Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SUBMITTED BY:
Marie Ann Terese S. Emano
GROUP #5
CENBSCE 4AX F(4:00-7:00 P.M.)
SUBMITTED TO:
Engr. Ruby G. Española
INSTRUCTOR
II. OBJECTIVES
To determine the flexural strength of concrete beam specimens after 3 days curing. To
determine the correlation of mass, unit weight and flexural strength to the number of curing
days.
A. Materials Used
The materials used were shovel, trowel, pail bucket (container), large tin can, tamping
rod, rubber mallet, plain sheet, plastic cellophane, tie wires, oil, paint brush, two beam molds,
cement, fine aggregate, coarse aggregate and water. Figure 1.1 and 1.2 show some of the
materials used in this activity.
The 0.65 water-cement ratio was first determined. Two (2) kilos of cement, four(4) kilos
of fine aggregate and eight (8) kilos of coarse aggregate were weighed according to 1:2:4
ratio. 1.3 liters of water was measured. The cement and aggregates were uniformly mixed and
a crater was formed. Water was then added slowly at the crater, mixing It carefully making a
homogenous appearance of the mixture. (See figures 2.1 and 2.2)
Prior to casting, beam moulds were cleaned and inside surfaces were coated first with
oil for easy demolding after the initial curing period. The molds were put on an even ground
free from disturbances. During casting of concrete, each mold was divided in two equal layers,
putting equal amount o f concrete mixture. Each layer was given 63 number of blows in its
perimeter area to ensure compactness of the specimens. After each mold was filled, the
external sides of the mold were each hammered by a rubber mallet. Top layer of the molds
was smoothly leveled with a trowel. The specimen were left for 24 ± 8 hours covered with a
plastic cellophane with the help of the tie wires. (See figures
After 24±8 hours, beam specimens were demolded and was submerge inside a curing
tank leaving it according the the assigned number of days which was 3. The tank was then
covered for temperature consistency inside. (See figures 4.1 and 4.2)
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Table 1 above shows the recorded measurements prior to actual testing. The
specimens had the same masses but had different measurements in lengths, height and
width.
Table 2 above shows the calculated data obtained from Table 1 and values during the
testing of beams in the Universal Testing Machine. Load P was the given point on the load
deflection curve. Specimen 1 got higher flexural strength than specimen 2 as the same as
to its volume, density, unit weight and load.
3𝑃𝐿
𝑓𝑏 =
2𝑏𝑑 2
Ave.Flexural
CURING Ave. Ave.Volume Ave.Density Ave. Unit
Strength fb
DAYS Mass (kg) (m3) (Kg/m3) Weight(KN/m3)
(MPa)
Group 1 28 29.85 0.012284866 2429.842803 23.8367579 6.067754717
Group 2 21 30.5 0.012563673 2427.794279 23.81666188 5.748291914
Group 3 14 28.25 0.01174539 2405.152504 23.59454607 5.07259498
Group 4 7 28.8 0.011853375 2431.617442 23.85416711 4.736463932
Group 5 3 29.2 0.01247594 2344.312251 22.99770318 3.871070874
Table 3. Data according to the number of curing days
Table shows the summary of data according to the number of curing days. The 3 day
curing gained the lowest flexural strength and the 28 days gained the highest flexural
strength. Except for the average flexural strength part, It can be seen that values varied,
they are not in a descending order nor ascending.
20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Curing Days
Graph 1 shows the correlation of mass to the number of curing days. It can be seen
that mass is directly proportional to curing days. As the number of curing days got longer,
the mass got higher.
Unit Weight Vs. Curing Days
24
23.8
Unit Weight
23.6
23.4
23.2
23
22.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Curing Days
Graph 2 shows the correlation of unit weight to the number of curing days. It can be
seen that between the 5 days and 10 days curing, high unit weight was achieved. Unit
weight was as not as consistent to the number of curing days compared to the relation of
mass to curing days.
6
Flexural Strength Mpa
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Curing Days
Graph 3 shows the correlation of flexural strength to the number of curing days. It can
be seen that as curing days got longer, flexural strength gained got higher meaning flexural
strength is directly proportional to the number of curing days.
V. Conclusion
Based from the results, the average flexural strength gained by the 3 days curing was
3.871 Mpa. It got the lowest flexural strength gained and it makes sense as the correlation between
curing days and flexural is directly proportional to each other. The correlation of mass and curing days
was the same as the flexural strength to curing days relationship, they are also directly proportional.
As to the unit weight to curing days, it was not that consistent with curing days.
VII. Recommendations
VIII. Reference
Flexural Strength Concrete. (2000). Retrieved from National Concrete Ready Mixed Concrete
Association: www.ncrma.org
Flexural Strength Concrete Wait, why and how? (n.d). Retrieved from Nevada Ready Mix:
http://www.nevadareadymix.com/concrete-tips/flexural-strength-concrete/
Aboutcivil.org. (2017). Flexural Strength of Concrete | Why Test Flexure? | How to Use Flexural
Strength?. [online] Available at: https://www.aboutcivil.org/flexural-strength-of-concrete.html
[Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].
Slutter, R. G. and Driscoll, G. C. Jr., "Flexural strength of steel and concrete composite beams,
" (1963). Fritz Laboratory Reports. Paper
1806.
http://preserve.lehigh.edu/engr-civil-environmental-fritz-lab-reports/1806
ScienceStruck. 2017. What is Flexural Strength and Why is it Important?. [ONLINE] Available at:
https://sciencestruck.com/flexural-strength. [Accessed 10 December 2017].