Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 18 views

    Materials Lab Report

    Uploaded by

    Salmah Abas

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF or read online from Scribd

    Materials Lab Report

    Uploaded by

    Salmah Abas
    18 views3 pages

    Original Title

    materials lab report.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx or pdf
    18 views3 pages

    Materials Lab Report

    Uploaded by

    Salmah Abas

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx or pdf
    You are on page 1of 3
    sieves. YBSERVATION AND CALCULATION: .S. sieve | Sieve Weight Cumulati | Cumulati | % size Weight Retained | ve ve % Passing Weight retained retained 4.75 396.0 0 0 0 100 2.36 321.5. 8 8.0 2.67 97.34 1.18 356.5 20.5 28.5 9.5 90.5 2.60 356.5 TDD. 101.0 33.67 66.34 2.30 361.0 133.5, 284.5 78.16 21.84 2.150 346.0 6.0 295.5. 98.5 2:5 2.075 338.0 3 298.5 99.5 5 2AN 0.000 LS 300.0 100 0 IIL Results and Discussion The collected data was expected to show an asymptotic behavior as the applied load neared the critical load. The critical load of the shorter specimens was expected to be much higher than that of the longer specimens. Also due to boundary conditions the clamped specimens were expected to have critical loads four times greater than their simply supported counterparts, The theoretical values for the critical loads of the six experiments are shown in table 3.1 ‘Table 3.1- Theoretical critical buckling loads EXPERIMENT- DETERMINATION OF PARTICAL SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF AGGREGATE Silt content = (cumulative percentage retained on specified stoves) 100) where FM. = fineness modulus (2.67+9,5+33.67+78.16+98.5+99.5)/ 100 =3.22 Laurence Chenab Sargedha Margala pure Sand Name of Sand Crush Crush Sample 2.563 1.492 2.920 2876 Fineness Modulus. As we know that the Fineness modulus is a measurement of coarseness or fineness of a given aggregate, higher the FM the coarser aggregate. The above table is showing us that the Laurence pure sane coarser then Chenab sand and similarly Sargodha crush is coarser then marg crush. As we know that Larger value of FM Is preferred for fine aggregates & | a good fine aggregate, the FM should be between 23 and 31 So, we ¢ conclude that the Laurence pure sand is a good fine aggregate as the finene modulus of Laurence pure sand is in between the given range of a good f aggregate. The most coarser of all the samples is Sargodha crush as its finene modulus is greater of all, As surface area is inversely proportional to finene modulus so Chenab sand will be having the greater surface area of all samples as its fineness modulus is least that is 1.492

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy