Anda di halaman 1dari 19

# Presented in fulfillment of

## Kalia Shibao & Jessica Le Spring 2002

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

## Six Test Cylinders

6 diameter, 12 height

## gauge factor 2.055 0.05

12 prepared wires, one wire per strain gauge Two Strain Indicators

## SATEC Universal Testing Machine

Testing Procedure
1.

2.

3.

4.

## Check wire connection with ohmmeter

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

## SATEC Testing Machine

Strain Indicators

## Testing Procedure (cont)

6. 7. 8.

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

## Different values of E are experimentally determined by:

Secant Modulus from the graph, draw a line from the origin to 0.4 fc the slope of this line is the secant modulus Chord Modulus E = S2 S1 e2 0.00005
where S2 = 0.4 fc S1 = stress at 0.00005 long. strain

## Theoretical Poissons Ratio: n =

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

## e2 = longitudinal strain at 0.4 fc e1 = 50.0 x 10-6

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)

## Results: Test Cylinder #1

Figure 1. Strain vs. Stress of Cylinder 1
7000 6000

Ultimate strength = fc

lateral strain
Stress (psi)

-1500

-1000

-500

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Strain (10-6)

Graph

## Results: Test Cylinder #1

DATA CALCULATIONS

fc = 6534psi
S2 = 2613 psi

S1 = 169 psi

## Theor. E = 57,000 *(fc)^1/2 psi

= 4,607,490 Secant E = 3.9454 Chord E = S2 S1 e2 0.00005 = 4,083,542

## et2 = - 186 x 10-6 et1= - 11.56 x 10-6

Poissons Ratio n =

Data - Calculations

## et2 et1 e2 0.00005 = 0.29

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

## Project Results / Conclusion

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

## Poissons Ratio = 0.20 Target Ranged of Poissons Ratio = 0.15 - 0.25

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