Introduction
While the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) continues to provide working standards for the concrete industry, definitive values for the materials elastic behavior are not able to be reported due to the heterogeneous nature of concrete
This uncertainty of Youngs Modulus makes it difficult to predict a concrete specimens deformation under a given load and known stress The following is an attempt to verify current concrete code standards in addition to better understanding the elastic behavior of uniaxially loaded concrete test cylinders
Project Objective
The ultimate objective of our testing is to obtain the values for Youngs Modulus and Poissons Ratio of concrete By graphing and analyzing the data we obtain, we will quantify the actual values of YM and PR of our specimens and shall compare it to the calculated theoretical values
Through comparison, we can identify sources of error in lab procedure or inconsistencies with theoretical calculations
6 diameter, 12 height
12 prepared wires, one wire per strain gauge Two Strain Indicators
Testing Procedure
1.
2.
3.
should read approximately 120 ohms to insure proper reading from strain indicator
5.
Set up strain indicator and connect wires to apparatus in a quarter bridge orientation
Test Set Up
Test Specimen
Strain Indicators
Compress each cylinder until failure Record strain and plot data Analyze results to quantify Youngs Modulus and Poissons Ratio
Equations - Calculations
Area: pr2 = p(3)2 = 9p = 28.27
Stress: Load / Area = Load / 28.27 Yield Stress: 0.4 fc
lateral strain ex = longitudinal strain ey Desirable Range : 0.20 0.21 0.15 0.25 (for concrete aged 50 years) Poissons ratio is experimentally determined by: n= et2 et1 e2 0.00005
where et2 = lateral strain at 0.4 fc
Experimental Calculation
Strain vs. Stress
7000 6000
lateral strain
Stress (psi)
longitudinal strain
1000
S1
-1500 -1000 -500
et2
0 0
e1
500
e2
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
et1
Strain (10-6)
Ultimate strength = fc
lateral strain
Stress (psi)
-1500
-1000
-500
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Strain (10-6)
Graph
fc = 6534psi
S2 = 2613 psi
Poissons Ratio n =
Data - Calculations
Project Results
Sample Cylinder 1 Cylinder 2 Cylinder 3 E theoretical 4,607,490 4,567,201 4,149,924 E chord 4,083,542 4,582,633 1,024,589 E secant 3,950,000 3,907,500 1,014,000 n theoretical 0.29 0.16 0.07
Cylinder 4
Cylinder 5 Cylinder 6 Average
4,623,473
4,599,924 4,555,234 4,517,208
1,929,096
3,776,279 7,919,949 3,886,014
1,895,900
3,667,400 7,607,900 3,673,783
0.07
0.16 0.55 0.22
Average Value for Youngs Modulus = 3.886 x 106 Average Target Value for Youngs Modulus = 4.517 x 106 Average Value for Poissons Ratio = 0.22 Target Range for Poissons Ratio = 0.15 0.25
* From the above results one can conclude that our results were favorable and comparable to theoretical values, proving a successful project
Conclusion
From the data table, we can observe inconsistencies in the experimental values for Cylinders 3, 4, and 6 compared to the desired theoretical values Taking into account only Cylinders 1, 2, and 5 we get: Avg. Youngs Modulus = 4.147 x 106 Target Youngs Modulus = 4.592 x 106
We feel that this conclusion yields more accurate prediction for the values of Youngs Modulus and Poissons Ratio
Conclusion
From our graphs it is apparent that concrete has a certain stress-strain relationship, making the development of standard values for the material feasible However, since only 3 out of our 6 samples performed to desired theoretical behavior, we conclude that definitive values for Youngs Modulus and Poissons Ratio cannot be discerned
Accurate ranges for Youngs Modulus and Poissons Ratio currently in practice are valid and may be developed further for various strengths and types of concrete.
THANK YOU