AFRISAM GAUTENG-ROODEPOORT Contents of P

6 3 5 4 8 1
AFRISAM GAUTENG-ROODEPOORT
CMTPRA-1 PRACTICUM REPORT
60339098 S. NGUBO
45780390 M. TENZA
57355967 S. MADONDO
49264885 T.N.L DLAMINI
44935730 T.E BALOI
45200181 M. MLALA
56862180 C.N ZULU
57235139 E. MORTEY
56520395 K.S RAMBUDA
54822963 M.K.S MAHANGO
SEPTEMBER 5, 2016
UNISA
ERNEST GOLAOTSWE NICOLY MOGOPODI
57063605
57063605 CMTPRA-1 13 September 2016
Contents of Practical
EXPERIMENT 1A – DETERMINING THE BULKING DENSITY OF STONE AT AFRISAM LAB .............................. 2

SUB-CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 3
EXPERIMENT 1A – DETERMINING THE BULKING DENSITY OF STONE AT AFRISAM LAB .............................. 3
Figure 1A - 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 1A-2 Figure 1A-3............................................................................................................... 6
EXPERIMENT 1B – DETERMINING THE MOISTURE CONTENT IN A SOIL SAMPLE ......................................... 7
SUB-CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 8
EXPERIMENT 1B – DETERMINING THE MOISTURE CONTENT IN A SOIL SAMPLE ......................................... 8
Figure 1B-1 ........................................................................................................................................ 10
Figure 1B-2 Figure 1B-3 ............................................................................................................. 10
Figure 1B-4 .......................................................................................................................................... 11
EXPERIMENT 2A – DESIGN A CONCRETE MIX ............................................................................................. 14
SUB-CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 15
EXPERIMENT 2A – DESIGN A CONCRETE MIX ............................................................................................. 15
EXPERIMENT 2B – SLUMP TEST: DETERMINE CONCRETE CONSISTENCY ................................................... 24
SUB-CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 2B-1 Figure 2B-2.............................................................................................................. 27
Figure 2B-3 Figure 2B-4.............................................................................................................. 27
Figure 2B-5 Figure 2B-6 ............................................................................................................ 29
EXPERIMENT 2C – COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST FOR CONCRETE........................................................... 30
SUB-CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 31
Fig 2c – 1 Fig 2C – 2.................................................................................................................... 33
Fig 2c – 3 Fig 2c – 4 ........................................................................................................................ 33
Figure 2C - 5 ............................................................................................................................................ 34
Figure 2C-6 .......................................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 2C-7 .......................................................................................................................................... 37
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 39
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................ 39
DECLARATION OF AUTHENTICITY .............................................................................................................. 39
1
EXPERIMENT 1A – DETERMINING THE BULKING DENSITY OF STONE AT AFRISAM LAB
2
SUB-CONTENTS
1. AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT
2. AGGREGATE THEORY
3. EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS
4. EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGY
5. PROCCEDURE AND RESULTS
6. DISCUSSION
7. CONCLUSION
EXPERIMENT 1A – DETERMINING THE BULKING DENSITY OF STONE AT AFRISAM LAB
3

This test on stone is done to determine its consolidated bulk density. The objective for this
experiment is to determine the bulk density and percentage voids of aggregates.
2. AGGREGATE THEORY
If the bulk density of aggregate material is known, then we the mass required to fill a unit volume
container can be calculated. The percentage voids influence the grading of the aggregate, which is
important in higher strength concrete.
 14 l container (10.52 kg)

 Scoop
 ∅ 16 tamping rod 600 mm long
 19 mm size aggregate
 Weighing scale
 PPE (clinical gloves, ear plugs, dust mask, safety glasses, safety boots, safety laboratory coat)
For Loose Bulk Density (LBD):
1. The empty container is weighed.
2. The volume of the container was determined.
3. The container was filled with 19 mm stone with a scoop.
4. The top surface of the aggregates in the container was leveled using a tamping rod.
5. Determine the weight (W) of the aggregates in the container in kg.
For Consolidated (compact) Bulk density (CBD):
1. The empty container is weighed.
2. The container is filled about half full with 19mm stone and tamped 30 times.
3. A second layer of a similar quantity is added and tamped 30 times.
4. The surplus aggregates s stoke of using the tamping rod as a straight edge.
4
5. The weight (W) is determined and recorded on paper.
5. RESULTS
Sample Density Mass of Volume of Mass of Mass of Mass of Bulk Density
Container (g) Container Container + Container + Aggregate
Mass of Mass of average (g)
Aggregate (g) Aggregate (g)
Test 1 Test 2
Loose 10520 0.014 m3 31020 31120 20550 1467.86 kg/m3
Compacted 10520 0.014 m3 33960 33980 23450 1675 kg/m3
Figure 1A - 1
Loose Bulk Density

= (Mass of loose aggregates in container – mass of container) / Volume
= (31.02 - 10.52) / 0.014
= 1464.23 kg/m³
≈ 1460 kg/m³
Specific Gravity LBD

= (Loose bulk density of objects/Density of water)
= (1460 kg/m³) / (1000 kg/m³)
= 1.46
Compacted Bulk Density

= (Mass of compacted aggregates in container – Mass of container)/Volume
= (33.96 – 10.52) / 0.014
= 1674.23 kg/m³
≈ 1670 kg/m³
Specific Gravity CBD

= (Compacted bulk density of objects/Density of water)
= (1670 kg/m³) / (1000 kg/m³)
= 1.67
6. DISCUSSION
Bulk density refers to the mass of aggregates that would fill a container of 1 m3 capacity. The full
procedure to determine bulk density is described in the SANS 5845 Specification document.
Loose bulk density (LBD) refers to aggregate that is placed without compaction, through pouring or
shoveling specimen into a container. Compacted bulk density (CBD) refers to aggregate that is
5
placed with compaction into a container. To stipulate differences between the two bulk densities,
this experiment was conducted with the theoretical stance that different results would be achieved,
so as displayed in the results of this experiment.
Bulk density of dry material depends on:
o Degree of compaction.
o Particle relative density.
o Grading – for a given rock type, a single-sized aggregate has a lower bulk density than an
aggregate having a range of graded sizes.
o Particle shape – the closer particle shape is to a spherical, the higher the bulk density.
The more the elongated and flakiness the shape, the lower the bulk density.
Necessary precautions were prioritized to yields acceptable and fair results. The apparatus were
appropriate for the testing of the experiment and checked for defects prior to the experiment to
curb inconsistencies in the testing stage.
Safety PPE clothing must be worn, signs to be well read and understood in order to carry out the
tests in the laboratory without jeopardizing the health and safety of personnel.
7. CONCLUSION
The calculated results of the compacted bulk density of the 19 mm aggregate are well within
realistic range, thus can be accepted and recorded for experiments that follow.
Bulk density is a measure of aggregate packing capacity and therefore influences water requirement
and mix proportioning. It does not, however, have a direct result and/or influence on workability,
provided that the mix is well and correctly proportioned.
From this experiment, it follows that the stipulation that, CBD is indicative of packing capacity
whereas LBD is used for volume batching, can be made in accordance.
Figure 1A-2 Figure 1A-3
6
EXPERIMENT 1B – DETERMINING THE MOISTURE CONTENT IN A SOIL SAMPLE
7
SUB-CONTENTS
2. WATER CONTENT THEORY
5. PRECAUTIONS
6. PROCCEDURE AND RESULTS
7. DISCUSSION
8. CONCLUSION
EXPERIMENT 1B – DETERMINING THE MOISTURE CONTENT IN A SOIL SAMPLE
8
The moisture content of aggregate is an important factor when developing a proper water:cement
ratio. Aggregate is generally not dried and therefore the aggregate moisture content will affect the
water content of the produced cement as the water content also affects aggregate proportioning.
The reason for this experiment is to determine the bulk density and percentage voids of
aggregates. If we know the bulk density of aggregate material then we can easily calculate the mass
required to fill a unit volume container. The percentage voids effect the grading of the aggregate
which is important in higher strength concrete.
2. WATER CONTENT THEORY

Water absorption – The extent to which pores in the aggregate structure can fill with water may
affect the performance of concrete made with these aggregates. An aggregate with a water
absorption of less than 1% is unlikely to influence concrete performance, but values above 1% may
lead to slump loss and cause difficulties with concrete placing, as well as affecting shrinkage and
creep.
 Weighing balance
 Spatula
 Scoop
 Pan
 Hot plate
 Glass plate
 Crusher sand (< 0.475mm Andesite from Eikenhof)
Determine the mass of the empty container as well as the container with the wet soil. Write down
these values. Preheat the oven (hot plate) to between 105 and 110 ℃ and place the soil and
container in the oven. Leave overnight or for an approximate 12 hours to dry.
Record the following values:
 Mass of empty container

 Mass of container with wet soil
 Mass of container with wet soil
Now determine:
 Mass of moist soil before drying

 Mass of dry soil (excluding mass of container)
9
Weigh the container with the dried soil and record the mass. To calculate the moisture content as a
%, use the formula:
𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 (%)

(𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟+𝑤𝑒𝑡 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)−(𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟+𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)
= (𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟+𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)−(𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦)
∗ 100
𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒
= ∗ 100
𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙
Figure 1B-1
Figure 1B-2 Figure 1B-3
10
Figure 1B-4
5. PRECAUTIONS
 Ensure apparatus is clean when ready for use.

 Safety PPE should be appropriately used at all times.
 Erect signages to make site staff and bystanders aware of any potential risk and safety
hazards.
 Take measurements of soil specimen’s mass before and after drying.
 Make necessary adjustment to the mix design.
6. PROCEDURE AND RESULTS

Make sure that the balance is at 0.000 kg.
Take sample from stock pile.
Test 1:
Pan A – 361.5 g
Mass of wet material + pan A mass = 724.5 g
Test 2:
Pan B – 353.5 g
11
Mass of wet material + pan B mass = 702.0 g
Place the two pans on a hot plate, monitor for steam or evaporation taking place with a glass plate.
Notice how the crusher changes color as soon as steam is lost. Use a spatula to enhance the rate of
evaporation by spreading the crusher sand over a wide surface area.
Mass of dry material + pan:
A – 697.0 g
Therefore, dry material = 697 – 361.5
= 335.5 g
𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 (%) = ∗ 100
= [ ( 724.5 – 697 ) / ( 697 – 361.5 ) ] * 100
= 8.20%
B – 674.0 g
Therefore, dry material = 674 – 353.5
= 320.5 g
𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 (%) = 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙
∗ 100
= [ ( 702 – 674 ) / ( 674 – 353.5) ] * 100
= 8.74%
7. DISCUSSION
For the samples of soil tested, the in-situ moisture content is 8.20% and 8.74% for both tests 1 and
2, respectively.
This experiment helps students understand how water can affect the strength of concrete,
especially that which is governed by the water:cement ratio in the mix design. Too much moisture in
the soil together with the intended water requirement will affect the slump of the concrete (shear
12
to a collapsed slump), and thus a fresh batch will need to be mixed (with the soil moisture content
deducted from the mix design), which will incur more expenses.
Consequently, the mobility of the fresh concrete will be high, thus compromising the concrete’s
cohesiveness. From this experiment, it is learned that the higher the water content, the less stiff or
sloppier the concrete. The slump increases and placing or applying and compacting the concrete
gets easier, but segregation and bleeding are more likely to occur.
When a heap of soil on site has some moisture content, it is advisable that the soil be heated
overnight for a period of 12 hours at 105 and 110 ℃ temperature.
Sand quality is the factor that has the greatest influence on water requirement of concrete. An
‘average’ water requirement – for concrete made with 19 mm crushed stone, average quality sand,
a CEM I type cement, no admixture, and to a slump of 75 mm – is 210 l/m3. Thus moisture content
found in a soil sample to be used in the batching of concrete needs to be guarded against, as this
would affect the cohesiveness of fresh concrete as well as the strength properties of hardened
concrete.
8. CONCLUSION
If we are to consider the average moisture content of these two tests, ± 8.47% of the soil moisture
content would have to be dried in the oven overnight to ensure a workable concrete design mix for
construction.
Another alternative is that ± 8.47% of the soil moisture content be deducted from the water to be
used in the concrete design mix if there is no time to dry the soil for 12 hours overnight, and ±
8.47% of soil added to the soil content in the design mix.
13
EXPERIMENT 2A – DESIGN A CONCRETE MIX
14
SUB-CONTENTS
2. CALCULATIONS
3. CHOOSING A MIX DESIGN FOR CONCRETE
4. RESULTS
5. DISCUSSION
6. CONCLUSION
EXPERIMENT 2A – DESIGN A CONCRETE MIX
15

The objectives of a mix design are to select suitable materials and to proportion these materials to
produce concrete which will satisfy the specific performance requirements as well as give the
correct yield or blend, i.e. mixture of the right quantities of water, sand, stone and cement for a
specified concrete mix.
Certain concrete structures require a stronger concrete design mix than other members. For this
reason, concrete mixes are designed specifically to suit the design requirements. Design mix is a
process, of determining suitable mix proportions for concrete of specific compression strength.
2. CALCULATIONS
Designing of 27 concrete mixes using the following:
 19mm stone
 Hand-compacted
 FM (sand) = 2,8
 CBD of stone = 1 580 kg/m³
 Density of sand = 2 670 kg/m³
 Density of cement = 3 140 kg/m³
 Density of stone = 2 920 kg/m³
Note: The density of water is approximately 1000Kg/m3, hence the mass of 1 liter of water = 1 Kg
Therefore a quantity x L/m3 is equivalent to x Kg
Design mix 1: 20 MPa – CEM strength class 52.5
Water requirement @ 50mm slump = 204 L/m³
Cement content = 204/0.82 = 248.78 kg/m³
Stone content: CBD x (K – 0.1 x FM) = 1 580(0.94 – 0.1x2.8) = 1 042.8 kg/m³
Sand: Volume of sand/Density of sand = 1 – [Vol/Density of (cement + stone + water)]
= 1 – (204/1000 + 248.78/3140 + 1042,8/2920)
= 1 – (0.640352…)
Volume sand = 0.35964… x 2670 = 960.26 kg/m³
16
Volume sand = 0.351316… x 2670 = 938.014 kg/m³
Sand content = 0.34437… x 2670 = 919.477 kg/m³
Sand content = 930.88 kg/m³
Stone content: CBD x (K – 0.1 x FM) = 1580(0.94 – 0.1x2.8) = 1042.8 kg/m³
17
Stone content: = 1042.8 kg/m³
Stone content: = 1 042.8 kg/m³
18
Cement content = 210/0.56 = 375 kg/m³
19
20
21
3. CHOOSING A MIX DESIGN FOR CONCRETE
Laboratory design mix 28: 25 MPa – CEM strength class 42.5R
 K = 1.00
 Water : cement ratio = 0.67
 Andesite 19mm stone
 Moderate vibration
 FM (sand) = 3.3
 RD of Andesite crusher sand = 2.92
 RD of Andesite 19mm stone = 2.92
1. Water requirement for a 100 mm slump = 210 + 5 = 215 l/m3

2. Cement content = 215 / 0.67 = 320 kg/m3
3. Stone content = CBDst(K - 0.1FM)
= 1636 (1 – 0.1*3.3)
= 1096.12 kg/m3
𝐶 𝑆𝑡
4. Sand content = 1000 – [𝑅𝐷𝑐 + 𝑅𝐷𝑠𝑡
+ 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐻2𝑂]
320 1096.12
= 1000 – [3.14 + 2.92
+ 215]
= 307.7 kg/m3
∴ Sand content * RDs = 307.7 * 2.92
= 898.50 kg/m3
4. RESULTS
From 1000 l to 10 l (mass of material for 500 l container)
Water requirement @ 100mm slump = 2.15 l/m³ = 1.075 l/m³
Cement content = 2.15/0.67 = 3.20 kg/m³ = 1.6 kg/m³
Stone content = 1 0.96 kg/m³ = 5.48 kg/m³
Sand content = 8.98 kg/m³ = 4.49 kg/m³
22
Material Content per m3 at 10 l Mass for 500 l container

Water 2.15 l/m³ 1.075 l/m³
Cement binder content 3.20 kg/m³ 1.6 kg/m³
Stone content 1 0.96 kg/m³ 5.48 kg/m³
Sand content 8.98 kg/m³ 4.49 kg/m³
5. DISCUSSION
Throughout the experiment, it became apparent how the water to cement ratio strongly influences
the strength of the concrete design mix. Having done these 27 concrete mix design calculations prior
to the Afrisam practical, it became much simpler to calculate having attended the practical, thus
influencing my judgement on which characteristic of fresh concrete governs its strength.
Every individual in the group had a respective understanding of how we were to get about the
calculations, and thus as a collective, teamwork prevailed as the whole group battled to know the
correct and more appropriate method of presenting the experiment results.
It was of utmost importance that the knowledge conveyed by the Afrisam presenters be attentively
heard, and as such, the diligence and attentiveness of the group made the practical more
interesting.
6. CONCLUSION
Different cement type classes, 28-Day strengths at different slumps give off different results and
different concrete mix designs. This means that these 27 different designs will produce concrete which
will satisfy the specific performance requirements (workability, compressive strength and durability) as
well as yield differently, i.e, mixtures of the right quantities of water, sand, stone and cement.
23
EXPERIMENT 2B – SLUMP TEST: DETERMINE CONCRETE CONSISTENCY
24
SUB-CONTENTS
3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
4. RESULTS
5. DISCUSSION
6. CONCLUSION
EXPERIMENT 2B – SLUMP TEST: DETERMINE CONCRETE CONSISTENCY
25

A slump test measures the consistency of the mix and is used to control the amount of water in a
mix, thus gives an indication of the workability of such a mix. Consistency refers to concrete’s
stiffness when it is still fresh, and thus plays a significant role in fresh concrete’s workability. The
sloppier the slump, the greater the slump.
 A standard slump mould in the form of a cone made of mild steel, 1.6 m thick fitted with
foot pieces and handles – damp and clean
 A non-absorbent, rigid surface, e.g. 600 * 600 mm2 base plate made of mild steel
 ∅ 16 tamping rod 600 mm long
 PPE (clinical gloves, ear plugs, dust mask, safety glasses, safety boots, safety laboratory
coat)
3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
 Using the concrete design mix calculated in the laboratory, a batch of concrete is to be
physically mixed to make provisions for the concrete specimen to be tested.
 Place the mould in the centre of the base plate. Place your feet on the foot pieces to
hold the mould firmly in position.
 Fill the mould in three layers of approximately equal height.
 Each layer poured in is given 25 blows of the rounded end of the tamping rod. The blows
should be made uniformly over the area of each layer.
 The bottom layer is tamped throughout its depth. When tamping the other layers, the
rod must just penetrate the layer below.
 The last layer should slightly overfill the mould.
 After tamping the top layer, level the surface by removing all excess concrete using a
sawing and rolling action of the tamping rod. Also clean off any concrete on the mould,
especially around the base.
 Transfer pressure from the foot pieces to the mould handles and remove mould as
slowly and steadily as possible from the concrete by raising it vertically for a period of 5
to 10 seconds.
 Turn the cone upside down and place it next to the slumped concrete.
 Place the taming rod across the top of the mould and measure the slump to the nearest
5 mm.
 Record the slump height from the bottom of the rod to the highest point of the concrete
specimen.
 The concrete is only desirable if it meets the required slump from the design calculation;
provided that the slump is within 25 mm or one third of the specified value. The test
must be repeated if a shear or collapsed slump occurs.
 Time taken to fill up the slump mould and record the slump height should be completed
within a timeframe of 2 minutes and 30 seconds.
26
4. RESULTS
The slump of our concrete was measured to a 75 mm slump from the soffit of the tamping rod
laying on top of the slump mould, which is 75 mm from the 100 mm concrete slump specified in the
concrete design calculation.
27
5. DISCUSSION
If the concrete is too stiff, more water needs to be added to the existing mix and a retest should be
done. However, if the existing mix is excessively wet and slippery a fresh new mix need to be used in
the slump test.
The slump is dependent on various factors, such as the many properties of the concrete elements:
aggregates and temperature. For a good and ideal true slump, these parameters should be
considered in the design mix stage.
When you measure the slump, record the following:
 Date and time.

 Sample number.
 Place of test.
 Type of slump.
 Name of tester.
The slump test must be carried out in accordance with SANS method 5862-1:2006, which is
commonly used to measure the consistency of conventional concrete.
From the time of mixing, fresh concrete gradualy loses consistence, known as slump loss. This gives
rise to problems only if the concrete becomes too stiff to handle, place and compact properly.
Usually this important aspect becomes an oversight at sight, thus it is wise and advisable to guard
against factors that cause slump loss such as:
o Hydration of the cement

o Loss of water by evaporation
o Absorption of water by dry aggregates
o Absorption of water by surfaces in contact with the concrete, i.e formwork
Note: adding water to the concrete to restore lost slump (known as retempering) should not be
permitted as this would increase the W:C ratio, with a resultant loss of strength and durability.
To minimize loss of slump:
o Batch the concrete at a higher slump than that needed for placing and compacting.
o Minimize delays in handling the concrete.
o Reduce concrete temperature.
6. CONCLUSION
The base plate was tamped with the tamping rod to assess the resistance (workability) of the
concrete. As the stones moved away from the rod, we noticed that the concrete mix was well-
proportioned.
28
The slump test resulted in the form of true slump. The slump is considered to be workable as the 75
mm slump height was recorded within the 25 mm to a one-third range of the specified 100 mm
slump.
The slump test conducted in this experiment showed cohesiveness, as depicted by Figure
B-6 below.
29
EXPERIMENT 2C – COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST FOR CONCRETE
30
SUB-CONTENTS
2. APPARATUS
3. METHODOLOGY
4. PRECAUTIONS
5. RESULTS
6. DISCUSSION
7. CONCLUSION
EXPERIMENT 2C – COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST FOR CONCRETE
31

The reason for making and testing concrete cubes is to physically determine if the concrete mix did
achieve the strength that it was designed for. In South Africa, concrete strength is measured in
terms of the compressive strength of test cubes.
2. APPARATUS
 150 mm moulds (100 mm moulds for Afrisam Laboratories).

 Mould release oil and cloth.
 Tamping bar, 16 mm diameter or square bar 25 x 25 mm – (1, 8 kg ± 0,1kg) or
alternatively, a vibration table for 1 minute.
 A scoop.
 A steel float.
 Absorbent paper for label and a ballpoint pen.
 Concrete curing tank.
 Concrete compressive test machine.
3. METHODOLOGY
o Use your design mix from the previous experiment and make a set of cubes.
o Clean, oil and assemble the concrete cube mould.
o Place the cube moulds on a firm level surface.
o Mix the concrete well and fill the cube mould in 50 mm layers tamping each layer 38 times
(square bar) or 45 times (round bar) to remove the air bubbles (at least 20 times with a round
bar for Afrisam Laboratories).
o Level off the top with a straight edge or a steel float.
o Write the following information on a piece of paper with a lead pencil:
 Learner’s name and number
 Date
 Strength of the mix
 Group number: 1075/16 G2
o Concrete cubes are kept in a room maintained at a room temperature of 22 – 25℃ and a
constant humidity of 90 – 100℃.
4. PRECAUTIONS
Ensure the following: - Clean and particle-free moulds are maintained.
- Grease and/or mould oil has been applied to the joint faces of the
moulds.
- The integrity of the structure of the moulds is strong.
- There are no loose fasteners.
32
- Take sufficient samples to make all the required cubes required.
- The curing tank water is regulated and maintained within the standard
temperature limits.
- Take the moulds completely apart during the cube removal stage.
- Clean the moulds as soon as the cubes are stripped.
The cubes are left in a room of regulated moist air for a complete period of 24 hours, then marked
and removed from the moulds. They are submerged in a body of clean water inside a curing tank
until taken out for a predetermined compressive test. See Fig 2c – 3 and Fig 2c – 4.
The curing tank water is regulated at an average temperature in the range of 22 and 25℃.
Fig 2c – 1 Fig 2C – 2
Fig 2c – 3 Fig 2c – 4
33
Figure 2C - 5
5. RESULTS
The following table shows Concrete Cube Compressive test results obtained at AfriSam
Laboratories in Roodepoort, Gauteng.
Test methods used:

SANS 5862-1:2006 Slump test
SANS 5863:2006 Compressive Strength of hardened concrete
Material Source SI Units Design Mix

Water Municipality Kg/m3 215
CEM II/A-M(V-L) Roodepoort Kg/m3 320
42.5R
Andesite crusher Eikenhof Kg/m3 898
sand
19.0 mm Andesite Eikenhof Kg/m3 1096
stone
water:cement 0.67
K mm 75
Moderate vibration mm 1.00
Ave. 1 day strength MPa 7.8
Ave. 7 day strength Mpa 25.2
Ave. 28 day strength Mpa 37.1
Cast Date 05/09/2016

Figure 2C-6
34
Compressive strength is defined as:
Fc, N/mm2 or MPa = P/A
Where:
P = load to failure, N
A = cross-sectional area, mm2
Characteristic strength (fck) is defined as the value for the compressive strength of concrete
below which not more than 5% of the valid test results obtained on concrete cubes of the same
grade should fall.
𝑓𝑐 (𝑡) = 𝛽(𝑡). 𝑓𝑐(28)
Where fc(t) is the strength at age t days, fc(28) is the strength at age 28-day strength and:
28⁄ 0.5
𝛽(𝑡) = exp {𝑠 [1 − ( 𝑡) ]}
Where s is a coefficient depending on the cement strength class:

s = 0.2 for CEM 42.5R, 52.5N and 52.5R
s = 0.25 for CEM 32.5R and 42.5R
s = 0.38 for CEM 32.5R
In the case of this experiment, to predict the compressive strength consideration is made for s =
0.2 for CEM 42.5R, 52.5N and 52.5R, since the design concrete mix was designed for a
characteristic strength of 25 MPa with a CEM class of 42.5R, thus:
{0.2 [1 − (28⁄ )0.5 ]}

𝛽(𝑡) = exp 7
Laboratory design mix 28: 25 MPa – CEM strength class 42.5R for a 5% water content in the sand.
 K = 1.00
 Water : cement ratio = 0.67
 Andesite 19mm stone
 Moderate vibration
 FM (sand) = 3.3
35

 RD of Andesite crusher sand = 2.92
 RD of Andesite 19mm stone = 2.92
𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 (%)

(𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟+𝑤𝑒𝑡 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)−(𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟+𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)
= (𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟+𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙)−(𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦)
∗ 100
= ∗ 100
𝑥
∗ 100 = 5%
898.5
𝑥 = 44.925 𝑘𝑔 = 44.925 L/m3
1. Water requirement for a 100 mm slump = 215 – 44.925 = 170.1 l/m3

2. Cement content = 215 / 0.67 = 320 kg/m3
3. Stone content = CBDst(K - 0.1FM)
= 1636 (1 – 0.1*3.3)
= 1096.12 kg/m3
𝐶 𝑆𝑡
4. Sand content = 1000 – [𝑅𝐷𝑐 + 𝑅𝐷𝑠𝑡
+ 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐻2𝑂]
320 1096.12
= 1000 – [3.14 + 2.92
+ 215]
= 307.7 kg/m3
∴ Sand content * RDs = 307.7 * 2.92
= 898.50 kg/m3 + 44.925 kg/m3
= 943.43 kg/m3
6. DISCUSSION
Test specimens are crushed between two platens in a hydraulic press. The rate of load application
influences the compressive strength results and is specified at a uniform rate of 0.3Mpa/s ±
0.1Mpa/s.
The mode of failure is primarily in tension. An accurate representation of strength of cast concrete
can only be obtained when cubes have been prepared and tested in a controlled manner as
prescribed in relevant standard test methods.
We incur variability in concrete strength because there are inherent variabilities in materials used in
the concrete mix design.
36
Target Mean Strength (T.M.S or fct) = Characteristic Strength (C.S or fck) + [ K * Standard
Deviation (SD) ]
Where K = 1.00 in this experiment exclusively,
And (SD) is dependent on the degree of control at the concrete production facility.
Factors affecting compressive strength:
The most significant factor influencing compressive strength is the amount of cement in the mix,
relating to water:cement ratio. The lower the W:C, the higher the strength for similar other
materials.
Water:Cement – mix designs for concrete with different compressive strengths are based on
predetermined ratios between water and cement.
Mineral components – cement containing mineral components is recommended for use in all
concretes to enhance durability.
Aggregates – although hardly considered in strength prediction, the use of inferior aggregate
which may be weathered, soft and contain deleterious substances may result in the predicted
strength not being achieved.
Admixtures – chemical admixtures may change the rate of strength development of concrete,
and may influence the 28-day compressive strength.
An indication of the compressive strength

test of concrete in the structure may be
determined by testing cores removed from
the structure. Cores are crushed after they
have been trimmed to the correct length and
their ends capped or ground flat.
The core tests may be carried out when cube

results are unsatisfactory or to assess the
strength of concrete in an existing structure.
Results of core tests should be interpreted

according to the criteria given in section
14.4.3 of SANS 10100-2.
Figure 2C-7
37
7. CONCLUSION
When the design mix was calculated in the laboratory, the characteristic strength intended for the
concrete specimen was 25 Mpa. The concrete cubes that had been left for 7 and 28 days to cure inside a
controlled and regulated curing tank were retrieved for compressive strength tests respectively.
At 7 days, the concrete cubes’ strength tested at 25.2 Mpa and at 28 days, the concrete cubes’ strength
tested at 37.1 Mpa.
These laboratory results prove the validity of the concrete specimen design and thus the concrete
design mix is suitable for the intended construction and can be used for future references.
38
REFERENCES
1. (AFRISAM, 2013)
2. (Amsterdam, 2013)
3. (Domone, 1930)
4. (Owens, 2013)
5. (AfriSam, 2013)
Bibliography
AFRISAM. (2013). AfriSam Technical Reference Guide (Fourth ed.). Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa:
AfriSam. Retrieved September 5th - 28th, 2016, from http://www.afrisam.co.za
AfriSam. (2013). Unisa Practicals - Introduction to Concrete - September 2013.pptx. (B. Makhathini, & F.
Mchunu, Eds.) Roodepoort, Gauteng, South Africa. Retrieved September 5th - 28th , 2016
Amsterdam, E. v. (2013). Construction Materials For Civil Engineering. (J. De Wet, Ed.) Cape Town,
Western Cape, South Africa: Juta & Company Ltd.
Domone, J. I. (1930). Construction Materials: Their Nature and Behaviour. Spon Press.
Owens, G. (2013). Fundamentals of Concrete. Midrand, South Africa: Cement & Concrete Institute.
DECLARATION OF AUTHENTICITY
I declare that this practical assignment is my own work and that all relevant sources herein quoted
have been acknowledged by appropriate references.
X
E G N M O G O PO D I
U N IS A N D E C I S TU D E N T
39

AFRISAM GAUTENG-ROODEPOORT Contents of P

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AFRISAM GAUTENG-ROODEPOORT Contents of P

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

6 3 5 4 8 1

EXPERIMENT 1A – DETERMINING THE BULKING DENSITY OF STONE AT AFRISAM LAB .............................. 2

EXPERIMENT 1A – DETERMINING THE BULKING DENSITY OF STONE AT AFRISAM LAB

1. AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT

5. PROCCEDURE AND RESULTS

EXPERIMENT 1A – DETERMINING THE BULKING DENSITY OF STONE AT AFRISAM LAB

1. AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT

 14 l container (10.52 kg)

For Loose Bulk Density (LBD):

1. The empty container is weighed.

2. The volume of the container was determined.

3. The container was filled with 19 mm stone with a scoop.

5. Determine the weight (W) of the aggregates in the container in kg.

For Consolidated (compact) Bulk density (CBD):

1. The empty container is weighed.

3. A second layer of a similar quantity is added and tamped 30 times.

5. The weight (W) is determined and recorded on paper.

Loose Bulk Density

Specific Gravity LBD

Compacted Bulk Density

Specific Gravity CBD

Bulk density of dry material depends on:

Figure 1A-2 Figure 1A-3

EXPERIMENT 1B – DETERMINING THE MOISTURE CONTENT IN A SOIL SAMPLE

1. AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT

2. WATER CONTENT THEORY

6. PROCCEDURE AND RESULTS

EXPERIMENT 1B – DETERMINING THE MOISTURE CONTENT IN A SOIL SAMPLE

1. AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT

2. WATER CONTENT THEORY

Record the following values:

 Mass of empty container

 Mass of moist soil before drying

𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 (%)

Figure 1B-2 Figure 1B-3

 Ensure apparatus is clean when ready for use.

6. PROCEDURE AND RESULTS

Take sample from stock pile.

Mass of wet material + pan A mass = 724.5 g

Mass of wet material + pan B mass = 702.0 g

Mass of dry material + pan:

Therefore, dry material = 697 – 361.5

= [ ( 724.5 – 697 ) / ( 697 – 361.5 ) ] * 100

Therefore, dry material = 674 – 353.5

= [ ( 702 – 674 ) / ( 674 – 353.5) ] * 100

EXPERIMENT 2A – DESIGN A CONCRETE MIX

1. AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT

3. CHOOSING A MIX DESIGN FOR CONCRETE

EXPERIMENT 2A – DESIGN A CONCRETE MIX

1. AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT

Therefore a quantity x L/m3 is equivalent to x Kg

Design mix 1: 20 MPa – CEM strength class 52.5

Water requirement @ 50mm slump = 204 L/m³

Cement content = 204/0.82 = 248.78 kg/m³

Stone content: CBD x (K – 0.1 x FM) = 1 580(0.94 – 0.1x2.8) = 1 042.8 kg/m³

Sand: Volume of sand/Density of sand = 1 – [Vol/Density of (cement + stone + water)]

= 1 – (204/1000 + 248.78/3140 + 1042,8/2920)

Volume sand = 0.35964… x 2670 = 960.26 kg/m³

Design mix 2: 20 MPa – CEM strength class 52.5

Water requirement @ 75mm slump = 210 L/m³

Cement content = 210/0.82 = 256.10 kg/m³

Stone content: CBD x (K – 0.1 x FM) = 1 580(0.94 – 0.1x2.8) = 1 042.8 kg/m³