Lab 1

docx

School

Louisiana State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3700

Subject

Mechanical Engineering

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ColonelFlowerGorilla29

CE 3700 Engineering Materials Laboratory Experiment 1: “Aggregate Sieve Analysis” & Experiment 2: “Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Tests” Performed By: Chrisotpher Issa Section 2 Group 1 Date Performed: 08/24/2023 & 08/31/2023 Date Submitted: 9/14/2023 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Louisiana State University Fall 2023 1

Purpose Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates: The purpose of this test was to determine the distribution of different particle sizes of coarse aggregates. A group of sieves, in varying sizes in order from largest to smallest, was used to sift dry aggregate through each size to capture the corresponding particles on each sieve. The amount of aggregate on a certain sieve established those particles’ sizes and were weighed to compare amounts of aggregates captured on each sieve size. Aggregate Specific Gravity and absorption tests: One purpose of this test was to find the average densities of a group of fine and coarse aggregates while trying to eliminate any volume that is not directly from an aggregate such as the empty space between particles. Another purpose is to find the relative density or specific gravity of the aggregates. The last purpose is to find the varying absorptions of the coarse and fine aggregates. Significance and Use Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates: Performing a sieve analysis for coarse aggregates helps provide the data for the contents of mixtures. Mixtures can be more easily identified and organized by measuring the particle size distribution that make them up. This can allow for meeting more specific safety standards and requirements as well as simply reaching a desirable mixture needed for a certain task. Being able to find out and control the different sizes and amounts of particles in coarse aggregates allows for more efficient and successful mixtures. Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Tests: Finding the relative density and knowing the specific gravity of an aggregate can be helpful in determining the volume of aggregates in mixtures as well as the volume of the empty spaces between aggregate. The weights of the aggregates found give a comparison to the volume of a unit weight of water. This will be able to help find more accurate weights of aggregates at dry and SSD condition, especially finer aggregates. Finding the absorption rates allows us to find the amount of water a coarse aggregate can hold in it’s pores when it is in SSD condition. Apparatus / Equipment Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates:  Scale  Pan 2

 Sieves – sizes (mm) 37.5, 25.0, 19.0, 12.5, 9.5, 4.75, 2.36, 1.18, 0.6, 0.3, 0.15, 0.75, and pan  Mechanical Sieve Shaker (Mary Ann)  Oven Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Tests:  Scale  Pycnometer  Flack  Mold and Tamper  Oven  Water tank  Towel Test Specimen / Sample Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates: The materials used in this experiment were limestone and sand aggregate. The initial weight for the compound used was 310.5 grams. After washing the aggregate, there was 299.5 grams remaining. The ASTM standards required 300 grams. There is a 0.5 gram deviation. Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Tests: The materials used in this experiment included 2447.9 grams of granite from Nova Scotia for the coarse aggregates as well as 499.5 grams of sand from the Amite River as the fine aggregate. The amount of sand is a deviation since the ASTM standards need 1000 grams. Test Procedure Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates: The sample was initially dried then weighed on the scale. The sieves were stacked in descending order with the sieve with the largest holes on top to the pan at the very bottom. The aggregate was poured onto the first sieve and the stack was put into the sieve shaker. The recommended time was 10 minutes by ASTM standards, but the shaker was set to 5 minutes for this experiment which is another deviation. Aggregate Specific Gravity and absorption tests: Granite was fully submersed in water for 24 hours prior to the experiment allowing the pores to be fully saturated. The granite was taken out of the water and dried with a towel until the surface looked dull showing it has been surface dried. The coarse aggregate was weighed, and the volume of the sample was found by measuring the displacement of the water. The granite was then oven dried in the oven with the final weight of the sample compared to the initial weight. With this information, the relative density (specific gravity) and absorption was found (Table 3,4, and 5 ). 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

For the fine aggregate, the procedure was following in accordance with ASTM C 128. The deviation was that water was added to the aggregate to get SSD condition rather than letting the aggregate soak overnight as recommended. The second deviation was that only 499.5 grams was used instead of ASTM’s standard of 1000 grams. The sand was placed in a pycnometer filled with water to help get the extra air out of the empty space in the aggregate. Then the volume was found using the volumetric method using mold and tamper. The deviation from this experiment was that only 5 minutes was spent attempting to remove air bubbles than the 15 minutes recommended from ASTM. Analysis of Results Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates: Table 1: Aggregate Weight Data Initial Sample Wt., g 310.5 Wt. After Wash, g 299.5 Decantation Wt., g 11.0 Final Sample Wt., g 310.2 % Difference 0.097 Fineness Modulus 4.09 Table 2: Sieve Analysis Data Table 1 shows the initial sample weight as well as the weight after wash. The decantation was accounted for to see how much of the sample was lost between the initial weight and the weight after wash. The final sample weight was from putting the aggregates from all the sieves as well as the decantation together. The initial sample weight compared to the final sample weight only had a 0.3 gram difference 4

so the percent difference was found to be 0.097 which is significantly lower than ASTM’s maximum of 0.3%. The percents retained between sieves 3/8 in and No. 100 were added then divided by 100 to find the fineness modulus of 4.09. Table 2 shows all the information gathered and calculated from the initial weights of the sieves and aggregate samples, to the amounts and percentages varying through the different sizes showing the particle distribution of the aggregate used. 91.1% of the aggregate still passed the first 3 sieve sizes which shows the majority of the aggregate was a finer compound. Figure 1 Aggregate Specific Gravity and absorption tests: Table 3: Coarse Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Table 4: Fine Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption 5

Table 5: Combined Coarse and Fine Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Tables 3 and 4 show the data for the coarse and fine aggregates such as the weights as well as the bulk and apparent specific gravities. The test sample weight in SSD condition for the coarse aggregate was 2447.9 grams and the dry weight for that sample was 2438.4 grams. The sample of granite was holding 9.5 grams in its pores. The test sample weight for the fine aggregate was 499.9 grams in SSD condition and the dry weight for this sample was 498.6. The aggregate was holding 1.3 grams of water in the voids between the particles. The coarse aggregate sample had a higher absorption rate than the fine aggregate sample at 39% versus 26%. Table 5 combines the data collected and calculated to find the combined bulk and apparent specific gravities of the dry and SSD samples as well as the combined absorption rate. Findings (Target Audience) Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates: ASTM 136-6 has a standard percent difference having to be less than 0.03%. From the calculations, the percent difference was 0.097% so the test is validated. The highest percentages of pass rates were from sieve No. 4 - sieve No. 30 (just above midrange) meaning the sample aggregate is on the more coarse side. Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Tests: For the coarse aggregates, the weight of the SSD sample was 2447.9 grams and the dry weight of the sample was 2438.4 grams. This means the aggregate was holding 9.5 grams of water in it’s pores. The absorption rate was calculated to be 39% for this sample. For the fine aggregates, the test sample SSD weight was 499.9 grams and the dry sample weight was 498.6 grams. This shows the aggregate was holding water in the voids between particles. 6

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Findings (Range of Audiences) Sieve Analysis for Coarse Aggregates: The test showed how the sample was more toward a coarse aggregate because the majority of the aggregate was caught on sieves No. 4 - sieve No. 30 (just above midrange) which are toward the top of the stack meaning they have larger holes, yet the aggregate was still caught. Aggregate Specific Gravity and Absorption Tests: The specific gravity and absorption data found data about the aggregates in conditions with water. The percent absorption for the fine aggregates was 26% versus the coarse aggregates at 39%. The weights of the SSD coarse aggregate versus the dry sample coarse aggregate were different by 9.5 grams meaning the SSD coarse aggregate sample was holding 9.5 grams of water in the pores. The weights of the SSD fine aggregate versus the dry sample fine aggregate were different by 1.3 grams meaning the aggregate was holding water in the empty spaces between particles. 7

Related Questions

pls help hoemwork problem question 26,27,28 and 29

Design of a Melting Procedure for a Casting You need to produce a M=1000 kg Cu-Ni alloy having minimum yield strength of Sy = 20,000 psi, a minimum tensile strength of Sut = 60, 000 psi, and a minimum % elongation of 20%. %3D You have in your inventory a Cu-20% Ni alloy and pure 1500 1400 1300 1200 nickel. 1100 1000 Design a method for producing castings having the required properties. 80,000 80 Tensile strength Cu strengthens Ni 60,000 60 40,000 40 Ni strengthens Cu % Elongation 20.000 20 Yield strength 20 40 80 Weight percent nickel 60 Ni Strength (psi) Temperature ('C) &Elongation

35. (SI units) Zinc has a density of 7.15 g/cm3 at room temperature (20°C). Determine its density at 410°C, using data in Table 4.1 of the book for reference (Hint: Assume a 1 cm3 cube, 1 cm on each side). Round to the nearest thousandth of a g/cm3.

I need ans in 15 min pleass pleass

Note:- • Do not provide handwritten solution. Maintain accuracy and quality in your answer. Take care of plagiarism. • Answer completely. • You will get up vote for sure.

M4.24 (Sl units) Aluminum has a density of 2.70 g/cm2 at room temperature (20°C). Determine its density at 650°C, using data in Table 4.1 of the book for reference (Hint: Assume a 1 cm2 cube, 1 cm on each side). Round to the nearest thousandth of a g/cm2.

The following data pertain to a carbonate formation: forma- tion thickness =15 ft; formation water salinity 95,000 ppm; formation temperature=200°F; and cementation factor=2.2. The vertical resistivity profile of the formation is shown by Fig. 1.33. a. If Zone B is water-bearing, estimate its porosity. b. If Zone A is an oil zone, estimate the oil saturation. c. Using qualitative and quantitative reasoning, give a com- plete explanation of the relatively high resistivity displayed by Zone C of the formation.

Please find the following using the graph provided. 1. Resilience (use calculated yield point) 2. Toughness please explain the calcualtion and equation needed. Thank you!

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has set a Permissible Exposure Limit of 1000 parts per million (ppm) of acetone. You are an industrial hygienist doing personal sampling on a worker who is supervising a production process that uses acetone. The upcoming exposures can be measured: 700 ppm for three hours and 1300 ppm for two hours. 3 hours at 900 ppm What is the TWA as calculated? What advice would you provide plant management regarding acetone exposure and PEL adherence?

Test Specimen 4140 CF steel 6061 T6 Al Gray Cast iron 40 FC Brass 360 Impact Energy (J or ft-lb) 48.5 ft-lb 25 ft-lb 12 ft-lb 27 ft-lb Impact Strength (J/m or ft-lb/in) 123.096 ft-lb/in 63.452 ft-lb/in What is the final analysis/ overall observation from the data? 30.457 ft-lb/in 68.528 ft-lb/in

d) A number of [0]s and [0,90]s CFRP test specimens were made from prepreg material with the following properties: Fibre strength, of = 3250 MPa Fibre modulus, E₁ = 195 GPa Matrix strength, m = 35 MPa Matrix modulus, Em = 3.8 GPa Volume fraction of fibres, Vf = 0.65 Calculate the tensile strength, oc, and the tensile modulus, Ec, in the 0° and 90° directions, using the simple "rule of mixtures" approach for both the [0]s and [0,90]s specimens.