.75
G
142
G
Il
G
142
5 wet room
5 wet room
5 wet room
7 wet room
7 wet root
7 cure box
62 wet room
62cure box
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
8.9
8.3
8.8
-
qu
603
674
774
797
qu
T60
585
623
691
785
616
919
864
qg
1379
1716
1536
eu
AVG
STO
%SID
0.0035 603
129 0.0025 674
432 0.0022 774
492 0.0025 797
206
en
0.0035 656
0.0029
0.0033
0.0020 697
0.0029
0.0034
0.0023 891
469 0.0028
382
320
251
603
406
60
538
75
11%
69
10%
28
3%
en
133
81
(Continued)
(Sheet I of 7)
D3
Table Dl (Continued)
061687-1-A
061687-1-1
061687-1-G
061687-1-J
0610l7-1-1
061687-1-1
061687-1-0
061687-1
061681-1-C
061687-1-?
Batch 10 C1 bee v/c
SL
071387-1 242
7.5
140
0 1.61
1.8 071387-1-A
071387-1-0
071387-1-P
071387-1-G
071387-1-1
071387-1-i
071387-1-1
071387-1-8
071387-1-C
SL
1.6 8.75
G
140
01
0.0023 753
0.0024
0.0021
0.0023 661
21
3%
13
21
66
9%
61
6%
780
8.6
754
1853 0.0010
qg
731
1207
102387-1102387-1-N
102387-1-1
102387-1-1
102387-1-L
102387-1-F
102387-1-1
102317-I-Q
102387-1-I
142
11
comp
9.1
-
9.7
28 yet
28wet
28wet
55wet
room cop
8.4
room gross room gross room gross 10.2
55 wet room gross 55wet room gross 91vet room cop 91wet room gross 91yet room gross -
498
540
540
540
wet room
wet room
wet room
wet room
cop
comp
comp
comp
918
eu
0.0024 717
396 0.0033
707 0.0031
1032
622 0.0031
1058
573 0.0029
440 0.0017 905
763
911
1040
891
1022
802
0.2024
0.0028
0.003( 905
0.0028
0.0030
063 0.0020 065
662
578
848
618
473
943
796
841
862
2350 0,0019
2313 0.0017
2131 0.0019
qo
4 wet
4 wet
4 wet
7 wet
10.8
931
room gross
room cOmP room gross 15.2
,wet room gross 7 wet room coop 2Awet room gross 28wet room gross -
943
5340.0028
111387-1-8
111317-1-C
111387-1-A
111317-1-J
11137-1-I
111317-1-L
111387-1-P
111317-1-1
111387-1-0
111387-1-1
8.1
0
0
0
312
631
790
room gross
8.9
6%
en
comp
9.2
132
21
3A
533
405
459
566
orols
34
67
783
738
737
661
102387-1-J
0 1.26 7.75
0.0027 2291
0.0029
0.0029
0.0018 2371
0,0018
0.0017
,02387-1-G
111387-1 321
neop
neop
neop
gross
qn
2215
528 0.0021
102387-1-1
3 core box
3 wet room
3wet room
7 wet room
7wet room
30wet room
20 wet r,4m
30 core box
91wet room
633 wet room
600 wet room
1034
984
1114
3120
2914
3051
966 00031
102387-1-I
SL
neop
gross gross gross comp
8.3
comp
0
comp
0
1842
2169
2225
2248
2105
2385
2383
2342
2307
2464
553
102387-1-C
102387-1-B
8
9.8
328
309
301
558
071387-1-1
102387-1 269
gross
neop
neop
071387-1-H
7 cure box
28 vet room
28 vet room
28vet room
52wet room
52 wet room
52vet room
627 let room
660 met room
660 wet room
113
131
30
:0%
54
6%
:6
A1
47
4%
.7
st
28
3A
eu
970
106S
1160
1057
1329
1540
1405
1031 0,0021
618 0.0029 1094
676 0.029
1414 0.0020
506 0.1333 425
917 0.0029
2171 0.0017
1492
(Continued)
(Sheet 2 of 7)
D4
Table D1 (Continued)
111317-1-4
111317-1-1
111387-1
111387-1-1
111387-1-1
Batch ID CY bee vie
SL
3L
G
8
138
139
138
91
91
532
477
519
140S
1421
1413
1187
1514
921
1832
2643
2749
2417
0.0015
0.0018
0.0015 1473
0.0019
0.0015
qi
3 wet
3 wet
3 wet
7 wet
7 wet
28 wet
28wet
28 wet
75 wet
75wet
75 wet
90 weL
90 wet
90 wet
542 wet
487 vet
150
158
158
240
264
296
301
295
322
312
313
286
301
299
288
293
59 0.0052
104 0.0031
244 0.0031
619 0.0026
937 0.0020
507 0.0012
358 0.0026
417 0.0022
181 0.0035
209 0.0027
707 0.0014
373 0.0024
312 0.0032
365 0.0029
1059 0.0021
826 0.0026
qu
244
248
245
414
18
402
529
475
466
483
519
510
473
501
470
295 0.0033
311 0.0026
i34t.5046
500 0.0027
311 0.0027
361 0.0023
S20 0.001f
444 O.024
375 0.0024
716 0.0019
625 0.0018
456 0.0021
1264 0.0021
i11 0.0018
1059 0.0019
qu
379
359
558
597
569
636
647
728
695
773
696
310
358
783
626
570
593
290
932
717
663
1325
110387-1-A
110317-1-3
110387-1-C
110317-1-1
110387-1-1
110387-1-G
110387-1-0
110387-1-D
110387-1-J
110387-1-1
110387-1-L
110387-1-P
110387-1-0
110387-1-1
110387-1-J
110387-1-K
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
camp
cop
gross
gross
13.7
-
camp
camp
0
12
110387-2-A
110387-2-B
113087-2-C
110387-2-G
110387-2-F
110387-2-1
110387-2-N
110387-2-P
110387-2-J
110387-2-I
110317-2-L
110387-2-0
110387-2-H
110387-2-1
110381-2-1
3 wet
3 vet
3 let
7 wet
7 wet
room
room
root
room
room
7 wet room
28wet room
28 wet room
28 wet room
90wet room
90 wet room
90wet room
529 wet room
487 vet room
542 wet room
gross 12.5
gross gross gross gross gross comp gross 12.5
groft camp groasgross 12.8
0
coup
11.1
comp
0
coup
110387-3-A
110387-3-B
110317-3-G
110317-3-1
110317-3-1
110317-3-F
110387-3-1
110387-3-M
110311-3-1
110387-3-J
110387-3-0
3 wet
3 wet
7 let
7 wet
7 wet
:8wet
28 wet
28wet
90 wet
90 wet
90 wet
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
gross
;rcss
gross
14.1
-
3%
es
40
3%
155
255
297
it
316
it
295
21
291
1%
246
it
411
2t
490
28
5%
504
15
31%
481
14
3%
374
it
575
16
3%
670
41
61
121
37
5%
eu
eu
0.0026
0.0032
0.0017
0.0019
0.0011
0.0025
0.0030
0.1019
0.0016
0.0021
0,0019
(Continued)
(Sheet 3 of 7)
D5
Table Dl
110317-3-H
110387-3-1
110387-3-0
Blatch
ID C!ben u/c
111087-1 353 10
SL
1.4 7.25
G
138
111087-1-A
111087-1-B
111087-1-C
111087-1-!
111087-1-D
111087-1-J
111087-1-G
111087-1-L
111007-1-1
111087-1-H
111087-1
111087-1-N
111087-1-P
SL
3L
2 9.25
SL
G
133
G
130
G
132
0.6 060487-1-A
060487-1-D
060487-1-B
060487-1-C
3 wet
3 wet
3 wet
7 wet
7 wet
29 wet
29 wet
29 wet
94 wet
94 wet
94 wet
480 wet
522 wet
535 wet
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
gross 13.5
gross
coop gross 14.3
comp coop gross 14.3
gross copm
14.1
coop coop coup
11.3
coup
0
coup
0
4 cure
4 cure
33 cure
33 cure
box
box
box
box
neop
7 care box
7 cure box
32 wet room
60 care box
60 care box
129 wet room
SL
10.4
0
0
061817-1-I
111087-1-I
(Continued)
4 wet
4 wet
7 wet
7 wet
7 wet
29wet
28wet
28 wet
50 wet
50 wet
50 wet
660 wet
559wet
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
655 wet room
gross 13.8
gross gross
14
gross gross -
neop
neop
13.8
neop
gross
gross
12.7
gross comp
0
comp
0
cop
13.4
711
681
514
qu
531
547
577
'64
916
978
967
941
931
821
939
997
904
946
415 0.0034
518 0.0030
741 0.0028
566 0.0029
702 0.0024
1379 0.0017
1070 0.0019
932 0.0024
1289 0.0018
466 0.0021
1153 0.0016
1552 0.0021
1671 0.0018
16810.0016
qo
163
158
215
213
qu
160
552
19
3%
790
26
3%
962
16
2t
900
15
6%
976
22
21
6o 0.0042 160
67 0.0043
214
2%
eu
1%
eu
1
2%
1%
367
0%
440
2%
401
23
6%
540
1%
529
15
3%
ea
14%
ev
43 0.0053 159
9 0.0055
176
176
82 0.0042 172
82 0.0033
96 0.0040 182
171
172
182
87
et
(Continued)
(Sheet 4 of 7)
D6
Table Dl
6.5
SL
8
135
G
136
0.5 071487-1-B
071487-1-P
071487-1-C
071487-1-0
071187-1-1
071487-1-H
071487-1-G
071487-1-A
071487-1-0
071487-1-1
071487-1-1
071487-1-1
I ?Fben v/c
SL
7.5
136
SL
2.4 0.75
G
129
12.2
12.3
11.7
11.2
o
11
0
0
12.4
0
114
I1'
184
185
189
265
256
249
239
265
261
279
249
104
260
97
109
125
570
660
656
629
112
1%
0.0021 136
0.0030
0.0024
0.0046 257
0.0040
0.0043
0.0011 261
0.0014
0.0018
0.0013
1%
24
61
31
367
2%
370
369
358
3%
go
311
en
I
529 0.0019 301
7 wet
7 vet
28vet
28vet
51wet
51vet
51vet
92vet
92 vet
92vet
495 vet
550 vet
537 vet
537 vet
302
290
362
373
359
373
371
360
368
379
370
343
358
361
585 0.0022
413 0.0039
234 0.0031
570 0.0020
423 0.0030
224 0.0037
279 0.0025
525 0.0031
264 0.0029
257 0.1028
566 0.0030
401 0.021
1019 0.0021
941 0.1021
qo
102687-1-B
102687-1-A
102687-1-I
102687-1-P
102617-1-G
102687-1-K
102617-1-1
102687-1-D
10267-1-L
102687-1-1
102687-1-1
102687-1-1
I02687-1-0
102687-1-I
Batch
(Continued)
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
root
room
room
root
room
room
coop
gross
gross
coom
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
comp
comp
coop
comp
16.4
-
16.7
-
15.2
-
12.7
0
0
0
111397-2-A
111337-2-C
111387-2-B
111387-2-H
111387-2-1
111387-2-F
111387-2-G
111387-2-0
111387-2-J
111387-2-1
111387-2-K
111387-2-1
111317-2-P
4 vet
4 wet
4 wet
7 vet
7 vet
7 vet
28wet
28vet
20vet
91vet
91vet
532 wet
519 vet
room
room
room
room
room
room
root
root
root
room
room
room
room
comp
coop
comp
comp
comp
15
0
0
5 wet room
5 cure box
7 vet room
7 cure box
7 care box
56wet room
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
gross
16.7
-
16.4
eu
271
:07 0.0042 94
:96 0.0037
156 0.0048
267 0.0035 :i5
235 0.0034
315 0.0031
196 0.0030 56
230 0.0028
559 0.0019
416 0.002 260
333 0.0019
521 0.0033 27
664 0.015
qo
193
199
189
218
211
217
260
243
264
263
17
293
61
68
67
67
73
74
3%
4%
1%
5%
eu
22 0.0070
5 0.0116
:5 0.066
35 0.0060
28 0.0074
26 0.0057
64
69
"
Q%
4%
(Continued)
(Sheet 5 of 7)
D7
Table Dl (Continued)
061017-1-3
061017-1-L
Batch ID CY hem v/c
SL
8.5
125
0.3 061887-2-1
06187-2-D
061187-2-L
061887-2-1
061887-2-6
061807-2-1
061887-2-C
061887-2-J
061087-2-N
061817-2-1
061887-2-K
SL
19.4
061887-2-B
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
room
gross
gross
21.3
19.6
80
05
qv
5%
5%
31
5%
3%
31
35
at
40
12
35
4%
50
21
20
29
Ft
1340.0030 200
104 0.0043
116 0.0044
534 0.0025 253
qu
131
0.5 072187-1-A
072187-1-0
072187-1-C
072187-1-K
072187-1-0
072187-1-L
072187-1-B
072187-1-1
072187-1-1
77
69
69
96
91
98
127
139
148
37 0.0093 71
42 0.0080
31 0.0101
32 0.0014 95
32 0.0071
35 0.0070
70 0.0068 127
263 0.0046 144
245 0.0062
I
3cure box gross 3 let room gross 3 wet room gross 14.3
7 cure box gross 13.3
7 wet room gross 7wet room gross 13.9
83wet room gross 16.4
592 Vi O0ON
comp
17.2
625 wet room coup
0
122
0.8 061287-1-B
3 cure box
061287-1-1
3wet room
061287-1-A
7 cure box
061217-1-J
7wet room
061287-1-0 28 cure box
061287-1-1 28 wet room
0612187-1-KS 28let room
061287-1-c
54wet room
061287-1-B 54 wet root
061207-1-I
54wet room
061287-1-C 122 wet room
37
32
45
35
37
35
33
50
49
51
73
G
8
qu
ev
34 0.0066 126
H6 0.0071
79 0.0048 168
44 0.0071
53 0.0057
138
192
206
203
253
SL
85
130
125
126
175
172
156
136
148
SL
28 0.0070
31 0.0076
106
gross
gross
gross
gross
neop
neop
aeop
gross
gross
gross
20.1
-
22
-
18.8
20
-
20.5
-
gross
28.1
062387-1-J
062387-1-G
062317-1-0
062317-1-K
062317-1-I
062317-1-I
062387-1-8
062387-1-A
3 cure box
3wet room
3 wet room
28wet room
21wet room
15wet room
45wet room
111wet room
II1wet room
gross 34.7
gross 33.5
gross gross gross gross 34.8
gross
gross
gross
go
22
19
20
31
20
29
29
50.1
46.9
44
41
eu
tu
18 0.0091
15 0.0117
12 0.0098
11 0.0098
19 0.0085
16 0.0062
26 0.0074
20 0.0094
73
en
6
6
6
9
7
7
0.0095
0.0078
0.0103
0.0073
0.0071
0.0090
6 0.0088
13 0.0100
29
43
t
1
3%
7 0.0111
(Continued)
(Sheet 6 of 7)
D8
Table Dl (Concluded)
SL
6.5
127
072787-1-1
072787-1-1
072717-1-9
3 cure box
3 let room
3 vet room
7 vat room
7 cure hot
7 vet room
77 met room
77 vet room
94 vet room
94 let room
gross
ql
eu
1%
56
5%
49
4%
+/-
3%
17.4
gross gross 14.1
gross gross 17.9
gross 16.7
gross 22.2
gross 21.1
25
25
25
25
26
28
53
59
6 0.0101
7 0.0096
7 0.003
13 0.0077
9 0.00i4
13 0.0077
13 0.0092
12 0.0096
25
gross
52
35
49
48
85
39 0.0053
gross
21.2
21.5
29
0.0065
26
0.0067
147 0.0044
85
100
13
4%
14%
(Sheet 7 of 7)
D9
Table D2
Summary of Phase II Unconfined Compression Test Program
Cr
%BIN
Age
SLUMP
I/C
Unit Vt.
qu
I
eu
Sample 2
sample I
Test ID
CF
een
pcy
080288-1
091488-1
030189-1
102688-!
082688-1
080588-1
091088-1
081088-1
082388-1
090188-1
111688-1
091588-1
090988-1
091988-1
101488-1
083188-1
092886-1
102880-1
022289-1
10088-1
290
302
299
295
304
297
302
306
289
299
300
305
306
305
302
305
296
301
308
300
0
0
0
0
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
Age
SMUI
days
inches
3
3
7
14
3
3
3
8
7
7
14
3
3
3
3
7
7
14
14
14
8
7 1/2
7
8
8 1/2
8
8
8 1/2
8 1/4
8 1/2
8
81/4
8
8 1/2
8 1/4
8 1/4
8
81/2
7 1/2
8
V/C
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.2
Unit Vt.
qo
pcf
psi.
144.6
146.5
145.2
243.9
133.4
128.8
139.7
139.2
138.8
138.1
138.8
133.2
133.3
132.9
134.3
129.5
133.
135.0
132.9
129.7
D10
442
793
760
979
282
295
290
375
336
408
117
127
116
124
146
134
152
155
157
eu
ksil.
642
1627
1750
467
695
446
464
512
619
199
114
162
179
159
241
209
190
277
%
0.33
0.19
0.15
0.32
0.38
0.41
0.26
qu
eu
psi.
ksi.
391
759
717
945
:6
302
297
342
245
0.27
0.33
0.78
0.78
0.88
0.92
0.67
0.64
0.66
0.72
0.73
340
397
117
127
116
121
144
128
150
153
164
975
1042
1477
188
446
572
446
464
466
519
565
215
103
137
161
180
255
214
223
279
0.28
0.27
0.23
0.16
0.33
0.39
0.44
0.29
0.35
0.28
0.31
0.9
0.61
1.02
0.7
0.76
0.73
0.74
0.49
0.77
Table D3
Summary of Phase I Brazilian Splitting Tensile Test Program
c!
then
1/C!
?ensile strength
Slup: 8 inches
test ID
then
age
CF
days
053088-1-C
053088-1-8
053088-1-A
053088-1-1
053088-1-9
D53088-1-J
053068-1-G
053088-1-L
053088-1-F
053088-1-N
053088-1-K
053088-1-I
060288-1-8
060288-1-A
060288-1-!
060288-1-D
060288-1-J
060288-1-1
060288-2-3
060288-'-1
060288-2-N
060288-2-D
060288-2-3
060288-2-L
060288-2-8
060288-2-C
060288-2-G
061988-1-A
061988-1-8
061988-1-P
061988-1-L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
I/C
lbs/cu. yd.
3
3
3
7
7
7
2s
28
28
92
92
92
7
7
7
28
28
28
7
7
7
28
28
28
92
92
92
3
3
7
7
length diameter
in.
in.
261
1.56 12.136
261
1.56 12.034
261
1.56 12.074
261
1.56 12.153
261
1.56 11.987
261
1.56 11.987
261
1.56 12.020
261
1.56 12,120
261
1.56 11.980
261
1.56 12.078
261
1.56 12.094
261
1.56 12.016
346
1.18 12.104
346
1.18 11.973
346
1.18 11.903
346
1.18 12,094
346
1.18 11.938
346
1.18 11.969
255
2.22 12.093
255
2.22 11.835
255
2.22 12.094
255
2.22 12.188
255
2.22 12.250
255
2.22 12.047
255
2.22 12.156
255
2.22 12.156
255
2.22 12.125
362
1.44 12,036
362
1.44 12.073
362
1.44 12.170
362
1.44 12.120
(Continued)
6.016
6.039
6.022
6.040
6.048
6.037
6.000
6.051
6.051
6.031
6.047
6.000
6.029
6.034
6.040
6.022
6.042
6.034
6.042
6,062
6.058
6.037
6.064
6.051
6.036
6.052
6.063
6.076
6.057
6.045
6.044
DI I
Load
lbs.
8850
9050
9775
14550
14800
16600
17850
17100
19150
17700
17200
17500
23950
21650
19950
26200
26800
23750
5475
5125
4650
6050
5625
6725
5400
6275
6300
9600
7450
11250
11575
tensile
strength
psi
77
79
86
126
130
146
158
148
168
155
150
155
209
191
177
229
237
209
48
45
40
52
48
59
47
54
55
84
65
97
101
Table D3 (Concluded)
061988-1-1
061988-1-9
061988-1-J
061980-1-0
062288-2-A
062288-2-B
062280-2-C
062281-2-1
062288-2-J
062288-2-1
062288-2-1
062288-2-D
062288-2-1
062288-2-J
20
20
20
20
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
7
30
30
30
3
3
3
8
8
28
28
28
90
90
362
362
362
362
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
1.44
1.44
1.44
1.44
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.31
2.34
D12
12.100
12.050
12.080
12.000
12.136
12.083
11.996
12.156
12.125
11.940
12.125
12.000
12.219
12.094
6.060
6.042
6.056
6.052
6.046
6.049
6.051
6.046
6.054
6.047
6.048
6.048
6.042
6.047
13250
13875
14900
13375
430
590
625
670
800
750
755
810
1020
900
115
I2
130
117
4
5
5
6
7
7
7
7
3
a
Table D4
Summary of Phase II Brazilian Splitting Tensile Test Results
C1
%BIN
Age
SLUNP
V/C
Test ID
C!
%Ben
pcy
080288-1
091488-1
030189-1
102688-1
082686-1
080588-1
091088-1
081088-1
082388-1
090188-1
111688-1
091588-1
090988-1
091988-1
101488-1
083188-1
092888-1
102888-1
022289-1
100688-1
290
302
299
295
304
297
302
306
289
299
300
305
306
305
302
305
296
301
308
300
0
0
0
0
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
Age
SLUK?
days
inches
3
8
3 7 1/2
7
7
14
8
3 8 1/2
3
8
3
8
8 8 1/2
7 8 1/4
7 8 1/2
14
8
3 8 1/4
3
8
3 8 1/2
3 8 1/4
7 8 1/4
7
8
14 8 1/2
14 7 1/2
14
8
DI 3
V/C!
Unit Vt.
pcf
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.2
144.6
146.5
145.2
143.9
133.4
128.8
139.7
139.2
138.8
138.1
138.8
133.2
133.3
132.9
134.3
129.5
133.6
135.0
132.9
129.7
T/US
psi.
56
123
88
127
42
39
35
55
46
46
45
13
19
14
14
17
20
17
19
22
0.27
0.32
0.24
0.26
0.30
0.26
0.24
0.31
0.26
0.28
0.22
0.23
0.30
0.25
0.23
0.23
0.31
0.22
0.24
0.27
Table D5
Summary of Flexural Beam Test Program
Cy
Ceent factor, lb. of cementbentointe per cubic yard of concrete
%BII
Bentonite content as a percent of cesent factor
V/C
Ratio of rater to ceuentbentonite, by veight
modulus of Rupture:
1:3P1/2bd^2
P:
1:
b:
d:
Batch ID
060288-1
053088-1
061988-1
060288-2
062288-1
060288-2
BIN
%
0
0
20
20
60
60
CF
pcy
346
261
362
255
330
246
V/C
1.18
1.56
1.44
2.22
2.34
2.62
Average
Load at modulus of
vidth
Depth Length Failure Rupture
in.
in.
in. lbs.
psi
Age
days
28
28
32
28
29
29
D14
6.18
6.09
6.02
6.08
5.99
6.00
6.06
6.00
6.04
6.15
6.06
6.02
18.0
18.0
18.0
18.0
18.0
18.0
3100
2850
2175
1005
235
185
369
351
267
118
29
23
APPENDIX E:
3 2 50 -............. ............
30002750-
........... .
Bentonite:
0%
Age:
3 days
120 psi
ar~e,:
20 psi
abCk:
S2500
22502000S17501500
cluc
o 1250
750
500
uc
250
0.00 0.50
3250-
00 1.50 2.00
Axial
Stress
Deviator
Batch: 0802881
Bentonite:
0%
3 days
Age:
OCol
250 psi
3000--cu
-
2 750
Crbok:
50 psi
2500
CL
0
2250
2000S1750
o1250Vo
1000
750
UC
500,250
00.00 0.50 1.00' 1.50 2.0062.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch:
091488-1
E3
3250Bentonite: 0%
Age:
7 days
O'cel: 200 psi
100 psi
abac:
30002750
'~2500A
cluc
22502000
17501500-
750500-U
250
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Botch:
3250
030189-1
3000
Bentonite: '0
Age:
14 days
20psi
Cluc
2750-
Crbk:
1 Opsi
S2500
22502000
C,,
S17501500
.2
1250-
1000--
uC
750
500
250
0-
.........
...... .....
"I "'
..........
' '
" " I
....
"
"....
0.00 0.50 1,00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch:
102688-1
E4
.6
2 7 50 -.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bentoriite:
20%
Age: 3 days
2500
or,,: 70 psi
2250
ao.,: 20 psi
C2000U
S1750
(I)
500
1250
250
0-0
0.0
2.0
2750 . . . . . .
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
Axial Strain. Z
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Botch:
082688-1
.... .
2500
7
2250
2000-
1.
Bentonite:
20%
Age:
3 days.
acei0:
120 psi
20 psi
abk:
S1750-
~j1500if)
8,
1250
>
1000-
750500-
0.0
20
4.
6.
80
10.0
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch: 080588-1
E5
12.0
2750
2500-
Bentonite:
Age:
crU. :
3 days
2 50 ps i
50
2250O~k.
u~
225
2000-
1750
V)
U)
~?1500
cu
01250
1000750
500uc
250-
07
0.0
27 5 0
2,0
6.0
8.0
10.0
Axial Strain. %.
Deviator Stress vs. Axial S5:-an
Batch: 091088-1
40
. . . ..
12.0
. . . . . . . . . . .v.. .
Beitonite- 20%
7 days
Age:
c",
120 psi
2500
(back:
2250
20 psi
62000-
~'1750
LO,
1
0
1500125ED0-
uc
I1000)
750
asoo 2
0.0
73
80
4.0)
Ax~il Strain,
081088-1
E6
100
%
Axial Slrjin
C2
2 7 5 0 . ..........
2500-
.6
.........
.........
..........
.........
Bentonite:
20%
7 days
Age:
250 psi
Cceii:
50 psi
aback:
2250
A~
&2000
S1750S1 500-Cu
12500
>
1000-
750500uc
250
0.0
20
.0
60
80
1.0
20
Axia; Strain. %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch: C82.388-1
2750-
Bentonite:
20%
7 days
2500 -Age:
-~'25
ceig,:
.350 psi
12750
S1500-
1250>
1000-
750
500
250
0.0
Lc
u
2.0
4.0
6.0
50
10.
Stronn. i
Deviator Stress vs~ Axial Strain
Batcr
090188-1
Axial
E7
12.0
2 75 0 .. . .
Cri 2250
2000-
tS
01750
a!
1500
>
C,
1000
750-
UC
250
8.0
6.0
4.0
0.06
12.0
10.0
Axial Strain %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch:
16 00 -
111688-1
. ... .. .. ... ...
Bentonite: 40%
1500
1400
Age:
3 days
Ocell:
70 psi
100
u,
Yock:
20 psi
-1200
1100
S1000
Lni
-4
cn900
7()o
600
500
300
2007
1300
00
'"
TT
_0
.4C)
'20
<
Axri
_Itrc n.
E8
..
12 0
+K
':--,Strain
10D
......
cn1300-
20 psi'
*1200
I1100-
tD 1000
U'900-
800
07
o
.0
00
cluc
600
S5004003002 000
uc
100
0.0
2.0
6-0
8.0
10.0 12.0 14'.0 ...
16.0
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch: 090988-1
.. 0
1600Bentonite: 40%
Age:
3 days
250 psi
Cci
1500
14001300
-ar
k:
50 psi
1200
t
1 100
100
800
700
6 00
5 00'
4 00
30)
2 00
300
0.0
aC
2.0
40
60
8.
0
12.0 14.0
Axial Strain, 5g
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
tsatch:
091988-1
E9
16.0
16 00
1500
1400
CiUC
ji
1300Benton'te:
Age:
1200-
acl
40%
3' days
350 psi
psi
ab~.50
'000
U)
00
U'
U1
00
-'0
400
30
~00 00.0
u
2.0
6.0
8.0
10.0 12.0 14.0
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch:
101488-1
40
16 00 -........ ...........
1500Bentonite:
1500Age:
1400
arc.1:
CrbOCk:
~1300
16.0
40%
7 days
120 psi
20 psi
1200I1100-
t:1000
in
900(J800
o700-
.0
600_________
__
o500-
400300-
200Q
10.0
1140
20
4
60
8.0
Axial Strain.
10042
E10
16.0
1600- .........
15001400
cluc
u1300
Bento'nite:
40%
7 days.
crel
350 psi
120Age:
1100tD
10
50 psi
0-UbOCk:
V)900S800
o7000
>~ 6007
S500400z00
--
100
iJC
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Botch: 092888-1
160 0 -....... ............
.
40%
Bentonite:
Age:
14 days
ar. 11: 200 psi
150o0
1400-
JbOCk:
S1300CI
1200
100 psi
I1100
b1000
S900'
S800
CU
S700.0
600
500400
300
200100
0-.
00
a
uC
2.0
I.....
. ...
80 .. 0.0... ..
12.0
14.0
16..
Axial Strain, %
Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain
Batch:
102888-1
4.0
Eli
1 6 0 0
Bentonite: 40%
14 days
Age:
cel:
200 psi
1500 514001300
100 Psi
Jbock:
(a.
1200
1100
1000S900
LOO
-:D0
V)
co
ocuc
________-______
520
=0
0
(sulfur end
cops)
-_30/
UC
2.0
0.0
4.0
160
........................... .................
16 0 0 ...........
Bentonite:
40%
1500
14 days
Age:
1400
S1300
400 psi
100 psi
oc,,.:
b
Oa
ciuc
1200
1100
o 1000
i~800
S700-
.
r
600
500
a
400
300
200
100
'
1_00
Ur
O
4,?
8
0
10.0
20
12.0
1 .
Axial Strain, %
100688--l
E12
14.0
!.
16.0
APPENDIX F:
(Project:
Batch ID:
080288-1
Cement Factor:
317 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
0 %
Fabrication Da 8/2/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.96
Area, sq. cm.:
176.4
Elapsed
Time
sec.
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
Date
Time
8/3/88
813/88
8/3/88
8/3/88
8/3/88
15:54
16:04
16:16
16:39
17:18
0
600
1320
2700
5040
118
119
119
119
119
19.9
19.9
19.9
19.9
19.9
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
9.8
9.8
9.8
9.8
9.8
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.6
23.4
23.4
23,4
23.4
23.4
0.0
3.9
3.4
5.4
7.9
1.6E-06
1.2E-06
9.5E-07
8.2E-07
8/4/88
8/4/88
8/4/88
8/4/88
8/4/88
8/4/88
14:53
15:28
16:06
16:38
17:01
18:22
0
2100
4380
6300
7680
12540
119
119
119
119
119
119
20
20
20
19.9
20
19.9
10
10
10
9.9
9.9
9.9
9.8
9.6
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.4
22.5
22.2
22.0
21.9
21.9
21.6
23.4
23.0
22.8
22.7
22.7
22.4
0.0
1.9
2.1
1.6
1.1
3.4
2.1E-07
2.3E-07
2.OE-07
1.9E-07
1.7E-07
8/5/88
8/5/88
13:19
15:06
0
6420
119
120
20
19.9
10
9.8
9.9
10.0
23.0
23.0
23.8
23.8
0.0
1.6 5.7E-08
Batch ID:
091488-1
Cement Factor:
328 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
0 %
Fabrication Dat 9/14/88
In Pipette #:
5
Out Pipette #:
6
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.98
Area, sq. -.
a.:
174.5
Date
Time
9/16/88
9/16/88
9/16/88
9/16/88
9/17/88
9/17/88
9/17/88
11:34
15:50
19:00
23:00
8:2U
16:59
17:05
Elapsed
Time
sec.
0
15360
26760
41160
74760
105900
106260
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
251
250
250
250
250
250
245
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
50
50
50
50
50
50
30
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
F3
24
25
25
25
25
25
23
56.3
57.7
57.7
57.7
57.7
57.7
54.1
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
57.1
58.6
58.6
58.6
58.6
58.6
54.9
0.0
0.8
0.6
1.0
1.6
1.0
0.2
5.1E-09
5.2E-09
6.8E-09
4.7E-09
3.1E-09
5.8E-08
Batch ID:
030189-1
Cement Factor:
325 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
0 %
Fabrica. Date: 3/1/89
In Pipette #:
5
Out Pipette #:
6
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.95
Area, sq. cm.:
183.6
Elapsed
Time
sec.
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
Date
Time
3/4/89
3/4/89
11:45
16:30
0
17100
198
200
100
99.7
50
49.9
49.5
48.8
114.2
112.5
120.4
118.6
0.0
4.8 1.3E-08
3/5/89
3/6/89
21:00
17:55
0
75300
204
203
100
100.3
50
50.2
49.8
49.1
114.9
113.3
121.1
119.4
0.0
12.6 7.6E-09
3/6/89
3/7/89
3/7,39
3/8/89
17:58
8:55
21:07
8:09
0
53820
97740
137460
203
202
205
203
100.3
100.5
100.4
100.5
50.2
50.4
50.4
50.4
49.1
49.1
49.0
48.9
113.3
113.2
113.2
112.8
119.4
119.3
119.3
118.9
0.5
6.6 5.6E-09
4.1 4.2E-09
3.8 4.4E-09
Batch ID:
102688-1
Cement Factor:
317 lbs.Icu.yd.
Bentonite:
0 %
Fabrica. Date: 10/26/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
1.01
Area, sq. cm.:
173.2
Date
Time
11/2/88
11/3/88
11/4188
11/6/88
16:20
10:30
14:54
15:03
Elapsed
Time
sec.
0
65400
167640
340980
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
201
200
201
203
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
100
100
100
100
50
50
50
50
F4
50
50
50
50
114.6
115.3
115.8
116.2
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cmjsec
113.8
114.6
115.0
115.4
0.0
2.2 1.7E-09
3.1 1,5E-09
4.9 1.4E-09
080888-1
Batch ID:
313 lbs./cu.yd.
Cement Factor:
20 %
Bentonite:
Fabrication Dat 8/5/88
Specimen Dimensions:
0.98
Height, ft.:
183.1
Area, sq. cm.:
Date
Time
816/88
8/6/88
8/6/88
6:01
6:21
6:40
8/8/88
8/8/88
14:02
17:27
Elapsed
Time
sec.
Gage
Cell
Press. Press.
Ped.
psi.
psi.
Head
loss
Diff.
Gage
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
ft
psi.
Flow Perm.
Grad.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
0
1200
2340
120
120
120
20
20.1
20.1
10
10
10
9.5
9.5
9.5
21.8
21.9
21.9
22.3
22.4
22.4
0.0
0.1 2.OE-08
0.1 2.1E-08
0
12300
120
120
40
39.8
10
10
29.7
29.6
68.6
68.4
70.1
69.9
0.0
1.1 7.0E-09
091088-1
Batch ID:
348 lbs./cu.yd.
Cement Factor:
20 %
Bentonite:
Fabrica. Date: 9/10/88
Specimen Dimensions:
0.96
Height, ft.:
167.8
Area, sq. cm.:
Date
Time
9/12/88
9/12/88
9/12/88
9/12/88
9/13/88
9/13/88
11:52
14:27
15:32
23:41
10:08
20:15
Elapsed
Time
sec.
0
9300
13200
42540
80160
116580
Gage
Cell
Press. Press.
Ped.
psi.
psi.
251
252
252
253
252
249
Head
loss
Diff.
Gage
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
ft
psi.
25
25
25
25
25
25
50
50
50
49.9
50
50
F5
24.2
23.7
23.6
24.3
23.3
23.3
55.8
54.7
54.4
56.1
53.7
53.9
Flow Perm.
Grad.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
57.9
56.8
56.4
58.1
55.7
55.8
0.0
1.2
0.4
2.2
2.3
1.7
1.4E-08
1.1E-08
7.5E-09
6.4E-09
5.OE-09
Batch ID:
081088-1
Cement Factor:
351 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
20 %
Fabrication Dat 8/10/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.98
Area, sq. cm.:
169.8
Date
Time
8/12/88
8112/88
8112/88
8/13/88
8/15/88
13:30
14:45
22:32
19:56
00:59
Elapsed Cell
Gage
Time
Press. Press.
sec.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
0
4500
32520
109560
214140
119
119
119
119
119
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
20.2
20.2
20.1
20
20
9.8
9.8
9.8
9.6
9.6
11.0
11.1
11.0
11.0
11.0
25.5
25.7
25.5
25.4
25.3
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
25.9
26.1
25.9
25.8
25.8
0.0
0.1
1.5
2.8
1.7
7.5E-09
1.2E-08
8.3E-09
3.7E-09
Batch ID:
082388-1
Cement Factor:
340 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
20 %
Fabrication Dat 8/23/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.96
Area, sq. cm.:
164.8
Date
Time
8/25/88
8/25/88
8/26/88
8/26/88
8/26/88
8/26/88
8/27/88
8/28/88
8/29/88
8/30/88
12:16
22:20
10:31
12:13
16:49
20:20
19:16
18:35
16:43
10:30
Elapsed
Time
sec.
0
36240
80100
86220
102780
115440
198000
281940
361620
425640
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
249
248
249
249
249
250
250
250
250
250
50.1
50
50
49.9
49.7
49.7
49.9
49.8
49.7
50
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
30
30
29.9
20
20
19.9
20
20
19.8
20
F6
19.1
19.0
19.0
28.9
29.2
28.4
28.2
28.3
29.9
28.4
44.0
43.8
43.8
66.7
67.4
65.6
65.1
65.3
69.0
65.4
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
46.0
45.8
45.8
69.7
70.5
68.6
68.1
68.3
72.2
68.4
0.0
3.3
3.0
0.6
1.9
7.1
4.4
3.4
2.4
1.8
1.2E-08
9.1E-09
8.5E-09
9.9E-09
4.7E-09
3.6E-09
2.6E-09
2.5E-09
Batch ID:
090988-1
Cement Factor:
365 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
40 %
Fabrica. Date: 9/9/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.95
Area, sq. cm.:
165.1
Elapsed
Time
sec.
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cmlsec
Date
Time
9/11/88
9/11/88
9/11/88
10:25
14:26
15:40
0
14460
18900
121
122
120
19.9
19.9
20
10
9.9
9.9
9.7
9.7
10.1
22.4
22.5
23.3
23.6
23.6
24.5
0.0
0.8 1.3E-08
0.3 1.7E-08
9/11/88
9/11/88
15:45
20:13
0
16080
120
120
20
20
10
10
10.0
10.0
23.1
23.1
24.3
24.3
0.0
0.8 1.2E-08
Batch ID:
101488-1
Cement Factor:
370 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
40 %
Fabrica. Date: 10/14/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.94
Area, sq. cm.:
165.0
Date
Time
10/16/88
10/16/88
10/17/88
10/17/88
15:59
16.05
11:42
17:18
Elapsed
Time
sec.
0
360
70980
91140
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
350
350
354
354
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
50
50
50
50
20
20
20
20
F7
31.0
30.0
30.8
30.7
71.5
69.2
71.1
70.9
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
75.7
73.3
75.3
75.1
0.0
0.2 3.4E-08
12.5 1.4E-08
2.9 1.2E-08
Batch ID:
092888-1
Cement Factor:
364 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
40 %
Fabrica. Date: 9/28/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.95
Area, sq. cm.:
164.1
Elapsed
Time
sec.
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
Date
Time
1011188
10/3/88
20:57
17:18
0
159660
340
340
50
50
24.9
24.9
25.1
25.1
57.9
57.9
61.1
61.1
0.0
2.2 1.4E-09
10/3/88
10/4/88
10/5/88
17:37
10:07
13:17
0
59400
318000
349
350
350
50
50
49.8
25
25.1
25
25.0
23.5
23.4
57.7
54.2
54.1
60.9
57.2
57.0
0.0
2.3 4.1E-09
2.3 9.5E-10
Batch ID:
102888
Cement Factor:
357 lbs./cu.yd.
Bentonite:
40 %
Fabrica. Date: 10/28/88
Specimen Dimensions:
Height, ft.:
0.96
Area, sq. cm.:
168.9
Elapsed
Time
sec.
Cell
Gage
Press. Press.
psi.
Ped.
psi.
Head
Gage
Diff.
loss
Press. Press. across
Top Cap psi. sample
psi.
ft
Grad.
Flow Perm.
across thru
sample sample
ml. cm/sec
Date
Time
11/2/88
11/3/88
11/4/88
11/6/88
16:08
10:30
14:53
14:40
0
66120
168300
340320
199
200
199
203
100
100
100
100
50
50
50
50
50.0
50.0
49.9
50.3
115.3
115.4
115.2
116.1
119.9
120.0
119.8
120.7
0.0
14.1 1.IE-08
20.5 9.9E-09
32.8 9.3E-09
11/6/88
11/7/88
15:00
14:28
0
84480
200
201
100
99.4
50
50.5
49.4
30.0
114.0
115.4
118.6
119.9
0.0
16.0 9.4E-09
11/7/88
11/7/88
11/8/88
11/8/88
14:54
18:38
9:07
16:55
0
13440
65580
93660
200
200
200
200
100
100
100
100
50
50
50
50
50.6
50.0
50.0
50.0
116.8
115.4
115.4
115.4
121.4
120.0
120.0
120.0
0.0
3.4 1.2E-08
10.0 9.5E-09
6.0 1.IE-08
F8