Sand from Surplus Quarry Material - Kayasand · quarry fines in its quarries, which could undergo further processing to provide the majority of the sand required by the construction

Sand from Surplus Quarry Material

Final ReportReport no: QRF_b- SC9086-CF

31 January 2013

D Gardner, R Lark, M Pilegis,

F i n a l R e p o r t

P a g e | 2 of 45��

Summary

This project was supported by the National Assembly for Wales, via the Aggregates Levy sustainability Fund for Wales. In 2000 the Welsh Assembly acknowledged the need to find a sustainable use for the growing stock piles of crusher fines in Wales, and commissioned research into the use of these fines as a replacement for natural sand. The 2000 study showed that whilst certain crusher dusts were acceptable for use in concrete, they still needed to be blended with natural sands to satisfy the required fine aggregate specifications and desired fresh concrete properties. The report highlighted the need for sand products of consistent quality and acceptable grading and suggested that the manufacturing and screening processes were fundamental to achieving these attributes. It is now believed that this technology has been developed and improved to the point where reprocessed crusher dusts can completely replace natural sand in concrete.

An extensive Cardiff University led laboratory programme, together with information from literature and input from industrial project partners form the basis for the evaluation of the primary aim of this project which was to examine the potential for Kayasand to completely replace natural sand in concrete. The results obtained from the laboratory testing of a range of samples collected for this project provide additional data on grading characteristics and pre and post-processing physical properties of the Kayasand product. Additional investigation into the chemical properties of the Kayasand products is considered in a separate study in order to assess the suitability of the use of the fines in agricultural applications.

Four different rock types were considered in the present study, gritstone (sandstone), limestone, basalt and granite and all appear to varying extents in the geology of South Wales In order to evaluate the use of Kayasand in concrete a suite of physical characterisation tests were performed which were used to identify the effect of the physical sand properties on the fresh and hardened properties of concrete. Mix proportions were established for each individual rock type and a w/c ratio selected to achieve a fresh concrete slump of 50-90mm.

Additional laboratory tests were performed in order to observe the performance of the various Kayasand concrete mixes with the use of plasticisers at a fixed water/cement (w/c) ratio. These mixes allowed the potential for cement savings to be addressed.

The test results demonstrate that with appropriate adjustment to the mix proportions it is possible to replace marine sand in concrete with 100% Kayasand with no detrimental effects on the development of workability as measured by the slump test, compressive or tensile strength. Moreover, there was no apparent relationship between fines content and 28-day compressive strength in any of the Kayasand concretes. This suggests that there are no negative effects of higher fines contents on the compressive strength for the given mix compositions and range of fines contents investigated in the study. An increase in the fines content of the Kayasand mixes generally resulted in a small reduction in the slump of the mix, however only 1 of the 16 Kayasand mixes fell outside of the S2 slump range with some evidence of the fines acting as lubricants in Kayasand concretes with medium fines contents.


P a g e | 3 of 45��

Table of Contents

Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 2

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................ 3

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4

2. Literature Review ..................................................................................................................................... 6

3. Kayasand ............................................................................................................................................... 16

4. Laboratory Testing Programme .............................................................................................................. 17

5. Results and Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 24

6. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................ 36

7. References ............................................................................................................................................. 39

Appendix 1. Quarterly Reports produced by Cardiff University

Appendix 2. KEMCO Test Reports

Appendix 3. Full Stage 1 Results

Appendix 4. Full Stage 2 Results

Table 1. Stage 1 concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions ...................................................................... 22

Table 2. Stage 2 Table 2. Concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions ........................................................ 23

Table 3. Fine aggregate classification results ............................................................................................... 26

Table 4. Stage 1 and stage 2 fresh and hardened concrete results .............................................................. 31

Figure 1. Different forms of crusher (BGS, 2011) ............................................................................................ 8

Figure 2. Schematic representation of crushed rock fine grading compared to standard grading envelopes 10

Figure 3. Effect of fines addition on a) low strength concrete and b) high strength concrete (figure reproduced from Li et al., 2009) .................................................................................................................... 12

Figure 4. Changes of slump of concrete mixes with different type of coarse aggregate in different moisture conditions (figure reproduced from Poon et al. 2004) ................................................................................... 14

Figure 5. V7 Dry Sand-Making System (Figure reproduced from Pettingell 2008) ........................................ 17

Figure 6. NZFC Flow time envelope (Figure reproduced from Goldsworthy, 2005) ...................................... 20

Figure 7. Particle size distribution curves for Kayasand material .................................................................. 25

Figure 8. Correlation between RMBV and MBV values for all samples ......................................................... 27

Figure 9. NZFC voids and flow time results for all FEED and Kayasand material ......................................... 28

Figure 10. Influence of fines content on concrete consistency ...................................................................... 30


P a g e | 4 of 45��

1. Introduction

In 2000 the Welsh Assembly acknowledged the need to find a sustainable use for the growing stock

piles of crusher fines in Wales, and commissioned research into the use of these fines as a

replacement for natural sand. The 2000 study showed that whilst certain crusher dusts were

acceptable for use in concrete, they still needed to be blended with natural sands to satisfy the

required fine aggregate specifications and desired fresh concrete properties. The report highlighted

the need for sand products of consistent quality and acceptable grading and suggested that the

manufacturing and screening processes were fundamental to achieving these attributes.

Wider environmental concerns regarding the depletion of natural aggregate resources have

highlighted the need to find alternative sources of fine aggregate. One such source is crushed rock

material from stone quarries. However, the material produced differs in characteristics from natural

sands. The major differences being its shape and texture, grading and amount of fine filler. These

characteristics can detrimentally affect concrete; therefore Manufactured Fine Aggregates (MFAs)

are only reluctantly accepted within the industry (Harrison et al., 2000).

The MFA shape is typically highly angular, elongated or flaky. This characteristic greatly influences

the fresh and subsequent hardened properties of concrete. MFA shape depends on the parent rock

and to large extent on the crushing method (Ahn et al., 2001 and Manning, 2004).

Typical particle size distribution of MFA or “quarry dust” rarely conforms to the requirements of

national standards. These types of aggregate can produce “harsh” mixes with bleeding problems if it

is washed and screened to fall within the prescribed limits (Harrison et al., 2000). This is mainly due

to an excess of fine particles passing the 63 micron sieve and a deficiency of particles in the size

range 0.3mm to 1mm. Thus manufactured sands are commonly used in blends with fine natural

sands to overcome these shortcomings and minimise the negative effects on fresh and hardened

concrete properties.

An alternative to washing and blending is reprocessing the quarry fines by employing another

crusher to refine the particle shape and size distribution. Furthermore, if the classification process of

the product employs a dry instead of a wet system then environmental benefits can be gained. New

methods of manufacturing sand are now available which can more accurately control the sand

particle size, shape and gradation including particles in the usually deficient range. Indeed, it is now

believed that this technology has improved to the point where reprocessed crusher dusts can

completely replace natural sand in concrete.


P a g e | 5 of 45��

The aim of this study is to explore the potential for the use of Kayasand, an MFA produced from

reprocessing quarry fines, in concrete applications in Wales and the UK as a 100% replacement for

natural marine dredged sand.

The motivation for this project is to address the increasing miss balance between the need for

aggregates in society and the availability of traditionally suitable geologic sources. A strong need is

realised for developing and implementing technology that can enable the use of alternative resources,

reduce the need for transport and present zero waste concepts for the aggregate and concrete

industry.�With small changes in gradations, cement contents in concrete can be minimised in a way

never envisaged before. It is also well known that consistency in sand is a key consideration when

deciding upon the amount of cement to be used in a mix. Savings in excess of 10% in the cement

content have been commonplace in recent tests, but a great deal of test work needs to be done to

formulate a model to find the ideal sand gradation for each stone type, including the highest tolerable

level of filler content to minimise waste. The results of such an analysis could well lead to

specification changes, if significant reductions in cement use generally are to be made, although this

is outside the scope of this particular study.

The core objectives of this study are:

• to establish the physical properties of a range of Kayasands of differing mineralogy and fines

contents, through a series of standard characterisation tests;

• to determine the effectiveness of the Grace Rapid Methylene Blue Test in comparison with the

standard Methylene Blue Test;

• to determine the w/c ratio and mix proportions required for a range of 100% Kayasand mixes

of differing mineralogy and fines contents to achieve a slump within a specified range (50-

90mm);

• to determine for the same range of 100% Kayasand mixes, the plasticiser content to achieve a

slump within a specified range of 50-90mm at a fixed w/c ratio of 0.55;

• to compare the fresh and hardened concrete performance of 100% Kayasand mixes to that of a

natural marine dredged sand mix;

• to evaluate the potential for cement savings in the Kayasand mixes to achieve equal

performance to a natural marine dredge sand concrete mix.


P a g e | 6 of 45��

2. Literature Review

In Wales approximately half of all aggregates for concrete applications are from marine dredged

sources, with fine aggregate comprising the majority of this figure (Mankelow et al., 2011). The

other half, predominantly comprising coarse aggregates, are from land-base resources. The

processing of these coarse aggregates produces crushed quarry fines as a bi-product, which usually

represents up to 40% of the quarry output. The crushed quarry fines do find markets as partial fine

aggregate replacement materials, but they are generally lower value products, and often a percentage

can be classified as surplus or even waste products. The UK has significant reserves of crushed

quarry fines in its quarries, which could undergo further processing to provide the majority of the

sand required by the construction industry, using the same sales and delivery channels as it does now

for its coarse aggregates. The advantage of this being in the ability to specify aggregates from

quarries close to their place of end-use, thereby shortening transport distances, followed by less

pollution and increased employment opportunities for the local population. However the problem

currently lies in the quality of the crushed quarry fines, particularly in their shape, surface texture and

grading. Conventional impact crushing techniques have been employed for a number of years as a

method by which crushed quarry fines are reprocessed to form sands which are more suitable for

concreting applications. However, these MFAs are still deficient in their grading and need to be

blended with natural sand before use in concrete. Advances in crushing techniques over the last

decade have resulted in technology that produces well-graded MFAs with accurate control over the

volume of fines that are returned to the sand after processing.

All sands and indeed crushed rocks break differently under impact which results in various

gradations and particle shapes. As a result different sand gradation specification “envelopes”

generally based on natural sand gradations are provided by construction industry standards

worldwide. It is apparent that the best performing sands have good shape and an even gradation, but

very little work has been done on actual concrete performance using MFAs.

In order for the complete replacement of natural sand in concrete with MFA it is necessary to

understand the influence of the physical and mineralogical properties on the fresh and hardened

properties of concrete. This summary of the literature will look at various properties of aggregates,

their effects on concrete performance and compile the views expressed in scientific papers. It will

present the requirements and recommended tests for MFA in European Standards, published

documents and research reports.


P a g e | 7 of 45��

2.1 Shape and Texture

Particle shape is influenced by the physical properties of the parent rock and by the method of

production. The consistency, flow, yield, air content, water requirement, bleeding and finishability of

concrete are all influenced by the particle shape of the fine aggregate (Ahn, 2001). Crushed

aggregates contain more angular particles with rougher surface textures and flatter faces than natural

sands that are more rounded as a result of weathering experienced over time (Ahn, 2001).

It is very difficult to describe the shape of three-dimensional bodies such as aggregate particles,

therefore, it normally proves convenient to define certain geometrical characteristics of such bodies,

and the terms used are sphericity, roundness and form. Sphericity is defined as a function of the ratio

of the surface area of the particle to its volume. Sphericity is influenced by the type of crushing

equipment (examples given in Figure 1) and is related to the bedding and cleavage of the parent rock.

Particles with a high ratio of surface area to volume are of particular interest because they increase

the water demand for a given consistency of the concrete mixture (Neville, 1995). Roundness

measures angularity or relative sharpness of the edges and corners of a particle. Roundness is greatly

controlled by the strength and abrasion resistance of the parent rock as well as the wear to which the

particle has been subjected. In case of the particle shape of crushed aggregate, it also depends on the

type of crusher and its reduction ratio, i.e. the ratio of the size of material fed into the crusher to the

size of the finished product. Impact crushers break rock by “hitting” the material, which causes the

rock to break along natural zones of weakness along grain interfaces (Marek, 1995) generally

producing particles with good cubical shape. Gyratory and cone crushers break rock by compression.

Size and shape can be controlled within relatively wide limits with such crushers. Product shape is

influenced by (i) the reduction ratio and (ii) the degree to which the crushing chamber is filled with

rock. The “best” particle shape is obtained when the crusher chamber is full because a large part of

the crushing work is accomplished by interparticle contact. Flat or elongated particles are readily

broken into more cubical shapes. Jaw crushers and large gyratories generally produce particles with

poor (non-cubical) shape due to the fact that the crushing chamber is rarely full to permit

interparticle crushing, and the degree of reduction is high (Marek 1995). Horizontal Shaft Impact

(HSI) and Vertical Shaft Impact (VSI) crushers are widely used to crush a range of soft to hard rocks

such as basalt, granite, hard limestone. The loading conditions of VSIs typically leads to a higher

probability of fracture of either weak or flaky particles, with fracture occurring by cleavage, with a

marked contribution from surface attrition. The result is that particles with greater integrity and more

isometric shapes are produced by this crushing process in comparison to other techniques, such as

cone, jaw and roll crushers.


P a g e | 8 of 45��

Cone Crusher Horizontal Shaft Impact Crusher Vertical Shaft Impact Crusher

Figure 1. Different forms of crusher (BGS, 2011)

Equidimensional particles are generally preferred to flat and elongated particles for use as concrete

aggregates because they present less surface area per unit volume and generally produce tighter

packing when consolidated (Marek, 1995). Equidimensional particles of a given grading require a

minimum of cement paste for a given degree of consistency of concrete (Marek, 1995). Cubical

particles tend to decrease consistency and thus require more cement and water unless the grading

(sub 75µm) of the fine aggregate is increased to reduce the void content of the aggregate

combination used. Decreasing roundness or increasing angularity directly affects the percentage of

voids in the aggregate, and this in turn affects consistency or the mix proportions required. Concrete

made with non-spherical aggregates will have higher strength than concrete made with spherical

aggregate particles, since the former have a larger surface area, and therefore, greater adhesive forces

develop between aggregate particles and the cement matrix (Marek, 1995).

Several different methods have been developed and used to evaluate particle shape or produce a

particle shape index (Marek, 1995). These methods include, but are not limited to:

i. Visual comparison of particle silhouettes with standard shapes

ii. Measurement of percentage of voids of individual size fractions, or of standard gradings of

fine particles

iii. Measurement of the time of flow required for the material to pass through an orifice, as

outlined in BS EN 933 part 6, with reference to the New Zealand flow cone.

iv. Measurement of critical particle dimensions using laser technology or from photographs

Most methods are based on the principle that the volume of voids in the fine aggregate is a function

of particle shape and therefore packing ability. Research by Ahn (2001) shows a correlation between

flow rate and particle shape and presents a relationship between the average 28-day compressive

strength and the orifice flow rate. He noticed that the variations in strength meant that the orifice


P a g e | 9 of 45��

flow rate could not be used to predict the compressive strength, but there was a general improvement

in the compressive strength as the orifice flow rate decreased. Sands with more angular shaped

particles took longer to flow due to the interlocking of particles, as opposed to rounded sands which

moved past each other much more easily.

The classification of the surface texture is based on the degree to which the particles surfaces are

polished or dull, smooth or rough. The surface texture of an aggregate depends on the grain size,

hardness and pore characteristics of the parent material, as well as the result of external forces acting

on the aggregate surface. There is no recognised method of measuring the surface roughness,

however, engineers tend to use a range of approaches to tackle this problem, the most popular is

Wright's method: the interface is magnified between the particle and a resin in which it is set, the

difference between the length of the profile and the length of an unevenness line drawn as a series of

chords is determined and taken as a measure of roughness (Neville, 1995). Additionally, the NZFC

has been used as an indirect measure of surface texture.

In summary it is well documented that it is difficult to accurately quantify the shape of an aggregate

and determine the exact relationship between its shape and performance in a concrete mix. However,

it is apparent that without external influence in the form of superplasticisers there is a compromise

between an aggregate’s performance in the fresh concrete state and the resulting hardened concrete

properties. Whilst angular particles have a detrimental effect on slump and flow, they provide

enhanced compressive strength due to greater particle interlock and cement paste bonding.

Conversely rounded particles, which tend to have a smoother surface texture, have better flow

properties, yet result in lower compressive strength due to weaker interface bonds between the

aggregates and cement paste. It seems therefore that manufactured sands, with their isometric shapes

may prove beneficial in achieving high compressive strengths if measures are taken to manage their

performance in fresh concrete.

2.2 Grading

The suitability of a sand for concrete-making is governed by knowledge of its grading and its void

content (Marek, 1995). Aggregate grading has a significant influence on water requirement,

consistency, bleeding, segregation and finishing quality of concrete. Current grading specifications

for fine aggregate for use in concrete, however, may not define a sand that is suitable for use in

concrete. Some sands that comply with existing specifications produce concrete that is harsh and

unworkable, prone to bleeding and segregation, and difficult to finish, whilst sands which do not


P a g e | 10 of 45��

meet present grading specifications may produce concrete with satisfactory fresh and hardened

concrete properties. Hewlett (1998) reported that the particle size distribution of the fine aggregate

was found to have a greater influence on the properties of concrete than that of the coarse aggregate,

if working within permitted standard limits. This is confirmed by Teranishi and Tanigawa (2007)

who report that it is the fluidity and segregation resistance in particular that are most affected by the

fine aggregate grading. Gonçalves et al (2007) recognised that the crushing processes can also be

used to influence the grading of the MFA, particularly the proportion of filler (sub 75ȝm material).

This signifies that through careful selection of crushing and classification techniques it will be

possible to produce a sand, from virtually any rock type to meet almost any desired specification.

According to Neville (1995) grading requirements should depend on shape and surface texture of the

aggregates. For sharp and angular particles slightly finer grading should be employed to reduce the

interlocking possibility and compensate for the high friction between particles. Furthermore, a higher

volume of fine aggregate should be used if a crushed and angular coarse aggregate is present in the

mix. It follows that for a fine grading of fine aggregate the fine to coarse aggregate ratio should be

decreased.

Conventional crushed rock sands typically have a

significant number of large particles (~4mm) and an

abundance of filler material (<75ȝm) however, this is

normally accompanied by a lack of particles in the 1mm-

150ȝm range (as indicated schematically in Figure 2).

Whilst these crushed rock sands can be blended with natural

sands there are several factors to address: (i) BS-EN 12620

limits blends of crushed rock fines with natural sand to 50%

and (ii) the grading of crushed rock fines are highly

inconsistent and therefore it is difficult to establish “standard”

mix designs using aggregate from a designated source.

In summary it appears that there are general guidelines for grading of aggregates, however, the exact

grading and combination of aggregates should be estimated based on the properties of aggregates

such as shape, texture and packing density as well as on the experience of a particular aggregate’s

performance in concrete. The influence of aggregate grading on the performance of a concrete mix

appears to be the same regardless of the origin of the aggregate (i.e. natural or manufactured) and the

concrete industry state that achieving consistency in aggregate grading is one of the most important

factors in controlling and potentially reducing cement contents in concretes. Numerous studies

Figure 2. Schematic representation of

crushed rock fine grading compared to

standard grading envelopes


P a g e | 11 of 45��

indicate that it is the fines (<75µm) component (content and nature) of the fine aggregate that has a

greater influence on the fresh and hardened properties of the concrete than the grading alone and

therefore this will be explored in more detail in the next section.

2.3 Fines

Fines are defined as the material passing a 75µm sieve (BS EN 12620:2002). In European standards

sand and fines are separated at 63µm. These particles may be very fine sand, silt, clay or dust. The

presence of a limited quantity of fines is beneficial in a concrete mix as it fulfils a void-filling role,

and aids cohesion and finishability. Nevertheless, an excess of fines, especially fines comprising

clays, may harm the concrete properties as they increase water demand and reduce the aggregate-

cement paste bond both of which result in a reduction in hardened concrete strength (Newman and

Choo, 2003).

Research by Celik and Marar (1996) concluded that, as the percentage of fines in the concrete

increases, the consistency of the mix decreases, and this was observed via slump measurement with

the addition of fines. They also stated that as the fines content of fresh concrete increases, the

average air content of the fresh concrete decreases. This indicates that air entrainment can effectively

be used as a measurement of void content. The addition of dust also improves the impermeability of

concrete due to its pore blocking ability which impedes the movement of moisture and gas through

the matrix.

The quantity of filler or “dust” of crushed aggregate used in concrete mixes appears to be relatively

similar throughout a vast majority of the studies examined, which is of the order of 10-15%. Celik

and Marar (1996) showed in their research that a dust content of 0% to 5% resulted in a number of

voids between the cement paste and the aggregate particles, yielding lower compressive strength

values than specimens with 10% dust content. As the dust content exceeds 10%, the amount of fines

in the concrete increases until there is insufficient cement paste to coat all of the coarse and fine

aggregate particles, leading to a decrease in compressive strength. Similar results were also reported

by Li et al. (2009) as presented in Figure 3.


P a g e | 12 of 45��

Figure 3. Effect of fines addition on a) low strength concrete and b) high strength concrete (figure reproduced

from Li et al., 2009)

Malhotra and Carette (1985) found that at a given water/cement ratio, concrete made with MFA

containing up to 7% microfines achieved compressive strengths equal to or higher than concrete

made with natural sand, reducing the void content of the aggregate, thereby lubricating the aggregate

system without increasing the water requirement of the mix.

In the case of natural sands, the requirements regarding the maximum amount of sub 75µm particles

are strictly related to controlling the presence of clays, but for MFAs/quarry fines, the significance is

quite different (Dumitru et al., 1999). The sub 75µm fraction resulting from the crushing process of

the quarry rocks is likely to have comparable composition with the parent rock. For good quality

hard rocks, the fines have the same mineralogy as the parent rocks, whereas for softer rocks, there

may be a certain tendency for “segregation” in which the “soft”/alteration components of the rocks

would be preferentially concentrated in the fines during the crushing process. It would seem

therefore that the type of processing and the rock mineralogy determines the level of fines which

may contain clays. Indeed Dumitru et al. (1999) stated that it is advisable to source supply of MFAs

from well established sources of aggregate and employ tests such as Methylene Blue Value (MBV)

for its performance. This also indicates that a high sub 75µm fraction for good quality manufactured

sands does not have to be restricted, and that mineralogical data is essential in assessing the

suitability of different aggregates and evaluating actual or potential durability problems (Dumitru et

al., 1999). Additionally Dumitru et al. recognised that fines levels up to 15% were possible and more

importantly that conventional concrete mixes may need some alterations to achieve the full benefits

of incorporating MFAs. These changes may be in the aggregate to sand ratio or admixture dosage.


P a g e | 13 of 45��

It has been repeatedly demonstrated in the literature that it is possible to include a high level of filler

material within a mix, although it is understood that mix proportions may have to be changed and the

use of admixtures explored to compensate for the loss of consistency due to the higher particle

surface area and water demand associated with high fines contents.

2.4 Effects of absorption and water content of aggregate

Studies regarding the effect of water absorption of MFA on the fresh properties of a concrete mix

appear to focus exclusively on the use of coarse aggregates. However, it is suggested by the authors

that the findings of such studies can be equally applied to the use of manufactured fine aggregate in

concrete.

The water absorption of aggregate represents the water contained in aggregate in a saturated surface-

dry condition. Water content and water absorption are important for concrete mix design as they

influence the w/c ratio of concrete which, in turn, affects the consistency of the mix. Normally, it is

assumed that the aggregate is in a saturated and surface-dry state at the time of mixing concrete. For

aggregate which is in the air-dry or oven-dried condition, it is assumed that some water will be

absorbed from the concrete mix to bring the aggregate to a saturated state, decreasing the concrete

consistency in the process, therefore additional water is required to provide the necessary w/c ratio.

Moreover, when dry aggregate is used, the particles quickly become coated with cement paste

forming a barrier to the ingress of any mix water specifically added to the mix to ensure aggregate

saturation (Neville, 1995).

According to Poon et al. (2004) the moisture states of aggregate affect the change in slump of the

concrete in fresh condition. Oven-dried aggregates led to a higher initial slump than the aggregates in

the air-dried and saturated surface-dried state, as indicated in Figure 4. This was attributed to the

time dependent nature of aggregate absorption, resulting in mix water designated for absorption

remaining within the mix leading to higher values of consistency.


P a g e | 14 of 45��

Figure 4. Changes of slump of concrete mixes with different type of coarse aggregate in different moisture

conditions (figure reproduced from Poon et al. 2004)

Typically, the absorption capacity between natural sand and MFA is different. This is due to the

higher specific surface area of the MFA which tends to be more angular with a rougher surface

texture, therefore more water is required to cover all particles in a concrete mixture. Also, the higher

absorption of MFA can be related to the process of its production, whereby as a result of the crushing

process particles may contain a high percentage of microcracks/fissures, therefore allowing

additional water to penetrate inside and, in turn, increase the total water content of the aggregate.

2.5 Aggregate Mineralogy

Aggregates with different mineralogy can produce concrete with various properties. The type of the

parent rock will influence the physical and chemical properties of the aggregate as well as particle

shape and texture if a crusher is employed to reduce its size. The mineralogical description of the

aggregates cannot be used alone to estimate whether it will produce a good concrete or not (Neville

1995). However, the chemical and mineralogical composition can be used as a tool to identify

minerals which might interfere with the hydration of cement or cause alkali-silica and alkali-

carbonate reactions. It can also be used to identify presence of clay minerals.


P a g e | 15 of 45��

Aggregate particles might be covered by clay, silt or crushing dust coatings. These can inhibit the

bond between the aggregates and cement paste as well as increase the water demand. However, if the

coatings are physically and chemically stable and do not pose a threat to concrete properties, there is

no objection to using such aggregate (Neville 1995).

The effect of rock mineralogy upon concrete strength was examined in detail by Donza et al. (2002).

The study used granite, limestone and dolomite crushed sand with similar gradings at equal cement

content and water cement ratio in concrete mixes. They found that the compressive strength of

limestone and dolomite concretes was lower than concretes made with granite sand. This behaviour

was attributed to individual particle strength and to the different surface textures and shapes of

granite sand particles.

Results by Donza et al. (2002) also showed that concrete with crushed sand required an increase of

superplasticiser to obtain the same slump. It also presented a higher strength than the corresponding

natural sand concrete at all test ages, while its elastic modulus was lower at 28 days and was the

same after that. Studies on the development of hydration and mortar phase of concrete showed that

the increase of strength could be attributed to the improvement of the paste–fine aggregate transition

zone.

2.6 Specifications and tests for manufactured sands in UK

The current British European standard BS EN 12620:2002 for aggregate properties requires the

producer of the fine aggregate to declare the relevant aggregate test values and grading in prescribed

categories. This allows the customer to select aggregate for a particular application on the basis of its

physical characteristics. However, there are few specified limits included in the standard and as a

result PD 6682-1:2009 provides recommended limits for aggregates depending on the end use of

concrete in the UK.

Relevant tests for fine aggregates specified in BS EN 12620:2002 and recommended by PD6682-

1:2009 for use in UK are:

x Grading (BS EN 933-1).

x Fines content (BS EN 933-1).

x Particle density and water absorption (BS EN 1097-6).

x Bulk density (BS EN 1097-3).

x Chemical requirements (BS EN 1744-1).


P a g e | 16 of 45��

Sand Equivalency (SE) provides an indication of the percentage of fines (sub 63µm) contained

within a material whilst the Methylene Blue Test (MBV) gives an indication of the clay content of

these fines.

BS EN 12620:2002 specifies a number of methods by which fines can be assessed within fine

aggregate to be considered as non-harmful for use in concrete. Firstly, the total fines content of the

fine aggregate is less than 3 % or another predefined value according to the provisions valid in the

place of use of the aggregate. Secondly, the equivalence of performance with known satisfactory

aggregate is established or there is evidence of satisfactory use with no experience of problems.

Lastly there are country specific limits on the Sand Equivalent (SE) value and Methylene Blue test

value (MBV) when tested in accordance with their relevant BS EN standard. Additionally, PD 6682-

1:2009 recommends that crushed rock sands could contain up to 16% of fines and be considered non-

harmful provided that the materials have been processed. Another recommended option is evidence

of satisfactory use. No limits for SE and MBV are provided for the UK as these tests and their

interpretation are considered inaccurate.

With respect to grading there is no distinction between crushed and natural sand. Another point to

note is that there are no specifications for fine aggregate shape and texture in BS EN 12620:2002,

although limited provision is made in BS EN 933-6 for testing these characteristics. As discussed in

previous sections, these characteristics can influence the performance of concrete and some

guidelines would be beneficial in allowing quantitative evaluation of fine aggregate for expected

performance in a concrete mix.

3. Kayasand

In an attempt to reduce the undesirable and detrimental characteristics of MFA Japanese-based

KEMCO (Kotobuki Engineering & Manufacturing Co) have developed a new dry sand

manufacturing system. The KEMCO V7, illustrated in Figure 5, plant merges the conventional VSI

crusher with a centrifugal attrition chamber in order to produce Kayasand; a better shaped and

graded fine aggregate with controllable amounts of filler dust. There are two elements of the

KEMCO V7 that make it unique in comparison to other crushing machine available on the market.

Firstly, the quarry waste material is fed into a crusher chamber, containing a milling function

designed so that all particles are subjected to multiple impacts and to help ensure that particles within

the normally deficient range of 150ȝm-1mm are produced. The particles then move to a classifying

system using fans to separate particles based on their weight, which allows oversize particles to be


P a g e | 17 of 45��

recirculated back to the crusher to undergo further

processing. This facility also allows accurate control of

the particle grading, particularly of the larger particles at

the top end of the grading curve. From the air screen the

particles are moved either to the mixer (finished

product) or to the dust collector unit, with the potential

to return a proportion of fillers, of varying gradations

back to the mixer to create the final Kayasand product.

By altering various parameters, it is possible to produce

a consistent sand product to any reasonable

specification.

Compared to the product of conventional sand

manufacturing processes, Kayasand is, according to the

company, in the position of completely substituting natural sea or river bed dredged sand in concrete

and mortar, yielding similar or even higher mechanical properties (Pettingell, 2008). A number of

studies have been completed at Cardiff University that support this view for a range of different

concrete products, including mortar, self compacting concrete and extrudable concrete (Parton 2012,

Chiew 2012, Volodskojs 2012 and Kroh 2010). Furthermore, these studies demonstrated that

concretes made with Kayasand also had similar durability indices. According to Pilegis et al. (2012)

Kayasand MFA can be used as a replacement for natural sand in concrete. In this study Kayasand has

successfully replaced granite and basalt sands in concrete giving higher compressive strength at the

same water/cement ratio as natural sand but with a reduction in concrete consistency.

4. Laboratory Testing Programme

A description of the experimental procedures adopted for the studies is reported in this section. The

quality and preparation of the main materials used for each concrete mix, the mixing and casting

details and the curing regimes used during these studies are also described. Details of trial mixes are

reported in quarterly reports 1-4 which have been reproduced in Appendix 1. Industrial input was

sought when developing mix proportions and target slump ranges. The laboratory testing programme

is divided into two stages. The first stage uses a consistent w/c ratio for each sand which was

selected on the basis of obtaining an S2 slump in the –B (approximately 3%) Kayasand grading. The

Figure 5. V7 Dry Sand-Making System

(Figure reproduced from Pettingell 2008)


P a g e | 18 of 45��

second stage employs a consistent w/c ratio of 0.55 for all sands and achieving an S2 slump through

the use of a water reducing admixture.

4.1 Materials

The cement used was CEM I 52.5 N conforming to EN 197-1, supplied by CEMEX. The coarse

aggregate used was crushed limestone 4/20mm. In this study marine dredged natural sand was used

as a control and it is denoted by the letter N in the tables and figures in this report. The Kayasand

sand was processed from 0/8 mm crusher dusts (FEED) taken from four quarries located in the UK,

these were: Taff’s Well Limestone (L), Gilfach Gritstone (S), Duntilland Basalt (B) and Glensanda

Granite (G). Properties of the 0/4mm parts of the crusher dusts were determined via fine aggregate

classification tests. The crusher dust, or feed material, is referred to as X-FEED in this report where

X is the rock aggregate identifier previously given. From the crusher dusts a number of sands with

different particle size distributions (gradings) were produced. These gradings for each rock type are

denoted -A to -D (or -E where appropriate) depending on the sub 63 µm particle content. For

example, B-A is a basalt sand with the least fines content, whereas B-D is a basalt sand with the

highest fines content. The fines content of each of the mixes is reported in Table 1.

4.2 Fine aggregate classification tests

A series of characterisation tests were performed on the fine aggregate as outlined in the following

sections of this report.

4.2.1 Grading

Dry sieving was performed in the laboratories at Cardiff University according to standard BS EN

933-1 (2012) and the results compared to the KEMCO output reports. Dry sieving was also

completed for the coarse aggregates employed in the study. Research by Hudson (2011) indicates

that it is best to perform a wet sieve analysis for fine aggregates. Most specifications call for rigid

tolerances on the finest size fractions. If these size fractions are indeed important, which they are

with respect to sub 63um and the amount of deleterious fines, then wet sieve analysis has been

shown to better quantify this material in the sample. Therefore, additional wet sieving was performed

at the Hanson laboratories.


P a g e | 19 of 45��

4.2.2 Methylene Blue Test, Rapid Methylene Blue Test and Sand Equivalence Test

MBV and SE tests were used to assess the presence of potentially deleterious fines e.g. clays in the

fine aggregate which could adversely affect the fresh and hardened properties of the concrete. The

MBV and SE tests were performed on the 0/2mm fine aggregate fraction according to BS EN 933-9

and BS EN 933-8 respectively, however a brief overview of the tests is provided in the following

paragraphs.

The MBV test was undertaken by adding methylene blue dye to a sample of sand in suspension and

measuring the quantity of dye absorbed via observing the excess released from the particle surface

when in contact with filter paper. The principle of the test is that clay minerals adsorb basic dyes

from aqueous solutions, therefore the greater the quantity of dye absorbed the greater the quantity of

potentially harmful fines present. However the interpretation of the test results is often subjective and

as a result significant variation in the results may be observed within the same sample set when

examined by a number of different researchers. The RMBV test, developed by Grace Construction

Products eliminates this problem as well as reducing the testing time. The test sample was mixed

with a methylene blue solution of known concentration, shaken for a fixed time and an aliquot of the

suspension was filtered. Afterwards a known volume of the filtrate was diluted with a set amount of

water and a pre-calibrated colorimeter was used to estimate the concentration of the solution. This

allowed direct estimation of the absorbed amount of methylene blue solution eliminating possible

errors due to human judgement. The RMBV test was used in this study to compare the results

obtained by the two methods and evaluate the feasibility of the new method.

The SE test provides a rapid assessment of the proportion of clay or plastic fines in the 0/2 mm

fraction of a fine aggregate. A small quantity of flocculating solution and a measured volume of oven

dried fine aggregate are poured into a measuring cylinder. Agitation loosens the clay like coatings

from the coarser particles and irrigation with an additional flocculating agent forces the clay-like

material into suspension above the fine aggregate. The sample is allowed to settle for a twenty-

minute period and the heights of the columns of clay and sand are measured. The sand equivalent is

reported as the ratio of the height of the sediment expressed as a percentage of the total height.

4.2.3 New Zealand Flow Cone (NZFC)

The NZFC (NZS 3111 Section 19) test evaluates sand flow and un-compacted voids ratio. It is

widely used within New Zealand and, to a lesser extent, in other countries as a measure of sand

characteristics. It involves a fixed volume of sand passing through a cone which is collected in a


P a g e | 20 of 45��

container of known volume whilst the flow time is measured. Using the density of the sand particles

the un-compacted voids ratio can be calculated. The test result is affected by the grading of the

sample, by the particle shape and by the surface texture of the particles. The flow of the material is

mostly affected by the shape and surface texture of the particles while the voids result is mostly

influenced by their grading and shape (Thomas et al. 2007). As such it is an indirect measure of

shape and texture and a standard envelope has been developed for natural sands based on the

experiences of the New Zealand authorities regarding the performance of various natural sands in

concrete. Although the British European Standards EN 933-6 and BS EN 1097-6 evaluate the flow

time and un-compacted voids ratio, they do not provide the opportunity to do that simultaneously, as

found in the NZFC test.

Figure 6. NZFC Flow time envelope (Figure reproduced from Goldsworthy, 2005)

The NZFC is a rapid test that does not require sophisticated equipment and experienced operator as

opposed to visual shape and texture estimation techniques. The results are plotted on the diagram

shown in Figure 6 with reference to a standard envelope developed in the 1980s by the New Zealand

Ministry of Works who tested a variety of sands and measured their influence on the properties of

fresh concrete. It was concluded that sand that lies within the prescribed envelope consistently

produces good results.


P a g e | 21 of 45��

4.3 Mix Proportions

4.3.1 Mix proportions Stage 1

Mix proportions were established after a number of trial mixes and with consultation with industrial

collaborators. For each quarry a trial mix using 100% Kayasand with a fines content of 2.8% (X-B)

was made adjusting the water content to reach a slump of 50-90mm (industry designated S2 Slump).

Other mixes comprising the same quarry material were then made using the established w/c ratio and

the resulting slump for each mix recorded. Acknowledging the fact that the natural sand has a

significantly different water demand to the Kayasand for each quarry there were two control mixes,

the first with a 70±20mm slump and the second with the same w/c ratio as used in the Kayasand

mixtures. The slump control mixture in this report is denoted as N whereas the other controls are N-

X, where X again represents the aggregate identifier. Mixes were also cast using the FEED material

from each quarry. These mixes were again proportioned such that only the w/c ratio was adjusted to

obtain an S2 slump. The FEED mixes used 100% of the crusher dust as the replacement for natural

sand and therefore it should be highlighted that whilst this has been performed in this study to

demonstrate the benefits of the Kayasand processing technique the usual practice is to blend the

crusher dust material with natural sand for use in concrete. The mix proportions used in the first

stage of this study are presented in Table 1.

It is recognised that the cement content of 350kg/m3 is towards the upper end of the limits generally

used in industry. To maintain the same mix proportions throughout the study required this level of

cement together with a coarse to fine aggregate ratio of 1:0.72 in order to achieve workable mixes in

each of the different concrete mixes. Parallel work undertaken by industrial collaborators has used a

range of cement contents to demonstrate the effectiveness of Kayasand as a 100% replacement for

natural sand in concrete and the reader is directed to their investigations for further information.


P a g e | 22 of 45��

Table 1. Stage 1 concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions

MIX CEM kg/m3

CA+ kg/m3

FA* kg/m3

WATER kg/m3

W/C FA/ CA

FINES CONTENT

% of FA N 350 1040 753 167 0.48 0.42 1.0

G-FEED 350 1040 753 231 0.66 0.42 10.0 N-G 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 1.0 G-A 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 2.0 G-B 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 2.8 G-C 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 5.1 G-D 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 6.5 G-E 350 1040 753 202 0.58 0.42 9.0

B-FEED 350 1040 753 260 0.87 0.42 13 N-B 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 1.0 B-A 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 1.0 B-B 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 2.9 B-C 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 5.1 B-D 350 1040 753 234 0.67 0.42 7.4

L-FEED 350 1040 753 215 0.61 0.42 12 N-L 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 1.0 L-A 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 2.8 L-B 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 4.9 L-C 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 7.1 L-D 350 1040 753 194 0.55 0.42 9.0

S-FEED 350 1040 753 262 0.748 0.42 18 N-S 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 1.0 S-A 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 3.5 S-B 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 5.0 S-C 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 7.0 S-D 350 1040 753 235 0.67 0.42 9.0

+CA – coarse aggregate; *FA – fine aggregate

4.3.2 Mix proportions Stage 2

In the second stage the w/c ratios were limited to 0.55 based on the maximum water cement ratio

recommend in BS EN 206-1 for a range of typical exposure classes for normal strength concrete (in

the range 30-60N/mm2). A mid-range water reducing admixture (WRDA 90 plasticiser) was then

used in the mix to target a 70mm slump (in the S2 slump range). Stage one demonstrated that the

limestone Kayasand mixes could achieve an S2 slump at 0.55 water/cement ratio without the use of

plasticiser, therefore in the second stage a lower water/cement ratio of 0.50 was employed for this

rock type alone. No mixes were cast using the FEED material in this stage and the natural sand

control was also made with a 0.55 water/cement ratio. The mix proportions used in the second stage

are presented in Table 2. Volumes of plasticiser were limited by the maximum dosage recommended

by the admixture manufacturer of 800ml per 100kg of cement (2.75l/m3). In some instances this was

exceeded in order to achieve an S2 slump. Again the reader is directed to the industrial collaborators’

investigations for additional mixes made with plasticiser.


P a g e | 23 of 45��

Table 2. Stage 2 Table 2. Concrete mix proportions at SSD conditions

MIX CEM kg/m3

CA+ kg/m3

FA* kg/m3

WATER kg/m3

W/C FA/ CA

PLASTICISER l/m3

FINES CONTENT

% of FA N 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0 1.0

G-A 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0 2.0 G-B 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0 2.8 G-C 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 1.25 5.1 G-D 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0.62 6.5 G-E 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 1 9.0 B-A 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 1.0 B-B 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 2.9 B-C 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 3.3 5.1 B-D 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 3.3 7.4 L-A 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.63 2.8 L-B 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.1 4.9 L-C 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.35 7.1 L-D 350 1040 753 175 0.50 0.42 1.1 9.0 S-A 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 0.45 3.5 S-B 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 5.0 S-C 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 7.0 S-D 350 1040 753 192.5 0.55 0.42 2.75 9.0

+CA – coarse aggregate; *FA – fine aggregate

4.4 Fresh Concrete Tests

Fresh concrete was tested for slump according to BS EN 12350-2:2009, air entrapment (BS1881:

Part 106) and plastic density, although this was limited to the Kayasand and natural mixes and not

the FEED mixes.

4.5 Hardened Concrete Specimen Numbers and Tests

In order to perform compressive strength tests ten 100mm cubes were cast in each mix (six for the

FEED mixes). These cubes were tested at 1, 7 and 28 days according to BS EN 12390-3:2009. For

flexural strength three 100mm x 100mm x 500mm beams were cast from each mix and tested at 28

days according to BS EN 12390-5:2009. The concrete specimens were de-moulded 16 to 20 hours

after casting and placed in water tanks at a constant temperature of 20qC until the test age was

reached.


P a g e | 24 of 45��

5. Results and Discussion 5.1 Classification tests 5.1.1 Grading

Figure 7 (a) to (d) show the particle size distributions for manufactured sands and corresponding

crusher dust 0-4 mm fractions used in the sand production. It can be seen that all manufactured sands

irrespective of the parent rock yield similar particle size distributions with sub 63 ȝm particle content

ranging from 1% to 9 % and all fall within the grading envelope specified by BS EN 12620.

Furthermore, gradings that contain higher levels of fines have a greater number of particles in the

0.3mm to 1 mm range than the feed crusher dust fractions as indicated by steeper gradients of the

particle size distribution curves in that region. The 0.3mm to 1mm fraction is usually deemed to be

deficient in crusher dusts, therefore, requiring a blend with natural sand to comply with standards

and perform adequately in concrete mixtures, as identified previously in Section 2.2. The particle

size distribution results for the FEED materials indicate that the crusher dust gradings generally lie

towards the lower limit of the grading envelope. It should be highlighted here that these results were

obtained from small samples of crusher dust obtained from stockpiles at each of the quarries at a

different time to when the raw material was selected for shipment and due to this direct

improvements in grading as a result of the processing technique cannot be readily identified between

this material and the final product produced by KEMCO. However, during the processing of the sand

KEMCO did perform a series of grading tests on the FEED and resulting Kayasand and these tests

clearly showed an improvement in size distribution such that all results conformed to the BS EN

12620 grading envelope. KEMCO’s results will not be discussed further in this report but for

completeness, extracts of their test report results are provided in Appendix 2. Particle size

distribution tests were also performed in the Cardiff University laboratory for the coarse aggregate

and natural control sand as indicated in Figure 7(e).

The Kayasand product yield from the crushing processes is between 66% to 87% depending on the

rock mineralogy and level of fines (higher yield occurs when more fines are included in the final

sand product) and therefore significant levels of filler are still produced alongside the final Kayasand

product. The use of this filler in geoenvironmental applications is the subject of a parallel study

being undertaken in the Cardiff School of Engineering.


P a g e | 25 of 45��

(a) Granite sand (b) Basalt sand

(c) Limestone sand (d) Gritstone sand

(e) Coarse aggregate and natural sand

Figure 7. Particle size distribution curves for Kayasand material

5.1.2 Methylene Blue and Sand Equivalence Test Results

Standard and rapid methylene blue results and sand equivalent results are presented in Table 3.

Marine dredged sand had the lowest MBV and highest SE value indicating a very clean sand. This is

as expected since natural sand from a dredged source typically has less than 1% fines as a result of

them being washed out of the sand during the dredging and screening process. The limestone has


P a g e | 26 of 45��

consistently low MBV across all sand gradings and FEED material, indicating a clean sand with

insignificant levels of deleterious fines.

Table 1 also demonstrates a distinct difference in the MBV between the FEED material and the final

Kayasand products, with the processing procedure reducing the MBV value by over 50% for the

granite, basalt and sandstone aggregates. It can therefore be concluded that during the processing a

proportion of clay sized particles (<2 µm) has been removed from the material as part of the filler

component lowering the MBV value of the sand, as previously reported by Dumitru et al. (1999).

This is beneficial for the Kayasand product and its potential use as 100% replacement for natural

sand particularly in instances in which there are limits placed on the MBV that may be met through

the Kayasand processing system. However, further investigation is recommended if the Kayasand

filler component of certain rock types is intended for use in concrete, especially since the MBV

associated with the filler may still be at elevated levels.

Table 3. Fine aggregate classification results

SAMPLE MBV GMBV SE NZFC Voids

NZFC Flow time

WA24 ȡssd ȡod ȡa

(g MB soln/kg

sand) (g MB soln/kg

sand) (%) (s) (%) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3)

N 0.24 0.35 94 37.9 20.9 1.04 2.66 2.63 2.71 G-FEED 0.77 0.94 50 42.4 29.1 0.58 2.64 2.62 2.66

G-A 0.39 0.42 80 45.2 25.3

0.58 2.63 2.61 2.65 G-B 0.40 0.5 74 44.6 24.4 G-C 0.47 0.71 71 43.7 23.9 G-D 0.50 0.88 70 43.6 23.4 G-E 0.63 0.9 69 42.7 23.9

B-FEED 5.36 6.16 48 45.7 36.7 1.92 2.89 2.83 3 B-A 2.10 2.3 73 45.8 25.7

1.67 2.91 2.87 3.01 B-B 2.29 2.54 61 44.5 23.2 B-C 2.64 2.97 60 43.7 22.5 B-D 2.90 3.75 58 43.7 22.3

L-FEED 0.40 0.65 65 42.4 32.4 0.62 2.90 2.85 2.87 L-A 0.47 0.44 72 43.6 26.3

0.45 2.89 2.85 2.86 L-B 0.40 0.44 71 42.1 23.9 L-C 0.40 0.44 71 41.9 23.4 L-D 0.37 0.45 67 41.0 23.0

S-FEED 3.19 4.05 27 45.9 28.6 1.53 2.76 2.64 2.68 S-A 1.40 1.73 31 41.8 23.3

0.98 2.64 2.57 2.60 S-B 1.48 1.84 30 41.6 22.3 S-C 1.50 1.86 28 40.8 21.3 S-D 1.63 2.07 27 40.1 20.7


P a g e | 27 of 45��

y = 1.1618x + 0.0741R² = 0.9899

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Rap

id M

ethy

lene

Blu

e Va

lue

(g/K

g sa

nd)

Methylene Blue Value (g/Kg of sand ) Figure 8. Correlation between RMBV and MBV values for all samples

It can be seen in Table 3 that the sand equivalent (SE) values have increased for the processed quarry

dusts. The SE values are the highest for manufactured sands with the least fines and gradually

decrease with increasing fines content, a similar inverse trend to that observed in the MBV values,

which can be attributed to the removal of clay sized particles during the manufacturing process.

One objective of the project was to compare the Grace RMBV test with the MBV standard test. This

was done for each of the four rock mineralogies for all Kayasand gradations and crusher dust

material. It can be seen in Figure 8 that the test results obtained using the Rapid test have an

excellent correlation (R2 = 0.99) to the test results obtained via the standard method. The use of the

RMBV is therefore recommended for use in all future tests as it eliminates any inconsistency

associated with the interpretation of the end point of the standard test.

5.1.3 NZFC Test Results

Figure 9 and Table 3 presents the results from the NZFC test. New Zealand specification NZS 3121

has been used as the envelope as justified in Section 4.2.3. The control sand falls comfortably within

the specification envelope as anticipated. The FEED material for each aggregate type lies either on or

outside of the envelope suggesting that it suffers from either poor shape and/or grading physical

properties. The flow time has been greatly reduced for the Kayasands; at least 4 seconds for granite

sands, 11 seconds for basalt sands, 6 seconds for limestone sands and 5 seconds for sandstone sands.

This suggests that the particle shape for all aggregates has been modified and after processing it is


P a g e | 28 of 45��

less angular and flaky. Visual inspection suggested that the basalt and sandstone crusher dust

particles were mostly angular and flaky whereas the Kayasand particles were mostly rounded

without sharp edges, yielding a reduction in flow time and in voids content. Similarly granite and

limestone FEED particles were highly angular and flaky, however the Kayasand particles were

mostly cubical with sharp edges but without flaky particles, which resulted in a reduction in flow

time although there was associated reduction in voids content.

The general trends that can be observed in Figure 9 are (i) the voids content decreases as the quantity

of fines increases due to an increased degree of particle packing and (ii) the flow time decreases with

increasing fines content. The latter is an interesting result and it is suggested that this is due to the

lubricating effect of the fine particles, as reported previously by Jackson and Brown (1996).

In summary the processing of the sand via the KEMCO system has optimised the grading and shape

of the Kayasand particles and provides additional justification for their use as 100% natural sand

replacement in concrete.

B-FEED

G-FEED

G-A

G-BG-C

G-D

G-EB-A

B-BB-CB-D

L-A

L-BL-C

L-D S-A

S-B

S-CS-D

L-FEED

S-FEED

N

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

34.0

36.0

38.0

36% 38% 40% 42% 44% 46% 48% 50%

Flow

Tim

e (s

)

Voids (%)

Granite Sand

Basalt sand

Limestone sand

Sandstone sand

NZS 3121 specification envelope

Figure 9. NZFC voids and flow time results for all FEED and Kayasand material


P a g e | 29 of 45��

5.1.4 Water Absorption Results and Particle Density

The results from the water absorption tests are reported in Table 3. The test was performed on the

4mm to 63µm fraction of the sand and therefore any differences in the water absorption between the

FEED material and the Kayasand product are unlikely to be due to the difference in mass of the sub

63µm particles in the sample. It is acknowledged by the authors that although the FEED material was

washed over a 63µm sieve this may not have separated all of the sub 63µm particles from the sand

and therefore the FEED material for all aggregate may have contained sufficient levels of fines, some

containing clays, to influence the water absorption level. The water absorption tests on Kayasand

were performed on the product prior to incorporation of the preduster (additional filler) and therefore

the quantity of sub 63µm particles fines in the sand is significantly lower than that of the FEED

material. This alone may be responsible for the lower water absorption levels reported for the

Kayasand sands. Additionally, the V7 process may influence the water absorption in the following

ways (i) it air-scrubs the particles as well as rounds them therefore removing clay coatings and

reducing the specific surface area and that in turn yields lower absorption values and (ii) the crushing

process breaks particles via areas of weakness (internal pores and cracks) therefore reducing the

volume in the sand particles which can be occupied by water.

The basalt and sandstone aggregates had the highest water absorption values of all of the aggregates

due to the presence of water absorbing deleterious fines (clays etc) in the fines proportion of the

aggregate. The Granite aggregate had the lowest and most consistent water absorption between the

FEED and Kayasand materials perhaps due to the inherently low absorption of the parent rock and

the greater removal of the fines component during the processing procedure.

5.2 Fresh and Hardened Concrete Tests

5.2.1 Fresh Concrete Properties

The slump test was employed to give an idea of concrete consistency, i.e. its ability to be mixed,

placed and compacted. The results presented in Figure 10 and in Table 4 demonstrate a general trend

of decreasing slump as the fines content increases as a result of an associated increase in the specific

surface area of the sands. However, there are a number of exceptions to this trend, namely mixes B-

B, S-C and L-C in particular, where the slump values are higher than the expected trend. This may be

due to a lubricating effect of the fines, as observed previously by Malhotra and Carette (1985) in

fresh concrete mixes, that occurs as a result of the achievement of optimum void packing with

additional fines providing lubrication before a further addition of fines results in an excessive water


P a g e | 30 of 45��

demand and insufficient paste coverage and an associated reduction in slump. This effect may only

be apparent in some of the aggregate types due to their particle shape and gradation.

Natural sand required the least water to cement ratio (0.48) to reach the S2 slump, as a result of the

intrinsic roundness of the sand particles as well as lack of fines which have usually been washed out

during the dredging process. Basalt and sandstone sands required higher w/c ratio (0.67) than granite

and limestone sands (0.58 and 0.55 respectively) to achieve an S2 slump. This was due to presence

of clay particles in the sands as indicated by the MBV test discussed previously.

As a result of controlling the w/c ratio for each aggregate via the Kayasand grading –B several mixes

fell outside of the S2 slump range. This is not envisaged to be a concern however, and compressive

strength results will be reported with reference to the values of slump in the following section.

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Slum

p (m

m)

Percentage of sub 63 micron particles of Kayasand (%)

Granite sands w/c 0.58 Basalt sands w/c 0.67

Sanstone sands w/c 0.67 Limestone sands w/c 0.55

Figure 10. Influence of fines content on concrete consistency�

Fin

al R

epo

rt

Pa

ge

| 31

of 4

5��

Tab

le 4

. Sta

ge 1

and

sta

ge 2

fres

h an

d ha

rden

ed c

oncr

ete

resu

lts

Stag

e 1

Stag

e 2

Mix

w

/c

ratio

Sl

ump

(m

m)

Com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

(N

/mm

2 )

Flex

ural

st

reng

th

N/m

m2

w/c

ra

tio

Slum

p

(mm

)

Com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

(N

/mm

2 ) Fl

exur

al

stre

ngth

N

/mm

2

1 da

y 7

day

28 d

ay

28 d

ay

1 da

y 7

day

28 d

ay

28 d

ay

N

0.48

95

23

.8

48.0

58

.9

6.1

0.55

C

olla

pse

13.2

39

50

.5

5.3

G-F

EED

0.

66

80

12.5

30

.3

39.1

-

- -

- -

- -

N-G

0.

58

Col

laps

e 13

.5

36.0

48

.7

5.4

- -

- -

- -

G-A

0.

58

120

17.6

43

.5

52.2

5.

6 0.

55

65

16.4

44

.4

53

5.7

G-B

0.

58

80

17.0

40

.2

49.9

5.

6 0.

55

67.5

20

.1

46.1

59

.2

5.8

G-C

0.

58

80

17.9

40

.4

50.1

6.

0 0.

55

70

20.7

46

.1

55.2

5.

9 G

-D

0.58

60

19

.3

42.2

52

.3

5.8

0.55

60

19

.4

48.3

58

.6

5.5

G-E

0.

58

60

16.6

40

.6

48.1

5.

4 0.

55

85

16.6

47

.8

59.2

4.

7 B

-FEE

D

0.72

70

9.

3 25

.8

35.5

-

- -

- -

- -

N-B

0.

67

Col

laps

e 9.

6 26

.2

35.9

4.

6 -

- -

- -

- B

-A

0.67

70

11

.8

30.4

41

.7

5.3

0.55

60

14

.5

48.2

57

.6

6.1

B-B

0.

67

80

12.9

31

.3

43.7

5.

5 0.

55

30

14.6

49

.2

60.5

6.

4 B

-C

0.67

62

.5

13.0

33

.1

42.7

5.

4 0.

55

30

17.9

48

.4

59.4

6.

1 B

-D

0.67

47

.5

13.2

35

.2

45.6

5.

6 0.

55

25

16.5

48

.3

58.5

5.

9 L-

FEED

0.

61

60

18.5

38

.0

50.2

-

- -

- -

- -

N-L

0.

55

Col

laps

e 13

.2

39

50.5

5.

3 -

- -

- -

- L-

A

0.55

90

18

.0

44.3

55

.7

6.6

0.50

90

23

.9

52.5

64

.3

6.1

L-B

0.

55

70

21.2

47

.8

58.0

6.

7 0.

50

90

20

49.7

61

.1

6.4

L-C

0.

55

82.5

22

.7

46.2

56

.2

6.1

0.50

75

23

.2

51.1

63

6.

1 L-

D

0.55

65

21

.4

46.9

56

.6

6.0

0.50

65

20

47

.1

59.9

6.

8 S-

FEED

0.

75

80

8.2

23.3

31

.3

- -

- -

- -

- N

-S

0.67

C

olla

pse

8.1

24.4

34

.9

4.6

- -

- -

- -

S-A

0.

67

85

12.7

34

.5

41.4

5.

2 0.

55

60

14.8

44

.3

55

5.4

S-B

0.

67

75

14.9

31

.4

43.3

5.

6 0.

55

50

19.8

43

.8

55.3

6

S-C

0.

67

97.5

14

.7

32.8

42

.8

5.5

0.55

50

18

.4

43.2

55

.6

5.4

S-D

0.

67

75

12.1

30

.5

39.9

5.

2 0.

55

45

17.2

41

.7

53

5.9


P a g e | 32 of 45��

Several qualitative observations were recorded during the laboratory investigations. For the

Kayasand mixes with the lowest fines contents (-A mixes) and the lower water cement ratios (0.55

and 0.58) the concretes were particularly harsh and difficult to finish, primarily due to the lack of

fines. For the limestone and granite Kayasands the mixes became easier to finish and work with an

increasing fines content ( –B and –C gradings). The basalt and sandstone mixes were easy to finish,

but tended to be very cohesive at the high fines contents.

5.2.2 Hardened Concrete Properties

5.2.2.1 Stage 1 results

The compressive strength results presented in Table 4 are the mean of either 3 or 4 specimens. The

results are given in full in Appendix 3, along with the coefficient of variation for the mean results.

This coefficient of variation was a maximum of 4.5% for the 1 and 7 day Kayasand tests and 7.4%

for the 28 day Kayasand tests (7.4% is associated with the L-D result, else a maximum of 3.9%). The

coefficients of variation associated with the Kayasand tensile strength results did not exceed 8.2%.

These levels of variation are generally within the accepted limits for such tests.

The natural sand mix has the highest compressive strength of all mixes at all ages, as reported in

Table 4. It should be recognised that this mix is made of high quality fine aggregate, which has not

been blended with crusher dust as is usual practice in industry. Therefore, whilst it will be used as the

control mix in this study to which other mixes will be benchmarked, the focus will be on achieving

viable concrete mixes that can be mixed, placed, compacted and finished adequately through 100%

replacement of natural sand with Kayasand. On this note, the fact that the natural sand mix had the

lowest w/c ratio of all mixes then it is not surprising that this mix yielded the highest compressive

strength. Further control mixes made using the fixed w/c ratio for each aggregate assist in confirming

the performance of the Kayasand mixes. However, many of these control mixes suffered from a

collapse of slump due to the combination of spherical natural sand particles and higher water

contents (up to 40% higher in the most extreme case compared to the S2 natural sand mix) required

to achieve S2 slump in the –B Kayasand sands. These aggregate specific control mixes were still cast

in order to determine the compressive and tensile strengths, although the mixes performed only

marginally better than the FEED mixes in each instance and would in fact be discarded in industry

due to non compliance with consistency specifications with accompanying visual observations of

segregation and bleeding.


P a g e | 33 of 45��

Granite Kayasand concretes at 28 days reached compressive strength of 48.1 to 52.3 N/mm2, lower

than the natural sand mix but still acceptable as viable normal strength concrete mixes. The G-D and

G-A mixes achieved the highest compressive strengths. This can be attributed to the moderately high

level of fines (6.5%) fines in the former and the good consistency (120mm) and dispersion of mix

components in the latter. However, if the granite sands are considered as one data set, the resulting

coefficient of variation is 3.5% which reflects the typical variation inherent in compressive strength

testing. Therefore, in this instance the evidence suggests that all granite Kayasand gradings perform

equally well although it would seem prudent in light of what has been reported in the literature

(Celik and Marar 1996) to recommend sands with higher fines contents (G-D and G–E) to aid a

reduction in permeability and enhance the durability properties of a concrete. The performance of the

granite Kayasand sands exceeds that of the G-FEED mix and demonstrates an improvement in

particle shape and size via the V7 process, enabling the use of lower w/c ratios to achieve the same

consistency. Comparable compressive strength was achieved by the N-G mix, although as noted

previously this result should be treated with caution as a result of slump collapse and segregation of

the mix during casting.

The compressive strength of the basalt Kayasand concretes was in the range of 41.7 N/mm2 for B-A

to 45.6 N/mm2 for the B-D mix. All basalt mixes surpassed the strength of the w/c ratio control N-B

mix and B-FEED mix, the latter having a w/c ratio 7% higher than the basalt Kayasand concretes but

a compressive strength 22% lower than the mean strength of the basalt Kayasand concretes. This

again provides a clear indication of the improvements afforded to the Kayasand from the V7 process,

allowing reductions in water content to compensate for improved particle shape and grading with an

associated enhancement in compressive strength. As reported for the granite Kayasands, the basalt

Kayasands, when considered as one data set have a compressive strength mean of 43.4N/mm2 and a

coefficient of variation of 3.8%. This is again within the 5% limit normally quoted as an acceptable

level of variation in the compressive strength of concrete. The basalt Kayasand concretes have

compressive strengths 35% lower than the natural sand mix and this can be attributed to the higher

w/c ratio required by the basalt mixes to achieve an S2 slump. There is again no clear evidence of

higher fines contents resulting in higher compressive strength values at 28 days. Whilst this may

imply that a basalt sand with any of the gradations may be suitable for a concrete mix, caution should

be exercised when recommending basalt Kayasands with high levels of fines. This is due to the

deterioration in the level of slump as a result of the increased water demand from the fines and the

associated detrimental effect the clay content of these fines may have on the hardened concrete. Such

an effect may explain the lower rate of gain in compressive strength between 1 and 7 days compared


P a g e | 34 of 45��

to the other Kayasand concretes. However, careful attention to mix proportioning together with

admixtures that address the presence of clays may be employed to achieve specified fresh and

hardened concrete properties.

Limestone Kayasand concretes yielded compressive strengths from 55.7 to 58.0 N/mm2 which are

comparable to the natural sand control mix with a strength of 58.9 N/mm2 and a 12% lower w/c ratio.

Furthermore, the limestone Kayasand concretes also performed better than the L-FEED and N-L

mixes again indicating that the shape of the Kayasand particles positively affects the compressive

strength of the concrete. When considered as one set of data the mean compressive strength of the

limestone Kayasand concretes is 56.6N/mm2 with a coefficient of variation of just 1.7%. Although

the slump values decrease with increasing fines content, they still lie within the S2 range and

therefore there are no apparent limitations in specifying the Kayasand mix with the highest fines

content (L-D). The results of the limestone Kayasand concretes provide encouraging evidence that at

the same w/c ratio and with the addition of consistency aids that the compressive strength of a

limestone Kayasand concrete mix could easily surpass that of a natural sand mix. Conversely to

target the same 28 day strength at equal w/c ratio, there is evidence that potential reductions in

cement content could be made in the Kayasand mix, the magnitude of which is suggested as an area

worthy of future investigation. It is believed that such conclusions can also be extended to the other

Kayasands employed in this study.

The concretes containing sandstone Kayasand had compressive strengths in the range 39.9-43.3

N/mm2, which is similar to the basalt Kayasand concretes. Such a result is not surprising since both

Kayasands had high MBV values, yielding a mix with a high water demand and a subsequent

reduction in compressive strength as a result of the need to provide sufficient water to meet the

slump range requirement. All Kayasand sandstone concretes surpassed the strength of the w/c ratio

control N-S mix and S-FEED mix, with the latter having a w/c ratio approximately 12% higher and a

compressive strength 34% lower than that of the sandstone Kayasand concretes. As observed in the

other mixes there was no significant influence of fines content on the compressive strength.

Moreover, there was no deterioration in consistency between the S-B mix, on which the water

cement ratio was based, and the S-D mix with 9% fines. The same concerns that were raised for the

basalt mixes regarding the potential presence of clays particles equally applies to the sandstone

sands, particularly as the fines content increases.


P a g e | 35 of 45��

5.2.2.2 Stage 2 Results

The compressive strength results for stage 2 presented in Table 4 are again the mean of either 3 or 4

specimens. The results are given in full in Appendix 4, along with the coefficient of variation for the

mean results. This coefficient of variation was a maximum of 6.4% for the 1 and 7 day Kayasand

tests and 5.5% (L-A result) for the 28 day Kayasand tests. The coefficients of variation associated

with the Kayasand tensile strength results did not exceed 6.8%. These levels of variation are

generally within the accepted limits for such tests.

The granite Kayasand concretes at 28 days reached compressive strengths in excess of the Stage 2

natural sand control, although it is acknowledged that at w/c ratio of 0.55 the slump of the control

mixed was recorded as a collapse. However, the granite Kayasand concretes with higher levels of

fines (G-D and G-E) performed as well as the natural sand control mix for Stage 1 which did record

an S2 slump. This supports the use of Kayasands with the maximum level of fines as suggested in

the stage 1 results. The level of plasticiser used within these mixes is within the manufacturer’s

stated dosage limits, and therefore there may be potential to enhance the compressive strength further

by reducing the w/c ratio, or maintain the compressive strength level by reducing both the w/c ratio

and cement content in the mix.

Regarding the basalt Kayasand concretes, only the mix with the lowest quantity of fines satisfied the

slump requirement within the plasticiser dosage limits. The compressive strength of this mix was

higher than the Stage 2 control mix and comparable to the Stage 1 control mix. An increase in the

fines contents of the basalt Kayasand concretes had a detrimental effect on the slump of the mix,

even when the plasticiser dosage was exceeded by 20%. This indicates the clay absorbing

characteristics of the fines content of the Kayasand resulted in lower quantities of free water in the

mix, which could not be compensated for by the addition of plasticiser. In spite of this the

compressive strength of the basalt Kayasand concretes remained reasonably constant demonstrating

sufficient water for cement hydration in the mix and the potential to reduce cement contents to match

the compressive strength of the natural sand control mixes..

Limestone Kayasand concretes with a w/c ratio of 0.50 yielded compressive strengths in excess of

the control mix from stage 2. Although a deterioration in slump was observed with increasing fines

content, the slump values were still within the S2 slump range and the plasticiser dosage limits.

When compared to the compressive strength of the natural sand control in Stage 1 it is apparent that

the limestone Kayasand concretes performed better, even at a higher w/c ratio. This indicates the

potential to reduce the w/c ratio further, whilst increasing the plasticiser dosage or reduce the cement


P a g e | 36 of 45��

content at the same w/c ratio and plasticiser dosage to match the performance of the stage 1 control

mix.

Sandstone Kayasand concretes performed better than their stage 1 counterparts as a result of the

lower w/c ratio, and better than the stage 2 natural sand control, even though the slump collapse for

this mix is acknowledged. Slump values in the S2 slump range were achieved in the majority of the

sandstone Kayasand mixes, although S-D fell just below the lower S2 slump boundary. However,

unlike the basalt mixes the plasticiser dosage was kept within the manufacturers limits indicating that

absorption of the water from the mix by the fines was lower and this is perhaps a reflection of the

lower MBV values of the sandstone Kayasands when compared to basalt mixes with equal fines

content. Nevertheless, it has been demonstrated that viable mixes can be made with sandstone

Kayasands with the same cautionary statements related to the clay contents of the higher fines mixes

being made here. It is more difficult to suggest savings in cement for the sandstone Kayasand mixes

due to the compressive strength results being lower than a natural sand control mix with similar

slump characteristics. However, there are a number of structural applications which require lower

strength (C30/37 and C35/45) concretes that could be satisfied using sandstone Kayasand at a w/c

ratio and plasticiser dosage similar to that used in stage 2 but with a lower cement content.

Lastly, it should be acknowledged here that there is little variation difference between stage 1 and

stage 2 tensile strength results, with only marginal increases seen with the reduction of w/c ratio and

introduction of plasticiser.

6. Conclusions

The aim of this study was to explore the use of Kayasand as a complete replacement for natural sand

in concrete mixes. The results shown in Section 5 prove that while great care is required to ensure

that the mix design used is appropriate for the type and properties of the feed material, it is feasible

to produce workable concretes with satisfactory 28 day compressive and flexural strengths using

Kayasand as a complete replacement for natural marine dredged sand in concrete.

The fine aggregate test results showed the following:

• The processing of the FEED material improved the shape and grading as well as having

removed some deleterious clay sized particles as indicated by the MBV and SE tests. In cases

of high MBV in the FEED material the V7 process can reduce the MBV by up to 50%,


P a g e | 37 of 45��

although this will be reliant on the level of fines considered in the range of Kayasand

gradations compared to the FEED material.

• The test results also suggest that the RMBV test could be used as an alternative to the

standard MBV test in order to rapidly assess the presence of potentially deleterious fines.

• The enhanced shape and grading of Kayasand is indicated by the reduced flow times in the

NZFC results with a visual inspection revealing particles that were less angular and flaky

than the FEED material.

For the direct replacement of natural sand with Kayasand, with a target of an S2 slump range the

following conclusions can be drawn:

• The increase of fines content in the Kayasand mixes generally resulted in a reduction in the

slump of the mix. However, in the Stage 1 study only the B-D mix fell outside of the S2

slump range. There was some evidence of the fines acting as lubricants in Kayasand

concretes with medium fines contents.

• There was no apparent relationship between fines content and 28-day compressive strength in

any of the Kayasand concretes. This suggests that there are no negative effects of higher fines

contents on the compressive strength for the given mix compositions and range of fines

contents investigated in the study. However, it is important to assess the presence of clays in

the fines portion of the mix as it can dramatically affect the water demand for the same

consistency, as shown by the basalt sands in comparison to the granite sands.

• The 28 day flexural strength for all mixes is in the range 4.6 to 6.1 N/mm2 and seems to

follow the trends of compressive strength, with higher compressive strength resulting in

higher flexural strength.

• Only the 28 day compressive strengths of the limestone Kayasand concretes approached the

compressive strength of the natural sand control mix. This is encouraging because it would

seem possible to achieve comparable strength concrete using Kayasand at higher w/c ratios.

• Basalt and sandstone Kayasand concretes required higher w/c ratios than limestone and

granite Kayasand concretes to meet the S2 slump range due to the high MBV and the

probable presence of clay absorbing particles in the fines component of the former.

Nevertheless, these w/c ratios were smaller than those required for the respective FEED

material and yielded higher compressive strength values at all ages.


P a g e | 38 of 45��

For the direct replacement of natural sand with Kayasand, with a target of an S2 slump range

achieved through a fixed w/c ratio and the use of a plasticiser the following conclusions can be

drawn:

• Use of plasticiser in limestone and granite mixes with w/c ratios of 0.5 and 0.55 respectively,

enabled compressive strengths in excess of the control mixes whilst still satisfying the slump

range and plasticiser dosage levels.

• For limestone and granite Kayasand concretes there is the potential to enhance the

compressive strength further by reducing the w/c ratio, or maintain the compressive strength

level by reducing both the w/c ratio and cement content in the mix. The exact reduction in

cement content cannot be quantified here.

• For all basalt Kayasand concretes the compressive strength was equivalent to that of the stage

1 control mix, although the S2 slump range could only be satisfied in the mix with the lowest

fines content. In the remaining mixes the S2 slump could not be achieved, even when

plasticiser dosages 20% higher than those recommended were used.

• For all sandstone Kayasand concretes the compressive strength was less than that of the stage

1 control but higher than that of the stage 2 control, although the latter reported a slump

collapse at the w/c ratio of 0.55. The S2 slump could not be satisfied in the mix with the

highest fines content whilst using the maximum plasticiser dosage recommended. It is

apparent that whilst improvements are seen between stages 1 and 2 sandstone Kayasand

concretes, further adjustment to the mix design is required to match the performance of the

other Kayasand rock types and this may include amending the w/c ratio, plasticiser type and

dosage.

• There was little difference in the flexural strength results between stage 1 and stage 2, even

though improvements in compressive strength for all Kayasand concretes was observed when

lowering the w/c ratio and introducing a plasticiser into the mix.

In summary, there is sufficient experimental evidence to justify the use of Kayasand as a 100%

replacement for natural sand in concrete. When considering sands with low MBV and SE values

there is the potential for the concrete mixes to outperform natural concrete mixes through further

reductions in w/c ratio. This may not hold true however, if the natural sand mixes are optimised

further through the use of plasticisers. With sands containing high MBV and SE values the V7

manufacturing process can significantly reduce the levels of deleterious fines in the sand to make

them acceptable for use in concrete. However, prudence is still required in controlling the fines


P a g e | 39 of 45��

portion in the resultant concrete mix, whether it be by minimising the fines content or using a

chemical admixture to deactivate the component of the fines that may be detrimental to the fresh and

hardened properties of concrete. Further work is suggested in this area to fully encompass the range

of rock mineralogies that are present in the UK. Moreover, there are numerous other properties that

would require further investigation in order to have full confidence in the use of Kayasand, namely

durability properties, chemical and chloride resistance and creep and shrinkage characteristics.

7. References

Ahn, N. Phelan, T. Fowler, D. Hudson, B. 2001. The Effects of High Fines on the Properties of

Cement Mortar and Concrete. In: International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 2001 9th

Annual Symposium.

BGS, 2011 BGS, 2011 http://www.bgs.ac.uk/planning4minerals/Index.htm (accessed 6th August

2012).

British Standards Institution. 2008. BS EN 12620:2002 + A1: 2008 Aggregates for concrete.

Çelik T. and Marar K. 1996. Effects of Crushed Stone Dust on some properties of Concrete. Cement

and Concrete Research, Vol.26, No. 7, pages 1121-1130.

Chiew, H. 2012. Sustainable extrudable concrete. Cardiff School of Engineering MSc Dissertation,

Cardiff University.

Donza, H. Cabrera, O. Irassar, E.F. 2002. High-strength concrete with different fine aggregate.

Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 32, No. 11, pages 1755–1761.

Dumitru, I. Zdrilic, T. Smorchevsky, G. 1999. The Use of Manufactured Quarry Fines in Concrete.

In: International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 1999 7th Annual Symposium.

Goldsworthy, S. 2005. Manufactured Sands in Portland Cement Concrete—The New Zealand

Experience, Proceedings of the 13th Annual ICAR Symposium.

Gonçalves, J.P. Tavares L.M., Toledo Filho, R.D., Fairbairn, E.M.R., Cunha, E.R. 2007. Comparison

of natural and manufactured fine aggregates in cement mortars. Cement and Concrete Research,

Vol. 37, No. 6, pages 924–932.


P a g e | 40 of 45��

Harrison, D. J., Wilson, D., Henney, P. J., Hudson, J. M. 2000. Crushed Rock Sand In South Wales,

A Reconnaissance Survey. British Geological Survey Technical Report No. WF/00/3. �

Hewlett, P. LEA's Chemistry of Cement and Concrete, Fourth edition, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New

York, 1998.

Jackson, N.M. and Brown, R.H. 1996. Use of higher fines contents in portland cement concrete. In:

International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 1996 4th Annual Symposium.

Kroh, T. 2010. Use of manufactured sand as a replacement material for dredged sand in mortar.

Cardiff School of Engineering MSc Dissertation, Cardiff University.

Li, B. Wang, J. Zhou, M. 2009. Effect of limestone fines content in manufactured sand on durability

of low- and high-strength concretes. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 23, No. 8, pages

2846-2850.

Malhotra, V. M., and Carette, G.G. 1985. Performance of Concrete Incorporating Limestone Dust as

Partial Replacement for Sand. ACI Journal, Proceedings Vol. 82, No. 3, pages 363-371.

Mankelow, J M Sen, M A Wrighton, C E. Idoine, N. 2011. Collation of the results of the 2009

aggregate minerals survey for England and Wales. British Geological Survey. Department for

Communities and Local Government and Welsh Assembly Government, Second edition.

Manning, D. 2004. Exploitation and Use of Quarry Fines, Mineral Solutions Ltd. Technical Report

No. 087/MIST2/DACM/01.

Marek, C.R. 1995. Importance of fine aggregate shape and grading on properties of concrete. In:

International Center for Aggregates Research (ICAR) 1995 3rd Annual Symposium.

Neville A.M. 1999. Properties of Concrete, 4th Edition, Essex-England, Pearson Education Ltd

Neville, A. 1995. Properties of concrete. 4th ed. Harlow: Longman Group.

Newman, J. and Choo, B.S. eds. 2003. Advanced concrete technology. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Parton, J. 2012. Sustainable extrudable concrete. Cardiff School of Engineering Year 3 Project,

Cardiff University.


P a g e | 41 of 45��

Pettingell H., 2008. Manufactured Sand: An Effective dry sand manufacturing process from Japan.

Quarry Management Magazine.

Pilegis, M, Gardner, D and Lark, B. 2012. Manufactured Sand for a Low Carbon Era. In 8th

International Conference: Concrete in the Low Carbon Era, Dundee, UK, 9-11 July 2012.

Poon, C.S. Shui, Z.H. Lam, L. Fok, H. Kou S.C. 2004. Influence of moisture states of natural and

recycled aggregates on the slump and compressive strength of concrete. Cement and Concrete

Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, pages 31–36.

Teranishi, K. Tanigawa, Y. 2007. Effect of Aggregate Grading on Fluidity of Concrete and Mortar.

Journal of Structures and Construction Engineering (Trans AIJ), No.614, pages 9-15 (in Japanese).

Thomas, T., Dumitru, I., van Koeverden, M., West. G., Basford, G., Lucas, G., James, W., Kovacs,

T., Clarke, P., Guirguis, S. 2007. Manufactured Sand National test methods and specification values.

Australia: Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia.

Volodskojs, R. 2012. Design and testing of self-compacting concrete using manufactured sand.

Cardiff School of Engineering Year 3 Project, Cardiff University.


A p p e n d i x |1

Appendix 1. Quarterly Reports produced by Cardiff University

Sand

from

Sur

plus

Qua

rry

Mat

eria

l

Qua

rterly

Rep

ort

1

Nove

mbe

r 201

0Re

port

no: 0

QR1

-SC

9086

-CF

Quarterly�Rep

ort�1

�Novem

ber�2

010�

�

Page�2�of�6

�

1.0

Intr

oduc

tion

The�motivation�for�this�project�is�th

e�increasing

�miss�balance�be

tween�the�ne

ed�fo

r�

aggregates�in

�society�and

�the�availability�of�traditionally�suitable�geologic�sou

rces.�A

�

strong

�need�is�re

alised

�for�d

evelop

ing�and�im

plem

enting

�techno

logy�th

at�can

�enable�

the�use�of�alternative�resou

rces,�redu

ce�the

�need�for�transport�and�presen

t�zero�

waste�con

cepts�for�the�aggregate�and�concrete�in

dustry.�A

ggregate�produ

cers�are�

faced�with�constant�dem

ands�for�highe

r�qu

ality�aggregates�and

,�at�the�same�time,�

have�to

�take�environ

men

tal�issue

s�into�accou

nt.�T

he�m

ost�pressing

�issues�being

�the�

excess�amou

nts�of�fine

s�(<�63ʅ

m)�following�the�crushing

�process�fo

r�manufactured�

aggregates�and

�the�de

pletion�of�natural�aggregate�re

sources.�Excess�fin

es�were,�and

�

in�m

any�coun

tries�still�are,�considered

�waste�and

�are�dispo

sed�of�accordingly,�at�

great�costs�and

�with�risk�of�con

tamination.�Produ

cers�have�iden

tifie

d�an

�opp

ortunity�

to�develop

�a�m

anufactured�sand

�from�gravel�a

nd�crushed

�rock.�O

ne�advantage�is

�

that�the

�sand�has�a�sm

oother�surface�texture�than�most�conven

tion

al�crusher�dust�

prod

ucts�and

�the

�Particle�Size�Distribution�(PSD

)�curve�can�be

�accurately�adjusted

�

whe

n�the�material�is�manufactured�therefore�making�it�m

uch�more�suitable�fo

r�use�

in�con

crete.�A

�secon

d�advantage�is�the

�ability�to�sou

rce�bo

th�fine�and�

coarse�

aggregates�from�the

�sam

e�qu

arry,�and�

with�

know

ledge�

of�the

�effect�of�the

�

mineralogical�com

position

�of�such�aggregates�on�the�fresh�and�harden

ed�prope

rties�

of�con

crete,�quarries�can�be

�kep

t�in�the

�near�vicinity�to�their�place�of�end

Ͳuse,�

thereb

y�shortening

�transpo

rt�distances,�followed

�by�less�pollution

�and

�increased

�

employmen

t�opp

ortunities�fo

r�the

�local�pop

ulation.�

� Num

erou

s�research�p

rogram

mes�h

ave�

been

�perform

ed,�exam

ining�the�

physical�

prop

erties�of�manufactured�sand

�in�the

�con

text�of�its�use�in�con

crete.�The

�results�

have�in�

gene

ral�be

en�in�

favour�o

f�using�

manufactured�

sand

,�given�

the�

right�

cond

itions�con

cerning�parent�rock�type

�and

�produ

ction�process.� H

owever,�de

sign

�

parameters�for�m

anufactured�sand

�are�differen

t�from�th

ose�used

�for�n

atural�sand.�It�

is�anticipated

�that�in

�the�future�aggregate�produ

ction�from

�crushed

�rock�will�increase�

and�prod

uction

�from

�natural�sa

nd�and

�gravel�dep

osits�w

ill�decrease.�

��

Quarterly�Rep

ort�1

�Novem

ber�2

010�

�

Page�3�of�6

�

The�project�w

ill�explore�th

e�feasibility�of�u

sing

�Kayasand�as�a�com

plete�replacem

ent�

for�n

atural�sand�in�cem

entitiou

s�materials�and

�then

�go�on

�to�develop

�a�spe

cification�

for�

the�

material.�

�This�will�be

�achieved

�by

�making�

up�mixes�of�Kayasand

�

(manufactured�sand

)�at�variou

s�replacem

ent�levels,�to�de

term

ine�the�op

timum

�mix�

of�Kayasand�replacem

ent�in�terms�of�w

orkability,�com

pression

�&�ten

sile�stren

gth.�

The�

mixes�that�will�b

e�used

�are:�100%

�Natural�Sand�

concrete�(control);�1

00%�

Kayasand

�con

crete;�100%�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�A;�100%

�Kayasand�with�Pre�

Duster�B

;�100%�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�C

;�50%

�Natural�50%

�Kayasand;�50%

�Natural�

50%�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�A

;�50%

�Natural�50%

�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�B

�and

�

Natural�50%

�Kayasand�with�Pre�Duster�C

.�

�� Kayasand

�manufactured�from

�6�differen

t�qu

arries�across�the�UK�will�be�used

�in�the

�

expe

rimen

tal�programme.�Ro

ck�type

s�ob

tained

�from

�these�

quarries�includ

e�

Greyw

acke,�Limestone

,�And

ersite,�

Gritstone

,�Ba

salt,�

Granite�and�

Slate.�The�

mineralogy�of�the

�paren

t�rock�w

ill�b

e�taken�

into�con

side

ration

�whe

n�trying

�to�

establish�the�op

timum

�mix�propo

rtions�and

�particle�gradation�for�variou

s�concrete�

applications.��The�following�tests�are�planne

d�for�the�differen

t�Kayasand

�blend

s�to�

determ

ine�their�m

ineralogy�and�strength:�

xMethylene

�Blue�Test�

xXR

D�and

�elemen

tal�analysis��

xSand

�Equ

ivalen

cy�Test��

xCu

be�Com

pression

�Test��

xCylinde

r�Ten

sile�Test�

2.0�Work�pe

rformed

�to�date�

In�this�last�quarter�the

�main�thrust�of�work�has�be

en�con

centrated�on

�establishing

�

the�correct�b

atching�and�mixing�metho

ds�to

�be�used

�in�th

e�remaind

er�of�the

�study,�

as�w

ell�a

s�pe

rforming�some�prelim

inary�trials�on�a�lim

estone

�Kayasand�originating�

from

�Rathm

olyon�Quarry�in�Sou

thern�Ireland.��T

he�details�of�the

�mixes�cast�to�date�

are�given�in�Table�2.1.�For�each�mix,�3

�cub

es�were�cast�to

�establish�their�c

ompressive�

strength�at�2

4�ho

urs,�3�fo

r�7�days�a

nd�3�fo

r�28�days.�The

�remaining

�2�cub

es�were�kept�

for�p

oten

tial�56�day�compressive�strength�te

sts.��

�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�1

�Novem

ber�2

010�

�

Page�4�of�6

�

Table�2.1.�M

ixes�cast�to�date�

Mix�

Reference�

Date�

Rock�Type�

Replacem

ent�level�(%

)Pred

uster�

Type

�

No.�

Cube

�s�

No .

Cylinde

rs�

Kayasand

Natural�Sand

CRͲN1�

14/10/10

�Limestone

�Ͳ

100

Ͳ11

�1�

CRͲK1�

14/10/10

�Limestone

�100

ͲͲ

11�

2�

CRͲK2�

21/10/10

�Limestone

�100

ͲA

11�

1�

CRͲK3�

21/10/10

�Limestone

�100

ͲB

11�

1�

CRͲK4�

21/10/10

�Limestone

�100

ͲC

11�

1�

CRͲN2�

21/10/10

�Limestone

�Ͳ

100

Ͳ11

�1�

CRͲK5�

21/10/10

�Limestone

�50

50Ͳ

11�

1�

CRͲK6�

28/10/10

�Limestone

�50

50Ͳ

11�

1�

CRͲK7�

28/10/10

�Limestone

�50

50A

11�

1�

CFͲK8�

28/10/10

�Limestone

�50

50C

11�

1�

CRͲN3�

28/10/10

�Limestone

�Ͳ

100

Ͳ11

�1�

� Based�on

�the�prelim

inary�labo

ratory�work�5�mixes�are�sc

hedu

led�for�e

ach�week,�from

�

Octob

er�20101

�to�April�2011.�The�5�mixes�each�week�comprise�4�Kayasand

�mix�

designs�and�1�control�m

ix,�to�mon

itor�th

e�consistency�of�th

e�casting�process�and�any�

natural�s

and�resource�variation

�between�mixes�perform

ed� on�consecutive�weeks.�

The�prelim

inary�investigations�have�de

mon

strated�that�th

is�le

vel�o

f�laboratory�work�

is�achievable.�How

ever,�initial�setbacks�have�m

eant�th

at�th

e�first�Kayasand�blen

d�has�

taken�a�mon

th�to

�com

plete�all�of�the

�mix�designs�(d

iscussed

�in�m

ore�de

tailed�be

low).��

3.0�Tests�p

erform

ed�to

�date�Ͳ�n

umbe

r�and

�type

�Co

mpression

�stren

gth�tests�have�been�pe

rformed

�so�far�o

n�24hr�and

�7�day�cub

es�of�

the�

mixes�d

etailed�

in�T

able�2

.1�a

bove.�A�M

ethylene

�Blue�

trial�test�h

as�b

een�

cond

ucted�

on�the

�Rathm

olyon�

limestone

,�achieving�

a�successful�result.�S

lump�

retention�and�bleed�tests�have�also�be

en�perform

ed�on�the�mixes�cast �to�date,�but�

due�to�delays�du

ring

�the

�mixing�process�ne

ithe

r�test�has�yielded

�any�useful�d

ata.�

These�tests�ho

wever,�a

re�still�be

ing�considered

�for�the

�next�stage�of�casting.�The�

results�of�the

�com

pressive�stren

gth�tests�will�be�available�in�the

�next�Quarterly�

Repo

rt.�

4.0�Observatio

ns/issue

s�4.1.�Slump�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�1

�Novem

ber�2

010�

�

Page�5�of�6

�

In�order�to

�make�be

st�use�of�laboratory�time�the�mixing�proced

ure�chosen

�used�tw

o�

pan�mixtures�runn

ing�concurrently�w

ith�tw

o�differen

t�mix�designs.�H

owever,�w

hilst�

the�on

e�mix�was�being

�tested

�and

�sub

sequ

ently�cast,�the

�other�re

maine

d�in�th

e�pan�

and�started�to�stiffen

.�In�the�case�of�the

�latter, �an�extra�10mins�in�th

e�mixer�re

sulted

�

in�a�5mm�lo

ss�in

�slump,�which�th

en�signifie

d�that�add

itional�w

ater�was�add

ed�to

�the�

mix�to�achieve�the�de

sired�slum

p.�How

ever,�in�do

ing�so�the

�water/cem

ent�ratio�of�

the�mix�w

as�com

prom

ised

,�leaving�a�comparison�of�com

pression

�stren

gth�results�

betw

een�mixes� difficult�to�complete.�The

�desired

�slump�for�all�the

�mixes�w

as�set�at�

70�±5�mm.�How

ever�it�soo

n�be

came�apparent�that�such�a�tolerance�for�a�70m

m�

slum

p�was�unrealistic.�The

�tolerance�compo

unde

d�the�length�of�tim

e�to�m

ix�and

�the�

observations�of�the

�mix�stiffen

ing�made�earlier.�

� After� con

sultation�with�an

�indu

stry�spe

cialist,�it�w

as�determined

�that�a�to

lerance�of�

40mm�(min)�to�9

0mm�(max)�slum

p�was�u

sed�

widely�througho

ut�the

�con

crete�

indu

stry,�a

nd�th

e�mix�only�ne

eded

�to�be�in�th

e�mixer�fo

r�approxim

ately�2m

ins�after�

the�water�con

tent�of�the

�mix�design�had�be

en�add

ed.�A

fter�re

alising �this�inform

ation,�

two�concurrent�m

ixes�were�discon

tinu

ed�in

�favour�of�o

ne�m

ix,�altho

ugh�this�was�not�

done

�until�the�3r

d �week�of�casting

�(28

/10/10

).�Co

nseq

uently�only�mixes�CRͲK6

�and

�

CRͲK8�have�been�mixed

�according

�to�th

e�mix�design�sheets.�A

ll�the�othe

r�mixes�(C

R�–�

K1�throu

gh�CRͲK5

�and

�CRͲK7

)�had�excess�w

ater�add

ed�because�the

�mix�w

as�le

ft�in

�

the�mixers�for�too�long

�whilst�the�70mm�slump�was�targeted.�For�all�future�m

ixes�

cast�after�28/10/10,�only�the�water�con

tent�outlined

�in�the

�mix�design�will�be�used

�

and�the�slum

p�value�will�be�recorded

�for�that�m

ix.�If�the

�slump�is�not�within�40mm�–�

90mm�th

en�excess�w

ater�will�be�adde

d�and�no

ted �do

wn�on

�the�mix�design�sheet.�

� 4.2�Mou

ld�preparation

�and

�Dem

oulding�

There�have�been�a�nu

mbe

r�of�issue

s�with�the�cast�iron�100m

m�con

crete�cube

�

mou

lds.�The

�first�issue�concerns�the

�bolts�holding

�the

�cub

e�mou

lds�on

�its�platform

,�

which�had

�a�ten

dency�to�unscrew

�the

mselves�w

hen�placed

�on�the �vibrating�table.�

This�problem

�was�enh

anced�by

�surplus�oil�applied�to�the

�steel�m

oulds.�The

�mou

ld�

bolts�have�been�replaced

�and

�this�has�alleviated

�the

�problem

.��The

�secon

d�issue�

expe

rien

ced�with�these�mou

ld�w

as�during�de

Ͳmou

lding.�An�internal�screw

�in�the�

mou

lds�made�

demou

lding�

and�

rejoining�

the�

mou

lds�difficult,� d

elaying�

the�

deͲ

Quarterly�Rep

ort�1

�Novem

ber�2

010�

�

Page�6�of�6

�

mou

lding�process.�The

�internal�screw

s�inside

�all�of�the

�new

�mou

lds�have�now

�been�

removed

�which�has�helpe

d�speed�up

�the�de

Ͳmou

lding�process.�

� 4.3�Fresh�prop

erty�m

easuremen

ts�

Curren

tly�air�e

ntrapm

ent�tests�have�no

t�been�pe

rformed

�on�the�fresh�concrete.�It�is�

recognised

�that�th

is�is�so

mething

�that�can

�be�do

ne�at�a

�later�stage�ra

ther�th

an�delay�

the�missing

�program

me�that�has�currently�been�establishe

d.��

� �

Sand

from

Sur

plus

Qua

rry

Mat

eria

l

Qua

rterly

Rep

ort

2

Febr

uary

201

1Re

port

no: 0

QR2

-SC

9086

-CF

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�1�of�6

�

1.0�In

troduction�

This�quarterly�rep

ort�covers�the�pe

riod�of�Novem

ber�2010

�to�Janu

ary�2011

.�It�rep

orts�

the�work�that�has�been�pe

rformed

�to�date�and

�presents�prelim

inary�results�from�a�

series�of�trial�m

ixes�cast�in�the�pe

riod

�of�O

ctob

er�to

�Novem

ber�2010.��

2.0�W

ork�perform

ed�to�date�



en�con

centrated�on

�establishing

�

data�rep

ortin

g�and�recording�proced

ures,�mix�referen

ces�and�standard�ope

ratin

g�

proced

ures�for�a

ll�of�the

�anticipated

�tests.�Furthe

rmore,�con

sulta

tion�

with

�an�

indu

stry�spe

cialist�has�be

en�und

ertaken�and�is�rep

orted�in�m

ore�de

tail�in�sectio

n�2.2.

An�additio

nal� two�mixes�w

ere�cast�during�the�repo

rting�proced

ure,�nam

ely�a�100%

�

Kayasand

�mix�and

�a�C

ontrol�m

ix.�This�w

as�p

rimarily�d

one�to�trial�the

�new

�air�

entrainm

ent�de

vice;�ho

wever,�the�

mixes�a

lso�

served

�the

�purpo

se�o

f�providing�

additio

nal�com

pressive�stren

gth�results.�C

ompressive�stren

gth�tests�have�also�be

en�

completed

�on�all�m

aterial�cast�to�date,�the

�results�of�which�are�discussed

�in�sectio

n

3. 2.1�M

ix�Referencing�System�

The�mix�referen

cing

�system�ado

pted

�is�as�follows:�

� � � � Reference�back�to�the�data�she

ets�will�be�requ

ired

�to�de

term

ine�the�age�of�the

�

specim

en.�Co

ntrol�mixes�(100%

�natural�sand)�are�designated�“Con

trol”�and�have� a�

casting�date�attache

d.�This�is�because�a�num

ber�of�con

trol�m

ixes�are�to�be

�cast�

througho

ut�the

�duration�of�the

�project.�The

�mix�referen

ces�for�the�prelim

inary�work�

are�repo

rted

�in�Table�A.1�of�App

endix�A,�along

�with

�the

�original�m

ix�referen

ce�given

�

in�th

e�first�quarterly�rep

ort.��

2.2�In

dustry�specialist�consultation��

A�m

eetin

g�was�set�up�with

�Dr�Ko

nstantinos�Kou

tselas�at�the�Aggregate�Ind

ustries�

research�a

nd�d

evelop

men

t�concrete�laboratory�

in�Derbyshire�

was�a

rranged�

in�

Decem

ber�2010

�to�discuss�the�direction�of�the

�project,�alon

g�with

�the

�issue

s�with

�

Ireland�CE

MEX

�Moyne

�Quarry

Kayasand

�(predu

ster

A)�

at�100

%�re

placem

ent�

Specim

en�

numbe

r�1

ICMͲKA100Ͳ1�

Ireland�CE

MEX

Moyne

�Quarry

Kayasand

�(no�

pred

uster)�at�5

0%�

replacem

ent�level�

Specim

en�

numbe

r�2

ICMͲKS50/50

Ͳ2�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�2�of�6

�

certain�elem

ents�of�the�project�as�ide

ntified

�by�the�tw

o�stud

ents.�Th

e�following�

conclusion

s�have�been�draw

n�from

�the�meetin

g:�

xThere�is�no�ne

ed�to

�con

duct�Ten

sile�Stren

gth�Tests�on

�the�harden

ed�con

crete,�

as�the

�result�be

ars�no

�significance�u

nless�tests�to�d

etermine�the�elastic

�

mod

ulus�are�also�pe

rformed

.�To�do

�the

�latter�wou

ld�significantly

�increase�the

�

numbe

r�of�tests�req

uired�and�in�light�of�the�de

manding

�workload�from

�the

�

project�as�curren

tly�sche

duled�

it�has�therefore�

been

�de

cide

d�that�the�

introd

uctio

n�of�fu

rthe

r�tests�is�unn

ecessary.�This�will�allow�the

�researche

rs�to�

focus�on

�the�core�aim

s�of�th

e�project.�

xTh

e�Flexural�Stren

gth�Test�(4�po

int�testing)�w

ill�rep

lace�the

�Ten

sile�Stren

gth�

test,�and

�sho

uld�indicate�better�p

acking

�in�Kayasand�samples.�

xThere�is�no�ne

ed�to�test�for�shrinkage�of�fresh/harden

ed�con

crete.�This�is�

because�the�result�will�have�little

�impact�with

�the

�overall�aims�of�the

�project.�

Furthe

rmore,�the

�BS�EN

�stand

ard�written

�for�this�test�ou

tline

s�apparatus�that�

simply�cann

ot�be�foun

d�anyw

here�in

�the�UK.�

xTh

e�elem

ental�analysis�of�Kayasand

�was�que

stione

d,�as�this�w

ould�have�a�

very�small�impact�on�harden

ed�con

crete�results.�H

owever,�this�test�is�neede

d�

to�fully�characterize�the�sand

,�the

�results� of�which�will�be�of�ben

eficial�u

se�to�

the�Ph

D�stude

nts�and�the�future�directio

n�of�this�work�after�this�current�

project�h

as�been�completed

.��

xBleeding

�Tests�w

ill�be�carried�ou

t�qu

alita

tively�as�the

�mixes�are�being

�cast.�

Photos�w

ill�be�taken�using�a�digital�cam

era,�and

�notes�w

ill�be�made�on

�any

�

bleeding

�that�occurs�from

�each�mix.�

xThere�is�a�need�to�m

easure�Fresh�(P

lastic)�D

ensity�as�well�as�Cu

red�Den

sity,�as�

this�cou

ld�give�some�reason

ing�to�results�obtaine

d.�The

�metho

d�of�how

�this�is�

measured�will�need�to�be�exam

ined

�furthe

r.�

xWe�are�going�to�keep �to�an�S2�slump�(40m

mͲ90m

m),�a�value�common

ly�used�

in�th

e�concrete�indu

stry.�

xIt�is�im

portant�to�sou

rce�the�cemen

t�direct�from�the

�manufacturer.�This�

project�was�outlined

�as�using�CE

M�I,�ho

wever,�there�have�been�prob

lems�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�3�of�6

�

sourcing

�CEM

�I�from

�Cardiff�University’s�cem

ent�sup

pliers.�It�is�now

�envisaged

�

that�the

�CEM

�I�cemen

t�will�be�sourced�from

�a�CEM

EX�quarry�just�outside

�of�

Cardiff.�This�is�im

portant�be

cause�up

�to�5%

�of�fin

es�can

�be�includ

ed�in�the�

cemen

t�which�m

ay�not�be�de

clared

�to�the�bu

yer.�It�is�the

�level�o

f�fin

es�in

�the

�

cemen

t�which�cou

ld�have�an

�impact�on�the�compressive�stren

gth�results�with

�

regards�to�th

e�use�of�Pre�dusters.�

xTh

e�water/cem

ent�ratio

�must�stay�the

�sam

e�for�all�o

f�the�mixes.�T

he�current�

indu

stry�w

/c�ratio�is�arou

nd�0.59,�and

�the

refore�the

�aim

�is�to�m

aintain�the�

same�w/c�ratio�for�all�of�the

�mixes,�giving

�an�even

�platform�on�which�to�

compare�th

e�results.�It�w

as�noticed

�from

�the�results�of�the

�first�mixes�th

at�th

e�

w/c�ratio�w

as�very�differen

t�for�all�of�the

�mixes,�and�

this�u

ndou

bted

ly�

affected

�the

�com

pressive�stren

gth�results�that�were�ob

tained

.�It�is�now

�very�

hard�to�compare�the

se�results�w

ithou

t�having

�a�con

stant�on

�which�to�base�

the�theo

ries.�

xTh

e�mixer�w

ill�be�kept�dam

p�for�every�mix.�Dr�Ko

utselas�stated

�that�every�

time�a�mix�is�cast�in�the

�Aggregate�In

dustries�labo

ratory,�an�initial�m

ix�is�cast�

to�dam

pen�the�mixer�which�is�sub

sequ

ently

�throw

n�aw

ay.�The

�mixes�are�the

n�

started�in�earne

st.�The�full�scientific�reason

ing�be

hind

�this�practise�is�not�

know

n,�but�from�years�of�expe

rien

ce�in�concrete�m

ixing,�Dr�Ko

utselas�has�

noticed

�that�there�is�a�differen

ce�between�using�a�damp�(already

�mixed

)�

mixer�and

�a�dry�clean

�mixer.�

Following�the�discussion

�with

�Dr�Ko

utselas�a�list�of�Aggregate�testin

g,�Fresh�Con

crete�

testing�and�Harde

ned�Co

ncrete�testin

g�has�be

en�drawn�up

�which�will�be�cond

ucted�

on�all�of�th

e�research�m

aterial.�Th

is�can

�be�seen

�in�Table�2.1.�

From

�this,�a�sched

ule�of�testin

g�has�be

en�drawn�up

�over�the�ne

xt�9�m

onths.�W

hen�

the�material�com

es�back�from

�Japan

�1�week�will�be�spen

t�on

�aggregate�testin

g.�This�

will�give�an

�ind

ication�

of�how

�the

�aggregate�w

ill�beh

ave�in�the

�mix,�and�what�

prop

ertie

s�it�po

ssesses,�so�as�to�explain�the�results�from�any�of�the�mixes.�The

�fresh�

concrete�tests�will�be�cond

ucted�whe

n�casting�the�mixes�and

�it�will�take�on

e�day�to�

test�all�of�th

e�harden

ed�con

crete�

�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�4�of�6

�

Table�2.1.�Propo

sed�aggregate,�fresh�and�harden

ed�con

crete�testing�

Aggregate�Testing�

Fresh�Concrete�Testing�

Hardened�Concrete�Testing�

Grading

�Air�Entrainmen

t�Den

sity�

Water�Absorption�

Slum

p�Co

mpressive�Stren

gth�

Methylene

�Blue�

Fresh�(plastic)�D

ensity�

Flexural�Stren

gth�Test�(4

Ͳpoint�te

sting)�

Sand

�Equ

ivalen

cy�

Bleeding

��

New

�Zealand

�Flow�Con

e��

�

%�W

ater�Con

tent�(b

efore�

mixing)�

� 3.0

Expe

rimen

tal R

esul

ts a

nd D

iscu

ssio

n It�is�im

portant�to�no

te�th

at�th

e�target�com

pressive�stren

gths�of�the

�spe

cimen

s�cast�in

�

this�project�are�25N

/mm

2 �after�7�days�of�curing�and�30N/m

m2�after�2

8�days�of�curing.��

The�average�compressive�stren

gth�results,�togethe

r�with

�the

�coe

fficients�of�variatio

n�

for�the�specim

ens�cast�in

�the

�prelim

inary�stud

y�are�presen

ted�in�Table�3.1.�T

he�raw

�

data,�a

s�collected

�from�the

�labo

ratory�is�provide

d�in�App

endix�B.�It�sho

uld�be

�noted

�

here�that�all�tests�were�

performed

�in�

triplicate,�u

nless�stated

�otherwise.�It�is�

observed

�that�bo

th�control�

mixes�satisfy�the�

target�compressive�strength�

requ

irem

ents.�How

ever,�on

ly�two�

Kayasand

�mixes�(ICMͲKS50/50

�and

�ICR

KS10

0)�

approach�the

�req

uiremen

ts,�w

ith�the

�rem

aining

�Kayasand�mixes�fa

lling

�below

�both�7�

and�28

�day�ta

rget�stren

gths.��Th

e�coefficients�of�variatio

n�are�gene

rally�with

in�th

e�5%

�

limit�

used

�in�

the�

labo

ratory�w

hen�

considering�

compressive�stren

gth�

results�o

f�

concrete.��

From

�the�data�it�is�app

aren

t�that�for�the

�Kayasand�mixes�with

�the�ICM�m

ix�referen

ce,�

the�differen

ce�between�the�7�and�28

�day�com

pressive�stren

gth�results�is�unu

sually�

small.�

The�

control�mix�cast�on

�the�

18th�Novem

ber�indicates�that�the�

7�day�

compressive�stren

gth�is�app

roximately�75

%�of�the

�28Ͳday�compressive�stren

gth,�and

�

this�ratio�between�the�compressive�stren

gth�at�the

�two�ages�is�gen

erally�accep

ted�as�

the�standard�whe

n�working

�with

�normal�stren

gth�concrete�m

ixes�in

�the

�labo

ratory�at�

Cardiff�U

niversity.�The�

reason

s�for�the�

slow

�stren

gth�

gain�o

f�Kayasand

�will�b

e�

explored

�fully�during�the�testing�programme�and�it�is�m

erely�highlighted

�here�as�an�

interesting�

outcom

e�of�the�

prelim

inary�

stud

y.�Alth

ough

�the�

results�from

�the�

prelim

inary�stud

y�give�an�indicatio

n�of�the

�expected�pe

rformance�of�concrete�m

ade�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�5�of�6

�

form

�Kayasand,�the

�main�focus�was�to�establish�correct�working

�procedu

res�and�mix�

calculation�proced

ures�to�use�in�the

�full�study.�Ind

eed,�it�is�im

portant�to�note�he

re�

that�the

�water/cem

ent�ratio

s�for�the�ICM�and

�first�two�control�m

ixes�were�no

t�kept�

constant�a

nd�the

refore�this�may�h

elp�

to�e

xplain�the

�variatio

n�in�com

pressive�

strength�observed�be

tween�mixes.��

Table�3.1.�C

ompressive�Stren

gth�results�from

�prelim

inary�tests�

�Compressive�Strength�(N

/mm

2)�

�Coefficient�of�V

ariation�(%

)�Age

�(Days)�

1�

7�

28�

Mix�Reference�

��

�ICMͲCon

trolͲ14/10

�6.10

�24.49�

Ͳ��

5.87

�0.74

�Ͳ�

ICMͲCon

trolͲ21/10

�7.44

�27.05�

Ͳ��

6.17

�1.40

�Ͳ�

ICMͲKS100

�5.45

�20.36�

22.41�

�2.92

�3.07

�0.77

�ICMͲKA100�

5.32

�18.38�

21.08�

�6.04

�1.07

�0.60

�ICMͲKB1

00�

4.76

�19.66�

21.87�

�4.89

�0.75

�0.95

�ICMͲKC1

00�

6.02

�21.68�

22.87�

�0.38

�1.09

�0.16

�ICMͲKS50/50

�6.68

�25.29�

28.01�

�4.12

�3.06

�0.79

�ICMͲKA50/50�

Ͳ�21.58�

23.23�

�Ͳ�

0.623�

1.422�

ICMͲKB5

0/50

�Ͳ�

20.74�

23.14�

�Ͳ�

3.42

�2.40

�ICRͲCo

ntrol�–�18/11

�Ͳ�

23.99�

32.80�

�Ͳ�

N/A

1�N/A

2�

ICRͲKS100�

Ͳ�14.87�

30.07�

�Ͳ�

N/A

1�N/A

2�

1 One

�spe

cimen

�only�

2 Average�of�2

�spe

cimen

s�

The�results�from

�the

�con

trol�m

ix�cast�on

�the

�18t

h �Nov

�201

1�and�the�ICR�Kayasand

�mix�

refle

ct�im

provem

ents�that�were�made�to�the

�mixͲcalculatio

ns�(w/c�and

�den

sitie

s)�as�

a�result�

of�the

�ICM

�studies.�Similar�28

�day�stren

gth�

compressive�results�w

ere�

achieved

�for�the

se�m

ixes�alth

ough

�the

�Kayasand�ICRͲKS100�mix�failed�to�m

eet�the�7�

day�compressive�stren

gth�target.�This�initially�sho

ws�that�100

%�Kayasand�can�replace�

tradition

al�m

arine�dred

ged�sand

�in�con

crete�mixes�because�it�can

�achieve�the

�28�day�

compressive�stren

gth�target�set�out�by�the�mix�design.��

It�is�interesting�to�note�he

re�that�100%

�marine�dred

ged�sand

,�which�is�used

�as�a�

control�in�the

�study,�is�con

side

red�un

represen

tative�of�ind

ustry�practice.�This�is�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�6�of�6

�

because�the�use�of�100%�m

arine�sand

�in�a�m

ix�is�not�cost�effective�and�therefore�a�

blen

d�of�m

arine�sand

�and

�(lim

estone

)�filler�is�com

mon

ly�used,�the

�filler�con

tent�

gene

rally�com

prising�10%�of�the�total�sand

�con

tent.�Th

e�main�differen

ce�between�

natural�and

�Kayasand�is�th

e�shape�of�the

�sand�particles,�and

�this�is�believed�to�be�the�

reason

�why

�the

�100

%�natural�sand�achieves�such�a�higher�com

pressive�stren

gth.�It�is�

anticipated

�that�if�a�more�realistic

�con

trol�had

�been�used

�in�the�prelim

inary�stud

y�

then

�the

�differen

ces�be

tween�the�Kayasand

�and

�the

�Con

trol�after�28�days�curing�

wou

ld�be�less�prono

unced.�How

ever,�the�main�goal�of�this�project�is�to�prove�that�

Kayasand

�can

�rep

lace�natural�dredged

�sand�in�con

crete,�with

out�a�de

trim

ental�effect�

on�the

�com

pressive�stren

gth.�The

�achievemen

t�of�this�goal�w

ill�be�of�particular�

impo

rtance�to�indu

stry,�no

t�on

ly�because�Kayasand�has�significant�environ

men

tal�

bene

fits,�but�because�con

sisten

t�particle�shape

�and

�gradatio

n�can�be

�achieved�and�

according�to�a

�num

ber�of�ind

ustry�contracts,�it�is�this�consistency�in�m

aterial�

prop

ertie

s�which�is�m

uch�de

sired�in�th

e�concrete�indu

stry.��

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�A1�of�1�

Appendix�A.�U

pdated�M

ix�Referencing�System�

Table�A1.�Revised

�mix�referen

cing

�system��

Mix�Reference�adopted�in

�

Quarterly�Report�1�

Mix�Reference�adopted�in

�the�laboratory�and�

presentation�of�results�(to�be�used�in

�all�future�work)�

CRͲN1�

ICMͲCon

trolͲ14/10

�

CRͲK1�

ICMͲKS100

�

CRͲK2�

ICMͲKA100�

CRͲK3�

ICMͲKB1

00�

CRͲK4�

ICMͲKC1

00�

CRͲN2�

ICMͲCon

trolͲ21/10

�

CRͲK5�

ICMͲKS50/50

�

CRͲK6�

ICMͲKA50/50�

CRͲK7�

ICMͲKB5

0/50

�

CFͲK8�

ICMͲKC5

0/50

�

CRͲN3�

ICMͲCon

trolͲ04/11

�

�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�2

�Janu

ary�2011

��

Page�B1�of�B14

�

Appendix�B.�C

oncrete�M

ix�and�Data�Sh

eets�

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

07.

57.

5015

.00

00

0.00

0.00

0.2

1073

0.0

26.8

26.8

353

.66

00.

00.

00.

000.

001.

078

019

.519

.50

39.0

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

176

0.4

4.4

4.40

9.20

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

00.

4058

.23

58.2

311

6.86

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

0.2

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0.

00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

752

Nor

mal

1 2

11

15-O

ct-1

060

.12

115

-Oct

-10

64.9

31

15-O

ct-1

057

.94

721

-Oct

-10

246.

65

721

-Oct

-10

245.

26

721

-Oct

-10

243

728

828

928

1056

1156 56

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

Cor

rect

edkg

/m³

Tria

lTa

rget

Tria

lA

ctua

l

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Test

ed B

y

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :Po

t Num

ber :

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-5

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-8

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Labo

rato

ry N

ame

:

Air

Test

Air

Met

er N

umbe

r

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-12

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-6

Test

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-9IC

M-C

ontro

l-14/

10-1

0IC

M-C

ontro

l-14/

10-1

1

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :

Plas

tic D

ensi

ty

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

io

Yiel

d (%

) =

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)

Com

men

ts:

Bal

ance

Num

ber :

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:A

ir C

onte

nt (%

)

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-1

Stre

ngth

N/m

m²)

Failu

reM

ode

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-7

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Slum

p Te

st

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-4

Adm

ixw

eigh

t

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

Litr

es) =

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (%

) =

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)W

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

eM

ax L

oad

(KN

)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Tria

l Mix

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

t

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

Sol

ids

(kg)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)C

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(2)

MA

TER

IALS

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

0 m

l0

ml

0 m

l

Tarm

ac

PC

4/20

mm

Gra

vel

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)

0/4m

m N

atur

al S

and

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

14-O

ct-1

0C

emen

t (kg

/m³)

:

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Con

trol

300

Dat

e of

Tria

l :M

ater

ial C

ode

:

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-3

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:B

atch

Tim

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)A

dmix

ture

(1)

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-2

Cem

ent

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

07.

507.

500

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

730.

12.

126

.83

26.7

70

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

1.00

%78

00.

27.

819

.50

19.3

10

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

176

0.5

20.0

4.40

5.15

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

00.

7529

.95

58.2

358

.73

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

0.2

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0.

00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

852

Nor

mal

1 2

11

22-O

ct-1

079

.62

122

-Oct

-10

70.8

31

22-O

ct-1

072

.94

728

-Oct

-10

266.

15

728

-Oct

-10

272.

56

728

-Oct

-10

272.

87

288

289

2810

5611

56 56

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-10

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-11

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-5

ICM

-Con

trol-1

4/10

-12

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-7IC

M-C

ontro

l-21/

10-8

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-9

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-6

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-1IC

M-C

ontro

l-21/

10-2

ICM

-Con

trol-2

1/10

-3IC

M-C

ontro

l-21/

10-4

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

N/m

m²)

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Test

Pot N

umbe

r :

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:A

ir M

eter

Num

ber

Bal

ance

Num

ber :

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts:

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

MA

TER

IALS

Tria

l Mix

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Tar g

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0

ml

0/4m

m N

atur

al S

and

Tarm

ac

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Cem

ent

PC

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Rep

lace

men

t

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:30

0Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :21

-Oct

-10

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:C

ontro

l

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

07.

507.

500

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

730.

12.

126

.83

26.7

70

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

3.10

%78

00.

624

.219

.50

18.9

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

176

0.5

20.0

4.40

5.56

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

01.

1646

.33

58.2

358

.73

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

00

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0

0.00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

652

Nor

mal

1 2

11

15-O

ct-1

056

.32

115

-Oct

-10

53.6

31

15-O

ct-1

053

.54

721

-Oct

-10

196.

45

721

-Oct

-10

207.

76

721

-Oct

-10

206.

77

2822

6.1

828

223

928

223.

210

5611

5612

56

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-KS

100-

12

ICM

-KS

100-

10IC

M-K

S10

0-11

ICM

-KS

100-

8IC

M-K

S10

0-9

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-KS

100-

1IC

M-K

S10

0-2

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Met

er N

umbe

rB

alan

ce N

umbe

r :A

ir C

onte

nt (%

)M

ean

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

:

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :A

ir Te

stPo

t Num

ber :

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (%

) =Yi

eld

(%) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

Litr

es) =

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts:

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)A

dmix

wei

ght

Wat

er

Tria

lA

ctua

lC

emen

tR

epla

cem

ent

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)

0 m

l

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Tar g

et

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(1)

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Kay

asan

dIC

MFi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

lR

epla

cem

ent

Cem

ent

PC

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:R

epla

cem

ent (

%) :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:30

0

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :14

-Oct

-10

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:K

ayas

and

100%

ICM

-KS

100-

6IC

M-K

S10

0-7

ICM

-KS

100-

5

ICM

-KS

100-

3IC

M-K

S10

0-4

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

0.00

7.50

7.50

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

73.0

00.

12.

126

.83

26.7

70.

000.

00.

00.

000.

003.

80%

748.

020.

728

.418

.70

17.9

93.

40%

31.9

80.

01.

10.

800.

7717

6.00

0.5

20.0

4.40

5.69

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

01.

2951

.66

58.2

358

.73

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

00

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0

0.00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

742

Nor

mal

1 2

11

15-O

ct-1

056

.92

115

-Oct

-10

50.9

31

15-O

ct-1

051

.94

721

-Oct

-10

185.

95

721

-Oct

-10

183.

56

721

-Oct

-10

182

728

212.

28

2821

0.3

928

209.

810

5611

5612

56

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-KA

100-

8

ICM

-KA

100-

12

ICM

-KA

100-

10IC

M-K

A10

0-11

ICM

-KA

100-

9

ICM

-KA

100-

4IC

M-K

A10

0-5

ICM

-KA

100-

6IC

M-K

A10

0-7

ICM

-KA

100-

2

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-KA

100-

1

Air

Test

Pot N

umbe

r :

ICM

-KA

100-

3

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Met

er N

umbe

rB

alan

ce N

umbe

r :

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts:

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Tar g

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0

ml

Kay

asan

dIC

M

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)P

redu

ster

AIC

M

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Cem

ent

PC

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Rep

lace

men

t

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:30

0Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :14

-Oct

-10

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:K

ayas

and

+ P

erdu

ster

A 1

00%

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

0.00

7.50

7.50

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

73.0

00.

12.

126

.83

26.7

70.

000.

00.

00.

000.

003.

70%

748.

020.

727

.718

.70

18.0

10.

90%

31.9

80.

00.

30.

800.

7917

6.00

0.5

20.0

4.40

5.65

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

01.

2550

.11

58.2

358

.73

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

00

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0

0.00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

682

Nor

mal

1 2

11

15-O

ct-1

050

.12

115

-Oct

-10

47.2

31

15-O

ct-1

045

.54

721

-Oct

-10

197.

15

721

-Oct

-10

197.

76

721

-Oct

-10

194.

97

2822

08

2821

6.3

928

219.

810

5611

5612

56

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-KB

100-

8

ICM

-KB

100-

12

ICM

-KB

100-

10IC

M-K

B10

0-11

ICM

-KB

100-

9

ICM

-KB

100-

4IC

M-K

B10

0-5

ICM

-KB

100-

6IC

M-K

B10

0-7

ICM

-KB

100-

2

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-KB

100-

1

Air

Test

Pot N

umbe

r :

ICM

-KB

100-

3

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Met

er N

umbe

rB

alan

ce N

umbe

r :

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts:

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Tar g

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0

ml

Kay

asan

dIC

M

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)P

redu

ster

BIC

M

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Cem

ent

PC

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Rep

lace

men

t

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:30

0Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :14

-Oct

-10

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:K

ayas

and

+ P

erdu

ster

B 1

00%

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

0.00

7.50

7.50

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

73.0

00.

12.

126

.83

26.7

70.

000.

00.

00.

000.

004.

20%

748.

020.

831

.418

.70

17.9

23.

80%

31.9

80.

01.

20.

800.

7717

6.00

0.45

18.0

4.40

5.72

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

01.

3252

.78

58.2

358

.68

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

00

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0

0.00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

652

Nor

mal

1 2

11

22-O

ct-1

060

.32

122

-Oct

-10

59.9

31

22-O

ct-1

060

.34

728

-Oct

-10

216.

25

728

-Oct

-10

214.

86

728

-Oct

-10

219.

47

2822

8.6

828

228.

49

2822

9.1

1056

1156

1256

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-KC

100-

8

ICM

-KC

100-

12

ICM

-KC

100-

10IC

M-K

C10

0-11

ICM

-KC

100-

9

ICM

-KC

100-

4IC

M-K

C10

0-5

ICM

-KC

100-

6IC

M-K

C10

0-7

ICM

-KC

100-

2

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-KC

100-

1

Air

Test

Pot N

umbe

r :

ICM

-KC

100-

3

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Met

er N

umbe

rB

alan

ce N

umbe

r :

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts:

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Tar g

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0

ml

Kay

asan

dIC

M

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)P

redu

ster

CIC

M

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Cem

ent

PC

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Rep

lace

men

t

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:30

0Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :21

-Oct

-10

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:K

ayas

and

+ P

erdu

ster

C 1

00%

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

07.

507.

500

0.00

0.00

1073

0.0

0.0

26.8

326

.83

00.

00.

00.

000.

004.

20%

390

0.4

16.4

9.75

9.34

1.00

%39

00.

13.

99.

759.

6517

60.

04.

404.

910.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

00TO

TALS

2329

.00

0.51

20.2

858

.23

58.2

30.

000.

00SS

DA

ctua

l0.

00W

/C0

00.

00Fi

nes

(%) =

00.

00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

702

Nor

mal

1 2

11

22-O

ct-1

064

.12

122

-Oct

-10

66.7

31

22-O

ct-1

069

.64

728

-Oct

-10

247.

25

728

-Oct

-10

249.

86

728

-Oct

-10

261.

77

2827

9.3

828

278.

49

2828

2.6

1056

1156

1228

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-10

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-11

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-5

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-12

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-7

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-8

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-9

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-6

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-1

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-2

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-3

ICM

-KS

50/5

0-4

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Test

Pot N

umbe

r :

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:A

ir M

eter

Num

ber

Bal

ance

Num

ber :

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts:

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Tar g

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0

ml

Kay

asan

dIC

M

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)0/

4mm

Nat

ural

San

dTa

rmac

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Cem

ent

PC

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Rep

lace

men

t

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:30

0Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :21

-Oct

-10

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:K

ayas

and/

Nat

ural

San

d B

lend

50%

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

07.

507.

500

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

730.

12.

126

.83

26.7

70

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

374

0.0

0.0

9.35

9.35

160.

00.

00.

400.

4039

00.

00.

09.

759.

7517

64.

404.

450.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

00TO

TALS

2329

.00

0.05

2.15

58.2

358

.23

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

00

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0

0.00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

2N

orm

al1 2

11

21

31

47

216.

25

721

6.9

67

214.

37

2822

8.9

828

232.

49

2823

5.5

1056

1156

1228

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

Fine

Agg

rega

te (3

)

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

eM

ax L

oad

(KN

)St

reng

th(N

/mm²)

Failu

reM

ode

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-4

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-5

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-7

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-8

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-6

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-12

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-9

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-11

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-10

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-2

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-3

ICM

-KA

50/5

0-1

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :A

ir Te

stPo

t Num

ber :

Air

Met

er N

umbe

rB

alan

ce N

umbe

r :

Test

ed B

y

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Com

men

ts:

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(3)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Sol

ids

(kg)

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Targ

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(1)

Pre

dust

er A

Kay

asan

dIC

M

0/4m

m N

atur

al S

and

ICM

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Cem

ent

PC

Rep

lace

men

t

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Kay

asan

d +

Pre

dust

er A

/Nat

ural

San

d B

lend

50%

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :30

0

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :M

ix D

escr

iptio

n :

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

0.0

7.50

7.50

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

73.0

0.1

2.1

26.8

326

.77

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

364.

40.

00.

09.

119.

1125

.60.

00.

00.

640.

6439

0.0

0.0

0.0

9.75

9.75

176.

04.

404.

450.

00.

000.

000.

000.

00.

000.

000.

000.

00.

000.

00TO

TALS

2329

.00

0.05

2.15

58.2

358

.23

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

00

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0

0.00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

2N

orm

al1 2

11

21

31

47

208.

25

721

46

719

9.9

728

225

828

234

928

235.

110

5611

5612

28

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-10

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-11

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-5

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-12

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-7

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-8

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-9

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-6

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-1

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-2

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-3

ICM

-KB

50/5

0-4

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Test

Pot N

umbe

r :

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Yiel

d (%

) =

Air

Met

er N

umbe

rB

alan

ce N

umbe

r :

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)

Com

men

ts:

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

Litr

es) =

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (%

) =

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)S

olid

s (k

g)

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(3)

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Targ

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (3

)0/

4mm

Nat

ural

San

d

Kay

asan

dIC

MFi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Pre

dust

er B

ICM

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Cem

ent

PC

Rep

lace

men

t

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :30

0

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :M

ix D

escr

iptio

n :

Kay

asan

d +

Pre

dust

er B

/Nat

ural

San

d B

lend

50%

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

0.0

7.50

7.50

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.20

%10

73.0

0.1

2.1

26.8

326

.77

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

354.

40.

00.

08.

868.

8635

.60.

00.

00.

890.

8939

0.0

0.0

0.0

9.75

9.75

176.

04.

404.

450.

00.

000.

000.

000.

00.

000.

000.

000.

00.

000.

00TO

TALS

2329

.00

0.05

2.15

58.2

358

.23

0.00

0.00

SSD

Act

ual

0.00

W/C

00

0.00

Fine

s (%

) =0

0.00

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)1

Nor

mal

2N

orm

al1 2

11

21

31

47

57

67

728

828

928

1056

1156

1228

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-10

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-11

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-5

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-12

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-7

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-8

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-9

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-6

Test

ed B

y

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-1

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-2

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-3

ICM

-KC

50/5

0-4

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

e

Air

Test

Pot N

umbe

r :

Air

Con

tent

(%)

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Yiel

d (%

) =

Air

Met

er N

umbe

rB

alan

ce N

umbe

r :

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Slum

p Te

stPl

astic

Den

sity

Test

Con

cret

eM

ass

(g)

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)

Com

men

ts:

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

Litr

es) =

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (%

) =

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)S

olid

s (k

g)

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(3)

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Targ

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

l

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (3

)0/

4mm

Nat

ural

San

d

Kay

asan

dIC

MFi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Pre

dust

er C

ICM

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

l

Cem

ent

PC

Rep

lace

men

t

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Bat

ch S

ize

(litr

es) :

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :30

0

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

M

Dat

e of

Tria

l :M

ix D

escr

iptio

n :

Kay

asan

d +

Pre

dust

er C

/Nat

ural

San

d B

lend

50%

Qu

arr

y:ICA

Qu

an

tity

Of

Fin

e A

gg

reg

ate

:**

*78

0

V7

Pro

du

ct (

wit

h P

re-D

ust

ers

):V

7 P

rodu

ct (B

efor

e P

re-D

uste

r):

68.0

0%V

7 P

rodu

ct A

(With

Pre

-Dus

ter A

)73

.60%

V7

Pro

duct

B (W

ith P

re-D

uste

r B)

75.6

0%V

7 P

rodu

ct C

(With

Pre

-Dus

ter C

)79

.70%

Mix

(kg

s)

Wit

h P

re D

ust

er

A:

Kay

asan

d:72

0.65

Pre

-Dus

ter

59.3

5

Wit

h P

re D

ust

er

B:

Kay

asan

d:70

1.59

Pre

-Dus

ter

78.4

1

Wit

h P

re D

ust

er

C:

Kay

asan

d:66

5.50

Pre

-Dus

ter

114.

50

V7

Mix

Pro

po

rtio

ns

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

030

0.0

3.00

3.00

00.

00.

000.

000.

200.

210

732.

110

75.1

10.7

510

.75

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

001.

001.

078

07.

878

7.8

7.88

7.88

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

0017

616

6.1

1.66

1.95

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

09.

9523

29.0

023

.29

23.5

823

57.7

520

4.75

SSD

Act

ual

28.7

5W

/C R

atio

0.58

70.

682

16.3

3Fi

nes

(%) =

42.1

101.

63

Slum

p Te

stSl

ump

Ret

entio

n

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)Te

stM

ode

Valu

e(m

m)

Con

cret

eD

ensi

ty

1N

orm

al60

1 H

our

Nor

mal

Mas

s (k

g)(k

g/m³)

2N

orm

al2

Hou

rsN

orm

alA

ctua

l23

.223

20M

ean

Slum

p Te

st60

Initi

al S

lum

p60

Cal

cula

ted

2357

.746

10A

ir Te

s tM

eter

Num

ber

Kay

aA

ir C

onte

nt (%

)0.

38%

2320

11

19-N

ov-1

045

.823

902

725

-Nov

-10

239.

922

403

2816

-Dec

-10

332.

524

204

2816

-Dec

-10

323.

524

10

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e of

Tria

l :M

ater

ial C

ode

:Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Bat

ch T

ime

:B

atch

Siz

e (li

tres

) :

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)A

dmix

ture

(1)

Cem

ent

10

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

R-A

ir Te

sts

Con

trol

300

Car

diff

Uni

vers

ityS

2

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

e

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)

0/4m

m N

atur

al S

and

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

PC

4/20

mm

Gra

vel

Tarm

ac

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)

MA

TER

IALS

Cem

ent

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

0 m

l0

ml

0 m

l

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Rep

lace

men

t

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Cor

rect

ed

Tria

lTa

rget

Tria

lA

ctua

l

Com

men

ts:

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Age

at

Test

Test

Dat

eM

ax L

oad

(KN

)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Adm

ixw

eigh

t

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

Litr

es) =

Failu

reM

ode

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Bal

ance

Num

ber :

Mea

n D

ensi

ty (k

g/m³)

:

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :

S.S.

D.

kg/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ion

Labo

rato

ry N

ame

:

DL

Plas

tic D

ensi

tyTe

st

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Test

ed B

y

Yiel

d (%

) =

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (%

) =

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)W

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

DL

Pot N

umbe

r :

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Stre

ngth

N/m

m²)

DL

MP

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

030

0.0

3.00

3.00

00.

00.

000.

000.

200.

210

732.

110

75.1

10.7

510

.75

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

003.

003.

078

023

.480

3.4

8.03

8.03

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

0017

615

0.5

1.50

1.80

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

025

.55

2329

.00

23.2

923

.58

2358

.05

205.

05SS

DA

ctua

l29

.05

W/C

Rat

io0.

587

0.68

316

.50

Fine

s (%

) =42

.110

1.64

Slum

p Te

stSl

ump

Ret

entio

nTe

stM

ode

Valu

e(m

m)

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)C

oncr

ete

Den

sity

1N

orm

al65

1 H

our

Nor

mal

Mas

s (k

g)(k

g/m³)

2N

orm

al2

Hou

rsN

orm

alA

ctua

l23

.223

20M

ean

Slum

p Te

st65

Initi

al S

lum

p65

Cal

cula

ted

2358

.046

10A

ir Te

stM

eter

Num

ber

Kay

aA

ir C

onte

nt (%

)0.

29%

2320

11

19-N

ov-1

044

.724

202

725

-Nov

-10

148.

722

803

2816

-Dec

-10

305.

824

404

2816

-Dec

-10

295.

524

40

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

DL

Pot N

umbe

r :B

alan

ce N

umbe

r :M

ean

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

:

Stre

ngth

(N/m

m²)

Failu

reM

ode

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Lab

Ref

eren

ceM

ould

Num

ber

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heet

Cem

ex IC

R-a

ir te

sts

Dat

e of

Tria

l :18

-Nov

-10

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:K

ayas

and

100%

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

Cem

ent (

kg/m³)

:30

0Tr

ial M

ix R

ef :

Rep

lace

men

t (%

) :B

atch

Tim

e :

Labo

rato

ry N

ame

:B

atch

Siz

e (li

tres

) :10

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eC

emen

tP

CR

epla

cem

ent

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

lA

dmix

ture

Dos

age

(ml/5

0kg)

or S

olid

Mat

eria

ls(k

g)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Kay

asan

dC

R-C

-BS

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)A

dmix

ture

(1)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

lS

olid

s (k

g)0

ml

MA

TER

IALS

Agg

rega

teA

bsor

ptio

n%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ioC

orre

cte

dTr

ial

Targ

etTr

ial

Act

ual

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)A

dmix

wei

ght

Wat

erA

dmix

ture

(1)

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)S

olid

s (k

g)C

omm

ents

:C

orre

cted

Wei

ghts

(kg/

m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

Litr

es) =

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (%

) =Yi

eld

(%) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sa

ndy

/

Nor

mal

/

Sto

ney

Test

Plas

tic D

ensi

ty

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

DL

Age

at

Test

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Test

Dat

e

Test

ed B

y

DL

MP

Sand

from

Sur

plus

Qua

rry

Mat

eria

l

Qua

rterly

Rep

ort 3

May

201

1Re

port

no: 0

QR3

-SC

9086

-CF

Quarterly�Rep

ort�3

�May�2011�

Page�1�of�5

�

1.0�In

troduction�


ort�covers�the

�period�of�Feb

ruary�2011

�to�April�2011.�It�repo

rts�the�

work�that�has�been�pe

rformed

�to�date�and

�presents�results�from�a�series�of�m

ixes�

cast�using

�V7�feed

�material�in�the�same�pe

riod

.��

2.0�W

ork�perform

ed�to�date�



en�con

centrated�on

�establishing

�

and�pe

rforming�characterizatio

n�proced

ures�for�the

�fine�aggregate.�Trial�tests�have�

been

�pe

rformed

�on

�existin

g�Kayasand

�samples�and�

form

al�tests�

have�be

en�

performed

�on�a�range�of�the

�crusher�dust�samples�from�the

�quarries�participating�in�

the�project.�The

�crusher�dust�material�rep

resents�V7

�feed�material�and

�the

�purpo

se�

of�using

�the

�feed�material�is�to�id

entify�the�effect�the

�manufacturing

�process�has�on�

the�fresh�and�harden

ed�prope

rties�of�con

crete.�The

�activities�perform

ed�in�this�

period

�are�outlined

�in�fu

rthe

r�de

tail�be

low.�

2.1�New�coarse�and�fine�aggregate�

New

�stocks�of�coarse�and�fin

e�aggregate�were�de

livered

�and

�stored�in�the

�Schoo

l�of�

Engine

ering�to�ensure�the�availablility�of�sufficient�quantities�of�aggregate�from

�the

�

same�source�fo

r�the�du

ratio

n�of�the

�who

le�project.�This�redu

ces,�whe

re�possible,�any

�

variation�in�the

�con

trolled�parameters.�The

�coarse�aggregate�is�crushed

�lim

estone

�

4/14

�mm�w

ith�grading

�provide

d�in�App

endix�A.�It�is�sup

plied�by�Tarmac,�the�same�

supp

lier�as�the

�one

�used�previously�in

�the

�trial�m

ixes�detailed�in�Quarterly�Rep

orts�1�

and�2.�The

�fine�aggregate�is�0/4mm�dredged

�natural�sand�from

�the

�sam

e�supp

lier�as�

the�aggregate�previously�used�in�trial�m

ixes.�How

ever,�the�grading�of�the

�sand�has�

changed�since�the�trial�m

ixes,�p

robably�du

e�to�the

�change�in�dredging�site.�T

he�new

�

sand

�is�coarser�than

�the

�one

�used�previously�and

�its�grading

�is�also�provide

d�in�

App

endix�A.�

� 2.2�New�cement�

The�cemen

t�used

�in�previou

s�trial�m

ixes�was�bagged�32.5N�CEM

�II�w

ith�up�to�7%�of�

fly�ash�add

ition

�manufactured�by�Lafarge.�T

he�con

cern�was�that�the�fly

�ash�con

tent�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�3

�May�2011�

Page�2�of�6

�

could�be

�variable�therefore�affecting�the�harden

ed�and

�fresh�prop

ertie

s�of�con

crete.�

It�w

as�decided

�that�in�order�to�elim

inate�this�poten

tial�variation�CE

M�I�sho

uld�be

�

used

.�An�agreem

ent�with

�CEM

EX�w

as�m

ade�for�CE

M�I�52.5N

�cem

ent�de

liveries�in�

sealed

�buckets�in�shipmen

ts�of�15

0kg�according�to�the

�cem

ent�de

mand�for�the�

project.��

2.3�Control�trials�with�new�aggregate�and�cement�

Forty�litre�con

trol�m

ixes�were�made�with

�the

�new

�aggregate,�cem

ent�and�Taff’s�W

ell�

crushe

r�du

st.�It�was�observed�that�the

�usage�of�CE

M�I�and�ne

w�coarse�aggregate�in�

the�control�mix�yielded

�a�slump�of�50�mm�instead

�of�70mm�as�expe

cted

�from�the

�

slum

p�values�obsevred�du

ring

�the

�previou

s�trial�mixes.�Th

e�crushe

r�du

st�con

crete�

had�0m

m�slump�and�was�unw

orkable.�Two�po

tential�causes�were�iden

tified:�

1.Highe

r�fin

eness�and�lack�of�fly

�ash�particles�in�the

�CEM

�I�cem

ent�increased�

water�dem

and�and�de

creased�workability,�

2.The�absorptio

n�capacity�and

�moisture�conten

t�of�coarse�aggregate�was�not�

taken�into�accou

nt�in

�mix�design.�

In�order�to�address�the�first�point,�the

�impact�of�the�change�in

�cem

ent�on

�the

�fresh�

concrete�prope

rties�was�verified

�using

�two�10

�litre�mixes.�Th

e�CE

M�II�cemen

t�mix�

yielde

d�a�slightly�highe

r�slum

p�value�than

�the

�CEM

�I�cem

ent�mix.�How

ever,�it�was�

eviden

t�that�the

�loss�in

�the

�workability�of�the

�mix�cou

ld�not�be�attributed

�solely�to�

the�change�in

�cem

ent�type.��

In�the

�trial�m

ixes�the

�water�con

tent�and

�absorption�capacity�of�coarse�aggregate�was�

not�accoun

ted�for.�D

ue�to�the�storage�of�the

�coarse�aggregate�in�the

�con

crete�

labo

ratory�w

here�it�is�w

arm�and

�with

�sufficient�air�circulatio

n�the�aggregate�had�

become�extrem

ely�dry.�The

refore,�d

uring�mixing�a�significant�amou

nt�of�water�w

as�

absorbed

�by�the�aggregate�from

�the

�mix,�low

ering�the�effective�w/c�ratio.�T

his�was�

iden

tified�as�the

�cause�of�the�un

expe

cted

ly�lo

w�workability.�Thu

s,�it�was�decided

�to �

keep

�the

�aggregate�m

oist�and

�covered

�with

�a�jute�cloth�as�w

ell�as�determine�the�

water�con

tent�of�the

�aggregates�be

fore�m

ixing�and�accoun

t�for�the�moisture�conten

t�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�3

�May�2011�

Page�3�of�6

�

and�the�absorptio

n�capacity�of�the

�aggregate�by�adjusting�the�am

ount�of�w

ater�to�be

�

adde

d�to�th

e�mix.�

2.4�Aggregate�characterization�tests�

As�the�processed�material�from�Japan

�has�not�yet�been�de

livered

,�it�was�decided

�to�

use�crushe

r�du

sts�(0/4mm�feed�for�V7

�process)�from

�the

�quarries�involved

�in�the�

project.�The

se�w

ould�serve�as�controls�to�compare�the

�material�be

fore�and

�after�

processing

�as�well�as�bu

ild�up

�a�

database�of�variou

s�materials�and�

their�

correspo

nding�characteristics.�The

�crusher�dusts�and

�con

trol�sand�tested

�with

�the

ir�

correspo

nding�mix�designatio

ns/cod

es�are�sho

wn�be

low.�

Table�2.1.�Sou

rce�and�material�w

ith�correspon

ding

�cod

e.�

Source�

Code�

Tarm

ac,�Con

trol�dredged

�sand�

Control�

Cemex,�Taff’s�W

ell�crusher�dust�

CTͲBSͲC�

Cemex,�G

ilfach�crushe

r�du

st�

CGͲBSͲC�

AI,�Dun

tilland

�crusher�dust�

ADͲBSͲC�

AI,�Glensanda

�crusher�dust�

AGͲBSͲC�

� The�following�tests�were�pe

rformed

�on�the�crushe

r�du

sts�and�control�sand

,�the�

results�of�w

hich�are�given

�in�Table�2.2:�

1.Wet�sieving

�–(perform

ed�in�

the�

Hanson�

labo

ratory)�(graph

ical�results�in�

App

endix�A)�

2.Sand

�Equ

ivalen

t�test�

3.Absorption�capacity�and

�density�

4.Methylene

�Blue�test�according

�to�BS�EN

�933

Ͳ9�

5.Methylene

�Blue�test�–�m

etho

d�de

velope

d�by

�GRA

CE�

6.New

�Zealand

�flow

�con

e�(graph

ical�results�in

�App

endix�A)�

The�MBV

�test�is�a�test�indicatin

g�the�presen

ce�of�clay�m

ineralogy�in�a�given

�sam

ple.�

There�are�tw

o�differen

t�MBV

�tests.�O

ne�is�a�Europ

ean�Standard�test,�the

�other�has�

been

�develop

ed�by�GRA

CE�adm

ixtures.�The

�principle�of�ho

w�the

y�work�is�sim

ilar�–�

measuring

�the

�methylene

�blue�dye�absorptio

n�on

�a�m

aterial�surface.�How

ever,�the�

way�in�which�this�measuremen

t�is�perform

ed�is�differen

t.�The

�stand

ard�test�uses�

titratio

n�and�

human

�jud

gemen

t�is�involved�

in�the

�determination�

of�the

�test’s�

endp

oint,�w

hereas�the

�GRA

CE�test�calorimetrically�determines�the

�con

centratio

n�of�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�3

�May�2011�

Page�4�of�6

�

methylene

�blue�dye�which�is�left�after�the

�particle�surface�h

as�absorbe

d�it.�A

�

comparison�of�th

e�results�from

�the�tw

o�metho

ds�will�m

ade�at�th

e�en

d�of�th

e�project.�

Table�2.2�Sum

mary�of�characterization�test�results

Grading�

Control�

CTͲBSͲC�

AGͲBSͲC�

CGͲBSͲC�

ADͲBSͲC�

Coarse�

Sieve�size�(m

m)�

(%�

passing)�

(%�

passing)�

(%�

passing)�

(%�

passing)�

(%�

passing)�

(%�

passing)�

31.5�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

20�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

16�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

14�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

10�

100�

100�

100�

100�

100�

91�

8�10

0�10

0�10

0�10

0�10

0�37

�

6.3�

99�

100�

99�

100�

100�

8�

4�93

�94

�87

�99

�94

�3�

2�80

�71

�66

�81

�73

�2�

1�60

�54

�49

�64

�54

�2�

0.5�

37�

39�

35�

51�

41�

2�

0.25

�13

�28

�24

�38

�29

�1�

0.12

5�1�

19�

16�

26�

20�

1�

0.06

3�0�

12�

10�

18�

13�

1��

��

��

��

Sample�

Control�

CTͲBSͲC�

AGͲBSͲC�

CGͲBSͲC�

ADͲBSͲC�

Coarse�

Sand�Equivalen

t�test�

Awaitin

g�result�

65�

50�

27�

48�

Ͳ�

��

��

��

�

Sample�

Control�

CTͲBSͲC�

AGͲBSͲC�

CGͲBSͲC�

ADͲBSͲC�

Coarse�

Water�ab

sorption�W

A24,�

%�

1.04

�1.09

�0.58

�1.53

�1.92

�0.79

�

Particle�density�on�SSD

�basis,�M

g/m

3�

2.66

�2.83

�2.64

�2.68

�2.89

�2.70

�

Particle�density�on�an�

ovenͲdried�basis,�M

g/m

3�

2.63

�2.79

�2.62

�2.64

�2.83

�2.68

�

Apparan

t�particle�

den

sity,�M

g/m

3 �2.71

�2.88

�2.66

�2.76

�3.00

�2.73

�

��

��

��

�

NZ�Flow�Cone�

Control�

CTͲBSͲC�

AGͲBSͲC�

CGͲBSͲC�

ADͲBSͲC�

Coarse�

Voids,�%�

37.89%

�41.19%

�42.40%

�45.94%

�45.73%

�Ͳ�

Flow�time,�sec�

20.9�

32.4�

29.1�

28.6�

36.7�

Ͳ��

��

��

��

Sample�

Control�

CTͲBSͲC�

AGͲBSͲC�

CGͲBSͲC�

ADͲBSͲC�

Coarse�

BS�EN

�933Ͳ9�M

B�value,�

gram

s�of�d

ye�per�

kilogram

�of�the�0/2�m

m�

fraction�

0.34

�0.43

�0.77

�2.58

�5.36

�Ͳ�

GRACE�MBV�TEST�RESULT�

0/2�m

m�fraction�

0.35

�0.67

�0.94

�3.9�

6.16

�Ͳ�

�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�3

�May�2011�

Page�5�of�6

�

2.5

Control�m

ixes�with�crusher�dust

Concrete�m

ade�with

�crusher�dust�as�a�rep

lacemen

t�for�natural�sand

�resulted�in�

unworkable�and�zero�slump�mixtures.�The

refore,�it�was�decided

�to�prep

are�mixtures�

with

�add

ition

al�w

ater�w

hich�w

ould�give�70

�±10

�mm�slump,�the

�sam

e�as�for�the

�

control�natural�sand�mixture.��

The�additio

nal�water�req

uiremen

t�was�determined

�in�sm

all�10

�litre�mixes�to�avoid�

the�longer�m

ixing�tim

es�associated�with

�the

�40�litre�batches.�In�the

se�m

ixtures�the�

water�con

tent�and

�absorption�capacity�of�fin

e�and�coarse�aggregate�w

as�taken

�into�

accoun

t,�allowing�w/c�ratios�to�be�precisely�calculated

.�This�signifie

d�that�a�tim

e�

consuiming�trial�a

nd�error�app

roach�to�prepare�40�litre�batches�w

ith�the

�sam

e�w/c�

ratio

s�and�workability�could�be

�avoided

.��

The�acqu

ired

�data�will�be�used

�later�to�com

pare�and

�evaluate�the�influ

ence�of�the

�V7�

process�on

�spe

cific�rock�type

s.�M

ix�designs�and

�correspon

ding

�fresh�and

�harde

ned�

prop

ertie

s�can�be

�fou

nd�in

�App

endix�B.�The

�following�tests�were/will�be�carried�ou

t�

on�fresh�and�harden

ed�con

crete�prop

ertie

s:�

1.Slum

p�2.

Air�entrapm

ent��

3.Fresh�de

nsity

�4.

Compressive�stren

gth�–�1,7,28

�days�

5.Flexural�stren

gth�–�28

�days.�

� Three�mixes�have�be

en�perform

ed�using

�the

�crusher�dust�from

�Taffs�W

ell�(CT

ͲBSͲC),�

Glensanda

�(AGͲBSͲC)�and

�Dun

tiland�(ADͲBSͲC)�quarries.�All�three�mixes�are�awaitin

g�

final�results�and

�an�additio

nal�tw

o�mixes�w

ill�be�cast�in�ne

ar�future�to�include

�the

�

control�mix�and

�the

�Gilfach�qu

arry.�The�mix�propo

rtions�used�in�the

�mixes,�alon

g�

with

�the

�results�obtaine

d�to�date�are�provided

�in�full�in�App

endix�B.�It�is�difficult�at�

this�stage

�to�draw

�any�com

parisons�between�the�results�from�the

�mixes�as�in�order�

to�con

trol�the


�mix,�the�water/cem

ent�ratio

�is�altered�for�each�

crushe

r�du

st�m

aterial.�The�magnitude

�of�this�alte

ratio

n�will�be�highly�dep

ende

nt�on�

the�absorptio

n�characterisics�of�the

�crusher�dust,�the

�grading

�of�the

�crusher�dust�and�

on�the

�shape

�of�the�crushe

r�du

st�particles�which�in

�turn�is�highly�de

pend

ent�on

�the

�

behaviou

r�of�ind

ividual�rock�types�during�the�qu

arry�crushing�process.�The

�most�

useful�com

parison�to�m

ake�will�be�be

tween�the�crushe

r�du

st�m

ix�results�and

�the

�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�3

�May�2011�

Page�6�of�6

�

results�from�the

�mixes�m

ade�with

�the

�sam

e�rock�type�V7�prod

uct.�This�will�only�be

�

possible�once�the�V7

�material�for�each�qu

arry�has�been�de

livered

�and

�processed

�in�

the�Cardiff�Schoo

l�of�E

ngineering.��

� 3.Future�work�

The�plan

�for�the

�next�qu

arter�is�to�carry�ou

t�all�the

�crusher�dust�testing�be

fore�the

�

Kayasand

�V7�material�arrives.�O

nce�the�V7

�material�has�arrived

�it�will�be�processed�in�

the�Scho

ol�of�E

ngineering

�using

�the�characterisatio

n�tests�that�have�be

en�establishe

d�

and�mixed

�using

�con

stant�w

/c�ratios�as�iden

tified�in�th

e�prelim

inary�mixes.�

�

Quarterly�Report�3�May�2011�


Appendix�A�–�Characterisation�Results�

�

Figure�A1.�Aggregate�particle�size�distribution�and�recommended�grading�envelopes�for�UK�by�PD�6682Ͳ1:2009�in�GF85�category

Quarterly�Report�3�May�2011�


�

Figure�A2.�NZ�Flow�cone�results�and�specification�envelope

Quartely�Re

port�3�M

ay�201

1

Appendix�B�M

ix�Details�and�Compressive�Strength�Results

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

030

0.0

12.0

012

.00

00.

00.

000.

000.

791.

700.

910

739.

810

82.8

43.3

143

.31

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

001.

923.

501.

678

012

.379

2.3

31.6

931

.69

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

0017

615

3.9

6.16

9.53

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

022

.09

2329

.00

93.1

696

.53

2413

.34

260.

34SS

DA

ctua

l84

.34

W/C

Rat

io0.

587

0.86

947

.92

Fine

s (%

) =42

.198

.21

Slum

p Te

st

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)C

oncr

ete

Den

sity

1N

orm

al60

Mas

s (k

g)(k

g/m³)

2N

orm

al60

Act

ual

18.9

615

2370

.188

22.9

04M

ean

Slum

p Te

st60

Cal

cula

ted

19.3

124

13.3

388

Air

Test

3.94

25M

eter

Num

ber

Kay

a23

70.1

88A

ir C

onte

nt (%

)0.

19%

11

26-M

ay-1

163

.26.

32N

orm

al23

612

126

-May

-11

64.5

6.45

Nor

mal

2369

.53

126

-May

-11

616.

1N

orm

al23

534

75

76

77

288

289

2810 11 12 13 14 15

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

MP

MP

Lab

Ref

eren

ce

Pot M

ass

:M

ean

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

:

Mou

ldN

umbe

rA

ge a

tTe

stTe

stD

ate

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Test

ed B

y

MP

Stre

ngth

N/m

m²)

Plas

tic D

ensi

tyTe

stP

ot +

co

ncre

te(k

g)

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Failu

reM

ode

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts: H

igh

wat

er d

eman

dC

orre

cted

Wei

ghts

(kg/

m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

0 m

l

Cor

rect

edk g

/m³

Tria

lTa

rget

Tria

lA

ctua

lM

ATE

RIA

LSA

ggre

gate

Abs

orpt

ion

%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ion

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Dun

tilan

d

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Cru

sher

Dus

tA

I

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

lC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(2)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eC

emen

tP

CR

epla

cem

ent

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:R

epla

cem

ent (

%) :

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Car

diff

Uni

vers

ityB

atch

Siz

e (li

tres

) :40

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

S2

Con

cret

e M

ix W

orks

heet

Dat

e of

Tria

l :19

-May

-11

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:C

rush

er D

ust 1

00%

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

AD

-BS

-CC

emen

t (kg

/m³)

:30

0

Page�B1�of�3

Qua

rterly

Rep

ort 3

May

201

1

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

030

0.0

12.0

012

.00

00.

00.

000.

000.

791.

150.

410

733.

910

76.9

43.0

743

.07

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

001.

091.

190.

178

00.

878

0.8

31.2

331

.23

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

0017

617

1.4

6.85

8.58

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

04.

6423

29.0

093

.16

94.8

923

72.1

421

9.14

SSD

Act

ual F

re43

.14

W/C

Rat

io0.

587

0.73

124

.51

Fine

s (%

) =42

.110

1.30

Slum

p Te

st

Test

Mod

eVa

lue

(mm

)C

oncr

ete

Den

sity

1N

orm

al80

Mas

s (k

g)(k

g/m³)

2N

orm

al80

Act

ual

19.2

2424

0323

.166

5M

ean

Slum

p Te

st80

Cal

cula

ted

18.9

823

72.1

438

Air

Test

3.94

25M

eter

Num

ber

Kay

a24

03A

ir C

onte

nt (%

)0.

70%

11

20-M

ay-1

110

510

.5N

orm

al23

942

120

-May

-11

100.

110

.01

Nor

mal

2391

31

20-M

ay-1

198

.69.

86N

orm

al23

834

726

-May

-11

273.

227

.32

Nor

mal

2420

57

26-M

ay-1

126

6.9

26.6

9N

orm

al24

156

726

-May

-11

273.

127

.31

Nor

mal

2421

728

828

928

10 11 12 13 14 15

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

SD

SD

MP

SD

MP

Lab

Ref

eren

ce

Pot M

ass

:M

ean

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

:

Mou

ldN

umbe

rA

ge a

tTe

stTe

stD

ate

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Test

ed B

y

MP

Stre

ngth

N/m

m²)

Plas

tic D

ensi

tyTe

stP

ot +

co

ncre

te(k

g)

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Failu

reM

ode

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e:

Sto

ney

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts:M

ix a

ppea

rs w

ater

y, li

ttle

blee

ding

in m

olds

, wor

kabi

lity

ok, f

inis

hing

w

ell

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

0 m

l

Cor

rect

edk g

/m³

Tria

lTa

rget

Tria

lA

ctua

lM

ATE

RIA

LSA

ggre

gate

Abs

orpt

ion

%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

k g/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ion

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Taff'

s W

ell

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Cru

sher

Dus

tC

EM

EX

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

lC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(2)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eC

emen

tP

CR

epla

cem

ent

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:R

epla

cem

ent (

%) :

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Car

diff

Uni

vers

ityB

atch

Siz

e (li

tres

) :40

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

S2

Con

cret

e M

ix W

orks

heet

Dat

e of

Tria

l :19

-May

-11

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:C

rush

er D

ust 1

00%

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

CT-

BS

-CC

emen

t (kg

/m³)

:30

0

Pag

e B

2 of

3

Quarterly�Rep

ort�3

�May�201

1

S.G

Tota

lFr

ee%

%30

030

0.0

12.0

012

.00

00.

00.

000.

000.

791.

700.

910

739.

810

82.8

43.3

143

.31

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

000.

582.

001.

478

011

.179

1.1

31.6

431

.64

0.0

00.

00.

00.

000.

0017

615

5.2

6.21

8.70

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

TOTA

LS23

29.0

020

.84

2329

.00

93.1

695

.65

2391

.34

238.

34SS

DA

ctua

l62

.34

W/C

Rat

io0.

587

0.79

535

.42

Fine

s (%

) =42

.197

.77

Slum

p Te

st

Test

Mod

eVa

lue(

mm

)C

oncr

ete

Den

sity

1N

orm

al60

Mas

s (k

g)(k

g/m³)

2N

orm

al70

Act

ual

18.7

0523

38.1

2522

.647

5M

ean

Slum

p Te

st65

Cal

cula

ted

19.1

323

91.3

48

Air

Test

3.94

25M

eter

Num

ber

Kay

a23

38.1

25A

ir C

onte

nt (%

)0.

50%

11

27-M

ay-1

186

.48.

64N

orm

al23

15.5

21

27-M

ay-1

185

8.5

Nor

mal

2301

31

27-M

ay-1

187

.68.

76N

orm

al22

974

75

76

77

288

289

2810 11 12 13 14 15

Wor

ked

Car

ried

Out

By

:-W

orke

d C

heck

ed O

ut B

y :-

Dat

e :-

Dat

e :-

AG

-BS

-C 3

MP

AG

-BS

-C 2

MP

Lab

Ref

eren

ce

Pot M

ass

:M

ean

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

:

Mou

ldN

umbe

rA

ge a

tTe

stTe

stD

ate

Max

Loa

d(K

N)

Den

sity

(kg/

m³)

Test

ed B

y

AG

-BS

-C 1

MP

Stre

ngth

N/m

m²)

Plas

tic D

ensi

tyTe

stP

ot +

co

ncre

te(k

g)

Pot V

olum

e (li

tres

) :

Failu

reM

ode

Diff

eren

ce fr

om T

arge

t (Li

tres

) =D

iffer

ence

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d (%

) =

Con

cret

e A

ppea

ranc

e: R

ocky

Adm

ixw

eigh

tW

ater

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)A

dmix

ture

(2)

Sol

ids

(kg)

Com

men

ts: h

ard

to fi

nish

Cor

rect

ed W

eigh

ts (k

g/m³)

=C

orre

cted

Wat

er (L

/m³)

=

Cem

ent

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(1)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (2

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (2

)

0 m

l

Cor

rect

edkg

/m³

Tria

lTa

rget

Tria

lA

ctua

lM

ATE

RIA

LSA

ggre

gate

Abs

orpt

ion

%

Agg

rega

te M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

S.S.

D.

kg/m

³M

oist

ure

Cor

rect

ion

Sol

ids

(kg)

0 m

lA

dmix

ture

(2)

0 m

l

Adm

ixtu

reD

osag

e (m

l/50k

g)or

Sol

id M

ater

ials

(kg)

Gle

nsan

da

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Cru

sher

Dus

tA

I

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te (1

)4/

20m

m G

rave

lC

oars

e A

ggre

gate

(2)

Fine

Agg

rega

te (1

)

Bas

ic M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eC

emen

tP

CR

epla

cem

ent

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:R

epla

cem

ent (

%) :

Bat

ch T

ime

:La

bora

tory

Nam

e :

Car

diff

Uni

vers

ityB

atch

Siz

e (li

tres

) :40

Targ

et C

onsi

sten

ce :

S2

Con

cret

e M

ix W

orks

heet

Dat

e of

Tria

l :26

-May

-11

Mix

Des

crip

tion

:C

rush

er D

ust 1

00%

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

AG

-BS

-CC

emen

t (kg

/m³)

:30

0

Page�B3�of�3

Sand

from

Sur

plus

Qua

rry

Mat

eria

l

Qua

rterly

Rep

ort 4

Augu

st 2

011

Repo

rt no

: 0Q

R4-S

C90

86-C

F

Quarterly�Rep

ort�4

�August�2

011�

Page�2�of�3

�

1.0�In

troduction�


ort�covers�the

�period�of�M

ay�2011�to�August�2011.�It�repo

rts�the�work�that�has�

been

�perform

ed�to�date�on�a�series�of�m

ixes�cast�using�basalt�and�granite

�Kayasand�received

�from

�

Japan�du

ring

�the�pe

riod

�of�this�qu

arterly�repo

rt.��

2.0�W

ork�perform

ed�to�date�


�main�thrust�of�work�has�concerne

d�the�full�scale�testing�of�basalt�and�

granite


�from

�Japan.�M

oreo

ver,�crusher�dusts�from

�all�qu

arries�that�form

�part�of�

this�research�project�have�been�characterised�and�cast�in�concrete�to�en

able�the

�effect�of�the

�

Kayasand

�manufacturing

�process�on�the�fresh�and�harden

ed�prope

rties�of�the

�con

crete�to�be�

establishe

d.�All�mixes�were�cast�using

�cem

ent�conten

ts�of�30

0�kg/m

3 �with

�con

stant�workability�of�

S2�slump.

The�initial�delay�in

�Kayasand�material�d

elivery�to�Cardiff�University

�allowed

�the

��literature�review

�

of�usage�of�manufactured�sand

s�in�con

crete�to�be�completed

�(see�App

endix�A).�This�lite

rature�

review

�will�fo

rm�one

�of�the

�chapters�of�th

e�Ph

D�th

esis.�

Upo

n�de

livery�of�Glensanda

�(granite

) �and�Dun

tilland

�(basalt)�Kayasands�a�full�range�of�plann

ed�

aggregate�characterisatio

n�tests�were�pe

rformed

.�Fine

�aggregate�particle�size�distribu

tions�w

ere�

determ

ined

�by�wet�sieving

�in�the�Hanson�labo

ratory�w

hereas�the

�rem

aind

er�of�the�tests�were�

carried�ou

t�in�Cardiff�University

’s�con

crete�labo

ratory.�Th

e�results�w

ill�be�presen

ted�in�the

�next�

quarterly�repo

rt.��

One

�of�the�initial�objectiv

es�of�the�expe

rimen

tal�w

ork�was�to�de

term

ine�the�effect�of�the�use�of�

Kayasand

�on�the�strength�of�con

crete�whilst�maintaining

�the�same�mix�propo

rtions�fo

r�all�con

crete�

mixes�cast.�This�involved

�maintaining

�the

�sam

e�water/cem

ent�ratio

�whilst�simply�repo

rting�the�

resulting


�con

crete.�H

owever,�after�a�nu

mbe

r�of�Kayasand�and�natural�sand

�

(con

trol)�mixes�were�made�with

�300

�kg/m3�cemen

t�it�was�quickly�evide

nt�that�the�water�dem

and�

for�each�of�the�Kayasand

s�was�highe

r�than

�for�natural�sand�as�w

ell�as�differing�be

tween�the�

Kayasand

s,�w

ith�basalt�sand

�displaying�a�the�highest�water�dem

and�of�all�sand

s.�This�suggested�

that�it�w

as�going

�to�extrem

ely�difficult�to�obtain�workable�concrete�m

ixtures�maintain�the�same�

w/c�ratios�with

out�introdu

cing

�som

e�changes�in�th

e�mix�design.�

Expe

rt�con

sulta

tion�was�sou

ght�from

�AI�a

nd�Grace,�w

ho�suggested

�changes�in

�mixture�design�by

�

increasing

�the

�cem

ent�conten

t�and�changing

�the

�fine�to�coarse�aggregate�ratio

.�After�ano

ther�set�

Quarterly�Rep

ort�4

�August�2

011�

Page�3�of�3

�

of�trial�m

ixes�and

�a�visit�to�the

�Grace�R&D�lab�in�UK�the�mix�design�was�changed

�and

�the

�existing�

mostly

�single�sized�14mm�coarse�aggregate�replaced

�with

�a�con

tinuo

usly�grade

d�4�to�20�mm.�The

�

change�in�aggregates�w

as�justified�by

�a�trial�w

ith�plasticizer�–�the

�con

crete�mixture�w

ith�single�

sized�aggregate�resulte

d�in�a�m

ixture�w

hich�w

as�“harsh”�and

�difficult�to�w

ork�with

.�Therefore,�a�

coarse�aggregate�of�continuo

us�particle�size�distribu

tion�was�con

side

red�to�be�more�suita

ble�for�

the�

programme�

keep

ing�in�m

ind�

that�the

�secon

d�ph

ase�

of�con

crete�

testing�wou

ld�include

�

admixtures.�

The�changes�in� m

ix�design�and�ne

w�coarse�aggregate�lowered

�the

�water�dem

ands�for�all�sand

s,�

but�it�was�clear�that�it�wou

ld�be�im

possible�to�achieve�eq

ual�w

/c�ratios�for�all�sands,�the

refore,�a

�

new�app

roach�was�con

side

red�as�sum

marised

�below

:�

1.For�each�quarry�a�concrete�m

ixture�with

�350

�kg/m

3 �cem

ent�con

tent�and

�Kayasand�+�pred

uster�

A�(u

sually�2Ͳ�3

%�fine

s)�is�m

ade�with

�target�slump�of�70�mm.�The

�w/c�ratio�of�that�m

ix�is�

recorded

.�

2.The�rest�of�the

�Kayasand�mixes�fo

r�that�quarry�are�mixed

�with

�the�recorded

�w/c�ratio�and

�

tested

�for�fresh�and�harden

ed�prope

rties.�

3.A�natural�sand�mix�(con

trol�m

ix�1)�w

ith�th

e�recorded

�w/c�is�m

ade�and�tested

.�

4.An�additio

nal�natural�sand�mix�(con

trol�m

ix�2)�w

ith�a�ta

rget�slump�of�70�mm�is�m

ade�and�

tested

.�

� 3.0�Future�work�

The�plan

�for�the

�next�qu

arter�is�to�process�all�of�the

�fresh�and

�harde

ned�concrete�results�for�

presen

tatio

n�in�a�con

ference�pape

r.��

� �

Sand

from

Sur

plus

Qua

rry

Mat

eria

l

Qua

rterly

Rep

ort 5

Dece

mbe

r 201

1Re

port

no: 0

QR5

-SC

9086

-CF

Quarterly�Rep

ort�5

�Decem

ber�2011

�

Page�2�of�3

�

1.�Introduction�


ort�covers�the

�period�of�Sep

tembe

r�2011

�to�Novem

ber�2011.�It�rep

orts�the

�

results�of�the

�work�that�has�been�pe

rformed

�to�date�on�basalt�and�granite


�from

�

Japan�du

ring

�the�pe

riod

�of�Q

R4.��

2.�W

ork�perform

ed�to�date�

2.1�Conference�Pap

er�

� In�this�last�quarter�the


en�con

cerned

�with

�the

�processing�of�the

�fresh�

and�harden

ed�con

crete�results�from�the

�Granite�and

�Basalt�Kaysand�mixes.�These�have�been�

incorporated

�into�a�conferen

ce�paper�entitled

�“Manufactured�sand

�for�a�low

�carbo

n�era”�to�be

�

presen

ted�

at�the

�201

2�Co

nferen

ce�o

n�“Con

crete�for�a�low�C

arbo

n�Era”,�on

e�of�the

�largest�

international�con

crete�conferen

ces�ho

sted

�by�the�Co

ncrete�Techn

ology�Unit�at�the

�University

�of�

Dun

dee.�The

�con

ference�pape

r�in�App

endix�A�provide

s�a�succinct�sum

mary�of�the

�testin

g�and�

results�to

�date.�

2.2�Further�Laboratory�Tests �

The�differen

ces�in�the

�water�dem

and�that�were�highlighted

�in�the

�last�quarterly�rep

ort�have�been�

attributed

�to�the�clay�con

tent�of�Dun

tilland

�basalt�sand

�as�indicated�by�high�MBV

�value

s�from

�the

�

aggregate�

testing�

results�a

s�well�as�d

ifferen

ces�in�shape

�of�the�

aggregates.�A�n

umbe

r�of�

exploratory�labo

ratory� tests�have�be

en�perform

ed�to�investigate�de

activation�of�the

�clay�conten

t�

and�these�are�still�ongoing.��

2.3�Visits�to�Project�Partners�

A�num

ber�of�site

�visits�have�be

en�con

ducted

�since�the

�con

crete�testing�work�was�com

pleted

�in�

August�2

011:�

xVisit�to�CEM

EX�Rugby�plant�to�familiarize�with

�cem

ent�manufacturing

�and

� meet�with

�

peop

le�working

�in�th

e�particular�field.�

xVisit�to�Aggregate�In

dustries�R&D�lab�in�Derby�to�discuss�and�share�op

inions�and

�results�on�

the�progress�of�the

�project,�testin

g�and�mixing�metho

ds.�

xVisit�to�Grace�Con

struction�Prod

ucts�R&D�lab�in�Poland,�Poznan.�Aim

ed�as�an

�introd

uctio

n�

into�adm

ixtures�and �their�usage�in�con

crete,�te

sting,�quality�control,�do

sages�etc.��

Quarterly�Rep

ort�5

�Dec�2011�

Page�3�of�3

�

The�know

ledge�gained

�from

�the�visit�to�the�Grace�labo

ratory�will�allow�th

e�use�of�adm

ixtures�to�be�

explored

�with

in�this�project.�It�is�evide

nt�from�the

�results�presented

�in�the

�con

ference�pape

r�that�

Kayasand

�can

�be�successfully�used�in�con

crete�with

out�the�use�of�adm

ixtures,�how

ever,�it�is�rare�in

�

practice�that�con

crete�wou

ld�be�made�with

out�admixtures.�It�is�the

refore�impo

rtant�for�future�

commercial�viability�to�u

nderstand�

and�

iden

tify�the�po

tential�interaction�

betw

een�

the�sand

,�

admixtures�and�clay�deͲactiv

ators.�

3.�Future�Plans��

The�plan

�for�the

�next�qu

arter�is�to�repe

at�the

�establishe

d�labo

ratory�procedu

res�and�tests�on

�the

�

Gilfach�and�Taffs�Well�K

ayasand�samples�w

hen�they�are�received�midͲJanuary�2012.�Further�lo

ng�

term

�plans�which�will�enable�additio

nal�acade

mic�pub

lication�of�th

e�work�also�includ

e:

1.Co

ncrete�m

ixes�with

�adm

ixtures:�testin

g�all �available�sand

s�and�preͲdu

sters�with

�w/c�ratio�

of�0.55�with

�various�W

ater�Red

ucing�Agents�(W

RDA)�9

0�do

sages�to�obtain�S2�slump�aiming�

at�70�mm.�

2.Shape�and�texture�stud

y:�analysis�of�differen

t�gradings,�shape

s�and�textures�using

�optical�

microscop

e,�New

�Zealand

�flow

�con

e,�and

�Mini�m

ortar�slum

p�tests�with

� con

stant�w

/c�ratio.�

3.MBV

�and

�clay�inhibitor�stud

y:�te

sting�MBV

�and

�mini�m

ortar�slum

p�of�treated�and�un

treated�

sand

s.�

� � � � � � � � � � � � � �

Quarterly�Rep

ort�5

�Dec�2011�

Appendix�A�–�Conference�Pap

er�Dundee�2012�

MA

NU

FAC

TUR

ED S

AN

D F

OR

A L

OW

CA

RBO

N E

RA

M

. Pile

gis*

, D.R

. Gar

dner

and

R.J

. Lar

k,C

ardi

ff U

nive

rsity

Key

wor

ds: m

anuf

actu

red

sand

, con

cret

e, sa

nd re

plac

emen

t, w

orka

bilit

y, st

reng

th

Abs

trac

t

In 2

000

the

Wel

sh A

ssem

bly

ackn

owle

dged

the

need

to fi

nd a

sust

aina

ble

use

for t

he g

row

ing

stoc

k pi

les

of c

rush

er f

ines

in

Wal

es,

and

com

mis

sion

ed r

esea

rch

into

the

ir us

e as

a

repl

acem

ent f

or n

atur

al s

and

in c

oncr

ete.

Thi

s st

udy

conc

lude

d th

at c

rush

er fi

nes

wer

e no

t a

suita

ble

repl

acem

ent f

or n

atur

al s

and

in c

oncr

ete

due

to th

eir i

ncon

sist

ent g

radi

ng a

nd a

lack

of

par

ticle

s in

the

0.3

to 1

mm

rang

e. N

ew m

etho

ds o

f man

ufac

turin

g sa

nd a

re n

ow a

vaila

ble

whi

ch c

an m

ore

accu

rate

ly c

ontro

l th

e sa

nd p

artic

le s

ize,

sha

pe a

nd g

rada

tion

incl

udin

g pa

rticl

es in

the

usua

lly d

efic

ient

rang

e. T

here

fore

a st

udy

has b

een

laun

ched

to in

vest

igat

e th

e su

itabi

lity

of th

is m

anuf

actu

red

sand

for u

se in

con

cret

e ap

plic

atio

ns.

Con

cret

e th

at in

corp

orat

es s

and

man

ufac

ture

d fr

om q

uarr

y w

aste

is a

maj

or d

evel

opm

ent i

n ac

hiev

ing

a su

stai

nabl

e co

nstru

ctio

n m

ater

ial.

How

ever

, the

cha

ract

eris

tics

of m

anuf

actu

red

fine

aggr

egat

es a

re d

iffer

ent t

o th

ose

of n

atur

al s

ands

and

thei

r eff

ects

on

the

perf

orm

ance

of

conc

rete

are

not

ful

ly u

nder

stoo

d. T

he m

ost

com

mon

iss

ues

asso

ciat

ed w

ith m

anuf

actu

red

sand

s ar

e po

or s

hape

, gra

datio

n, a

nd th

e qu

antit

y an

d qu

ality

of f

iller

mat

eria

l. To

inve

stig

ate

the

effe

cts o

f the

se a

nd o

ther

par

amet

ers a

test

pro

gram

me

has b

een

unde

rtake

n.

Labo

rato

ry te

sts

have

bee

n us

ed to

eva

luat

e th

e m

iner

alog

ical

and

phy

sica

l cha

ract

eris

tics

of

a ra

nge

of q

uarr

y w

aste

san

ds. C

oncr

ete

mix

es w

ith 1

00%

repl

acem

ent o

f nat

ural

san

d ha

ve

been

use

d to

com

pare

and

cor

rela

te th

e ch

arac

teris

tics

of th

ese

sand

s w

ith th

e be

havi

our

of

fres

h an

d ha

rden

ed c

oncr

ete.

Thi

s pap

er d

escr

ibes

the

met

hodo

logy

of t

his s

tudy

, pre

sent

s the

re

sults

and

dis

cuss

es th

e si

gnifi

canc

e of

the

findi

ngs

in th

e co

ntex

t of m

anuf

actu

red

sand

for

a lo

w c

arbo

n er

a.

INT

RO

DU

CT

ION

As

natu

ral r

esou

rces

of c

oncr

ete

aggr

egat

es a

re b

eing

dep

lete

d or

a re

sist

ance

to th

e us

age

of

dred

ged

sand

due

to e

nviro

nmen

tal c

once

rns

is m

et, a

n al

tern

ativ

e so

urce

of

fine

aggr

egat

e ha

s to

be

foun

d. O

ne s

uch

sour

ce is

cru

shed

rock

mat

eria

l fro

m s

tone

qua

rrie

s. H

owev

er, t

he

mat

eria

l pr

oduc

ed d

iffer

s in

cha

ract

eris

tics

from

nat

ural

san

ds.

The

maj

or d

iffer

ence

s ar

e sh

ape

and

text

ure,

gra

ding

and

am

ount

of

fine

fille

r. Th

ese

char

acte

ristic

s ca

n de

trim

enta

lly

affe

ct c

oncr

ete,

ther

efor

e m

anuf

actu

red

fine

aggr

egat

es a

re o

nly

relu

ctan

tly a

ccep

ted

with

in

the

indu

stry

[1].

The

man

ufac

ture

d fin

e ag

greg

ate

(MFA

) sha

pe is

typi

cally

hig

hly

angu

lar,

elon

gate

d or

flak

y.

This

cha

ract

eris

tic g

reat

ly in

fluen

ces

the

fres

h an

d th

eref

ore

hard

ened

pro

perti

es o

f con

cret

e.

MFA

shap

e de

pend

s on

the

pare

nt ro

ck a

nd to

larg

e ex

tent

on

the

crus

hing

met

hod

[2],

[3].

Typi

cal

parti

cle

size

di

strib

utio

n of

M

FA

or

“qua

rry

dust

” ra

rely

co

nfor

ms

to

the

requ

irem

ents

of n

atio

nal s

tand

ards

. The

se ty

pes

of a

ggre

gate

can

pro

duce

“ha

rsh”

mix

es w

ith

blee

ding

pro

blem

s if

it is

was

hed

and

scre

ened

to fa

ll w

ithin

the

pres

crib

ed li

mits

[1].

This

is

mai

nly

due

to a

n ex

cess

of

fine

parti

cles

pas

sing

the

63

mic

ron

siev

e an

d a

defic

ienc

y of

pa

rticl

es in

the

size

ran

ge 0

.3m

m to

1m

m. T

hus

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds

are

com

mon

ly u

sed

in

blen

ds w

ith f

ine

natu

ral

sand

s to

ove

rcom

e th

ese

shor

tcom

ings

and

min

imis

e th

e ne

gativ

e ef

fect

s on

fres

h an

d ha

rden

ed c

oncr

ete

prop

ertie

s.

An

alte

rnat

ive

to w

ashi

ng a

nd b

lend

ing

is re

proc

essi

ng th

e qu

arry

fine

s by

empl

oyin

g an

othe

r cr

ushe

r to

ref

ine

the

parti

cle

shap

e an

d si

ze d

istri

butio

n. F

urth

erm

ore,

if

the

clas

sific

atio

n pr

oces

s of t

he p

rodu

ct e

mpl

oys a

dry

inst

ead

of a

wet

syst

em th

en e

nviro

nmen

tal b

enef

its c

an

be g

aine

d. K

otob

uki

Engi

neer

ing

& M

anuf

actu

ring

Com

pany

(K

emco

), Ja

pane

se q

uarr

y in

dust

ry s

uppl

ier

has

deve

lope

d a

plan

t whi

ch in

corp

orat

es th

ese

feat

ures

, kno

wn

as th

e V

7 dr

y sa

nd m

anuf

actu

ring

syst

em.

Acc

ordi

ng to

Lus

ty, i

n 20

08 th

ere

wer

e ap

prox

imat

ely

50 V

7 pl

ants

in J

apan

acc

ount

ing

for

20%

of

Japa

n’s

sand

sup

ply

[4].

The

sand

has

bee

n no

ted

as “

exhi

bitin

g ex

celle

nt

char

acte

ristic

s in

con

cret

e as

a c

ompl

ete

repl

acem

ent f

or n

atur

al s

and.

Mor

eove

r it h

as b

een

repo

rted

that

the

shap

e of

the

parti

cles

is c

ubic

le e

ven

in th

e fin

e si

zes,

and

the

grad

atio

n ca

n be

adj

uste

d an

d he

ld a

t a

leve

l w

ithin

any

of

the

stan

dard

s se

t by

Am

eric

an S

ocie

ty f

or

Test

ing

and

Mat

eria

ls (A

STM

), Ja

pane

se S

tand

ards

(JIS

) or B

ritis

h St

anda

rds (

BS)

.”

In 2

000

the

Wel

sh A

ssem

bly

ackn

owle

dged

the

need

to fi

nd a

sust

aina

ble

use

for t

he g

row

ing

stoc

k pi

les

of c

rush

er f

ines

in

Wal

es,

and

com

mis

sion

ed r

esea

rch

into

the

ir us

e as

a

repl

acem

ent f

or n

atur

al sa

nd in

con

cret

e [1

]. Th

is st

udy

conc

lude

d th

at c

rush

er fi

nes w

ere

not

a su

itabl

e re

plac

emen

t for

nat

ural

sand

in c

oncr

ete

due

to th

eir i

ncon

sist

ent g

radi

ng a

nd a

lack

of

par

ticle

s in

the

0.3

to 1

mm

rang

e. N

ew m

etho

ds, i

nclu

ding

Kem

co’s

V7,

of m

anuf

actu

ring

sand

are

now

ava

ilabl

e w

hich

can

mor

e ac

cura

tely

con

trol t

he s

and

parti

cle

size

, sha

pe a

nd

grad

atio

n in

clud

ing

parti

cles

in

the

usua

lly d

efic

ient

ran

ge.

Ther

efor

e th

is s

tudy

has

bee

n la

unch

ed t

o in

vest

igat

e th

e su

itabi

lity

of t

his

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd f

or u

se i

n co

ncre

te

appl

icat

ions

in W

ales

and

the

UK

as a

100

% re

plac

emen

t for

nat

ural

sand

.

In th

is s

tudy

two

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds

of d

iffer

ent m

iner

alog

y pr

oduc

ed u

sing

the

V7

plan

t w

ere

cons

ider

ed. T

he re

sulti

ng c

onsi

sten

cy a

nd c

ompr

essi

ve s

treng

th o

f con

cret

e w

hen

sand

s w

ere

used

as 1

00%

repl

acem

ent f

or n

atur

al sa

nd is

pre

sent

ed.

V7

PLA

NT

Figu

re 1

V7

plan

t sim

plifi

ed d

iagr

am

The

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd u

sed

in th

is s

tudy

was

pro

duce

d us

ing

the

V7

plan

t. Fi

gure

1 s

how

s a

sim

plifi

ed s

etup

of

the

plan

t. Th

e fe

ed m

ater

ial f

or m

anuf

actu

ring

sand

is u

sual

ly a

0/8

mm

cr

ushe

r du

st w

ith a

wat

er c

onte

nt le

ss th

an 1

.5%

. It i

s fe

d to

a v

ertic

al s

haft

impa

ct (

VSI

) cr

ushe

r and

afte

rwar

ds s

epar

ated

usi

ng a

n ai

r scr

een.

Ove

rsiz

e an

d so

me

coar

ser p

artic

les

are

re-c

ircul

ated

, whi

le th

e re

quire

d pa

rticl

e si

zes,

are

deliv

ered

as

a pr

oduc

t whe

reas

mos

t of t

he

dust

is fe

d to

a “

skim

mer

”. T

he “

skim

mer

” se

para

tes

coar

ser p

artic

les

as w

ell a

s so

me

fille

r fr

om th

e du

st. T

he s

epar

ated

par

ticle

s kn

own

as a

pre

-dus

ter a

re a

dded

into

the

final

pro

duct

in

crea

sing

the

yie

ld,

allo

win

g co

ntro

l of

the

fin

es c

onte

nt a

s w

ell

as p

rovi

ding

usu

ally

de

ficie

nt 0

.3 to

1 m

m p

artic

les i

n th

e m

anuf

actu

red

sand

.

For t

he p

roje

ct a

t lea

st fo

ur sa

nd g

rada

tions

wer

e pr

oduc

ed fr

om e

ach

crus

her d

ust.

The

sand

s sl

ight

ly d

iffer

with

par

ticle

size

dis

tribu

tions

as s

how

n in

Tab

les 2

-4.

MA

TER

IALS

Cem

ent

The

cem

ent u

sed

was

CEM

I 52

.5 N

con

form

ing

to E

N 1

97-1

.

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te

The

coar

se a

ggre

gate

use

d w

as c

rush

ed li

mes

tone

4/2

0mm

and

its

parti

cle

size

dis

tribu

tion

is

show

n in

Tab

le 4

.

Fine

Agg

rega

te

In th

is st

udy

mar

ine

dred

ged

sand

was

use

d as

a c

ontro

l and

it is

den

oted

by

the

lette

r N in

the

tabl

es a

nd fi

gure

s in

this

pap

er.

The

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd w

as p

roce

ssed

fro

m 0

/8 m

m c

rush

er d

usts

take

n fr

om tw

o qu

arrie

s lo

cate

d in

UK

. O

ne q

uarr

y pr

oduc

es b

asal

t w

here

as t

he o

ther

pro

duce

s gr

anite

agg

rega

te.

Prop

ertie

s of t

he 0

/4m

m p

arts

of t

he c

rush

er d

usts

are

incl

uded

in T

able

s 1 -

3 fo

r com

paris

on

purp

oses

. In

all

tabl

es a

nd f

igur

es t

he b

asal

t cr

ushe

r du

st i

s de

note

d as

B-F

EED

and

the

gr

anite

as G

-FEE

D.

From

the

crus

her

dust

s fo

ur b

asal

t san

ds a

nd f

ive

gran

ite s

ands

with

diff

eren

t par

ticle

siz

e di

strib

utio

ns w

ere

prod

uced

. Bas

alt

sand

s ar

e de

note

d by

let

ter

B i

n th

e ta

bles

and

fig

ures

w

here

as g

rani

te s

ands

are

den

oted

by

lette

r G

. Fo

llow

ing

the

lette

r B

or

G i

ndic

atin

g th

e qu

arry

, the

sand

s are

furth

er d

enot

ed w

ith a

lette

rs A

to D

E (E

for g

rani

te sa

nd) d

epen

ding

on

the

sub

63 m

icro

n pa

rticl

e co

nten

t. Fo

r ex

ampl

e, B

-A i

s a

basa

lt sa

nd w

ith t

he l

east

fin

es

cont

ent,

whe

reas

B-D

is a

bas

alt s

and

with

the

high

est f

ines

con

tent

. Par

ticle

size

dis

tribu

tions

ar

e sh

own

in T

able

s 2 a

nd 3

.

The

fine

aggr

egat

e us

ed in

the

stud

y w

as c

hara

cter

ized

usi

ng th

e fo

llow

ing

stan

dard

test

s:- M

ethy

lene

blu

e te

st (M

BV

) acc

ordi

ng to

BS

EN 9

33-9

on

0/2m

m fr

actio

n - S

and

equi

vale

nt te

st (S

E) a

ccor

ding

to B

S EN

933

-8 o

n 0/

2mm

frac

tion

- Par

ticle

size

dis

tribu

tion

acco

rdin

g to

BS

EN 9

33-1

- P

artic

le d

ensi

ty a

nd w

ater

abs

orpt

ion

acco

rdin

g to

BS

EN 1

097-

6.

MB

V a

nd S

E te

sts

are

inte

nded

to a

sses

s if

ther

e ar

e po

tent

ially

del

eter

ious

fine

s e.

g. c

lays

in

the

fine

aggr

egat

e w

hich

cou

ld a

dver

sely

aff

ect

the

fres

h an

d ha

rden

ed p

rope

rties

of

the

conc

rete

.

In a

dditi

on to

the

abov

emen

tione

d te

sts t

he fo

llow

ing

fine

aggr

egat

e te

sts w

ere

also

use

d:

- New

Zea

land

Flo

w c

one

(NZF

C) a

ccor

ding

to N

ZS 3

111-

1986

-

Rap

id M

ethy

lene

blu

e te

st (

RM

BV

) de

velo

ped

by G

race

on

the

0/2m

m f

ract

ion

of t

he

sand

s.

The

NZF

C t

est

eval

uate

s sa

nd f

low

and

the

un-

com

pact

ed v

oids

rat

io. A

fix

ed v

olum

e of

sa

nd is

pas

sed

thro

ugh

a co

ne a

nd c

olle

cted

in a

con

tain

er o

f kno

wn

volu

me

whi

lst m

easu

ring

the

flow

tim

e. U

sing

the

dens

ity o

f the

san

d pa

rticl

es a

llow

s th

e un

-com

pact

ed v

oids

ratio

to

be c

alcu

late

d. T

he te

st r

esul

t is

affe

cted

by

the

grad

ing

of th

e sa

mpl

e, b

y th

e pa

rticl

e sh

ape

and

by th

e su

rfac

e te

xtur

e of

the

parti

cles

. The

flow

of t

he m

ater

ial i

s m

ostly

aff

ecte

d by

the

shap

e an

d su

rfac

e te

xtur

e of

the

par

ticle

s w

hile

the

voi

ds r

esul

t is

mos

tly i

nflu

ence

d by

gr

adin

g an

d sh

ape

[5].

Alth

ough

the

Brit

ish

Euro

pean

Sta

ndar

ds E

N 9

33-6

and

BS

EN 1

097-

6 ev

alua

te th

e flo

w ti

me

and

un-c

ompa

cted

voi

ds, t

hey

do n

ot p

rovi

de th

e op

portu

nity

to d

o th

at si

mul

tane

ousl

y.

The

NZF

C i

s a

rapi

d te

st t

hat

does

not

req

uire

sop

hist

icat

ed e

quip

men

t an

d ex

perie

nced

op

erat

or a

s op

pose

d to

vis

ual s

hape

and

text

ure

estim

atio

n te

chni

ques

. The

resu

lts a

re p

lotte

d on

the

diag

ram

sho

wn

in F

igur

e 2

with

refe

renc

e to

a s

tand

ard

enve

lope

ado

pted

by

the

New

Ze

alan

d au

thor

ities

, the

refo

re, t

he N

ZFC

test

was

ado

pted

in th

e st

udy.

The

RM

BV

test

eva

luat

es th

e sa

me

prop

ertie

s as t

he B

S EN

933

-9 M

BV

test

, how

ever

, usi

ng

a di

ffer

ent a

ppro

ach.

The

Brit

ish

Euro

pean

sta

ndar

d pr

oced

ure

dete

rmin

es th

e ab

sorp

tion

of

met

hyle

ne b

lue

dye

by c

onse

cutiv

ely

addi

ng a

dro

p of

the

dye

and

che

ckin

g fo

r th

e te

st’s

en

dpoi

nt.

The

endp

oint

of

the

test

is

dete

rmin

ed b

y dr

oppi

ng a

sm

all

amou

nt o

f th

e su

spen

sion

on

a fil

ter

pape

r un

til a

ligh

t blu

e ha

lo a

roun

d a

cent

ral d

epos

it is

obs

erve

d an

d th

is e

ndpo

int i

s ofte

n op

en to

inte

rpre

tatio

n.

The

RM

BV

test

elim

inat

es th

is p

robl

em a

s w

ell a

s re

duci

ng th

e te

stin

g tim

e. T

he te

st p

ortio

n is

mix

ed w

ith a

met

hyle

ne b

lue

solu

tion

of k

now

n co

ncen

tratio

n, s

hake

n fo

r a fi

xed

time

and

an a

liquo

t of t

he s

uspe

nsio

n is

filte

red.

Afte

rwar

ds a

kno

wn

volu

me

of th

e fil

trate

is d

ilute

d w

ith a

set

am

ount

of

wat

er a

nd a

pre

-cal

ibra

ted

colo

rimet

er i

s us

ed t

o es

timat

e th

e co

ncen

tratio

n of

the

sol

utio

n. T

his

allo

ws

dire

ct e

stim

atio

n of

the

abs

orbe

d am

ount

of

met

hyle

ne b

lue

solu

tion

elim

inat

ing

poss

ible

err

ors d

ue to

hum

an ju

dgem

ent.

The

RM

BV

test

was

use

d in

this

stu

dy to

com

pare

the

resu

lts o

btai

ned

by th

e tw

o m

etho

ds

and

eval

uate

the

feas

ibili

ty o

f the

new

met

hod.

Tabl

e 1

Fine

agg

rega

te te

st re

sults

SAM

PLE

MB

V,

g of

MB

so

lutio

npe

r kg

of sa

nd

RM

BV

, g

of M

B

solu

tion

per k

g of

sand

SEN

ZFC

VO

IDS,

%

NZF

CFL

OW

TIM

E,se

c

WA

24,

%U s

sd,

Mg/

m3

U rd,

Mg/

m3

U a,

Mg/

m3

N

0.24

0.

35

94

37.9

20

.9

1.04

2.

66

2.63

2.

71

G-F

EED

0.

77

0.94

50

42

.4

29.1

0.

58

2.64

2.

62

2.66

G

-A

0.39

0.

42

80

45.2

25

.3

0.58

2.

63

2.61

2.

65

G-B

0.

40

0.50

74

44

.6

24.4

G

-C

0.47

0.

71

71

43.7

23

.9

G-D

0.

50

0.88

70

43

.6

23.4

G

-E

0.63

0.

90

69

42.7

23

.9

B-F

EED

5.

36

6.16

48

45

.7

36.7

1.

92

2.89

2.

83

3.00

B

-A

2.10

2.

3 73

45

.8

25.7

1.67

2.

91

2.87

3.

01

B-B

2.

29

2.54

61

44

.5

23.2

B

-C

2.64

2.

97

60

43.7

22

.5

B-D

2.

90

3.75

58

43

.7

22.3

*

BS

EN 1

097-

6 te

st w

as c

arrie

d ou

t on

ly f

or m

anuf

actu

red

sand

s w

ith t

he l

owes

t fin

es

cont

ent a

s the

sub-

63 m

icro

n pa

rticl

es a

re w

ashe

d ou

t of t

he sa

mpl

e pr

ior t

o te

stin

g.

** W

A24

- w

ater

abs

orpt

ion

***U

ssd–

parti

cle

dens

ity o

n sa

tura

ted

surf

ace

dry

basi

s **

**U r

d - p

artic

le d

ensi

ty o

n ov

en d

ry b

asis

**

***U

a- ap

pare

nt p

artic

le d

ensi

ty

Tabl

e 2

Agg

rega

te p

artic

le si

ze d

istri

butio

n

SAM

PLE

D-F

EED

B-A

B

-B

B-C

B

-D

N

SIEV

E SI

ZE

mm

PER

CEN

T PA

SSIN

G B

Y M

ASS

8 10

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

0 6.

3 10

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

98.0

4

94.0

10

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

093

.0

2.8

86.0

99

.0

99.2

99

.3

99.3

87

.0

2 73

.0

88.0

90

.3

91.0

91

.4

82.0

1

54.0

56

.0

64.2

66

.4

67.7

61

.0

0.5

41.0

34

.0

44.9

48

.7

50.8

37

.0

0.25

29

.0

16.0

27

.1

32.2

34

.7

12.0

0.

125

20.0

4.

0 10

.9

15.9

18

.8

1.0

0.06

3 13

.0

1.0

2.9

5.1

7.4

1.0

Tabl

e 3

Agg

rega

te p

artic

le si

ze d

istri

butio

n co

ntin

ued

SAM

PLE

G

-FEE

DG

-A

G-B

G

-C

G-D

G

-E

SIEV

E SI

ZE

mm

PE

RC

ENT

PASS

ING

BY

MA

SS

8

100.

0 10

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

6.3

99

.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

0 4

87

.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

010

0.0

100.

0 2.

8

77.0

99

.0

99.1

99

.2

99.2

99

.2

2

66.0

90

.0

90.8

91

.8

92.1

92

.3

1

49.0

63

.0

65.7

69

.4

70.2

71

.1

0.5

35

.0

39.0

43

.2

48.9

50

.6

51.9

0.

25

24

.0

17.0

21

.9

29.1

31

.4

33.3

0.

125

16

.0

4.0

7.5

13.0

15

.6

17.8

0.

063

10

.0

2.0

2.8

5.1

6.5

9.0

Tabl

e 4

Agg

rega

te p

artic

le si

ze d

istri

butio

n co

ntin

ued

SAM

PLE

CA

SIEV

E SI

ZE m

mPE

RC

ENT

PASS

ING

BY

MA

SS

40

100

31.5

10

0 20

95

16

68

14

58

10

36

6.

3 16

4

6 2

5 0.

063

2

Figu

re 2

New

Zea

land

Flo

w C

one

resu

lts a

nd sp

ecifi

catio

n en

velo

pe

CO

NC

RE

TE

MIX

TU

RE

S

For e

ach

quar

ry a

tria

l mix

usi

ng 1

00%

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd w

ith a

fine

s con

tent

of 2

.8%

(G-B

or

B-B

) was

mad

e ad

just

ing

the

wat

er c

onte

nt to

reac

h a

slum

p of

80m

m. O

ther

mix

es o

f tha

t qu

arry

mat

eria

l wer

e m

ade

usin

g th

e es

tabl

ishe

d w

/c r

atio

. Ack

now

ledg

ing

the

fact

that

the

natu

ral s

and

has

diff

eren

t wat

er d

eman

d to

the

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd fo

r eac

h qu

arry

ther

e w

ere

two

cont

rol m

ixes

, the

firs

t with

80±

20m

m s

lum

p an

d th

e se

cond

with

the

sam

e w

/c ra

tio a

s us

ed in

the

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd m

ixtu

res.

The

slum

p co

ntro

l mix

ture

in th

is p

aper

is d

enot

ed

as N

whe

reas

the

othe

r con

trols

are

N-G

for t

he g

rani

te q

uarr

y an

d N

-B fo

r the

bas

alt q

uarr

y m

ixes

.

The

abso

rptio

n ca

paci

ty a

nd w

ater

con

tent

of

fine

and

coar

se a

ggre

gate

s w

ere

take

n in

to

cons

ider

atio

n an

d th

e m

ixtu

re’s

wat

er c

onte

nt w

as a

djus

ted

acco

rdin

gly

to m

aint

ain

the

w/c

ra

tio a

nd m

ixtu

re p

ropo

rtion

s, as

pre

sent

ed in

Tab

le 5

.

Tabl

e 5

Con

cret

e m

ixtu

re p

ropo

rtion

s at S

SD c

ondi

tions

MIX

CEM

kg/m

3C

Akg

/m3

FA kg/m

3W

ATE

Rkg

/m3

W/C

FA/

CA

FIN

ESC

ON

TEN

T %

of F

A

N

350

1040

75

3 16

7 0.

48

0.42

1.0

N-G

35

0 10

40

753

202

0.58

0.

421.

0 G

-A

350

1040

75

3 20

2 0.

58

0.42

2.0

G-B

35

0 10

40

753

202

0.58

0.

422.

8 G

-C

350

1040

75

3 20

2 0.

58

0.42

5.1

G-D

35

0 10

40

753

202

0.58

0.

426.

5 G

-E

350

1040

75

3 20

2 0.

58

0.42

9.0

N-B

35

0 10

40

753

234

0.67

0.

421.

0 B

-A

350

1040

75

3 23

4 0.

67

0.42

1.0

B-B

35

0 10

40

753

234

0.67

0.

422.

9 B

-C

350

1040

75

3 23

4 0.

67

0.42

5.1

B-D

35

0 10

40

753

234

0.67

0.

427.

4 *F

A –

fine

agg

rega

te, C

A –

coa

rse

aggr

egat

e

Fres

h C

oncr

ete

Test

s

Fres

h co

ncre

te w

as te

sted

for

slu

mp

acco

rdin

g to

BS

EN 1

2350

-2:2

009,

pla

stic

den

sity

and

ai

r ent

rapm

ent.

The

resu

lts o

f the

se te

sts a

re p

rese

nted

in T

able

6.

Har

dene

d C

oncr

ete

Test

s

Har

dene

d co

ncre

te w

as te

sted

for

com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

at 1

, 7 a

nd 2

8 da

ys a

ccor

ding

to B

S EN

123

90-3

:200

9, f

or f

lexu

ral s

treng

th a

t 28

days

acc

ordi

ng to

BS

EN 1

2390

-5:2

009.

The

co

ncre

te sp

ecim

ens w

ere

de-m

ould

ed 1

6 to

20

hour

s afte

r cas

ting

and

plac

ed in

wat

er ta

nks a

t a

cons

tant

tem

pera

ture

of

20qC

unt

il th

e te

st a

ge w

as r

each

ed.

Res

ults

of

thes

e te

sts

are

pres

ente

d in

Tab

le 6

.

RE

SUL

TS

AN

D D

ISC

USS

ION

In t

his

sect

ion

fres

h an

d ha

rden

ed c

oncr

ete

prop

ertie

s ar

e pr

esen

ted

and

disc

usse

d w

ith

refe

renc

e to

the

fine

aggr

egat

e pr

oper

ties s

how

n in

Tab

les 1

-4 a

nd F

igur

e 2.

Fine

Agg

rega

te T

est R

esul

ts

One

obj

ectiv

e of

the

proj

ect w

as to

com

pare

the

RM

BV

test

with

the

MB

V s

tand

ard

test

. It

can

be s

een

in F

igur

e 3

that

the

test

resu

lts o

btai

ned

usin

g bo

th m

etho

ds e

xhib

it a

very

goo

d lin

ear

corr

elat

ion

with

R2 =

0.99

sug

gest

ing

that

bot

h te

st m

etho

ds e

valu

ate

the

sam

e

prop

erty

, alth

ough

pro

vidi

ng d

iffer

ent n

umer

ical

val

ues.

This

sug

gest

s th

at th

e R

MB

V te

st

coul

d be

use

d as

an

alte

rnat

ive

test

to th

e st

anda

rd M

BV

test

.

Figu

re 3

Cor

rela

tion

betw

een

RM

BV

and

MB

V v

alue

s for

all

sam

ples

Tabl

e 1

show

s th

at th

ere

are

diff

eren

ces

betw

een

the

feed

mat

eria

l for

eac

h qu

arry

and

the

resu

lting

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds.

B-F

EED

bas

alt

quar

ry d

ust

has

a hi

gh M

BV

of

5.36

g/k

g (R

MB

V 6

.16

g/kg

) w

here

as t

he h

ighe

st f

ines

bas

alt

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd B

-D p

osse

sses

an

MB

V o

f 2.

90 g

/kg

(RM

BV

3.7

5 g/

kg).

A s

imila

r tre

nd c

an b

e se

en w

ith t

he g

rani

te

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds.

The

G-F

EED

MB

V is

0.7

7 g/

kg w

here

as th

e hi

ghes

t fin

es g

rani

te s

and

G-E

MB

V is

0.6

3 g/

kg. I

t can

be

conc

lude

d th

at d

urin

g th

e pr

oces

sing

a p

ropo

rtion

of

clay

si

zed

parti

cles

(<2

mic

ron)

has

bee

n re

mov

ed f

rom

the

mat

eria

l as

par

t of

the

fill

er

com

pone

nt lo

wer

ing

the

MB

V v

alue

of t

he sa

nd.

From

Tab

le 1

it

can

be s

een

that

the

san

d eq

uiva

lent

(SE

) va

lues

hav

e in

crea

sed

for

the

proc

esse

d qu

arry

dus

ts. T

he S

E va

lues

are

the

high

est f

or m

anuf

actu

red

sand

s w

ith th

e le

ast

fines

and

gra

dual

ly d

ecre

ase

with

incr

easi

ng fi

nes c

onte

nt. A

sim

ilar i

nver

se tr

end

to th

at w

as

obse

rved

in

the

MB

V v

alue

s th

at c

an b

e at

tribu

ted

to t

he r

emov

al o

f cl

ay s

ized

par

ticle

s du

ring

the

man

ufac

turin

g pr

oces

s.

The

SE v

alue

s fo

r gra

nite

san

ds a

re in

rang

e fr

om 8

0 to

69;

for b

asal

t san

ds th

ey a

re lo

wer

- fr

om 7

0 to

58.

Sim

ilarly

to th

e M

BV

val

ues

this

sug

gest

s th

at th

e ba

salt

sand

s co

ntai

n so

me

dele

terio

us fi

nes o

r cla

ys w

hich

may

adv

erse

ly a

ffec

t the

wat

er d

eman

d of

con

cret

e m

ixtu

res.

Figu

re 2

show

s the

resu

lts fr

om N

ZFC

. The

pro

cess

ed m

anuf

actu

red

sand

s lie

with

in th

e N

ew

Zeal

and

spec

ifica

tion

enve

lope

whe

reas

the

fee

d m

ater

ial

from

bot

h qu

arrie

s do

es n

ot

conf

orm

to th

e sp

ecifi

catio

n. It

sugg

ests

that

the

G-F

EED

and

B-F

EED

are

poo

rly sh

aped

and

gr

aded

.

The

flow

tim

e ha

s be

en g

reat

ly r

educ

ed f

or th

e m

anuf

actu

red

sand

s; a

t lea

st 4

sec

onds

for

gr

anite

san

ds a

nd 1

1 se

cond

s fo

r bas

alt s

ands

. Thi

s su

gges

ts th

at th

e pa

rticl

e sh

ape

has

been

m

odifi

ed a

nd a

fter p

roce

ssin

g it

is le

ss a

ngul

ar a

nd fl

aky.

The

voi

ds c

onte

nt o

f the

G-F

EED

is

42.4

% w

here

as f

or th

e m

anuf

actu

red

sand

s it

rang

es f

rom

45.

2% f

or th

e le

ast f

ines

san

d to

42

.7%

for t

he h

ighe

st fi

nes s

and

G-E

, whe

reas

the

void

s con

tent

of t

he B

-FEE

D is

45.

7% a

nd

it is

dec

reas

ing

for

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds

with

mor

e fin

es. V

isua

l ins

pect

ion

sugg

ests

that

the

basa

lt cr

ushe

r du

st p

artic

les

are

mos

tly a

ngul

ar a

nd f

laky

whe

reas

the

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd

parti

cles

are

mos

tly ro

unde

d w

ithou

t sha

rp e

dges

. Sim

ilarly

gra

nite

cru

sher

dus

t par

ticle

s ar

e hi

ghly

ang

ular

and

fla

ky,

how

ever

the

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds

are

mos

tly c

ubic

al w

ith s

harp

ed

ges b

ut w

ithou

t fla

ky p

artic

les.

Thes

e ob

serv

atio

ns s

ugge

st th

at a

ngul

ar a

nd f

laky

par

ticle

s re

sult

in a

hig

her

void

s co

nten

t an

d flo

w ra

te. S

imila

rly c

ubic

al p

artic

les

with

sha

rp e

dges

incr

ease

the

void

s co

nten

t but

to a

le

sser

ext

ent t

han

flaky

one

s. R

ound

ed p

artic

les

resu

lt in

the

low

est v

oids

con

tent

and

flo

w

rate

s. In

crea

sed

fines

con

tent

s low

er th

e vo

ids c

onte

nt a

nd g

ener

ally

impr

ove

the

flow

rate

.

Wor

kabi

lity

It w

as e

xpec

ted

from

the

fin

e ag

greg

ate

test

s th

at t

he n

atur

al s

and

wou

ld r

equi

re t

he l

east

w

ater

to a

chie

ve th

e 80

mm

slu

mp

due

to th

e in

trins

ic r

ound

ness

and

low

am

ount

of

fines

. Th

e gr

anite

san

d w

as e

xpec

ted

to h

ave

a hi

gher

wat

er d

eman

d th

an n

atur

al s

and

due

to s

hape

an

d hi

gher

am

ount

s of

fin

es, h

owev

er, l

ower

tha

n th

at o

f th

e ba

salt

sand

due

to

the

low

er

MB

V. T

he te

st re

sults

pro

ved

the

expe

cted

tren

d –

to re

ach

an 8

0 m

m s

lum

p th

e na

tura

l san

d m

ixtu

re (N

) req

uire

d a

w/c

ratio

of 0

.48,

the

gran

ite s

and

(G-B

) 0.5

8 an

d th

e ba

salt

sand

(B-

B) 0

.67.

Figu

re 4

Var

iatio

n of

slum

p w

ith fi

nes c

onte

nt

Figu

re 4

sho

ws

the

slum

p ve

rsus

the

amou

nt o

f fin

es fo

r the

gra

nite

and

bas

alt m

ixtu

res.

The

gene

ral

trend

is

that

the

hig

her

the

amou

nt o

f fin

es,

the

low

er t

he s

lum

p of

the

con

cret

e.

How

ever

, it h

as to

be

note

d th

at th

e m

anuf

actu

red

sand

mix

ture

s with

the

low

est f

ines

con

tent

w

ere

obse

rved

to b

e ha

rd to

wor

k an

d fin

ish

even

thou

gh th

e sl

ump

was

from

70

to 1

20 m

m.

Mix

ture

s w

ith h

ighe

r fin

es c

onte

nts

B-B

, B-C

and

G-B

, G-C

, G-D

wer

e ea

sier

to f

inis

h an

d

wor

k ev

en w

ith lo

wer

slum

p va

lues

. How

ever

, the

B-D

and

G-E

mix

ture

s wer

e ve

ry c

ohes

ive

due

to th

e am

ount

of f

ines

.

It w

as n

ot p

ossi

ble

to m

easu

re t

he s

lum

p fo

r th

e na

tura

l sa

nd w

/c r

atio

con

trols

for

bot

h qu

arrie

s (N

-G a

nd N

-B)

as t

he s

lum

ps c

olla

psed

. D

urin

g th

e ca

stin

g of

spe

cim

ens

the

mix

ture

s seg

rega

ted

and

blee

ding

was

obs

erve

d.

The

natu

ral s

and

slum

p co

ntro

l N m

ix w

as e

asy

to w

ork

and

finis

h.

Har

dene

d C

oncr

ete

Prop

ertie

s

Tabl

e 6

Fres

h an

d ha

rden

ed c

oncr

ete

prop

ertie

s

MIX

SLU

MP

mm

AIR %

FRES

HD

ENSI

TYkg

/m3

CO

MPR

ESSI

VE

STR

ENG

TH, N

/mm

2

FLEX

UR

AL

STR

ENG

TH,

N/m

m2

1 da

y 7

day

28 day

28 d

ay

N

95

0.5

2447

23

.8

48.0

58

.9

6.1

N-G

C

olla

pse

0.3

2405

13

.5

36.0

48

.7

5.4

G-A

12

0 0.

45

2393

17

.6

43.5

52

.2

5.6

G-B

80

1.

6 23

75

17.0

40

.2

49.9

5.

6 G

-C

80

0.9

2378

17

.9

40.4

50

.1

6.0

G-D

60

0.

65

2393

19

.3

42.2

52

.3

5.8

G-E

60

0.

78

2393

16

.6

40.6

48

.1

5.4

N-B

C

olla

pse

0.35

23

63

9.6

26.2

35

.9

4.6

B-A

70

0.

5 24

30

11.8

30

.4

41.7

5.

3 B

-B

80

0.5

2423

12

.9

31.3

43

.7

5.5

B-C

62

.5

0.45

24

34

13.0

33

.1

42.7

5.

4 B

-D

47.5

0.

65

2410

13

.2

35.2

45

.6

5.6

Tabl

e 6

show

s th

e co

mpr

essi

ve a

nd f

lexu

ral

stre

ngth

s of

all

conc

rete

mix

ture

s. Th

e co

mpr

essi

ve s

treng

th o

f th

e co

ntro

l m

ixtu

re N

is

the

high

est

at a

ll st

ages

of

test

ing

and

reac

hes 5

8.9

N/m

m2 a

t 28

days

.

The

com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

of b

asal

t mix

es is

in ra

nge

of 4

1.7

N/m

m2 fo

r B-A

to 4

5.6

N/m

m2

for

the

B-D

mix

. A

ll ba

salt

mix

ture

s su

rpas

s th

e st

reng

th o

f th

e w

/c r

atio

con

trol

N-B

m

ixtu

re. S

imila

rly to

the

basa

lt sa

nd m

ixes

, the

com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

of

gran

ite s

and

mix

es

surp

ass t

he w

/c ra

tio c

ontro

l N-G

and

are

in ra

nge

of 4

8.1

N/m

m2 to

52.

3 N

/mm

2 . How

ever

, it

has

alre

ady

been

not

ed th

at th

e sl

ump

of th

e N

-B a

nd N

-G m

ixtu

res

colla

psed

and

seg

rega

ted

durin

g ca

stin

g, a

nd th

eref

ore

it w

ould

seem

pru

dent

to tr

eat t

hese

resu

lts w

ith c

autio

n.

The

incr

ease

of

fines

con

tent

in

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds

did

not

show

a c

orre

latio

n w

ith t

he

com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

s at

28

days

. It s

ugge

sts

that

ther

e ar

e no

neg

ativ

e ef

fect

s of

hig

her f

ines

cont

ents

on

the

com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

for

the

give

n m

ixtu

re c

ompo

sitio

n an

d ra

nge

of f

ines

co

nten

ts in

vest

igat

ed in

the

stud

y.

The

28 d

ay f

lexu

ral

stre

ngth

for

all

mix

es i

s in

the

ran

ge 4

.6 t

o 6.

1 N

/mm

2 and

see

ms

to

follo

w t

he t

rend

s of

com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

, w

ith h

ighe

r co

mpr

essi

ve s

treng

th r

esul

ting

in

high

er fl

exur

al st

reng

th.

CO

NC

LU

SIO

NS

The

resu

lts s

how

tha

t th

e m

anuf

actu

red

sand

mix

ture

s at

the

sam

e w

/c r

atio

s su

rpas

s th

e st

reng

th o

f na

tura

l san

d co

ncre

te, h

owev

er, t

hey

exhi

bit l

ower

wor

kabi

lity.

How

ever

the

28

day

stre

ngth

of t

he s

lum

p co

ntro

lled

natu

ral s

and

conc

rete

sur

pass

es th

at o

f the

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd c

oncr

ete

due

to th

e lo

wer

w/c

ratio

. Th

e fin

e ag

greg

ate

test

res

ults

sho

wed

tha

t th

e pr

oces

sing

of

crus

her

dust

s im

prov

ed t

he

shap

e an

d gr

adin

g as

wel

l as

rem

oved

som

e de

lete

rious

cla

y si

zed

parti

cles

as

indi

cate

d by

th

e M

BV

and

SE

test

s. Th

e te

st re

sults

als

o su

gges

t tha

t the

RM

BV

test

cou

ld b

e us

ed a

s an

al

tern

ativ

e to

the

sta

ndar

d M

BV

tes

t in

ord

er t

o ra

pidl

y as

sess

the

pre

senc

e of

pot

entia

lly

dele

terio

us fi

nes.

It is

impo

rtant

to a

sses

s th

e ha

rm o

f fin

es in

fine

agg

rega

tes

as it

can

dra

mat

ical

ly a

ffec

t the

w

ater

dem

and

for

the

sam

e w

orka

bilit

y, a

s sh

own

by th

e ba

salt

sand

s in

com

paris

on to

the

gran

ite sa

nds.

Dur

ing

this

pha

se o

f th

e st

udy

it w

as o

bser

ved

that

it

is h

ard

or s

omet

imes

im

poss

ible

to

com

pare

the

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds w

ith n

atur

al sa

nd a

t the

sam

e w

/c ra

tio a

nd c

oncr

ete

mix

ture

co

mpo

sitio

n du

e to

the

sha

pe a

nd t

extu

re,

and

pres

ence

of

dele

terio

us p

artic

les

in t

he

man

ufac

ture

d sa

nds.

Ther

efor

e, th

e ne

xt p

hase

of t

he s

tudy

will

be

aim

ed a

t inv

estig

atin

g th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f man

ufac

ture

d sa

nd c

oncr

ete

mix

ture

s con

tain

ing

adm

ixtu

res.

AC

KN

OW

LE

DG

EM

EN

TS

The

auth

ors

wou

ld li

ke to

ack

now

ledg

e th

e fin

anci

al a

nd te

chni

cal s

uppo

rt of

Kay

asan

d Lt

d.,

Agg

rega

te L

evy

Fund

for

Wal

es p

roje

ct c

onso

rtium

, K

emco

Ltd

., G

race

Con

stru

ctio

n Pr

oduc

ts, A

ggre

gate

Indu

strie

s and

Cem

ex.

RE

FER

EN

CE

S

1 H

AR

RIS

ON

, D J

, WIL

SON

, D, H

ENN

EY, P

J, H

UD

SON

, J M

. Cru

shed

Roc

k Sa

nd

In S

outh

Wal

es,

A Re

conn

aiss

ance

Sur

vey.

Brit

ish

Geo

logi

cal

Surv

ey T

echn

ical

R

epor

t No.

WF/

00/0

. 200

0.

2 A

HN

, N

, FO

WLE

R,

D W

. An

Exp

erim

enta

l St

udy

On

The

Gui

delin

es F

or U

sing

H

ighe

r Con

tent

s Of A

ggre

gate

Mic

rofin

es In

Por

tland

Cem

ent C

oncr

ete.

Inte

rnat

iona

l C

entre

For

Agg

rega

te R

esea

rch.

Res

earc

h re

port

No.

ICA

R 1

02-1

F, 2

001.

3 M

AN

NIN

G,

D.

Expl

oita

tion

and

Use

of

Qua

rry

Fine

s, M

iner

al S

olut

ions

Ltd

. Te

chni

cal R

epor

t No.

087

/MIS

T2/D

AC

M/0

1, 2

004.

4 LU

STY

, A. S

and

indu

stry

lead

s re

viva

l of J

apan

ese

aggr

egat

es. Q

uarr

y, 2

008/

10, p

p 90

-92.

5 C

EMEN

T C

ON

CR

ETE

&

AG

GR

EGA

TES

AU

STR

ALI

A.

Man

ufac

ture

d Sa

nd

Nat

iona

l tes

t met

hods

and

spec

ifica

tion

valu

es. R

esea

rch

repo

rt, 2

007,

pp

17-1

8

Sand

from

Surpl

us Q

uarry

Ma

terial

Quar

terly

Repo

rt 6Ma

y 201

2Re

port n

o: 0Q

R6- S

C90

86-C

F

Quarterly

!Rep

ort!M

ay!2012!

Page

!2!of!1

1!

1.!In

trod

uctio

n!This

!quarterly

!rep

ort!covers

!the

!period!of

!January

!201

2!to

!May

!2012.

!It!rep

orts

!the

!results

!of!the

!

work!that

!has

!been!

performed

!to!

date

!on!

the!partial!shipmen

t!of

!lim

estone

!and

!gritston

e!

Kayasand

!received!from

!Japan

!during!the!pe

riod!of

!QR5

!and

!add

ition

al!test!pe

rformed

!on!the!

granite

!and

!basalt!K

ayasand!discussed!in

!previou

s!qu

arterly

!repo

rts.

!

2.!W

ork!pe

rformed

!to!date!

2.1M

ixes

!incorporating!ad

mixtures!

A!serie

s!of

!tests

!were!pe

rformed

!using

!a!clay!inhibitor!EXP"CM

1!admixture

!provide

d!by

!GRA

CE!in

!

small!D

untilland

!con

crete!mixes

!incorporating!WRD

A!90

!plasticizer.!In

!order

!to!complete!these!

trials

!a!dosage!respon

se!curve

!was

!develop

ed!using

!100

!g!sand!samples

!(adjusted

!for

!moisture!

conten

t)!and

!treated

!with

!various

!dosages

!of!EXP"CM

1.!The

!dosages

!were!calculated

!from

!the

!

mass!of

!single!drop

s,!rathe

r!than

!percentage!values

!for!the!mix

!based

!on!the!available!measurin

g!

techniqu

es!in!the!lab.

!How

ever,!this

!had

!no!influ

ence

!on!the!fin

al!form

!of!the!respon

se!curve

!

graph.

!The

!sand!was

!treated!with

!the!EXP"CM

1!mixed

!with

!water

!to!re

ach!a!10%

!moisture!state!in

!

the!sand

,!mixed

!and

!after

!5!m

inutes

!drie

d!in

!the

!microwave!oven

.!The

!drie

d!sand

!particles!had!

become!slightly

!"cemen

ted"

!!

The!do

sage

!cho

sen!for!the

!10!litre

!con

crete!trials

!was

!the!maxim

um!used!in

!the!prod

uctio

n!of

!the!

respon

se!curve

!24.48

%.!T

wo!sets

!of!concrete

!mixes,!o

ne!w

ith!0.55!w/c

!ratio

!and

!the

!other

!with

!

0.60

!w/c

!ratio.!B

oth!were!adjusted

!for

!moisture!conten

t,!aggregate!absorptio

n!and!water

!in!the

!

admixtures!(M

ix!design!sheets

!are

!in!App

endix!A).!T

he!first!mix

!incorporated

!WRD

A!90

!with

out!

EXP"CM

1!to

!establish!initial

!slump!value,

!the

!secon

d!mix

!incorpo

ratin

g!same!am

ount

!of!water

!

(adjusted!for!50%

!water

!in!the

!EXP

"CM1)

!and

!WRD

A!90

!plus!the!clay

!deactivator.!T

he!following!

mixing!sequ

ence

!was

!followed

!for!a

ll!mixes:!

1)!Sand!and!Co

arse

!aggregate

!placed!in

!drum

!and

!mixed

!with

!half!o

f!mixing!water

!+!EXP

"CM1!for!1

!

minute!

2)!Covered

!and

!left

!for!5

!minutes

!

3)!m

ixed

!for!2

!minutes

!while

!add

ing!rest

!of!the

!water

!and

!plasticizer

!

4)!Tested!slum

p!tw

o!tim

es,!w

ith!brie

f!rem

ixing!in

!between!the!tests!

!

Quarterly

!Rep

ort!M

ay!2012!

Page

!3!of!1

1!

The!compressive

!stren

gth!results

!at!1

!and

!7!and

!28!days

!are

!sum

marised

!in!Table

!2.1.!!

Table!2.1!

Compressive

!stren

gth,

!N/m

m2 !

w/c

!Slum

p,!m

m!

1!day!

7!day!

28!day

!No!CM

"1!

0.55

!20

!20.08!

52.5

!65

.6!

With

!CM

"1!

0.55

!40

!17.23!

48.84!

62.5

!No!CM

"1!

0.6!

70!

15.36!

43.95!

53.4

!With

!CM

"1!

0.6!

75!

14.11!

43.3

!54

.2!

! An!in

crease

!in!slump!of

!20!mm

!was

!observed!for!0.55

!w/c

!ratio

!mixes

!but

!only!5!mm

!for!0.6!w/c

!

mix.!Furthermore,

!the!mixes

!incorporating!EXP"CM

1!seem

ed!wetter!a

nd!easier!to!work!and!fin

ish,

!

however,!the

!increase

!in!slump!was

!only!marginal.!CM

"1!m

ixes

!have!lower

!stren

gth!at

!1!and

!7!

days,!this!could!be

!explained

!by!more!free

!water

!in!th

e!mix

!due

!to!th

e!actio

n!of

!CM

"1!but

!there!is

!

very

!small!increase!in

!slump!which

!accom

panies

!it.!D

iscussions

!with

!GRA

CE!have!revealed

!that

!the!

clay

!deactivator

!works

!better!with

!an!S3

!con

sisten

cy!con

crete!incorporating!differen

t!type

!of!

plasticizer

!(sup

erplasticiser).!This

!may

!be!explored

!furthe

r!by!Cardiff

!or!b

y!Grace

!dep

ending

!on!the!

time!available!with

in!th

e!project.!

From

!the!results

!it!seems!that

!with

out!p

lasticizer

!to!obtain!S2

!slump!basalt!sand

!with

!clay!requ

ires!

more!water

!than!granite

!sand,

!con

firming!theo

retical

!predictions.!T

his!indicates!that

!clay!absorbs!

water,!the

refore,!m

ore!water

!is!req

uired!to

!com

pensate!for!this

!absorption!and!he

nce!the!fin

al!

strength

!is!com

prom

ised

!due

!to!th

e!higher

!free

!water/cem

ent!ratio

!if!only!absorptio

n!of

!the!sand

!

and!coarse

!aggregate

!is!ta

ken!into

!accou

nt!(to!test

!absorption!capacity

!according

!to!th

e!standard,!

the!fin

es!m

ust!be

!washe

d!ou

t!of

!the

!sam

ple).!T

hat!means

!the

!water

!absorbe

d!by

!clays

!doe

s!no

t!

contrib

ute!to

!workability,

!but

!con

tributes

!to!the!lower

!stren

gth!of

!the

!con

crete!at

!later!stages.!

This

!can

!be!confirm

ed!by!the!second

!set

!of!results

!of!0.55

!w/c

!ratio

!which

!yields!very

!sim

ilar!

strength

!at!2

8!days

!for!a

ll!granite

!and

!basalt!con

crete!mixes.!!

! 2.2Sand

!Cha

racterisation!tests!on

!Taff’s

!Well!and

!Gilfach!Ka

yasand

s!

Partial!shipm

ent!of

!the

!Taff’s

!Well!a

nd!Gilfach!sand

s!were!received

!in!April!2012.!T

he!following!

suite

!of!tests

!has

!been!pe

rformed

!on!the!sand

s!and!the!results

!presented

!in!Table

!2.2:!!

Quarterly

!Rep

ort!M

ay!2012!

Page

!4!of!1

1!

1)Methylene

!Blue!Va

lue!(M

BV)!

2)Methylene

!Blue!Va

lue!using!GRA

CE!m

etho

d!(GMBV

)!

3)Sand

!Equ

ivalen

t!(SE)!

4)New

!Zealand

!flow

!con

e!(uncom

pacted

!voids

!and

!flow

!time)

!(NZFC)

!

5)Water

!absorption!(W

A),!a

nd!relative!de

nsities:!d

ry!(r rd),!apparent

!(r a)!and!SSD

!

density

(rssd)

!

Table!2.2!Summary!of

!Characterisation!test

!results

!

SAMPLE!

MBV

,!GMBV

,!

SE!

NZFC!

Voids,

!%!

NZFC!

Flow

!tim

e,!

sec!

WA 2

4,!%

!r ss

d,!Mg/m

3 !r rd,!

Mg/m

3 !r a,!

Mg/m

3 !

g!of

!MB!

solutio

n!pe

r!kg!of

!0/2m

m!

sand

!

g!of

!MB!

solutio

n!pe

r!kg!of

!0/2!mm

!sand

!

Natural

!sand!

0.24

!0.35

!94

!37

.9!

20.9

!1.04

!2.66

!2.63

!2.71

!

Taff's

!Well!Feed!

0.40

!0.65

!65

!42

.4!

32.4

!0.62

!2.90

!2.85

!2.87

!

Taff's

!Well!!

0.47

!0.44

!72

!43

.6!

26.3

!

0.45

!2.89

!2.85

!2.86

!Taff's

!Well!PA!

0.40

!0.44

!71

!42

.1!

23.9

!

Taff's

!Well!PB!

0.40

!0.44

!71

!41

.9!

23.4

!

Taff's

!Well!PC!

0.37

!0.45

!67

!41

.0!

23.0

!

Gilfach!Feed

!3.19

!4.05

!27

!45

.9!

28.6

!1.53

!2.76

!2.64

!2.68

!

Gilfach!

1.40

!1.73

!31

!41

.8!

23.3

!

0.98

!2.64

!2.57

!2.60

!Gilfach!PA

!1.48

!1.84

!30

!41

.6!

22.3

!

Gilfach!PB

!1.50

!1.86

!28

!40

.8!

21.3

!

Gilfach!PC

!1.63

!2.07

!27

!40

.1!

20.7

!

In!order

!to!compare

!the

!GMBV

!test!with

!the

!MBV

!stand

ard!test,!test!results

!from

!all!4!Kayasand

s!

have

!been!considered

!(Dun

tilland

,!Glensanda,!Taff’s

!Well!and

!Gilfach).!It!c

an!be!seen

!in!Figure!2.1!

that

!the

!test!results

!obtaine

d!using!bo

th!m

etho

ds!exhibit!a!very

!goo

d!linear!correlation!with

!R2 !=

!

0.99

!suggesting!that

!both!test

!metho

ds!evaluate!the!same!prop

erty,!a

lthou

gh!providing

!differen

t!

numerical

!value

s.!This!suggests

!con

fiden

ce!in

!the!RM

BV!te

st!as!an

!alte

rnative!test

!to!th

e!standard

!

MBV

!test.!

Quarterly

!Rep

ort!M

ay!2012!

Page

!5!of!1

1!y!=!1.16

19x!+!0.07

38R#

!=!0.990

3

01234567

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Figure

!3!Correlatio

n!be

tween!GMBV

!and

!MBV

!value

s!for!a

ll!samples

!

2.3Co

ncrete

!Mixes

!with

!Taff’s

!Well!and

!Gilfach!Ka

yasand

s!

Concrete

!mixes,!ide

ntical

!in!nature!to

!tho

se!rep

orted!in

!0QR4

"!SC90

86"CF!for!the!Dun

tilland

!and

!

Glensanda

!sands

!were!prod

uced

!with

!Taff’s

!Well!and!Gilfach.

!The

!full!results

!are

!provide

d!in

!

Appe

ndix

!B!alth

ough

!they

!are

!sum

marised

!here!for!com

pleten

ess.

!!

! At!all!ages

!the

!Taff’s

!Well!lim

estone

!con

cretes

!sho

w!very!similar!strength

!results

!to!the!natural!

sand

!slump!control!m

ix!even!thou

gh!the

!w/c

!ratio

!for

!limestone

!con

crete!was

!0.55!whe

reas

!for

!

the!control!it!was

!0.48.

!This!im

plies!that

!it!shou

ld!be!po

ssible,!with

!the

!use

!of!admixtures!to

!

develop!a!Kayasand

!mix

!which

!yields!higher

!com

pressive

!stren

gth!values

!whe

n!compared!to

!the

!

natural!sand!slum

p!control!m

ix!at!e

qual

!w/c

!ratio

.!!

! The!Gilfach!sand

!perform

ed!in

!a!very!similar!manne

r!to

!the

!Dun

tilland

!sand,

!with

!an!S2

!slump!

value!be

ing!achieved

!at!a

n!iden

tical

!w/c

!ratio

.!Alth

ough

!slightly

!lower

!GMBV

!and

!MBV

!value

s!were!

repo

rted

!for!the

!form

er!in

!com

parison

!to!th

e!latter

!this

!differen

ce!had

!little

!effect!o

n!the!ob

served

!

compressive

!stren

gth!

and!

only

!marginal!effect

!on!

the!workability!of

!the

!mix.!This

!con

firms!

previous

!observatio

ns!that!whilst!it!is

!possible!to

!use

!Dun

tilland

!and

!Gilfach!sand

s!in

!a!con

crete!

mix,!the

!use

!of!adm

ixtures!may

!be!requ

ired!to

!achieve

!desire

d!fresh!and!harden

ed!prope

rties.

!

!

Quarterly

!Rep

ort!M

ay!2012!

Page

!6!of!1

1!

3.!Future!Plan

s!!

The!plan

!for!the!ne

xt!quarter

!is!to!complete!the!full!range!of

!tests

!on!the!Gilfach!and!Taff’s

!Well!

Kayasand

!sam

ples

!whe

n!the!remaind

er!of!the!Shipmen

t!is

!received!in

!July!2012

.!Th

ese!tests!

mainly!concern!concrete

!mixes

!using

!w/c

!ratio

!of!0.55

!including

!a!W

RDA!90

!plasticizer

!and

!a!

70mm

!(S2)

!slump.

!Add

ition

al!activities

!that

!are

!ongoing

!includ

e:!

!Finalise!shape!and!texture!stud

y!for!the!sand

s!using!New

"Zealand

!flow

!con

e,!m

ini"m

ortar!

slum

p!cone

!and

!optical

!microscop

y.!

!Investigate!mod

elling!of

!con

crete!prop

ertie

s!using!Artificial!N

eural!N

etworks.!

!Lastly

!the!results

!to!date!will

!be!presen

ted!at

!the!international!con

ference!“Con

crete!in

!the!

Low

!Carbo

n!Era”

!in!Dun

dee,

!July

!2012!

! ! !

Quarterly

!Rep

ort!M

ay!2012!

Page

!7!of!1

1!

App

endix!A!–!Adm

ixture

!Mix

!Design!Sheets

Con

cret

eTr

ialM

ixW

orks

heat

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heat

Date

of T

rial :

11-A

pr-1

2M

ix D

escr

iptio

n :

Kaya

sand

100

%

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

AD-A

DM

Cem

ent (

kg/m

!) :

350

pp

y(

g)

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:Re

plac

emen

t (%

) :Ba

tch

Tim

e :

Labo

rato

ry N

ame

:C

ardi

ff U

nive

rsity

p(

)y

yBa

tch

Size

(litr

es) :

10Ta

rget

Con

sist

ence

:(

)g

Basi

c M

ater

ial

Mat

eria

l Det

ails

S.G

Basi

c M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eS.

GC

emen

tPC

Cem

exR

ugby

Type

sTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eC

emen

tPC

Cem

exR

ugby

Rep

lace

men

tAd

mix

ture

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

eAg

greg

ate

(1)

4/20

mm

Cru

shed

Lim

esto

neAd

mix

ture

Dosa

ge(m

l/50k

g)C

oars

eAg

greg

ate

(2)

Coa

rse

Aggr

egat

e (1

)4/

20m

m C

rush

ed L

imes

tone

Dosa

ge (m

l/50k

g)or

Solid

Mat

eria

lsC

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(2)

Fine

Aggr

egat

e(1

)Ka

yasa

ndD

until

and

or S

olid

Mat

eria

ls(k

g)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Kaya

sand

Dun

tilan

dFi

neAg

greg

ate

(2)

Adm

ixtu

re(1

)W

RD

A90

plas

ticiz

erG

race

0m

l(k

g)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)W

RD

A 90

pla

stic

izer

Gra

ce0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re(2

)0

ml

Solid

s(k

g)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0

ml

Solid

s (k

g)0

ml

Aggr

egat

eAg

greg

ate

Moi

stur

eM

ixDe

sign

Figu

res

Tota

lFr

eeM

ATER

IALS

Aggr

egat

eAb

sorp

tion

Aggr

egat

e M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

SS

DM

it

Ct

Ti

lT

il

Tota

lFr

ee%

%M

ATER

IALS

Abso

rptio

n%

S.S.

D.k

/!

Moi

stur

eC

tiCo

rrec

ted

Tria

lT

tTr

ial

At

l%

%35

035

00

350

350

Ct

%kg

/m!

Corr

ectio

nd

Targ

etAc

tual

350

350.

03.

503.

500

00

000

000

Cem

ent

Rl

t0

0.0

0.00

0.00

066

014

05

1040

54

1034

610

3510

35R

epla

cem

ent

CA

t(1

)0.

660.

14-0

.510

40-5

.410

34.6

10.3

510

.35

00

00

00

00

000

00C

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(1)

CA

t(2

)0.

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

167

435

27

753

202

773

27

737

73C

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(2)

FiA

t(1

)1.

674.

352.

775

320

.277

3.2

7.73

7.73

00

00

00

00

000

00Ad

iFi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

FiA

t(2

)0.

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

192

177

21

771

76Ad

mix

iht

WFine

Agg

rega

te (2

)19

217

7.2

1.77

1.76

wei

ght

Wat

er2.

752.

80.

030.

030.

03Ad

mix

ture

(1)

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0.

000.

00.

000.

00(

)So

lids

(kg)

TOTA

LS23

37.7

514

.77

2337

.75

23.3

823

.37

(g)

Com

men

ts:

2336

.52

Corr

ecte

d W

eigh

ts (k

g/m!)

=19

0.77

g(

g)

Corr

ecte

d W

ater

(L/m

!) =

190.

77SS

DAc

tual

-1.2

3Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

Litre

s) =

Corr

ecte

d W

ater

(L/m

)SS

DAc

tual

1.23

W/C

Ratio

0.54

90.

551

-0.6

4Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

Litre

s)

Diffe

renc

efro

mTa

rget

(%)=

W/C

Rat

io0.

549

0.55

1-0

.64

Fine

s(%

)=42

0-0

21Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d(%

)=Fi

nes

(%) =

42.0

-0.2

1Yi

eld

(%) =

Conc

rete

Appe

aran

ce:

Conc

rete

App

eara

nce:

Slum

pTe

stPl

astic

Dens

itySl

ump

Test

Plas

tic D

ensi

tyT

tPo

t+Te

stM

ode

Valu

e(m

m)

Conc

rete

Dens

ityTe

stPo

t +

conc

rete

()

y

1N

orm

al20

Mas

s(k

g)(k

g/m

!)co

ncre

te(k

g)1

Nor

mal

20(k

g)(k

g/m

!)2

Nor

mal

20Ac

tual

394

2549

281

3(k

g)2

Nor

mal

20Ac

tual

-3.9

425

-492

.813

MSl

Tt

20C

ll

td

1869

2336

522

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

20C

alcu

late

d18

.69

2336

.522

88Ai

Tt

394

25Po

t Vol

ume

(litre

s) :

Air T

est

3.94

25Po

t Mas

s :

Met

er N

umbe

rKa

ya-4

92.8

13M

ean

Dens

ity (k

g/m

!) :

Air C

onte

nt (%

)(

)

Dens

ityLa

bM

ould

Age

atTe

stM

axSt

reng

thFa

ilure

ADe

nsity

(kg/

m!)

Test

ed B

yLa

bRe

fere

nce

Mou

ldNu

mbe

rAg

e at

Test

Test

Date

Max

Load

Stre

ngth

N/m

m")

Failu

reM

ode

Aver

age

(kg/

m!)

yRe

fere

nce

Num

ber

Test

Date

Load

(KN)

N/m

m")

Mod

e

10.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-1

(KN)

10.

00N

orm

al1

000

Nor

mal

00

ADAD

M1

AD-A

DM

-21

0.00

Nor

mal

0.0

10

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-3

AD-A

DM

-21

0.00

Nor

mal

70

00N

lAD

-AD

M-3

ADAD

M4

70.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-4

70.

00N

orm

al0.

0AD

-AD

M-5

70.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-6

280.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-7

280.

00N

orm

al28

000

Nor

mal

00

ADAD

M7

AD-A

DM

-828

0.00

Nor

mal

0.0

280

00N

orm

alAD

ADM

9AD

-AD

M-8

280.

00N

orm

al28

000

Nl

AD-A

DM

-9AD

ADM

1028

0.00

Nor

mal

AD-A

DM

-10

Fil

Lb

Mld

At

Tt

Real

Flex

ural

Failu

reM

dTe

sted

ByLa

bR

fM

ould

Nb

Age

atT

tTe

stD

t

Real

Load

Flex

ural

Stre

ngth

aver

age

Mod

eTe

sted

By

Refe

renc

eNu

mbe

rTe

stDa

teLo

ad(k

N)St

reng

thN/

mm

")g

280

Nor

mal

ADAD

M1

MP

(kN)

N/m

m)

280

Nor

mal

280

Nl

00

AD-A

DM

-1M

PAD

ADM

2M

P28

0N

orm

al0.

0AD

-AD

M-2

MP

280

Nor

mal

AD-A

DM

-3M

P

Con

cret

eTr

ialM

ixW

orks

heat

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heat

Date

of T

rial :

11-A

pr-1

2M

ix D

escr

iptio

n :

Kaya

sand

100

%

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

AD-A

DM

Cem

ent (

kg/m

!) :

350

pp

y(

g)

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:Re

plac

emen

t (%

) :Ba

tch

Tim

e :

Labo

rato

ry N

ame

:C

ardi

ff U

nive

rsity

p(

)y

yBa

tch

Size

(litr

es) :

10Ta

rget

Con

sist

ence

:(

)g

Basi

c M

ater

ial

Mat

eria

l Det

ails

S.G

Basi

c M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eS.

GC

emen

tPC

Cem

exR

ugby

Type

sTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eC

emen

tPC

Cem

exR

ugby

Rep

lace

men

tAd

mix

ture

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

eAg

greg

ate

(1)

4/20

mm

Cru

shed

Lim

esto

neAd

mix

ture

Dosa

ge(m

l/50k

g)C

oars

eAg

greg

ate

(2)

Coa

rse

Aggr

egat

e (1

)4/

20m

m C

rush

ed L

imes

tone

Dosa

ge (m

l/50k

g)or

Solid

Mat

eria

lsC

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(2)

Fine

Aggr

egat

e(1

)Ka

yasa

ndD

until

and

or S

olid

Mat

eria

ls(k

g)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Kaya

sand

Dun

tilan

dFi

neAg

greg

ate

(2)

Adm

ixtu

re(1

)W

RD

A90

plas

ticiz

erG

race

0m

l(k

g)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)W

RD

A 90

pla

stic

izer

Gra

ce0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re(2

)0

ml

Solid

s(k

g)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0

ml

Solid

s (k

g)0

ml

Aggr

egat

eAg

greg

ate

Moi

stur

eM

ixDe

sign

Figu

res

Tota

lFr

eeM

ATER

IALS

Aggr

egat

eAb

sorp

tion

Aggr

egat

e M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

SS

DM

it

Ct

Ti

lT

il

Tota

lFr

ee%

%M

ATER

IALS

Abso

rptio

n%

S.S.

D.k

/!

Moi

stur

eC

tiCo

rrec

ted

Tria

lT

tTr

ial

At

l%

%35

035

00

350

350

Ct

%kg

/m!

Corr

ectio

nd

Targ

etAc

tual

350

350.

03.

503.

500

00

000

000

Cem

ent

Rl

t0

0.0

0.00

0.00

066

014

05

1040

54

1034

610

3510

35R

epla

cem

ent

CA

t(1

)0.

660.

14-0

.510

40-5

.410

34.6

10.3

510

.35

00

00

00

00

000

00C

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(1)

CA

t(2

)0.

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

167

435

27

753

202

773

27

737

73C

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(2)

FiA

t(1

)1.

674.

352.

775

320

.277

3.2

7.73

7.73

00

00

00

00

000

00Ad

iFi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

FiA

t(2

)0.

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

210

195

21

951

93Ad

mix

iht

WFine

Agg

rega

te (2

)21

019

5.2

1.95

1.93

wei

ght

Wat

er2.

752.

80.

030.

030.

03Ad

mix

ture

(1)

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0.

000.

00.

000.

00(

)So

lids

(kg)

TOTA

LS23

55.7

514

.77

2355

.75

23.5

623

.54

(g)

Com

men

ts:

2353

.52

Corr

ecte

d W

eigh

ts (k

g/m!)

=20

7.77

g(

g)

Corr

ecte

d W

ater

(L/m

!) =

207.

77SS

DAc

tual

-2.2

3Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

Litre

s) =

Corr

ecte

d W

ater

(L/m

)SS

DAc

tual

2.23

W/C

Ratio

0.60

00.

600

-1.0

6Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

Litre

s)

Diffe

renc

efro

mTa

rget

(%)=

W/C

Rat

io0.

600

0.60

0-1

.06

Fine

s(%

)=42

0-0

21Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d(%

)=Fi

nes

(%) =

42.0

-0.2

1Yi

eld

(%) =

Conc

rete

Appe

aran

ce:

Conc

rete

App

eara

nce:

Slum

pTe

stPl

astic

Dens

itySl

ump

Test

Plas

tic D

ensi

tyT

tPo

t+Te

stM

ode

Valu

e(m

m)

Conc

rete

Dens

ityTe

stPo

t +

conc

rete

()

y

1N

orm

al70

Mas

s(k

g)(k

g/m

!)co

ncre

te(k

g)1

Nor

mal

70(k

g)(k

g/m

!)2

Nor

mal

70Ac

tual

394

2549

281

3(k

g)2

Nor

mal

70Ac

tual

-3.9

425

-492

.813

MSl

Tt

70C

ll

td

1883

2353

522

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

70C

alcu

late

d18

.83

2353

.522

88Ai

Tt

394

25Po

t Vol

ume

(litre

s) :

Air T

est

3.94

25Po

t Mas

s :

Met

er N

umbe

rKa

ya-4

92.8

13M

ean

Dens

ity (k

g/m

!) :

Air C

onte

nt (%

)(

)

Dens

ityLa

bM

ould

Age

atTe

stM

axSt

reng

thFa

ilure

ADe

nsity

(kg/

m!)

Test

ed B

yLa

bRe

fere

nce

Mou

ldNu

mbe

rAg

e at

Test

Test

Date

Max

Load

Stre

ngth

N/m

m")

Failu

reM

ode

Aver

age

(kg/

m!)

yRe

fere

nce

Num

ber

Test

Date

Load

(KN)

N/m

m")

Mod

e

10.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-1

(KN)

10.

00N

orm

al1

000

Nor

mal

00

ADAD

M1

AD-A

DM

-21

0.00

Nor

mal

0.0

10

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-3

AD-A

DM

-21

0.00

Nor

mal

70

00N

lAD

-AD

M-3

ADAD

M4

70.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-4

70.

00N

orm

al0.

0AD

-AD

M-5

70.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-6

280.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-7

280.

00N

orm

al28

000

Nor

mal

00

ADAD

M7

AD-A

DM

-828

0.00

Nor

mal

0.0

280

00N

orm

alAD

ADM

9AD

-AD

M-8

280.

00N

orm

al28

000

Nl

AD-A

DM

-9AD

ADM

1028

0.00

Nor

mal

AD-A

DM

-10

Fil

Lb

Mld

At

Tt

Real

Flex

ural

Failu

reM

dTe

sted

ByLa

bR

fM

ould

Nb

Age

atT

tTe

stD

t

Real

Load

Flex

ural

Stre

ngth

aver

age

Mod

eTe

sted

By

Refe

renc

eNu

mbe

rTe

stDa

teLo

ad(k

N)St

reng

thN/

mm

")g

280

Nor

mal

ADAD

M1

MP

(kN)

N/m

m)

280

Nor

mal

280

Nl

00

AD-A

DM

-1M

PAD

ADM

2M

P28

0N

orm

al0.

0AD

-AD

M-2

MP

280

Nor

mal

AD-A

DM

-3M

P

Con

cret

eTr

ialM

ixW

orks

heat

Con

cret

e Tr

ial M

ix W

orks

heat

Date

of T

rial :

11-A

pr-1

2M

ix D

escr

iptio

n :

Kaya

sand

100

%

Mat

eria

l Cod

e :

AD-A

DM

Cem

ent (

kg/m

!) :

350

pp

y(

g)

Tria

l Mix

Ref

:Re

plac

emen

t (%

) :Ba

tch

Tim

e :

Labo

rato

ry N

ame

:C

ardi

ff U

nive

rsity

p(

)y

yBa

tch

Size

(litr

es) :

10Ta

rget

Con

sist

ence

:(

)g

Basi

c M

ater

ial

Mat

eria

l Det

ails

S.G

Basi

c M

ater

ial

Type

sM

ater

ial D

etai

lsTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eS.

GC

emen

tPC

Cem

exR

ugby

Type

sTy

peSu

pplie

rM

ater

ial S

ours

eC

emen

tPC

Cem

exR

ugby

Rep

lace

men

tAd

mix

ture

Rep

lace

men

tC

oars

eAg

greg

ate

(1)

4/20

mm

Cru

shed

Lim

esto

neAd

mix

ture

Dosa

ge(m

l/50k

g)C

oars

eAg

greg

ate

(2)

Coa

rse

Aggr

egat

e (1

)4/

20m

m C

rush

ed L

imes

tone

Dosa

ge (m

l/50k

g)or

Solid

Mat

eria

lsC

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(2)

Fine

Aggr

egat

e(1

)Ka

yasa

ndD

until

and

or S

olid

Mat

eria

ls(k

g)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

Kaya

sand

Dun

tilan

dFi

neAg

greg

ate

(2)

Adm

ixtu

re(1

)W

RD

A90

plas

ticiz

erG

race

0m

l(k

g)Fi

ne A

ggre

gate

(2)

Adm

ixtu

re (1

)W

RD

A 90

pla

stic

izer

Gra

ce0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re(2

)EX

P-C

M1

Gra

ce0

ml

Solid

s(k

g)0

ml

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)EX

P-C

M1

Gra

ce0

ml

Solid

s (k

g)0

ml

Aggr

egat

eAg

greg

ate

Moi

stur

eM

ixDe

sign

Figu

res

Tota

lFr

eeM

ATER

IALS

Aggr

egat

eAb

sorp

tion

Aggr

egat

e M

oist

ure

Mix

Des

ign

Figu

res

SS

DM

it

Ct

Ti

lT

il

Tota

lFr

ee%

%M

ATER

IALS

Abso

rptio

n%

S.S.

D.k

/!

Moi

stur

eC

tiCo

rrec

ted

Tria

lT

tTr

ial

At

l%

%35

035

00

350

350

Ct

%kg

/m!

Corr

ectio

nd

Targ

etAc

tual

350

350.

03.

503.

500

00

000

000

Cem

ent

Rl

t0

0.0

0.00

0.00

066

014

05

1040

54

1034

610

3510

35R

epla

cem

ent

CA

t(1

)0.

660.

14-0

.510

40-5

.410

34.6

10.3

510

.35

00

00

00

00

000

00C

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(1)

CA

t(2

)0.

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

167

435

27

753

202

773

27

737

73C

oars

e Ag

greg

ate

(2)

FiA

t(1

)1.

674.

352.

775

320

.277

3.2

7.73

7.73

00

00

00

00

000

00Ad

iFi

ne A

ggre

gate

(1)

FiA

t(2

)0.

00

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

210

195

21

951

92Ad

mix

iht

WFine

Agg

rega

te (2

)21

019

5.2

1.95

1.92

wei

ght

Wat

er2.

752.

80.

030.

030.

03Ad

mix

ture

(1)

0.00

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

Adm

ixtu

re (2

)0.

000.

00.

000.

00(

)So

lids

(kg)

TOTA

LS23

55.7

514

.77

2355

.75

23.5

623

.53

(g)

Com

men

ts:

2352

.52

Corr

ecte

d W

eigh

ts (k

g/m!)

=20

6.77

g(

g)

Corr

ecte

d W

ater

(L/m

!) =

206.

77SS

DAc

tual

-3.2

3Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

Litre

s) =

Corr

ecte

d W

ater

(L/m

)SS

DAc

tual

3.23

W/C

Ratio

0.60

00.

600

-1.5

4Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

Litre

s)

Diffe

renc

efro

mTa

rget

(%)=

W/C

Rat

io0.

600

0.60

0-1

.54

Fine

s(%

)=42

0-0

21Di

ffere

nce

from

Tar

get (

%) =

Yiel

d(%

)=Fi

nes

(%) =

42.0

-0.2

1Yi

eld

(%) =

Conc

rete

Appe

aran

ce:

Conc

rete

App

eara

nce:

Slum

pTe

stPl

astic

Dens

itySl

ump

Test

Plas

tic D

ensi

tyT

tPo

t+Te

stM

ode

Valu

e(m

m)

Conc

rete

Dens

ityTe

stPo

t +

conc

rete

()

y

1N

orm

al75

Mas

s(k

g)(k

g/m

!)co

ncre

te(k

g)1

Nor

mal

75(k

g)(k

g/m

!)2

Nor

mal

75Ac

tual

394

2549

281

3(k

g)2

Nor

mal

75Ac

tual

-3.9

425

-492

.813

MSl

Tt

75C

ll

td

1882

2352

522

Mea

n Sl

ump

Test

75C

alcu

late

d18

.82

2352

.522

88Ai

Tt

394

25Po

t Vol

ume

(litre

s) :

Air T

est

3.94

25Po

t Mas

s :

Met

er N

umbe

rKa

ya-4

92.8

13M

ean

Dens

ity (k

g/m

!) :

Air C

onte

nt (%

)(

)

Failu

reDe

nsity

Lab

Mou

ldAg

eat

Test

Max

Stre

ngth

AFa

ilure

Mod

eDe

nsity

(kg/

m!)

Test

ed B

yLa

bRe

fere

nce

Mou

ldNu

mbe

rAg

e at

Test

Test

Date

Max

Load

Stre

ngth

N/m

m")

Aver

age

Mod

e(k

g/m

!)y

Refe

renc

eNu

mbe

rTe

stDa

teLo

ad(K

N)N/

mm

")

10.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-1

(KN)

10.

00N

orm

al1

000

Nor

mal

00

ADAD

M1

AD-A

DM

-21

0.00

Nor

mal

0.0

10

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-3

AD-A

DM

-21

0.00

Nor

mal

70

00N

lAD

-AD

M-3

ADAD

M4

70.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-4

70.

00N

orm

al0.

0AD

-AD

M-5

70.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-6

280.

00N

orm

alAD

-AD

M-7

280.

00N

orm

al28

000

Nor

mal

00

ADAD

M7

AD-A

DM

-828

0.00

Nor

mal

0.0

280

00N

orm

alAD

ADM

9AD

-AD

M-8

280.

00N

orm

al28

000

Nl

AD-A

DM

-9AD

ADM

1028

0.00

Nor

mal

AD-A

DM

-10

Fil

Lb

Mld

At

Tt

Real

Flex

ural

Failu

reM

dTe

sted

ByLa

bR

fM

ould

Nb

Age

atT

tTe

stD

t

Real

Load

Flex

ural

Stre

ngth

aver

age

Mod

eTe

sted

By

Refe

renc

eNu

mbe

rTe

stDa

teLo

ad(k

N)St

reng

thN/

mm

")g

280

Nor

mal

ADAD

M1

MP

(kN)

N/m

m)

280

Nor

mal

280

Nl

00

AD-A

DM

-1M

PAD

ADM

2M

P28

0N

orm

al0.

0AD

-AD

M-2

MP

280

Nor

mal

AD-A

DM

-3M

P

Quarterly

!Rep

ort!M

ay!2012!

Page

!11!of

!13!

App

endix!B!–!Taffs!Well!and

!Gilfach!Co

ncrete

!Results

!!

!

MIXw/cSlump,!mm1daycoefficient!of!variation7day

coefficient!of!variation28day


coefficient!of!variation

Control!slump0.489523.80.4482.858.92.96.14.6Taff's!FEED0.6146018.51.6383.950.20.4""Control!Taff's!Well0.55collapse13.21.9392.350.50.65.310.4Taff's!Well0.5590182.544.32.855.73.16.64.3Taff's!Well!PA0.557021.21.047.81.2581.16.74.3Taff's!Well!PB0.5582.522.74.246.23.256.23.66.18.0Taff's!Well!PC0.556521.41.546.92.056.67.466.3Gilfach!FEED0.748808.22.423.31.731.31.1""Control!Gilfach0.67collapse8.15.524.45.534.91.94.63.3Gilfach0.678512.70.934.52.941.43.95.23.3Gilfach!PA0.677514.91.431.40.743.32.65.68.2Gilfach!PB0.6797.514.71.432.83.342.82.25.54.5Gilfach!PC0.677512.10.930.52.339.90.65.26.3

No!admixture!mixesCompressive!strength!N/mm2Flexural!strength!N/mm2

MIXw/cSlump,!mm%!fines!of!FA1day




coefficient!of!variation

Control0.55collapse113.21.9392.350.50.65.310.4Taff's!Well0.5902.823.90.752.51.864.35.56.13.6Taff's!Well!PA0.5904.9201.849.76.461.11.96.416.0Taff's!Well!PB0.5757.123.20.851.12.6633.06.123.1Taff's!Well!PC0.5659200.947.10.259.92.16.814.2Gilfach0.55603.514.81.144.31.3552.85.44.1Gilfach!PA0.5550519.82.043.81.655.31.965.6Gilfach!PB0.5550718.41.743.20.855.62.15.47.3Gilfach!PC0.5545917.21.741.70.4532.65.910.6

w/c!ratio!0.55!admixtureCompressive!strength!N/mm2Flexural!strength!N/mm2


A p p e n d i x |2

Appendix 2. KEMCO Test Reports

HHF '<�2'9+7/'1

IF +6:/7+*�8/>+�*/897/(:9/43

��

��

��

��

�'843'7=��479'7

�4/89:7+�)439+39�4,�,++*�2'9+7/'1

�/7):1'9/3-�14'*�7'9/4

&/+1*�7'9/4��

�'79/)1+�8/>+�*/897/(:9/43��<+9�8/;/3-�2+9.4*�

JF�14<�4,�9+89�51'39

�7:8.+7

�/7�8)7++3

�7+*:89+7

�:89�)411+)947

@!/+;+�2+8.�8/>+

�43)7+9+�8'3*

��?��22

�479'7�8'3*

��?��22

$��574*:)9��

[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

[NESQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.��

[NESRP$��574*:)9�R��</9.��$��574*:)9��

��/11+7��

[NESSP$��574*:)9�S��</9.��

[NESTP$��574*:)9�T��</9.��

[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

[NEWQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.��

[NEWRP$��574*:)9�R��</9.��

[NEWSP$��574*:)9�S��</9.��

KF"+89�7+8:19

��p

��

EE

��

[NES

��

��

[NESQ

��

��

[NESR

��

��

[NESS

� ��

��

[NEST

��

��

[NEW

� �

��

[NEWQ

��

��

[NEWR

��

��

[NEWS

��

��

E��

�43)7+9+�8'3*

�479'7�8'3*

&/+1*

7'9/4��

��22�'3*

(+14<�',9+7

*+)'39'9/43�9+89

'<�2'9+7/'1

$��574*:)9

�43)7+9+

8'3*

p

E� �

�49'7

8'3*

�p

!'251+

!/>+

�22�

�4/89:7+

)439+39��

�/7):1'9/3-

14'*�7'9/4

�'9'

#!��

�!�

��!

�e

�G2/3

"49'1�%+/-.9��0-�

��

$��574*:)9

�43)7+9+�8'3*

��22�'3*�(+14<�',9+7�*+)'39'9/43�9+89

�479'7�8'3*

�'9+8�4,�9+898

��'3�p��'3�

'<�2'9+7/'1

4)0�9=5+

�7'3/9+

!/>+��22�

��p

�4/89:7+�)439+39��

��

�'-8�/3�949'1

�

LLFXbgkg

'��$��9+89�51'39

(��7+*:89+7

��)�� '<�2'9+7/'1

ZYN

�:89�)411+)947

�+,47+�57+*:89+7

�/11+7

�/7�8)7++3

�

MMF�745+79=� !'251+

'<�2'9+7/'1

$��574*:)9

�43)7+9+�8'3*

�479'7�8'3*

!/>+��22�

��p��

E

!:7,')+�*7=�*+38/9=�C-��D

��

��

�;+3�*7=�*+38/9=�C-��D

��

��

%'9+7A'(84759/43A7'9/4��

E

��

��

!41/*A)439+39�C�D

��

��

EE

!/>+�� 22

!/>+� ��22

!/>+��22

!/>+��22

!/>+��22

!/>+��22

!/>+��22

NNFF""+89�7+5479�,47�)43)7+9+

HHD"+89Ahig^l]kcgfA`dgnFA

IDVi\^cfa

'�� '<�2'9+7/'1

(��$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

��p�

�

�

��p�

�

�

�p��

��

��

�p��

�

�

��p

��

��

��p

�

�

p�

��

��

p�

��

��

�p

��

��

�p

��

��

p��

��

��

p��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��p��

��

�

��p��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��p

��

��p

��

949'1

�

949'1

�

)��7+*:89+7�574*:)9

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

��p

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

p�

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

�p

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

p��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��p��

�

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��p��

��

��

� �

��

� �

��

��

��

��p

��

��

��

��

949'1

�

�

�

�

*��$��574*:)9��</9.�57+*:89+7�574*:)9�

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

��p

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

p�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�p

� ��

� �

��

��

��

��

��

��

p��

� ��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��p

��

��

��

��

949'1

�

�

�

�

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

[NESQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.��S��[NESRP$��574*:)9��</9.��S��[NESSP$��574*:)9��</9.��SS�[NESTP$��574*:)9��</9.��T�

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

'<�2'9+7/'1

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

XTESQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q

XTESRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R

XTESSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S

XTESTP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�T

�

++��/11+7

+9'/3+*��'88+*�� +9'/3+*��'88+*�� +9'/3+*��'88+*�� +9'/3+*��'88+*�� +9'/3+*��'88+*��

��p

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

p�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�p

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

�

��

p��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��p��

��

��

��

� ��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��p��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��p��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��p

��

��

��

��

��

949'1

�

�

�

�

�

JDVi\^cfaA]lim_j

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

UESP�/11+7

UESQP�/11+7�Q

UESRP�/11+7�R

UESSP�/11+7�S

UESTP�/11+7�T

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

X\jj_^CBD

Yc_m_jco_C22D

'<�2'9+7/'1

[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

XTESQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q

XTESRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R

XTESSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S

XTESTP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�T

UESP�/11+7

UESQP�/11+7�Q

UESRP�/11+7�R

UESSP�/11+7�S

UESTP�/11+7�T

�!��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

X\jj_^CBD

Yc_m_jco_C22D

[NESP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

[NESQP$��574*:)9�Q�</9.��S��

[NESRP$��574*:)9��</9.��S��

[NESSP$��574*:)9��</9.��SS�

[NESTP$��574*:)9��</9.��T�

�!��

�

OOFF""+89�7+5479�,47�2479'7

HHD"+89Ahig^l]kcgfA`dgnFA

IDVi\^cfa

'�� '<�2'9+7/'1

(��$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

�

�

�

�

�

��

�

�

��

��

�

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

�

��

�

�

)��7+*:89+7�574*:)9

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

�

�

�

�

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

� �

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

*��$��574*:)9��</9.�57+*:89+7�574*:)9�

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

�

�

�

�

�

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��p��

��

��p

949'1

p��

��

��p��

��

��p��

��

p��

��

��p�

��

�p

��

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

[NEWQP$��574*:)9�Q��</9.�XT�W��[NEWRP$��574*:)9��</9.�XT�W��[NEWSP$��574*:)9��</9.�XT�W��

�'88+*��

��p

�

��p��

��

��p

949'1

p��

��

��p��

��

��p��

��

p��

��

��p�

��

�p

��

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

XTEWQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q

XTEWRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R

XTEWSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S

�'88+*��

��p

�

��p��

��p��

��p

��p

949'1

949'1

p��

p��

��p��

��p��

��p��

��p��

p��

p��

��p�

��p�

�p

�p

��p�

��p�

�p��

�p��

��p

��p

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

'<�2'9+7/'1

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

�

++��/11+7

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

+9'/3+*��

�'88+*��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

��

��

�

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

�

JDVi\^cfaA]lim_j

��p��

��p

949'1

p��

��p�

�p

p��

��p��

��p��

!/+;+�8/>+

�22�

UEWP�/11+7

UEWQP�/11+7�Q

UEWRP�/11+7�R

UEWSP�/11+7�S

��p

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

X\jj_^CBD

Yc_m_jco_C22D

'<�2'9+7/'1

[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

XTEWQP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�Q

XTEWRP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�R

XTEWSP�7+*:89+7�574*:)9�S

UEWP�/11+7

UEWQP�/11+7�Q

UEWRP�/11+7�R

UEWSP�/11+7�S

�'843'7=��479'7

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

X\jj_^CBD

Yc_m_jco_C22D

[NEWP$��574*:)9��(+,47+�57+*:89+7�

[NEWQP$��574*:)9�Q�</9.�XT�W��

[NEWRP$��574*:)9��</9.�XT�W��

[NEWSP$��574*:)9��</9.�XT�W��

�'843'7=��479'7

㪈

䋱䋱䋮㪩㪸㫎

㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃

䋲䋮㪩㪼㫈㫌㫀㫉㪼㪻㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅

㪊㪅㪇㩼

㪌㪅㪇㩼

㪎㪅㪇㩼

㪐㪅㪇㩼

䇭䇭䇭㪤㪸㫊㫆㫅㫉㫐㩷㪤

㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉

㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㫆㪽㩷㪽㪼㪼㪻㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃

㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾㩷㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆

㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪧㪸㫉㫋㫀㪺㫃㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㩿㫎㪼㫋㩷㫊㫀㫍㫀㫅㪾㩷㫄㪼㫋㪿㫆㪻㪀

䋳䋮㪝㫃㫆㫎㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋

㪚㫉㫌㫊㪿㪼㫉

㪘㫀㫉㩷㫊㪺㫉㪼㪼㫅

㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉

㪛㫌㫊㫋㩷㪺㫆㫃㫃㪼㪺㫋㫆㫉

㶎㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫄

㪼㫊㪿㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼

㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻

㪉㪅㪌㬍㪍㪅㪍㫄㫄

㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉㩷㫊㪸㫅㪻

㪉㪅㪇㬍

㪊㪅㪇㫄㫄

㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷

䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚䌁㪀㩷㩷

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀㩷㩷

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷㩷㩷

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌

㪺㫋㩷䌃㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀㩷㩷

䌖䋷䋭䌍䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪤㪘㪀㩷㩷

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪤㪙㪀㩷㩷

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪤㪚㪀㩷㩷

䋴䋮㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫊㫌㫃㫋

㪐㪅㪌䌾㪇

㪈㪅㪈㪈

䋭䋭

㪊㪅㪐㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃

㪍㪋㪅㪌

㪊㪅㪌㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁

㪎㪐㪅㪏

㪌㪅㪇㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂

㪏㪋㪅㪇

㪎㪅㪇㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃

㪏㪏㪅㪊

㪐㪅㪇㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌍

㪍㪌㪅㪉

㪋㪅㪈㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁

㪎㪎㪅㪋

㪋㪅㪎㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂

㪎㪐㪅㪉

㪌㪅㪊㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃

㪏㪈㪅㪊

㪍㪅㪊㩼

㪛㪸㫋㪼㫊㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㫊

㪐㪄㪤㪸㫉㪄㪈㪉䌾㪉㪏㪄㪤㪸㫉㪄㪈㪉

㪩㪸㫎


㪩㫆㪺㫂㩷㫋㫐㫇㪼

㪞㫉㫀㫋㫊㫋㫆㫅㪼

㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋

㪈㪈

㪫㫆㫋㪸㫃㩷㪮㪼㫀㪾㪿㫋㩷㩿㫂㪾㪀

㪐㪉㪐㪇

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻㩷㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉㩷㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋


㪤㫆㫋㪸㫉

㫊㪸㫅㪻

㪉䌾㪇

䋭㪉㪅㪈㪉

㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼

㫊㪸㫅㪻

㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾

㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻

㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉

㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋

㪩㪸㫎



㪛㪸㫋㪸

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪐㪅㪌䌾㪇

㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀㩷

㪈㪅㪈㪈

㪙㪸㪾㫊㩷㫀㫅㩷㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃


㪪㪸㫄

㫇㫃㪼

㪪㫀㫑㪼

㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼

㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻

㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪋䌾㪇

䋭㪈㪅㪎㪊


㪬㪪㪎㩷㩿㪙㪌㪇㪇㪀

㪘㪪㪏㪇㪇

㪧㪛㪉㪇㪇㪪

㪈㪌㪇䌭

㪊䋯㫄㫀㫅


㪉

䋵䋵䋮䌐䌨䌯䌴䌯

㪸㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋

㪹㪀㩷㪧㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪺㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎


䌕䌓䋷


㪙㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㫇㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉

㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉


㪊

䋶䋶䋮㪧㫉㫆㫇㪼㫉㫋㫐㩷

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪌㪄㪇㪅㪉㪌㫄㫄

䋭

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪈㪅㪇㪄㪇㪅㪌㫄㫄

䋭

㪉㪅㪌䌾

㪈㪅㪉

䋭

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄

䋭

䋭

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㫄㫄

䋭

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪉㪅㪇㪄㪈㪅㪇㫄㫄

䋭

㪌㪌㪅㪎

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪐㪅㪌㪄㪋㪅㪇㫄㫄

䋭䋭

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪋㪅㪇㪄㪉㪅㪇㫄㫄

㪪㪸㫄

㫇㫃㪼

㪩㪸㫎





㪮㪸㫋㪼㫉䇭

㪸㪹㫊㫆㫉㫇㫋㫀㫆㫅䇭㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪈㪅㪊㪎


䋭

㪪㫌㫉㪽㪸㪺㪼㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩

㪉㪅㪍㪌

㪦㫍㪼㫅㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩

㪉㪅㪍㪉

㪪㫆㫃㫀㪻䇭㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷䋨㩼䋩

㪋

䋷䋷䋮䋮㪫㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫇㫆㫉㫋㩷㪽㫆㫉㩷㪺㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼

䋱䋱䋩㪫㪼㫊㫋䇭䌰䌲䌯

䌤䌵䌣䌴䌩䌯䌮䇭䌦䌬䌯䌷䋮䇭

䋲䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧

㪸㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎


㪹㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀

㪩㪼㫋㪸㫀㫅㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪧㪸㫊㫊㪼㪻㩷㩿㩼㪀



㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪌㪅㪐

㪐㪋㪅㪈

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪎㪋㪅㪋

㪈㪐㪅㪎

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪈㪅㪍

㪏㪅㪈

㪈㪋㪅㪇

㪏㪍㪅㪇

㪈㪅㪉

㪍㪅㪐

㪉㪏㪅㪍

㪌㪎㪅㪋

㪇㪅㪍

㪍㪅㪊

㪉㪇㪅㪐

㪊㪍㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪍

㪌㪅㪎

㪈㪍㪅㪏

㪈㪐㪅㪎

㪇㪅㪏

㪋㪅㪐

㪈㪉㪅㪌

㪎㪅㪉

㪈㪅㪇

㪊㪅㪐

㪊㪅㪎

㪊㪅㪌

㪊㪅㪐

㪊㪅㪌

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪺㪀㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋






㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪅㪉

㪐㪏㪅㪏

㪇㪅㪐

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪌㪅㪋

㪐㪊㪅㪋

㪉㪅㪍

㪇㪅㪎

㪐㪐㪅㪊

㪐㪅㪊

㪏㪋㪅㪈

㪍㪅㪍

㪋㪅㪐

㪐㪋㪅㪋

㪈㪌㪅㪎

㪍㪏㪅㪋

㪈㪉㪅㪐

㪈㪇㪅㪎

㪏㪊㪅㪎

㪊㪈㪅㪎

㪊㪍㪅㪎

㪉㪐㪅㪈

㪉㪎㪅㪈

㪌㪍㪅㪍

㪉㪌㪅㪋

㪈㪈㪅㪊

㪉㪐㪅㪋

㪊㪉㪅㪍

㪉㪋㪅㪇

㪈㪈㪅㪊

㪈㪏㪅㪌

㪉㪋㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪻㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㪀






㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪈㪅㪌

㪏㪏㪅㪌

㪈㪇㪅㪐

㪈㪇㪅㪉

㪏㪐㪅㪏

㪉㪋㪅㪉

㪍㪋㪅㪊

㪉㪉㪅㪍

㪉㪈㪅㪈

㪍㪏㪅㪎

㪈㪏㪅㪎

㪋㪌㪅㪍

㪈㪎㪅㪍

㪈㪍㪅㪍

㪌㪉㪅㪈

㪈㪍㪅㪍

㪉㪐㪅㪇

㪈㪌㪅㪐

㪈㪌㪅㪉

㪊㪍㪅㪐

㪈㪍㪅㪈

㪈㪉㪅㪐

㪈㪍㪅㪊

㪈㪍㪅㪋

㪉㪇㪅㪌

㪎㪅㪐

㪌㪅㪇

㪐㪅㪎

㪈㪈㪅㪌

㪐㪅㪇

㪌㪅㪇

㪎㪅㪇

㪐㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼

㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪩㪸㫎



㩿㫄㫄㪀


㪈㪐䌾㪈㪊㪅㪉

㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾㪐㪅㪌

㪐㪅㪌䌾㪍㪅㪎

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪌䌾㪇㪅㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪋䌾㪉

㪉䌾㪈

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾

㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪉䌾㪈

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌


㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾

㪇


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌

㪺㫋㩷䌁

䌓䌋䋭䌃䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂

䌓䌋䋭

䌃䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃



㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪋䌾㪉

㪐㪐㪅㪈

㪉䌾㪈

㪐㪍㪅㪌

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪏㪐㪅㪐


㪎㪎㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪋㪎㪅㪐


㪈㪏㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾

㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀


㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀



㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪋䌾㪉

㪏㪐㪅㪈

㪉䌾㪈

㪍㪍㪅㪌

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪋㪏㪅㪐


㪊㪊㪅㪇


㪈㪍㪅㪎


㪎㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾

㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃




㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪋䌾㪉

㪌

㪼㪼㪀㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉









㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪌

㪐㪐㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪅㪎

㪐㪎㪅㪏

㪇㪅㪐

㪐㪐㪅㪈

㪇㪅㪍

㪐㪐㪅㪋

㪇㪅㪉

㪐㪐㪅㪏

㪋㪅㪉

㪐㪊㪅㪍

㪈㪅㪌

㪐㪎㪅㪍

㪈㪅㪊

㪐㪏㪅㪈

㪈㪅㪇

㪐㪏㪅㪏

㪎㪅㪏

㪏㪌㪅㪏

㪉㪅㪏

㪐㪋㪅㪏

㪈㪅㪍

㪐㪍㪅㪌

㪈㪅㪊

㪐㪎㪅㪌

㪈㪏㪅㪌

㪍㪎㪅㪊

㪍㪅㪊

㪏㪏㪅㪌

㪌㪅㪌

㪐㪈㪅㪇

㪊㪅㪌

㪐㪋㪅㪇

㪉㪉㪅㪊

㪋㪌㪅㪇

㪈㪏㪅㪈

㪎㪇㪅㪋

㪈㪊㪅㪍

㪎㪎㪅㪋

㪍㪅㪋

㪏㪎㪅㪍

㪋㪌㪅㪇

㪎㪇㪅㪋

㪎㪎㪅㪋

㪏㪎㪅㪍

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

䋳䋩䌇䌲䌡䌤䌩䌮䌧䇭䌣䌵䌲䌶䌥䌳


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌆䋭䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉

䌆䋭䌃䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁

䌆䋭䌃䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂

䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃


㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪋䌾㪉

㪉䌾㪈

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌


㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌


㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾㪇

㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪐㪅㪌

㪍㪅㪎

㪋㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪈

㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪈㪇

㪉㪇

㪊㪇

㪋㪇

㪌㪇

㪍㪇

㪎㪇

㪏㪇

㪐㪇

㪈㪇㪇䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩

䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥

䌳䌩䌺䌥䋨㫄㫄䋩

㪩㪸㫎



䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁


䌓䌋䋭䌃䌃䋺㪪

㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃




䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝

㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃

㪠㪪㩷㪜㪥㩷㪈㪉㪍㪉㪇

㪐㪅㪌

㪍㪅㪎

㪋㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪈

㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪈㪇

㪉㪇

㪊㪇

㪋㪇

㪌㪇

㪍㪇

㪎㪇

㪏㪇

㪐㪇

㪈㪇㪇

䌐䌡䌳䌳䌥䌤䋨䋦䋩

䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥



䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁

㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀


䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀


㪍

䋸䋸䋮䋮㪫㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫇㫆㫉㫋㩷㪽㫆㫉㩷㫄㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉




㪸㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎







㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪌㪅㪐

㪐㪋㪅㪈

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪎㪋㪅㪋

㪈㪐㪅㪎

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪈㪅㪍

㪏㪅㪈

㪇㪅㪈

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪈㪅㪉

㪍㪅㪐

㪉㪇㪅㪐

㪎㪐㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪍

㪍㪅㪊

㪉㪏㪅㪊

㪌㪇㪅㪎

㪇㪅㪍

㪌㪅㪎

㪉㪊㪅㪌

㪉㪎㪅㪉

㪇㪅㪏

㪋㪅㪐

㪈㪎㪅㪎

㪐㪅㪌

㪈㪅㪇

㪊㪅㪐

㪌㪅㪋

㪋㪅㪈

㪊㪅㪐

㪋㪅㪈

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇







㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪍

㪐㪐㪅㪋

㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪋

㪐㪐㪅㪍

㪌㪅㪌

㪐㪊㪅㪐

㪋㪅㪎

㪋㪅㪊

㪐㪌㪅㪊

㪈㪈㪅㪋

㪏㪉㪅㪌

㪈㪇㪅㪉

㪐㪅㪊

㪏㪍㪅㪇

㪈㪏㪅㪋

㪍㪋㪅㪈

㪈㪍㪅㪍

㪈㪌㪅㪌

㪎㪇㪅㪌

㪊㪉㪅㪏

㪊㪈㪅㪊

㪊㪇㪅㪌

㪉㪏㪅㪐

㪋㪈㪅㪍

㪉㪊㪅㪋

㪎㪅㪐

㪉㪍㪅㪌

㪉㪍㪅㪇

㪈㪌㪅㪍

㪎㪅㪐

㪈㪈㪅㪇

㪈㪌㪅㪍

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇







㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪈

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪇㪅㪈

㪇㪅㪈

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪈㪏㪅㪌

㪏㪈㪅㪋

㪈㪏㪅㪈

㪈㪎㪅㪍

㪏㪉㪅㪊

㪉㪌㪅㪍

㪌㪌㪅㪏

㪉㪌㪅㪈

㪉㪋㪅㪍

㪌㪎㪅㪎

㪉㪉㪅㪎

㪊㪊㪅㪈

㪉㪉㪅㪉

㪉㪈㪅㪐

㪊㪌㪅㪏

㪉㪇㪅㪈

㪈㪊㪅㪇

㪉㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪐㪅㪐

㪈㪌㪅㪐

㪏㪅㪊

㪋㪅㪎

㪐㪅㪉

㪐㪅㪍

㪍㪅㪊

㪋㪅㪎

㪌㪅㪊

㪍㪅㪊

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇


㪌㪅㪊

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊䌾

㪇㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪌㪍㪅㪎


㪊㪋㪅㪌


㪈㪋㪅㪌

㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪉䌾㪈

㪏㪈㪅㪏


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀


㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇


㪈㪈㪅㪇


㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪏㪋㪅㪍


㪍㪏㪅㪇


㪊㪎㪅㪌

㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉

㪐㪐㪅㪌

㪉䌾㪈

㪐㪋㪅㪏


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌓䌋䋭䌍䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌

㪺㫋㩷䌁

䌓䌋䋭䌍䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂

䌓䌋䋭

䌍䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃


㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇





㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌



㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏

㪋䌾㪉

㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉

㪉䌾㪈

㪉䌾㪈

㪈㪐䌾

㪈㪊㪅㪉

㪈㪊㪅㪉䌾

㪐㪅㪌




㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋


㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪩㪸㫎



㩿㫄㫄㪀


㪎










㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪉

㪐㪐㪅㪏

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪌

㪐㪐㪅㪊

㪇㪅㪈

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪋㪅㪊

㪐㪌㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪊

㪐㪐㪅㪍

㪇㪅㪊

㪐㪐㪅㪎

㪇㪅㪈

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪎㪅㪍

㪏㪎㪅㪋

㪈㪅㪎

㪐㪎㪅㪐

㪈㪅㪋

㪐㪏㪅㪊

㪇㪅㪎

㪐㪐㪅㪉

㪈㪋㪅㪐

㪎㪉㪅㪌

㪌㪅㪈

㪐㪉㪅㪏

㪋㪅㪊

㪐㪋㪅㪇

㪉㪅㪏

㪐㪍㪅㪋

㪈㪏㪅㪐

㪌㪊㪅㪍

㪈㪍㪅㪈

㪎㪍㪅㪎

㪈㪊㪅㪌

㪏㪇㪅㪌

㪈㪉㪅㪋

㪏㪋㪅㪇

㪌㪊㪅㪍

㪎㪍㪅㪎

㪏㪇㪅㪌

㪏㪋㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇




㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪋䌾㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪅㪏䌾㪉

㪉䌾㪈

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌


㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌆䋭䌍䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉

䌆䋭䌍䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁

䌆䋭䌍䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂

䌆䋭䌍䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪐㪅㪌

㪍㪅㪎

㪋㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪈

㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪈㪇

㪉㪇

㪊㪇

㪋㪇

㪌㪇

㪍㪇

㪎㪇

㪏㪇

㪐㪇


䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥


㪩㪸㫎



䌓䌋䋭䌍䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁

䌓䌋䋭䌍䌂䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂

䌓䌋䋭䌍䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃

䌆䋭䌍䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉

䌆䋭䌍䌁䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌁

䌆䋭䌍䌂䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌂

䌆䋭䌍䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃

㪤㪸㫊㫆㫅㫉㫐㩷㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉

㪐㪅㪌

㪍㪅㪎

㪋㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪈

㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪈㪇

㪉㪇

㪊㪇

㪋㪇

㪌㪇

㪍㪇

㪎㪇

㪏㪇

㪐㪇

㪈㪇㪇


䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥



䌖䋷䋭䌍䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁


䌖䋷䋭䌍䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪙㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌍䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㪚㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀

㪤㪸㫊㫆㫅㫉㫐㩷㪤㫆㫉㫋㪸㫉

㪈

䋱䋱䋮㪩㪸㫎


䋲䋮㪩㪼㫈㫌㫀㫉㪼㪻㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅

㪊㪅㪇㩼

㪌㪅㪇㩼

㪎㪅㪇㩼

㪐㪅㪇㩼

㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㫆㪽㩷㪽㪼㪼㪻㩷㫄㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃

㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾㩷㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆

㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪧㪸㫉㫋㫀㪺㫃㪼㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼㩷㪻㫀㫊㫋㫉㫀㪹㫌㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㩿㫎㪼㫋㩷㫊㫀㫍㫀㫅㪾㩷㫄㪼㫋㪿㫆㪻㪀

䋳䋮㪝㫃㫆㫎㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋

㪚㫉㫌㫊㪿㪼㫉


㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉


㶎㪪㫀㪼㫍㪼㩷㫄

㪼㫊㪿㩷㫊㫀㫑㪼


㪉㪅㪌㬍㪍㪅㪍㫄㫄

㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷


䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚䌁㪀㩷㩷

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌂㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪙㪀㩷㩷

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷㩷㩷

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷㩷㩷


㪺㫋㩷䌃㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪚㪀㩷㩷

䋴䋮㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫊㫌㫃㫋

㪐㪅㪌䌾㪇

㪇㪅㪌㪏

䋭䋭

㪏㪅㪐㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃

㪌㪈㪅㪍

㪉㪅㪏㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁

㪍㪍㪅㪈

㪋㪅㪐㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌂

㪍㪐㪅㪌

㪎㪅㪈㩼

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌃

㪎㪉㪅㪐

㪐㪅㪇㩼

㪋䌾㪇

䋭㪈㪅㪌㪏

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻

㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉

㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋

㪩㪸㫎


㪪㪸㫄

㫇㫃㪼

㪪㫀㫑㪼

㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼

㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀


㪚㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼

㫊㪸㫅㪻

㪚㫀㫉㪺㫌㫃㪸㫋㫀㫅㪾

㫃㫆㪸㪻㩷㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆


㪛㪸㫋㪸

㪬㪪㪎㩷㩿㪙㪌㪇㪇㪀

㪘㪪㪏㪇㪇

㪧㪛㪉㪇㪇㪪

㪈㪌㪇䌭

㪊䋯㫄㫀㫅

㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻

㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪌

㪫㫆㫋㪸㫃㩷㪮㪼㫀㪾㪿㫋㩷㩿㫂㪾㪀

㪋㪉㪍㪇



㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㫄㫄㩷㪸㫅㪻㩷㪹㪼㫃㫆㫎㩷㪸㪽㫋㪼㫉㩷㪻㪼㪺㪸㫅㫋㪸㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋

㪛㪸㫋㪼㫊㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㫊

㪈㪄㪝㪼㪹㪄

㪈㪉䌾

㪈㪋㪄㪝㪼㪹㪄㪈㪉

㪩㪸㫎


㪩㫆㪺㫂㩷㫋㫐㫇㪼

㪣㫀㫄㪼㫊㫋㫆㫅㪼


㪍㪅㪎䌾㪇

㪤㫆㫀㫊㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷㩿㩼㪀㩷

㪇㪅㪌㪏

㪙㪸㪾㫊㩷㫀㫅㩷㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪉

䋵䋵䋮䌐䌨䌯䌴䌯

㪸㪀㩷㪭㪎㩷㫋㪼㫊㫋㩷㫇㫃㪸㫅㫋

㪹㪀㩷㪧㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪺㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎


䌕䌓䋷


㪙㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㫇㫉㪼㪻㫌㫊㫋㪼㫉

㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉


㪊

䋶䋶䋮㪧㫉㫆㫇㪼㫉㫋㫐㩷

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌㪄㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪈㪄㪇㪅㪌㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪇㪅㪌㪄㪇㪅㪉㪌㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪋㪄㪉㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㪉㪄㪈㩷㩿㫄㫄㪀


㪉㪅㪊㪍䌾

㪈㪅㪈㪏

㪪㫌㫉㪽㪸㪺㪼㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩

㪉㪅㪏㪈

㪉㪅㪏㪈

㪦㫍㪼㫅㩷㪻㫉㫐㩷㪻㪼㫅㫊㫀㫋㫐㩷䋨㪾㪆ঢ䋩

㪉㪅㪎㪐

㪉㪅㪎㪐

㪮㪸㫋㪼㫉䇭

㪸㪹㫊㫆㫉㫇㫋㫀㫆㫅䇭㫉㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㩿㩼㪀

㪇㪅㪍㪏

㪇㪅㪍㪌

㪪㫆㫃㫀㪻䇭㪺㫆㫅㫋㪼㫅㫋㩷䋨㩼䋩

㪌㪋㪅㪎

㪌㪐㪅㪇

㪪㪸㫄

㫇㫃㪼

㪩㪸㫎



㪋

䋷䋷䋮䋮㪫㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㫉㪼㫇㫆㫉㫋㩷㪽㫆㫉㩷㪺㫆㫅㪺㫉㪼㫋㪼




㪸㪀㩷㪩㪸㫎







㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪅㪐

㪐㪏㪅㪈

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪊㪎㪅㪏

㪍㪇㪅㪊

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪉㪇㪅㪈

㪋㪇㪅㪉

㪉㪇㪅㪇

㪏㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪎㪅㪋

㪊㪉㪅㪊

㪋㪎㪅㪎

㪎㪅㪏

㪈㪐㪅㪍

㪉㪈㪅㪇

㪉㪍㪅㪎

㪌㪅㪇

㪈㪋㪅㪍

㪈㪉㪅㪌

㪈㪋㪅㪉

㪊㪅㪉

㪈㪈㪅㪋

㪎㪅㪏

㪍㪅㪋

㪉㪅㪌

㪏㪅㪐

㪊㪅㪍

㪉㪅㪏

㪏㪅㪐

㪉㪅㪏

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇







㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪊㪅㪊

㪐㪍㪅㪎

㪉㪅㪍

㪉㪅㪋

㪐㪎㪅㪍

㪈㪉㪅㪈

㪏㪋㪅㪍

㪈㪇㪅㪉

㪐㪅㪈

㪏㪏㪅㪌

㪈㪏㪅㪇

㪍㪍㪅㪍

㪈㪌㪅㪉

㪈㪊㪅㪐

㪎㪋㪅㪍

㪈㪏㪅㪋

㪋㪏㪅㪉

㪈㪍㪅㪇

㪈㪋㪅㪏

㪌㪐㪅㪏

㪈㪐㪅㪈

㪉㪐㪅㪈

㪈㪏㪅㪉

㪈㪍㪅㪐

㪋㪉㪅㪐

㪈㪍㪅㪍

㪈㪉㪅㪌

㪈㪏㪅㪉

㪈㪏㪅㪏

㪉㪋㪅㪈

㪈㪉㪅㪌

㪈㪐㪅㪍

㪉㪋㪅㪈

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇







㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪍㪅㪊

㪏㪊㪅㪎

㪈㪌㪅㪌

㪈㪋㪅㪏

㪏㪌㪅㪉

㪉㪎㪅㪐

㪌㪌㪅㪏

㪉㪍㪅㪍

㪉㪌㪅㪍

㪌㪐㪅㪍

㪉㪇㪅㪋

㪊㪌㪅㪋

㪈㪐㪅㪍

㪈㪏㪅㪐

㪋㪇㪅㪎

㪈㪊㪅㪎

㪉㪈㪅㪎

㪈㪊㪅㪊

㪈㪊㪅㪉

㪉㪎㪅㪌

㪈㪇㪅㪊

㪈㪈㪅㪋

㪈㪇㪅㪌

㪈㪇㪅㪌

㪈㪎㪅㪇

㪍㪅㪌

㪋㪅㪐

㪎㪅㪋

㪏㪅㪇

㪐㪅㪇

㪋㪅㪐

㪎㪅㪈

㪐㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇


㪎㪅㪈


㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃




㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪋䌾㪉

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪊㪏㪅㪊


㪉㪌㪅㪇


㪈㪋㪅㪌

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪋䌾㪉

㪏㪋㪅㪌

㪉䌾㪈

㪌㪎㪅㪐


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁㩷㩿㫎㫀㫋㪿㩷㪪㪢㪄㪚㪘㪀





㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇


㪈㪐㪅㪍


㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌

㪎㪉㪅㪇


㪌㪍㪅㪇


㪊㪎㪅㪏

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪋䌾㪉

㪐㪎㪅㪋

㪉䌾㪈

㪏㪎㪅㪉


㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌

㪺㫋㩷䌁


䌓䌋䋭

䌃䌃䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃



㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇



㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪉䌾㪈

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌


㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌



㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌



㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪋䌾㪉

㪉䌾㪈





㩿㫄㫄㪀

㪩㪸㫎



㩿㫄㫄㪀

䌖䋷䋭䌃䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌

㪺㫋㩷㩿㪹㪼㪽㫆㫉㪼㩷㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㪀

㪌










㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪅㪇

㪐㪐㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪊㪅㪏

㪐㪌㪅㪉

㪇㪅㪉

㪐㪐㪅㪏

㪇㪅㪈

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪇㪅㪈

㪐㪐㪅㪐

㪍㪅㪉

㪏㪐㪅㪇

㪈㪅㪉

㪐㪏㪅㪍

㪇㪅㪐

㪐㪐㪅㪇

㪇㪅㪋

㪐㪐㪅㪌

㪎㪅㪇

㪏㪉㪅㪇

㪉㪅㪈

㪐㪍㪅㪌

㪈㪅㪎

㪐㪎㪅㪊

㪈㪅㪇

㪐㪏㪅㪌

㪐㪅㪇

㪎㪊㪅㪇

㪋㪅㪍

㪐㪈㪅㪐

㪊㪅㪌

㪐㪊㪅㪏

㪉㪅㪉

㪐㪍㪅㪊

㪈㪉㪅㪍

㪍㪇㪅㪋

㪈㪈㪅㪇

㪏㪇㪅㪐

㪐㪅㪌

㪏㪋㪅㪊

㪍㪅㪐

㪏㪐㪅㪋

㪍㪇㪅㪋

㪏㪇㪅㪐

㪏㪋㪅㪊

㪏㪐㪅㪋

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇

㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇




㫋㫆㫋㪸㫃

㪍㪅㪎䌾㪋

㪋䌾㪉

㪉䌾㪈

㪈䌾㪇㪅㪌


㪇㪅㪉㪌䌾

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌


㩿㫄㫄㪀




䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃


㪐㪅㪌

㪍㪅㪎

㪋㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪈

㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪈㪇

㪉㪇

㪊㪇

㪋㪇

㪌㪇

㪍㪇

㪎㪇

㪏㪇

㪐㪇


䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥


㪩㪸㫎



䌓䌋䋭䌃䌁䋺㪪㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁


䌓䌋䋭䌃䌃䋺㪪

㫂㫀㫄㫄㪼㫉㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌃




䌆䋭䌃䌃䋺㪝

㫀㫃㫃㪼㫉㩷䌃


㪐㪅㪌

㪍㪅㪎

㪋㪉㪅㪏

㪉㪈

㪇㪅㪌

㪇㪅㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪈㪉㪌

㪇㪅㪇㪍㪊

㪇㪈㪇

㪉㪇

㪊㪇

㪋㪇

㪌㪇

㪍㪇

㪎㪇

㪏㪇

㪐㪇

㪈㪇㪇


䌓䌩䌥䌶䌥



䌖䋷䋭䌃䌁䋺㪭㪎㩷㫇㫉㫆㪻㫌㪺㫋㩷䌁





DDB�#8�.#5'3+#-

EB�'26+3'&�4+:'�&+453+$65+0/

��

��

��

��

�#40/#39��035#3

�0+4563'�%0/5'/5�0(�(''&�.#5'3+#-

�+3%6-#5+/)�-0#&�3#5+0

"+'-&�3#5+0��

�#35+%-'�4+:'�&+453+$65+0/��8'5�4+7+/)�.'5*0&�

FB�-08�0(�5'45�1-#/5

�364*'3

�+3�4%3''/

�3'&645'3

�645�%0--'%503

<�+'7'�.'4*�4+:'

�0/%3'5'�4#/&

� ;��..

�035#3�4#/&

��;��..

��130&6%5��

VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

VJANLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*��L��

VJANMK ��130&6%5�M��8+5*�� 130&6%5��

��+--'3��

VJANNK ��130&6%5�N��8+5*��

VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

VJARLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*��

VJARMK ��130&6%5�M��8+5*��

VJARNK ��130&6%5�N��8+5*��

GB�'45�3'46-5

�� k�

��

AA

��

VJANL

��

��

VJANM

��

��

VJANN

��

��

VJANO

��

��

VJAR

��

��

VJARL

��

��

VJARM

� �

��

VJARN

��

��

��130&6%5

�0/%3'5'

4#/&

�05#3

4#/&

�k�

A��

A� �

�035#3�4#/&

"+'-&

3#5+0��

��..�#/&

$'-08�#(5'3

&'%#/5#5+0/�5'45

�#8�.#5'3+#-

k�

�#.1-'

�+:'

�..�

�0+4563'

%0/5'/5��

�+3%6-#5+/)

-0#&�3#5+0

�0/%3'5'�4#/&

�#5#

��

��

��

�`

�C.+/

�

�05#-�!'+)*5��,)�

��

��130&6%5

�0/%3'5'�4#/&

��..�#/&�$'-08�#(5'3�&'%#/5#5+0/�5'45

�035#3�4#/&

�#5'4�0(�5'454

��#3�k ��#3��13�k��13�

�#8�.#5'3+#-

�0%,�591'

�#4#-5

�+:'��..�

�� k�

�0+4563'�%0/5'/5��

��

�#)4�+/�505#-

HHBS]bfb

#�� 5'45�1-#/5

$��3'&645'3

��%��#8�.#5'3+#-

UTJ

�645�%0--'%503

�'(03'�13'&645'3

�+--'3

�+3�4%3''/

�

IIBB��'45�3'1035�(03�%0/%3'5'

DD@�'45=cdbYgXf^ba=[_biB=

E@QdWYâ\

#��#8�.#5'3+#-

$�� 130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

%��3'&645'3�130&6%5

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

� �

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

&�� 130&6%5��8+5*�13'&645'3�130&6%5�

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

� �

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� k��

��

��k�

505#-

�k��

��k��

�� k��

��k�

�k

k��

��

�� k��

��

�� k��

��

��k�

��

�k

��

k

��

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

VJANLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*�SO�R��VJANMK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��VJANNK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��

�#44'&��

�� k��

��

�� k��

��

��k�

505#-

k��

��

�� k��

��

�� k��

��

��k�

��

�k

��

k

��

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

SOANLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L

SOANMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M

SOANNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N

�#44'&��

�� k��

��

�� k��

��k�

505#-

505#-

k

k��

�� k��

�� k��

�� k��

��k�

k��

�� k��

�� k��

��k�

�k

k

�k��

��k��

�� k��

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

�#8�.#5'3+#-

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

�

''��+--'3

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

�

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

F@QdWYâ\=XgdhZe

�� k��

��k�

505#-

��k�

�k

k

k��

�� k��

�� k��

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

PANK�+--'3

PANLK�+--'3�L

PANMK�+--'3�M

PANNK�+--'3�N

�� k��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

SWeeZY?>@

T^ZhZe^jZ?..@

�#8�.#5'3+#-

VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

SOANLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L

SOANMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M

SOANNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N

PANK�+--'3

PANLK�+--'3�L

PANMK�+--'3�M

PANNK�+--'3�N

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

SWeeZY?>@

T^ZhZe^jZ?..@

VJANK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

VJANLK ��130&6%5�L�8+5*�SO�R��

VJANMK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��

VJANNK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��

��

JJBB��'45�3'1035�(03�.035#3

DD@�'45=cdbYgXf^ba=[_biB=

E@QdWYâ\

#��#8�.#5'3+#-

$�� 130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

%��3'&645'3�130&6%5

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

�

��

��

��

� �

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

&�� 130&6%5��8+5*�13'&645'3�130&6%5�

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

�

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� k��

��

��k�

505#-

k��

��

�� k��

��

�� k��

��

�k��

��

��k

��

k

��

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

VJARLK ��130&6%5�L��8+5*�SO�R��VJARMK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��VJARNK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��

�#44'&��

��k�

��

�� k��

��

��k�

505#-

k��

��

�� k��

��

�� k��

��

�k��

��

��k

��

k

��

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

SOARLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L

SOARMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M

SOARNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N

�#44'&��

��k�

��

�� k��

�� k��

��k�

��k�

505#-

505#-

k��

k��

�� k��

�� k��

�� k��

�� k��

��k�

�k��

�k

��k

k

k

�k��

��k��

��k��

�� k��

�� k��

��k�

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

�#8�.#5'3+#-

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

�

''��+--'3

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

�'5#+/'&��

�#44'&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

�

� ��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

F@QdWYâ\=XgdhZe

�� k��

��k�

505#-

�k��

��k

k

k��

�� k��

�� k��

�+'7'�4+:'

�..�

PARK�+--'3

PARLK�+--'3�L

PARMK�+--'3�M

PARNK�+--'3�N

��k�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

SWeeZY?>@

T^ZhZe^jZ?..@

�#8�.#5'3+#-

VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

SOARLK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�L

SOARMK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�M

SOARNK�3'&645'3�130&6%5�N

PARK�+--'3

PARLK�+--'3�L

PARMK�+--'3�M

PARNK�+--'3�N

�#40/#39��035#3

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

SWeeZY?>@

T^ZhZe^jZ?..@

VJARK ��130&6%5��$'(03'�13'&645'3�

VJARLK ��130&6%5�L�8+5*�SO�R��

VJARMK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��

VJARNK ��130&6%5��8+5*�SO�R��

�#40/#39��035#3

Fin

al R

epo

rt

Ap

pe

nd

ix |

3

Appe

ndix

3. Fu

ll Sta

ge 1

Resu

lts

Tab

le A

3.1

Stag

e 1

full

resu

lts

Com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

Fl

exur

al st

reng

th

MIX

w

/c

Slum

p (m

m)

1 da

y (N

/mm

2 ) C

OV

(%

) 7

day

(N/m

m2 )

CO

V

(%)

28 d

ay

(N/m

m2 )

CO

V

(%)

28da

y (N

/mm

2 ) C

OV

(%

) N

0.

48

95

23.8

0.

4 48

2.

8 58

.9

2.9

6.1

4.6

G-F

EED

0.

66

80

12.5

1.

9 30

.3

0.0

39.1

3.

5 -

- N

-G

0.58

co

llaps

e 13

.5

4.1

36

2.7

48.7

1.

6 5.

4 4.

4 G

-A

0.58

12

0 17

.6

0.6

43.5

1.

0 52

.2

2.3

5.6

5.3

G-B

0.

58

80

17

1.6

40.2

1.

6 49

.9

1.9

5.6

5.4

G-C

0.

58

80

17.9

0.

7 40

.4

2.0

50.1

1.

2 6

5.7

G-D

0.

58

60

19.3

1.

9 42

.2

2.1

52.3

1.

4 5.

8 7.

3 G

-E

0.58

60

16

.6

0.3

40.6

1.

0 48

.1

3.6

5.4

5.6

B-F

EED

0.

72

70

9.3

2.4

25.8

0.

4 35

.5

0.9

- -

N-B

0.

67

colla

pse

9.6

0.5

26.2

1.

0 35

.9

1.3

4.6

0.2

B-A

0.

67

70

11.8

1.

8 30

.4

2.9

41.7

2.

2 5.

3 4.

9 B

-B

0.67

80

12

.9

2.1

31.3

4.

5 43

.7

1.7

5.5

5.1

B-C

0.

67

62.5

13

2.

3 33

.1

2.0

42.7

1.

8 5.

4 7.

7 B

-D

0.67

47

.5

13.2

2.

3 35

.2

0.4

45.6

2.

6 5.

6 3.

2 L-

FEED

0.

614

60

18.5

1.

6 38

3.

9 50

.2

0.4

- -

N-L

0.

55

colla

pse

13.2

1.

9 39

2.

3 50

.5

0.6

5.3

10.4

L-

A

0.55

90

18

2.

5 44

.3

2.8

55.7

3.

1 6.

6 4.

3 L-

B

0.55

70

21

.2

1.0

47.8

1.

2 58

1.

1 6.

7 4.

3 L-

C

0.55

82

.5

22.7

4.

2 46

.2

3.2

56.2

3.

6 6.

1 8.

0 L-

D

0.55

65

21

.4

1.5

46.9

2.

0 56

.6

7.4

6 6.

3 S-

FEED

0.

748

80

8.2

2.4

23.3

1.

7 31

.3

1.1

- -

N-S

0.

67

colla

pse

8.1

5.5

24.4

5.

5 34

.9

1.9

4.6

3.3

S-A

0.

67

85

12.7

0.

9 34

.5

2.9

41.4

3.

9 5.

2 3.

3 S-

B

0.67

75

14

.9

1.4

31.4

0.

7 43

.3

2.6

5.6

8.2

S-C

0.

67

97.5

14

.7

1.4

32.8

3.

3 42

.8

2.2

5.5

4.5

S-D

0.

67

75

12.1

0.

9 30

.5

2.3

39.9

0.

6 5.

2 6.

3

Fin

al R

epo

rt

Ap

pe

nd

ix |

4

Appe

ndix

4. Fu

ll Sta

ge 2

Resu

lts

Tab

le A

4.1

Stag

e 2

full

resu

lts

Com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

Fl

exur

al st

reng

th

MIX

w

/c

Slum

p (m

m)

% fi

nes

of F

A

1 da

y (N

/mm

2 ) C

OV

(%

) 7

day

(N/m

m2 )

CO

V

(%)

28 d

ay

(N/m

m2 )

CO

V

(%)

28da

y (N

/mm

2 ) C

OV

(%

)

N

0.55

co

llaps

e 1

13.2

1.

9 39

2.

3 50

.5

0.6

5.3

10.4

G-A

0.

55

65

2 16

.4

1.7

44.4

2.

7 53

2.

7 5.

7 5.

7 G

-B

0.55

67

.5

2.85

20

.1

1.4

46.1

1.

6 59

.2

2.2

5.8

9.6

G-C

0.

55

70

5.11

20

.7

0.9

46.1

1.

7 55

.2

1.9

5.9

7.1

G-D

0.

55

60

6.54

19

.4

3.1

48.3

1.

3 58

.6

1.7

5.5

2.7

G-E

0.

55

85

9.0

16.6

2.

2 47

.8

1.6

59.2

1.

7 4.

7 12

.2

B-A

0.

55

60

1.0

14.5

2.

8 48

.2

1.1

57.6

2.

5 6.

1 4.

2 B

-B

0.55

30

2.

89

14.6

1.

7 49

.2

1.1

60.5

1.

8 6.

4 3.

8 B

-C

0.55

30

5.

05

17.9

2.

7 48

.4

1.5

59.4

2.

4 6.

1 1.

0 B

-D

0.55

25

7.

43

16.5

2.

8 48

.3

2.4

58.5

2.

5 5.

9 1.

4

L-A

0.

5 90

2.

8 23

.9

0.7

52.5

1.

8 64

.3

5.5

6.1

3.6

L-B

0.

5 90

4.

9 20

1.

8 49

.7

6.4

61.1

1.

9 6.

4 16

.0

L-C

0.

5 75

7.

1 23

.2

0.8

51.1

2.

6 63

3.

0 6.

1 23

.1

L-D

0.

5 65

9.

0 20

0.

9 47

.1

0.2

59.9

2.

1 6.

8 14

.2

S-A

0.

55

60

3.5

14.8

1.

1 44

.3

1.3

55

2.8

5.4

4.1

S-B

0.

55

50

5.0

19.8

2.

0 43

.8

1.6

55.3

1.

9 6

5.6

S-C

0.

55

50

7.0

18.4

1.

7 43

.2

0.8

55.6

2.

1 5.

4 7.

3 S-

D

0.55

45

9.

0 17

.2

1.7

41.7

0.

4 53

2.

6 5.

9 10

.6

�

Documents

Sand from Surplus Quarry Material - Kayasand · quarry fines in its quarries, which could undergo further processing to provide the majority of the sand required by the construction