TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.1 Introduction 2

1.2 Methodology 3

1.3 Result And Analysis 4

1.4 Discussion 5

1.5 Recommendations 6

1.6 Conclusion 6

1.7 References 7

1.8 Appendices 8

1|Page

01) 6. self-plate picks up the sample and steel sphere. Los Angeles Abrasion Test (ASTM C131) Introduction The Los Angeles test is a measure of degradation of mineral aggregates of standard grading resulting from a combination of action including abrasion a grinding resulting in a rotating steel drum containing a specified number of steel spheres. Balance (accurate to 0. Sieve shaker 5. Sieve (25mm. Loss Angeles abrasion machine 2. 1. Apparatus 1. and pan 4. Tray 3.  AASHTO T 96 or ASTM C 131: Resistance to Degradation of Small-Size Coarse Aggregate by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles Machine.7mm. As the drum rotated. The number steel charges depend upon the amount and grading of the test sample. 20mm. Objective To ascertain the degradation of aggregates by abrasion and impact. 14mm. After prescribe number of revolution the content is remove from the drum and the aggregate portion is sieved to measure the degradation as percent loss. 10mm. carrying them until they are dropped to the opposite of the drum creating and impact- crushing effect the content then roll with drum with abrading and gridding action until the self- plate impact and the cycle is repeated. Fine Haired brushed 2|Page .

5mm.1: Sieves (19mm. f.5mm. 12. 9. The drum is rotated for about 500 revolutions at 30 – 33 rpm. Samples are placed in Los Angeles Abrasion Machine.01g) Methodology a. 14 – 10 mm and 20 – 14mm b. c. Eleven steel balls are added in the machine.7mm and Pan) Figure 1.Figure 1. The retained sample on the sieved is washed and dried at the temperature of 105 to 110ºC.2: Electronic Balance (accurate to 0. 3|Page . 12 sieve after being rotated. Sample are weight up to 2500g for every size. 1. weight of the samples is taken.After the sample cool down. Sample is removed from the drum and sieved on no. e. d.

6477 1.532% Percent Wear 2 1.13667 1.Result and Analysis Aggregate Size Weight Of Sample Weight Of Sample Loss Before (Kg) After (Kg) (Mm) (Kg) 20-14 2.5 1.5 0 0.310% 4|Page .089% Calculation Weight loss = (Weight of sample before abrasion) – (Weight of sample after abrasion) = 5.78437 = 3.3633 ÷ 2.215 = 5.85223 ÷ 2.0000 x 100 = 64.85223 Percent Wear (Average) 3.0 × 100 64.5×100 74.3633 5.0000 – 1.21553 ÷ 5.5×100 54.21553kg Weight loss Percent wear = Initial weight x 100 3.000 14-10 2.310 % Percent Wear 1 1.

Sample may escape from the open window. d) Only 10 steel balls are being used may cause different data from the actual experiment. b) Drum must be clean before using because it may have affected the weight of the sample. c) The condition of the machine may also affect the sample weight. The factors are outlined below: a) Different data will be collected when the weighting process because of wind resistance. 5|Page .1 ( JKR manual). The sample data may be higher or lower than the reading data because of the reading error. Even though this experiment has a problem as stated above. The data may be slightly different than that we had obtained. Because of that the small aggregates will escaped from the machine. It’s because dust from previous project will affect the reading of the scale. Steel balls are used to abrasion and impact the aggregate when the drum is rotating. the value of aggregate physical property requirement still not exceeded as what the JKR had stated in the Table 1. Aggregate will break to smaller size that will represent the percentage of the total mass of aggregate.Discussion During the experiment. many factors can influence the data obtained.

These all are listed below: e) Laboratory must be closed area especially at the measuring area to avoid the wind resistance affected the weight data or closed box of measuring machine. Lower Los Angeles abrasion loss values indicate aggregate that is tougher and more resistant to abrasion.Recommendations All the problems stated above can be solved if these precautions have been taken. The sample will break into what we supposed to get. all the apparatus must be clean and keep at the clean place to avoid any dust entering the apparatus. g) Machine must do the maintenance regularly. we get the value is 64% More than the requirement of JKR’s. 30%. All the damages must be repaired before being used by student. We can conclude that the aggregate been used are less resistant to abrasion. It’s also can avoid accident in laboratory. h) The accurate amount of steel balls will make the collected data more efficient. 6|Page . It’s because the value more than half than JKR’s requirement. f) After doing the experiment. Aggregate physical property is lower Los Angeles abrasion is tougher and more resistance to abrasion. Conclusions From the experiment.

Civil Engineering Department. Civil Engineering Materials Laboratory.php?title=Los_Angeles_Abrasion h. 2007 December 15. 2010. . Highway Materials.. Karen K.unm. Ahmed Essam Mansour.pdf j. Available from: URL: http://pavementinteractive.html i. Muniandy R. Available from: URL: http://civilx. 2003. Celeste Hoffman. Resistance to Degradation Of Small-Size Coarse Aggregate By Abrasion And Impact In The Los Angeles Machine [Astm C131].ahm531. Los Angeles Abrasion. 1(1): [3 screen]. 1(1): [11 screen]. 7|Page .com/lab-reports/concrete- lab/reports/1/LA%20Abrasion%20test. Highway Engineering [Seventh Edition].org/index.W. University Putra Malaysia: Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia.. A Guide Book For Beginners. University of New Mexico.Reference g. Radin Umar Radin Sohadi. Los Angeles Abrasion Test. k. USA: John Wiley & Son. 1(1): [3 screen].D. CE 305L. Available from: URL: http://www. Paul H.edu/laboratories_ss/pcc/laabrasion.

5: Los Angeles Abrasion machine 8|Page .Appendices Figure 1.4: Aggregates after sieved Figure 1.2: Aggregates Before Sieve Figure 1.