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..........................................................................................................14

Table 2. Data Analysis Wednesday Lab....................................................................................................15
Table 3Data Analysis Friday Lab..............................................................................................................16
Table 4 Results Monday Lab.....................................................................................................................18
Table 5Results Wednesday Lab.................................................................................................................19
Table 6 Results Friday Lab........................................................................................................................20

List of Figures

Figure 1Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete...............................................................18

Figure 2Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete...............................................................19
Figure 3 Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Concrete..............................................................20
Figure 4 Influence of w/c on Elastic Modulus of Concrete........................................................................21

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 211.1-

91 consists of a sequence of logical, straightforward steps which take into account the

characteristics of the materials to be used. These steps are.

 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

ii. 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

Page | 5
ash, but it does not cover flowing concrete or pumped concrete; nor does it deal with

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 ٥٢ the cube has been finished by

means of a float, the cube is stored undisturbed for 24±4 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 20±2°c (68±4°F).

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 non-

linearity 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 water-

barrier 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 3 1515 4.18E+06 192530 6809.355821
0.00032
0.5 5143 145424 14542 58170 14 66 5 1543 4.75E+06 178920 6328.000537
0.00025
0.55 4027 113851 11385 45541 15 56 6 1208 4.71E+06 164550 5819.765752
0.00026
0.6 3423 96792 9679 38717 3 45 3 1027 3.91E+06 136540 4829.114651

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 8 1651 4.26E+06 193570 6846.138297
0.00034
0.5 4740 134020 13402 53608 14 69 4 1422 4.14E+06 182840 6466.642177
0.00025
0.55 4078 115293 11529 46117 12 53 6 1223.3 4.77E+06 163960 5798.898771
0.00023
0.6 3660 103484 10348 41394 10 48 8 1098 4.62E+06 139650 4939.108401

Page | 14
 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 4 1733 5.04E+06 199060 7040.307327
0.00026
0.5 4440 125538 12554 50215 13 55 3 1332 5.07E+06 157310 5563.703133
0.00026
0.55 3743 105840 10584 42336 10 52 3 1123 4.28E+06 155500 5499.687478
0.00021
0.6 3303 93400 9340 37360 9 43 3 991 4.66E+06 134730 4765.098996
Table 3Data Analysis Friday Lab

Page | 15
Formula used
F
i. Compressive Strength σ =
A

Where = Compressive Strength

F = Force applied

A = Area of cylinder

∆σ
ii. Elastic Modulus =
∆Є

σ = Stress applied

Є = strain produced

2P
iii. Split Cylinder Strength =
∏ dH

d = diameter of Cylinder

H = Height of Cylinder

PL
iv. Modulus of Rupture fr =
bd 2

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
4660 5190 4100 3520
Stresses
5430 5110 4050 3260

Influence of w/c on Compressive Strength of Normal Concrete

8000

7000

6000
Compressive Strength (psi)

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

5000
Compressive Strength (psi)

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

6000
Compressive Strength (psi)

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
5.00E+06

4.50E+06

4.00E+06

3.50E+06
Elatic Modulus (E)

3.00E+06

2.50E+06

2.00E+06

1.50E+06

1.00E+06

5.00E+05

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

σ = F/A

= 51200lb/12.57in2

= 4070 psi

Elastic Modulus

σ0.4 = (0.4)(5440) = 2176 psi

σ0.1 = (0.1)(5440) = 544 psi

Loriginal = 16in L0.4 = 0.0081 in L0.1 = 0.0019 in

Є0.4 = 0.0081 in / 16 in = 5.0625(10)-4

Є0.1 = 0.0019in / 16 in = 1.188(10)-4

∆σ σ 0.4 −σ 0.1 2176−544

E= = = = 4.21(10)-6 psi
∆ Є Є0.4 −Є 0.1 5.0625(10)−4−1.188(10)−4

Split Cylinder Test

2P (2)(54630)
f s= = =483 psi
∏ dH ∏(6)(12)

Modulus of Rupture

PL (9000)(18)
f r= = =750 psi
bd 2 (6)(6)

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 ٠/ 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 ٠/ 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).

Page | 23
ACI 318-02, Building code requirements for structural concrete, ACI Manual ٠/ Concrete

Practice, Part 3: Use ٠/ Concrete in Buildings - Design, Specifications, and Related Topics, 443

pp.

Page | 24