Report for Concrete Labs - CE 3111

Submitted By:

Date Experiment Performed:

Date Experiment Submitted:
Name of Experimenters:
Name of Instructor:

Table of Contents
Mix Design Method ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Mixing Procedures ........................................................................................................................................ 5
i.

American method of selection of mix proportions ........................................................................... 5

ii.

British method of mix selection (mix design) ................................................................................... 5

Testing Procedures ........................................................................................................................................ 7

Cube test ................................................................................................................................................... 8
Cylinder test .............................................................................................................................................. 9
Curing Procedures....................................................................................................................................... 11
Wet curing............................................................................................................................................... 11
Membrane Curing ................................................................................................................................... 12
Data Analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 13
Formula used............................................................................................................................................... 16
Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 21
Discussion ................................................................................................................................................... 22
References ................................................................................................................................................... 23

Page | 1

List of Tables
Table 1 Data Analysis Monday Lab ........................................................................................................... 13
Table 2. Data Analysis Wednesday Lab ..................................................................................................... 14
Table 3Data Analysis Friday Lab ............................................................................................................... 15
Table 4 Results Monday Lab ...................................................................................................................... 17
Table 5Results Wednesday Lab .................................................................................................................. 18
Table 6 Results Friday Lab ......................................................................................................................... 19

List of Figures
Figure 1Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete ................................................................ 17
Figure 2Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete ................................................................ 18
Figure 3 Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete ............................................................... 19
Figure 4 Influence of w/c on Elastic Modulus of Concrete ........................................................................ 20

Page | 2

Mix Design Method

The basic factors which have to be considered in determining the mix proportions are
represented schematically in Fig. The sequence of decisions is also shown down to the quantity
of each ingredient per batch. For instance, in the excellent method of American Concrete
Institute the water content kilograms per cubic meter (or pounds per cubic yard) of concrete is
determined directly from the workability of the mix instead of being found indirectly from the
water cement ration and the cement content. It should be explained that an exact determination of
mix proportion by means of tables or computer is not possible the materials used are essentially
variable and many of their properties cannot be assessed truly quantitatively. For example,
aggregate grading, shape and texture cannot be defined in a fully satisfactory manner. It is not
surprising, therefore, that in order to obtain a satisfactory mix, it is not only to calculate or
estimate the proportions of the available materials but must also make trial mixes. The properties
of these mixes are checked and adjustments in the mix proportions are made; further trial mixes
are made in the laboratory until a fully satisfactory mix is obtained.
However, a laboratory trial mix does not provide the final answer even when the moisture
condition of aggregate is taken into account. Only a mix made and used on the site can guarantee
that all the properties of the concrete are satisfactory in every detail for the particular job in hand.
To justify this statement three points may be mentioned. Firstly, the mixer used in the laboratory
is generally different in type and performance from that employed on site. Secondly, the
pumping properties of the mix may need to be verified. Thirdly, the wall effect (arising from the
surface to volume ratio) in laboratory test specimens is larger than in the full-size structure, so
that the fine aggregate content of the mix as determined in the laboratory may be unnecessarily
high.

Page | 3

It can be seen then that mix selection requires both knowledge of the properties of concrete and
experimental data or experience.
Other factors, such as effects of handling, transporting, delay in placing, and small variations in
weather conditions may also influence the properties of concrete on the site but these are
generally secondary and necessitate no more than minor adjustments in the mix proportions
during the progress of work.
This may be an appropriate place to note that the mix proportions, once chosen, cannot be
expected to remain entirely immutable because the properties of the ingredients may vary from
time to time. In particular, it is difficult to know the precise amount of free water in the mix
because of the variation in the moisture content of the aggregate, especially the fine aggregate.
The problem is even greater with lightweight aggregate, especially in pumped concrete. Other
variations occur in the grading of aggregate, particularly its dust content, and in the temperature
of the concrete due to exposure of the ingredients and of the mixer to the sun or due to the
cement being hot. In consequence, periodic adjustments to the mix proportions are necessary.

Page | 4

Mixing Procedures
i.
American method of selection of mix proportions
The ACI Standard Practice ACI 211.1-9114.5 describes a method of selection of mix proportions
of concrete containing Portland cement alone or together with other cementitious materials, and
containing also admixtures. It should be emphasized that the method provides a first
approximation of mix proportions to be used in trial mixes. In essence, the method of ACI 211.191 consists of a sequence of logical, straightforward steps which take into account the
characteristics of the materials to be used. These steps are.

ii.

Step 1: Choice of slump

Step 2: Choice of maximum size of aggregates

Step3: Estimate of water content and air content.

Step 4: Selection of water/cement ratio

Step 5: calculation of cement content

Step 6: Estimate of coarse aggregate content

Step 7: Estimate of fine aggregate content

Step 8: Adjustments to mix proportions

British method of mix selection (mix design)

The current British method is that of the Department of the Environment revised in 1988.
Similarly to the ACI approach, the British method explicitly recognizes the durability
requirements in the mix selection. The method is applicable to normal weight concrete made
with Portland cement only or also incorporating ground granulated blast furnace slag or fly
ash, but it does not cover flowing concrete or pumped concrete; nor does it deal with

Page | 5

lightweight aggregate concrete. Three maximum sizes of aggregate are recognized: 40, 20,
and 10 mm
In essence, the British method consists of 5 steps, as follows.

Step 1: This deals with compressive strength for the purpose of determining the
water/cement ratio

Step 2: This deals with the determination of the water content for the required

Step 3: This determines the cement content, which is simply the water content divided
by the water/cement ratio. This cement content must not conflict with any minimum

Step 4: This deals with the determination of the total aggregate content.

Step 5: This determines the proportion of fine aggregate in the total aggregate.

Page | 6

Testing Procedures
The most common of all tests on hardened concrete is the compressive strength test, partly
because it is an easy test to perform, and partly because many, though not all, of the desirable
characteristics of concrete are qualitatively related to its strength; but mainly because of the
intrinsic importance of the compressive strength of concrete in structural design.
The strength test results may be affected by variation in type of test specimen; specimen size;
type of mold; curing; preparation of the end surface; rigidity of the testing machine; and rate of
application of stress. For this reason, testing should follow a single standard, with no departure
from prescribed procedures.
Compressive strength tests on specimens treated in a standard manner which includes all
compaction and wet curing at a specified period give results representing the potential quality of
the concrete. Of course, the concrete in the structure may actually be inferior, for example, due to
inadequate compaction, segregation or poor curing. These effects are of importance if we want to
know when the formwork may be removed, or when farther construction may continue, or the
structure be put into service. For this purpose, the test specimens are cured under conditions as
nearly similar as possible to those existing in the actual structure. Even then, the effects of
temperature and moisture would not be the same in a test specimen as in a relatively large mass
of concrete. The age at which service specimens are tested is governed by the information
required. On the other hand, standard specimens are tested at prescribed ages, generally 28 days,
with additional tests often made at 3 and 7 days. Two types of compression test specimens are
used: cubes and cylinders.

Page | 7

Cube test
The specimens are cast in steel or cast-iron molds of robust construction, generally 150 mm (or 6
in.) cubes, which should conform within narrow tolerances to the cubical shape, prescribed
dimensions and planeness. The mold and its base must be clamped together during casting in
order to prevent leakage of mortar. Before assembling the mold, its mating surfaces should be
covered with mineral oil, and a thin layer of similar oil must be applied to the inside surfaces of
the mold in order to prevent the development of bond between the mold and the concrete.
The standard practice prescribed by BS 1881 :Part 108:1983 is to fill the mold in three layers.
Each layer of concrete is compacted by a vibrating hammer, or using a vibrating table, or by not
fewer than 35 strokes of a 25 mm (1 in.) square steel punner. Ramming should continue until full
compaction without segregation or laitance has been achieved because it is essential that the
concrete in the cube be fully compacted if the test result is to be representative of the properties
of fully-compacted concrete. On the other hand, a check on the properties of the concrete as
placed is required, then the degree of compaction of the concrete in the cube should simulate that
of the concrete in the structure. Thus, in the case of precast members compacted on a vibrating
table, the test cube and the member may be vibrated simultaneously, but the disparity of the two
masses makes the achievement of the same degree of compaction extreme!) difficult, and this
method is not recommended.
According to BS 1881: Part 111: 1983, after the top surface the cube has been finished by
means of a float, the cube is stored undisturbed for 244 hours at a temperature of 20 5 c (68
9 F) and a relative humidity of not less than 90 percent. At the end of this period, the mold is
stripped and the cube is further cured in water at 202c (684F).

Page | 8

In the compression test, the cube, while still wet, is placed with the cast faces in contact with the
platens of the testing machine, i.e. the position of the cube when tested is at right angles to that
as-cast. According to BS 1881: Fart 116:1983, the load on the cube should be applied at a
constant rate of stress equal to 0.2 to 0.4 MPa/second (30 to 60 psi/second). Because of the nonlinearity of the stress-strain relation of concrete at high stresses, the rate of increase in strain
must be increased progressively as failure is approached, i.e. the speed of the movement of the
head of the testing machine has to be increased. The requirements for testing machines are
discussed on p. 588.
The compressive strength, known also as the crushing strength, is reported to the nearest 0.5
MFa or 50 psi; a greater precision is usually only apparent.
Cylinder test
The standard cylinder is 6 in. in diameter, 12 in. long or 150 by 300 mm, but in France the size is
159.6 by 320 mm; the diameter of 159.6 mm gives a cross-sectional area of 20000mm2.
Cylinders are cast in a mold generally made of steel or cast iron, with a clamped base; cylinder
molds are specified by ASTM c 470-94, which allows also the use of single-use molds, made of
plastic, sheet metal and treated cardboard.
Details of molds may seem to be trivial but non-standard molds can result in a misleading test
result. For example, if the mold has a low rigidity, some of the compaction effort is dissipated so
that the compaction of the concrete in the mold may be inadequate; a lower strength would be
recorded. Conversely, if the mold allows leakage of mix water, the strength of concrete would
increase. Excessive re-use of molds intended for single use or for limited re-use leads to their
distortion and to an apparent loss of strength.

Page | 9

The method of making test cylinders is prescribed by BS 1881: Part 110:1983 and by ASTM c
192-90a. The procedure is similar to that used with cubes, but there are differences in detail
between the British and American standards.
The testing of a cylinder in compression requires that the top surface of the cylinder be in contact
with the platen of the testing machine. This surface, when finished with a float, is not smooth
enough for testing and requires further preparation; this is a disadvantage of cylinders tested in
compression. Treatment of the top end of cylinders by capping is considered in a later section,
but even though the cylinders will be capped, ASTM C 192-90a and C 31-91 do not allow
depressions or excrescences greater than 3.2 mm these could result in air pockets.

Page | 10

Curing Procedures
There are two broad categories of curing depending on the conditions on site and on the size,
shape, and position of the concrete member. The methods are;

Wet curing and

Membrane curing

Wet curing
The first method is that of providing water which can be imbibed by the concrete. This requires
that the surface of the concrete is continuously in contact with water for a specified length of
time, starting as soon as the surface of the concrete is no longer liable to damage. Such
conditions can be achieved by spraying or flooding (ponding), or by covering the concrete with
wet sand or earth, sawdust or straw. Some care is required as staining may result. Periodically
wetted clean hessian (burlap) or cotton mats (thick and lapped) may be used, or alternatively an
absorbent covering with access to water may be placed over the concrete. On inclined or vertical
surfaces, soaking hoses can be used. A continuous supply of water is naturally more efficient
than an intermittent.
As far as quality of the water used for curing is concerned, ideally it should be the same as
mixing water. Sea water may lead to corrosion of reinforcement. Also, iron or organic matter
may cause staining, particularly if water flows slowly over the concrete and evaporates rapidly.
In some cases, discoloration is of no significance.

Page | 11

Membrane Curing
The second method of curing relies on the prevention of loss of water from surface of the
concrete, without the possibility of external water impressing it. This could be called a waterbarrier method. The techniques used include using the surface of the concrete with overlapping
polyethylene sheeting, laid or with reinforced paper. The sheeting can be black, which is
preferable in cold weather, or white, which has the advantage of reflection of solar radiation in
hot weather. Paper with a white surface is also available. Sheeting can cause discoloration or
mottling because of non-uniform condensation of water on the underside.
Another technique uses spray-applied curing compounds which form a membrane. The common
ones are solutions of synthetic hydrocarbon resins in high volatility solvents, sometimes
including a fugitive bright-color dye. The dye makes obvious the areas not properly sprayed. A
white or alumina pigment can be included to reduce the solar heat gain; this is very effective.
Other resin solutions are available; acrylic, vinyl or styrene butadiene, and chlorinated rubber.
Wax emulsions can also be used, but they result in a slippery finish which is not easy to remove,
whereas the hydrocarbon resins have poor adhesion to concrete and are degraded by ultraviolet
light; both these features are desirable.

Page | 12

Data Analysis
Monday Lab
Table 1 Data Analysis Monday Lab
w/c

Stress

Force

0.1*F

0.4*F

0.1

0.4

Strain

Stress

28 Day

Compressiv

28 Day

Average

Average

(lb)

(lb)

1/10000

strain

(psi)

(psi)

Modulus of

e Force (lb)

Breaking

(psi)

(lb)

1/1000

Elasticity

Compressive

(E)

Stress

0.00036
0.45

5050

142785

14279

57114

15

73

1515

4.18E+06

192530

6809.355821

1543

4.75E+06

178920

6328.000537

1208

4.71E+06

164550

5819.765752

1027

3.91E+06

136540

4829.114651

0.00032
0.5

5143

145424

14542

58170

14

66

5
0.00025

0.55

4027

113851

11385

45541

15

56

6
0.00026

0.6

3423

96792

9679

38717

45

Page | 13

Wednesday Lab
Table 2. Data Analysis Wednesday Lab
w/c

Stress

Force

0.1*F

0.4*F

0.1

0.4

Strain

Stress

28 Day

Compressiv

28 Day

Averag

Average

(lb)

(lb)

1/10000

strain

(psi)

(psi)

Modulus of

e Force (lb)

Breaking

e (psi)

(lb)

1/1000

Elasticity

Compressive

(E)

Stress

0.00038
0.45

5503

155603

15560

62241

14

76

1651

4.26E+06

193570

6846.138297

1422

4.14E+06

182840

6466.642177

1223.3

4.77E+06

163960

5798.898771

1098

4.62E+06

139650

4939.108401

0.00034
0.5

4740

134020

13402

53608

14

69

4
0.00025

0.55

4078

115293

11529

46117

12

53

6
0.00023

0.6

3660

103484

10348

41394

10

48

Page | 14

Friday Lab
Table 3Data Analysis Friday Lab
w/c

Stress

Force

0.1*F

0.4*F

0.1

0.4

Strain

Stress

28 Day

Compressiv

28 Day

Averag

Average

(lb)

(lb)

1/10000

strain

(psi)

(psi)

Modulus of

e Force (lb)

Breaking

e (psi)

(lb)

1/1000

Elasticity

Compressive

(E)

Stress

0.00034
0.45

5777

163331

16333

65333

15

70

1733

5.04E+06

199060

7040.307327

1332

5.07E+06

157310

5563.703133

1123

4.28E+06

155500

5499.687478

991

4.66E+06

134730

4765.098996

0.00026
0.5

4440

125538

12554

50215

13

55

3
0.00026

0.55

3743

105840

10584

42336

10

52

3
0.00021

0.6

3303

93400

9340

37360

43

Page | 15

Formula used
i.

Compressive Strength =

Where = Compressive Strength

F = Force applied
A = Area of cylinder
ii.

Elastic Modulus =

= Stress applied
= strain produced
iii.

Split Cylinder Strength =

d = diameter of Cylinder
H = Height of Cylinder
iv.

Modulus of Rupture fr =

fr = Modulus of Rupture
L = Length of Cylinder
d = Diameter of Cylinder

Page | 16

Results
7 Day Stresses
i.

Monday Lab

Table 4 Results Monday Lab

w/c

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

7Days

5060

5130

3930

3490

Stresses

4660

5190

4100

3520

5430

5110

4050

3260

Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of

Normal Concrete
8000

Compressive Strength (psi)

7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Water Cement Rario

Figure 1Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete

Page | 17

ii.

Wednesday Lab

7 Day Stresses
Table 5Results Wednesday Lab

w/c

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

7Days

5130

4920

4110

3760

Stresses

6090

4370

4180

3630

5290

4930

3943

3590

Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of

Normal Concrete
6000

Compressive Strength (psi)

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Water Cement Rario

Figure 2Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete

Page | 18

Friday Lab
Table 6 Results Friday Lab

w/c

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

7Days

5530

4640

3550

3110

Stresses

6440

4240

3910

3540

5360

4440

3770

3260

Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of

Normal Concrete
7000

Compressive Strength (psi)

6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Water Cement Rario

Figure 3 Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete

Page | 19

Influence of w/c on Elastic Modulus of Concrete

6.00E+06

Elatic Modulus (E)

5.00E+06

4.00E+06

3.00E+06

2.00E+06

1.00E+06

0.00E+00
0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Water Cement Rario

Figure 4 Influence of w/c on Elastic Modulus of Concrete

Page | 20

Appendix
Sample Calculation
Compressive strength
= F/A
= 51200lb/12.57in2
= 4070 psi
Elastic Modulus
0.4 = (0.4)(5440) = 2176 psi
0.1 = (0.1)(5440) = 544 psi
Loriginal = 16in

L0.4 = 0.0081 in

L0.1 = 0.0019 in

0.4 = 0.0081 in / 16 in = 5.0625(10)-4

0.1 = 0.0019in / 16 in = 1.188(10)-4
E=

= 4.21(10)-6 psi

Split Cylinder Test

Modulus of Rupture

Page | 21

Discussion
The various methods of mix selection may seem simple and, indeed, they do not involve any
complex calculations. However, a successful implementation of the selection requires
experience, coupled with the knowledge of the influence of various factors upon the properties of
concrete; this knowledge must be based on an understanding of the behavior of concrete. When
these three desiderata - experience, knowledge, and understanding - are all present, the first trial
mix is likely to be approximately satisfactory, and can be rapidly and successfully adjusted so as
to achieve a mix with the desired properties.
It is not enough to select a suitable concrete mix; it is also necessary to ensure a proper execution
of all the operations involved in concreting. Such execution requires skill backed by appropriate
knowledge at the execution level. The belief, once held, that any fool can make concrete has,
alas, sometimes led to a situation where he did. The consequences of such execution manifest
themselves before long. It cannot be stated too strongly that, competently used, concrete is a very
successful construction material but, in the literal sense of the word, concrete is not foolproof.

Page | 22

References

G. M. GAMPBELL and R. 1 Df.twiler, Gevelopment of mix designs for strength and durability
of steam-cured concrete, Concrete International, 15, No. 7, pp. 37-9(1993).
w. c. Greer, Jr, Variation of laboratory concrete flexural strength tests, Cement, Concrete and
Aggregates, 5, No. 2, pp. 111-22 (Winter 1983).
D. S. Lane, Flexural strength data summary, NRMCA Technical Information Letter, No. 451, 5
pp. (Silver Spring, Maryland, 1987).
ACI 211.3-75, Revised 1987, Reapproved 1992, Standard practice for selecting proportions for
no-slump concrete, ACI Manual / Concrete Practice, Part /.' Materials and General Properties of
Concrete, 11 pp. (Detroit, Michigan, 1994).
ACI 211.1-91, Standard practice for selecting proportions for normal, heavyweight, and mass
concrete, ACI Manual / Concrete Practice, Part /.' Materials and General Properties of Concrete,
38 pp. (Detroit, Michigan, 1994).
F. c. Hewlett, Superplasticised concrete: Part 1, Concrete, 18, No. 4, pp. 31-2 (London, 1984).
ACI 1 1R-85, Quality assurance systems for concrete construction, ACI Manual of Concrete
Practice, Part 2: Construction Practices and Inspection Pavements, 7 pp. (Detroit, Michigan,
1994).
ACI 318-02, Building code requirements for structural concrete, ACI Manual / Concrete
Practice, Part 3: Use / Concrete in Buildings - Design, Specifications, and Related Topics, 443
pp.
Page | 23