STRUCTURAL LAB REPORT

By

SAMTA S. KUBDE
Roll No:- 13CE65R09

Instructor

Dr. Sushanta Chakraborty

Structural Lab -II ( CE 69012) report
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of
the second Semester Curriculum for the Degree of

Master in Technology in Structural Engineering

Department of Civil Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Kharagpur-721 302, INDIA
Year:- 2014

0
 CONTENTS

o CONCRETE MIX DESIGN

Mix Design for M25 grade of concrete ( As per IS 10262:2009)

Mix Design for M30 grade of concrete ( As per IS 10262:2009)
o STRENGTH DETERMINATION TESTS ON CONCRETE-
DIRECT TESTS

Compressive Test

Flexural Strength of Concrete

Stress-Strain behavior of Concrete
o STRENGTH DETERMINATION TESTS ON CONCRETE-
INDIRECT TESTS

Ultra Sonic Pulse Velocity Method

Rebound Hammer Test
o DESIGN AND TESTING OF R.C.C T BEAM
o RECTANGULAR REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM
o DESIGN AND TESTING OF POST TENSIONED PRE-
STRESSED BEAM
o TESTING OF STEEL BEAM
o DESIGN AND TESTING OF RC COLUMN
o CORE SAMPLING AND TESTING OF CONCRETE
o MODAL ANALYSIS OF FRAME USING ROVING HAMMER FFT
ANALYSER AND SHAKE TABLE

Roving Hammer FFT Analyzer

Numerical Model

Shake Table Test
o REFERENCES

1
 1. CONCRETE MIX DESIGN
MIX DESIGN FOR M25 GRADE OF CONCRETE (AS PER IS 10262:2009)

Grade designation = M25

Type of cement = PSC 43 confirming as per IS 8112
Maximum nominal size of aggregate = 20 mm
Minimum cement content = 300 kg/m3
Maximum water cement ratio = 0.5
Workability (slump) = 50-60 mm
Exposure condition = moderate
Quality control = Good
Maximum cement content = 450 kg/m3
Zone of sand = II
Specific gravity of cement = 3.08
Specific gravity of coarse aggregate = 2.8
Specific gravity of fine aggregate = 2.6
Water absorption of coarse aggregate = 0.8%
Water absorption of fine aggregate = 0.5%
Amount of air trapped = 2%
28 days cube strength of concrete = 45 MPa
Surface moisture of coarse aggregate = nil
Surface moisture of fine aggregate = nil

TARGET STRENGTH FOR MIX PROPORTIONING :

fck = fck + s*t
= 25+4*1.65
= 31.6 N/mm2

SELECTION OF WATER CEMENT RATIO :

28 days cube strength for concrete = 41.7-46.6 N/mm2 (curve C in fig 2: IS 10262-1982)
Therefore, w/c = 0.45 < 0.5 Hence OK

SELECTION OF WATER CONTENT:

From Table 2, maximum water content =186 liters (for 25 to 50 mm slump range)
for 20 mm aggregate

Estimated water content for 50-60 mm slump =186+ X X186

=188 liters

CALCULATION OF CEMENT CONTENT:

Water cement ratio= 0.45

Cement content = = 418 kg/m3
.

PROPORTION OF VOLUME OF COARSE AGGREGATE AND FINE AGGREGATE

CONTENT:
From Table 3,volume of coarse aggregate corresponding to 20 mm size aggregate and fine aggregate

2
(Zone II)
for water-cement ratio of 0.50 =0.62
In this case w/c ratio = 0.45
Therefore, as water-cement ratio is lowered by 0.05, the proportion of volume of coarse aggregate is
increased by 0.01 (at the rate of -/+ 0.01 for every 0.05 change in water-cement ratio)

Therefore, corrected proportion of volume of coarse aggregate = 0.63

So, volume of fine aggregate = 1-0.63 = 0.37

MIX CALCULATIONS:
The mix calculations per unit volume of concrete shall be as follows:

a) Volume of concrete = 1 m3

b) Volume of cement =
X

= . X

= 0.136 m3

c) Volume of water = X

= X

= 0.188 m3

d) Volume of all in aggregate = 1- (0.136+0.188)

= 0.676 m3

e) Mass of coarse aggregate = e x Volume of coarse aggregate x Specific gravity of coarse

aggregate x 1000
= 0.676 X 0.63 X 2.8 X 1000
= 1192 kg

f) Mass of fine aggregate = e x Volume of coarse aggregate x Specific gravity of fine aggregate x
1000
= 0.676 X 0.37 X 2.6 X 1000
= 650 kg
Corrections:
Increase in fine aggregate content= 1%
Corrected mass of fine aggregate = 650*1.01 = 657 kg
Therefore , reduction in water content=188-7=181 kg

MIX PROPORTIONS FOR TRIAL :

a) Cement = 418 kg/m3
b) Water = 181 kg/m3
c) Fine aggregate = 657 kg

3
 d) Coarse aggregate = 1192 kg
e) Water-cement ratio = 0.45

MIX DESIGN FOR M30 GRADE OF CONCRETE (AS PER IS 10262:2009)

1. Design stipulations:-
Grade of Concrete = M30
Maximum Nominal size of aggregate = 20mm
Type of Cement = PPC 43 Grade Confirming to IS
8112
Workability = 50-60 mm Slump
Quality control = good
Exposure = moderate
Minimum cement Content =320 kg/m3
Maximum Water Cement ratio =0.45
Method of Concrete placing =Manual
Degree of Supervision =Good
Type of Aggregate =Crushed Angular aggregate
Maximum Cement Content =450 kg/m3
2. Test Data for Materials
Cement used = 43 Grd
Specific gravity of fine aggregate (Sfa) =2.6
Surface moisture of course aggregate = nil
Surface moisture of fine aggregate = nil
Water absorption of Coarse aggregate =0.8%
Specific gravity of cement , Sc =3.08
Specific gravity of course aggregate (Sca) =2.80
Water absorption of Fine aggregate =0.5%
3. Target Mean Strength
fct = fck +s*t
=(30+5*1.65) N/mm2 (Table 1 of IS
10262:2009)
=38.25 N/mm2
4. Water Cement Ratio
28 days cube strength for concrete = 41.7-46.6 N/mm2 (Curve c in fig 2 of
IS 10262:1982)

4
w/c = 0.38 (less than .45 ok)

5. Selection of water and Sand Content

Zone of Sand = II
For zone II grade of sand and max size of aggregate = 20 mm
Water content in kg (Per m3) of concrete = 186 kg/m3
Volume of Coarse aggregate per unit volume to Total aggregate
=0.62 + from Table 3 of IS 10262:2009
for w/c =0.5
% Coarse aggregate to be increased @ 0.01 for every 0.05 change in w/c

Coarse aggregate as % of total aggregate by absolute volume

= 0.62 + 0.01*(0.5-0.38)/0.05
= 64.4 %

Sand as % of total aggregate by absolute volume

=(1-0.644) *100
=35.6%
Increment in water content =186 + (10%/25%) *(3/100)*186 ;
Clause 4.2 of IS 10262:2009
=188.23 kg/m3
6. Determination of Cement Content:
W/C = 0.38
Water = 188.23 lt. per Kg
Cement = 188.23/0.38
= 495.342 Kg/m3
7. Mix Calculations
Volume of Concrete =1 m3
Volume of Cement = Mass of Cement /Sp. gravity of
Cement * 1/1000
=495.342/3.08 * 1/1000
=0.161 m3
Volume of Water = Mass of water /Sp. gravity of water *
1/1000

5
 =188.23/1 * 1/1000
=0.188 m3
Volume of All in aggregates =1-0.161-0.188
=0. 651 m3
Mass of Coarse Aggregates =0.644*0.651*2.8*1000
=1174 kg
Mass of Fine Aggregates =0.356*0.651*2.6*1000
=602.50
Corrected Mix Proportion
Corrected for moist fine aggregate =1% of weight of fine aggregate
a) Fine Aggregate =603 *1.01
=609 kg/m3
b) Coarse Aggregate =1174 kg/m3
c) Water Cement ratio =0.38
d) Water = 188 - 6
=182 kg/m3
e) Cement = 495 kg/m3

2. STRENGTH DETERMINATION TESTS ON CONCRETE- DIRECT

TESTS
COMPRESSION TEST
OBJECTIVE
To determine the compressive strength of concrete by conducting direct compression test on
cylindrical and cubical concrete specimens.
Test Result: M25 Concrete
Testing after 28 days
Crushing Comp. Crushing Comp.
Mean Mean
Cube No Load Strength Cylinder Load Strength
(ton) (ton)
(ton) (MPa) (ton) (MPa)
1 95 1 58
32.2
2 97 97.7 42.6 58
3 101

6
Test Result: M30 Concrete
Testing after 28 days
Crushing Comp. Crushing Comp.
Mean Mean
Cube No Load Strength Cylinder Load Strength
(ton) (ton)
(ton) (MPa) (ton) (MPa)
1 109 1 59.5
2 106 106.6 46.48 59.5 33.03
3 105

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. The direct compression test results for both the specimens are higher results when compared to the
mix design calculations as per IS Codal provisions.
2. This is due to the fact that only 3 samples cannot measure the strength of the concrete accurately. For
fairly accurate results large number of samples must be used to establish characteristic strength.
3. Target mean strength itself is obtained by the most idealized materials , and quality controls, but those
idealised situations may not be correctly established in the conducted test.
4. Cylinder strength values are found to be closer to the characteristic strength of concrete which might
be due to the inherent size effect in concrete. The zone of confinement is quite uniform throughout
the cubes due to smaller height but there is a cone of confinement at the ends in case of cylinders
leading to localized shear zones rather than distributed shear bands leading ultimate failure.

FLEXURAL TEST ON CONCRETE

OBJECTIVE
This test is done to measure the flexural tensile strength of concrete by applying concentrated
forces on 1/3rd and 2/3rd spans.

Dimension of Prism-100 x 100 x 500 mm

7
Section Modulus Z
= 100*1002/6
=1.67 x 105 mm3
Flexural Strength = P*9.81*L/(3*Z)
Test Result: M25 Concrete
Total Ultimate Load(2P) Flexural Tensile Strength
Specimen
Kg N/mm2
1 1245 5.49
2 1285 5.66
3 1275 5.62
Test Result: M30 Concrete
Total Ultimate Load(2P) Flexural Tensile Strength
Specimen
Kg N/mm2
1 1345 5.93
2 1550 6.83
3 1430 6.30

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS

1. The experimental values of Flexural strength is found to be higher than the theoretical values as
per the IS codal provisions which are 3.5 N/mm2 and 3.83 N/mm2 for M25 and M30 concrete
respectively.
2. This may be due to the fact that concrete is a heterogeneous material and also the probability of
weaker planes in the flexural zones of the element needs to be considered in the determination of
flexural strength.

SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH OF CONCRETE

OBJECTIVE
This test is done to measure the tensile strength of concrete in an indirect way by applying
compressive force.
THEORY
The Splitting Tensile Strength test has become the most popular test for tensile strength
determination. The method is easy to carry out and provides quick results. It is carried out on a standard

8
cylinder, tested on its side in diametric compression, as shown in following figure. If the load is applied
along the two symmetric lines joining outer longitudinal surface of cylinder, then an element on the
vertical diameter of the cylinder is subjected to a vertical compressive stress of: Vertical compression, c
Horizontal tension,

=
( )
Where, P is the applied compressive load, L the cylinder length, D the cylinder diameter. It is not
practical to apply a true line load along the top and bottom of the specimen, partly because the specimen
sides are not sufficiently smooth, and partly because this would induce extremely high compressive
stresses near the points of load application. Therefore, the load is usually applied through a narrow
bearing strip of relatively soft material

Observations shows that, Splitting tensile strength is 5 to 12% higher than the direct tensile
strength.
Experimental Set-up:

9
Test Result:
Ultimate Load Split Tensile Strength
Grade of Concrete
Ton N/mm2
2 13.5 10 /( 300
M 25 13.5
150) = 1.91
2 15.5 10 /( 300
M 30 15.5
150) = 2.19

Crack Pattern:

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. The direct tensile strength is about one tenth of the uni-axial compressive strength for normal
strength undamaged concrete. For M25 concrete, 28 days compressive strength by testing on 28
days is coming out to be 42.6 N/mm2 for cubes and from the split tensile test, results are 1.91
MPa which is less than (1/10) x42.6= 4.26 MPa. This is a discrepancy.
2. It is observed that the split tensile strength of concrete is always less than the flexural strength,
since the resistance to loading is more in flexural strength test due to uniform compressive stress
distribution. But in split tensile strength test, apart from negligible zone of confinement , the
entire longitudinal section is under near uniform tensile stress.
3. The advantage of the splitting tension test is that specimen is identical to that used for the
compression test. Also the test is not significantly influenced by the surface conditions of the
specimen, such as moisture or temperature, or by minor irregularities in the testing.

10
 4. The split tensile strength test is not very useful for low-strength materialsl because such
specimens suffer considerable deformation during the test, which alters the distribution of
stresses.

STRESS-STRAIN BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE

OBJECTIVE:
The objective behind performing this test is to find out stress strain relationship of
concrete and from there to find out the modulus of elasticity of concrete (both static & dynamic
modulus).
THEORY:
The stress strain relationship of concrete is not linear. In the design of concrete structures
we need to have a good knowledge about the modulus of elasticity of concrete. As Hookes law
holds well for initial shorter region, we need to have the knowledge of entire curve including the
non linear part. Moreover, there is more than one modulus of elasticity that can be defined for
concrete. The modulus of elasticity found out from actual behavior is called the static modulus of
elasticity. Up to 10%-15% of ultimate strength, the stress strain curve remains linear. The
modulus of elasticity found out from the tangent drawn at the origin is called initial tangent
modulus. The modulus of elasticity found out from the tangent drawn at any point is called
tangent modulus. The modulus of elasticity from joining the origin to a particular point on the
stress strain curve gives secant modulus for that point. The chord modulus can be obtained by
joining the two points on the curve.

11
PROCEDURE:
The cylindrical specimen of 150 mm dia and 300 mm height is taken. Dial gauge at a gauge
length of 200mm was fixed. Then the values of axial shortening were taken for different load values from
the dial gauge.

Experimental results:
Gauge length = 200 mm.

Least Count = 0.001 mm.

M30 Readings M25 Readings

Stress Extensometer Extensometer
Load (ton)
(M Pa) Reading for Strain Reading for Strain
M30 M25
0 0 132 0 70 0
5 2.77 133 2.5E-06 80 2.5E-05
10 5.55 137 1.25E-05 165 0.00024
15 8.32 137.5 1.38E-05 220 0.00038
20 11.10 138 0.000015 299 0.00057
25 13.87 138 0.000015 370 0.00075
30 16.65 137 1.25E-05 460 0.00098
35 19.42 137 1.25E-05 485 0.00104
45 24.97 137 1.25E-05 520 0.00113
45 24.97 137 1.25E-05 555 0.00121
50 27.75 140 0.00002 610 0.00135

12
Stress Strain Plot

30 Stress Strain Plot- M25 Cylindrical

Specimen
25

20
Stress
15 vs Strain
Plot
Stress

10

0
Strain
-0.0002 0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014 0.0016

12 Stress Strain Plot- M30 Cylindrical

Specimen
10

8
Stress vs
6 Strain
Plot
Stress

0
Strain
0 0.0000020.0000040.0000060.0000080.000010.0000120.0000140.000016

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. Concrete shows nonlinear behaviour in stress strain characteristics.
2. Because of the experimental & instrumental errors & also due to presence of initial micro-cracks,
the initial portion of the curve is highly non-linear .
3. Also erroneous results are observed for initial tangent modulus (initial tangent modulus for M25
grade concrete is higher than as in the case of M30 concrete).

13
 3. STRENGTH DETERMINATION TESTS ON CONCRETE- INDIRECT
TESTS
NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTS
A. ULTRA SONIC PULSE VELOCITY METHOD
OBJECTIVE
This test gives the qualitative estimation of concrete. Without breaking the
specimen of concrete one can assess the quality of the concrete after casting at hardened stage.
Quality of concrete is assessed comparing with the values given in IS: 13311 (Part 1) - 1992.
PRINCIPLE OF TESTING
An ultrasonic (acoustic) wave is generated by exciting a piezoelectric material
with a high-amplitude, transient electrical pulse from a high-voltage, high-current pulsar. The
short burst of ultrasonic energy from the crystal is transmitted into the concrete and impinges
upon the various interfaces within. The change in acoustic impedance at the various interfaces,
air voids, water-filled voids, reinforcing bars, cracks, de-laminations and other interfaces or
inclusions within the concrete causes a portion of the input energy to reflect (echo) back to the
surface. There the energy is detected by a second piezoelectric element. A larger portion of the
energy continues to travel forward, strike other interfaces and return an amount of energy based
on (1) the area of the reflecting surface, (2) the angle of the reflecting surface, and (3) the
acoustic impedance of the reflecting material. The time for the echo to return is measured with
the accurate time base of an oscilloscope.
The wave velocity depends upon the elastic properties and mass of the medium, and
hence if the mass and velocity of wave propagation are known it is possible to assess the elastic
properties. For an infinite, homogeneous, isotropic elastic medium, the compression wave
velocity is given by:
= /
where, V=compression wave velocity (km/s)
(1 )
K= (1 + )(1 2)

Ed=dynamic modulus of elasticity (kN/mm2)

14
=density (kg/m3) and v =dynamic Poissons ratio.

Velocity Criterion of concrete quality grading (as per IS: 13311-part I)

Ultra Sonic Pulse Velocity Test Equipment

15
Test Results for M25 grade of Concrete

Cube No Length of Time (s) Velocity (km/s) Quality of concrete

specimen (mm)

1 150 34.64 4.330 Good

2 150 34.17 4.390 Good

3 150 35.21 4.260 Good

Test Results for M30 grade of Concrete

Cube No Length of Time (s) Velocity (km/s) Quality of concrete

specimen (mm)

1 150 34.09 4.40 Good

2 150 34.01 4.41 Good

3 150 33.26 4.51 Excellent

Test Results for M25 grade slab

Length of Time Mode of

Velocity (km/s)
measurement (s) measurement
(m)
1.00 233 4.29 Direct Mode

16
UPV results with compressive loaded M25 grade cube

Length of the cube specimen = 150 mm.

UPV Reading
Load Velocity (km/s)
(s)
Ton
0 33.33 4.50
10 33.26 4.51
20 33.19 4.52
30 33.11 4.53
40 32.97 4.55
50 33.11 4.53
60 33.11 4.53
70 33.26 4.51
80 33.41 4.49
90 34.17 4.39
100 36.41 4.12
Load vs UPV Plot

Load vs UPV
4.6
4.55
4.5
4.45
4.4
UPV (km/s)

4.35
4.3
4.25
4.2
4.15
4.1
4.05
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Load (ton)

17
OBSERVATION AND COMMENTS:
1. As concrete is inherently heterogeneous it is essential that path length should be sufficiently long
to avoid the effect of heterogeneity of the material .Here the test is conducted on the cube sample
which has significantly smaller length which may lead to erroneous results.
2. The surface should be smooth enough to maintain good contact between specimen and face of
each transducer. The use of coupling medium may also affect the result.

B. REBOUND HAMMER TEST

OBJECTIVE
Rebound hammer test is done to find out the compressive strength of concrete by using rebound hammer
as per IS: 13311 (Part 2) - 1992.
PRINCIPLE OF TESTING
The rebound of an elastic mass depends on the hardness of the surface against which its
mass strikes. When the plunger of the rebound hammer is pressed against the surface of the concrete, the
spring controlled mass rebounds and the extent of such a rebound depends upon the surface hardness of
the concrete. The surface hardness and therefore the rebound is taken to be related to the compressive
strength of the concrete. The rebound value is read from a graduated scale and is designated as the
rebound number or rebound index. The compressive strength can be read directly from the graph
provided on the body of the hammer.
Rebound Hammer Test Equipments

Steps followed in Rebound Hammer Test

18
In this test, a part of the structure is tested by taking cores from that part (cylinders or cubes).We would
then determine the rebound numbers for the concrete. Then the concrete strength is determined from
direct tests and the results from rebound hammer test and direct tests are compared to calibrate the
instrument. Then the investigator would test the different parts of structure with the rebound hammer that
needs to be investigated. If the rebound numbers for concrete being investigated are approximately the
same or higher than the concrete sample that had met the project specifications, the tested concrete can be
determined to be acceptable. If the rebound numbers in the area being tested are lower, then additional
investigations would need to be done.

Rebound Hammer Value Vs. Compressive Strength

Test Results for M30 grade of Concrete

Rm= mean Rebound Number out of 20 no. of results in this case.

Cube No. Weight (kg) Rm S.D. Load(ton) Strength (MPa)

1 8.66 24.80 2.48 109 47.2

2 8.60 21.05 2.68 106 46.22

3 8.72 24.05 3.00 105 45.18

19
Rebound Number vs Compressive Strength

Rebound Number vs Compressive

Strength (M30)
47.5
Compressive Strength (MPa)

47

46.5

46

45.5

45
20 21 22 23 24 25
Mean Rebound Number

Test Results for M25 grade of Concrete

Rm= mean Rebound Number out of 20 no. of results in this case.

Cube No. Weight (kg) Rm S.D. Load(ton) Strength (MPa)

1 8.72 26.3 2.1 95 40.88

2 8.60 27.4 2.5 97 42.29

3 8.66 27.3 1.5 101 43.74

20
Rebound Number vs Compressive Strength

Rebound Number vs Compressive

Strength (M25)
44
Compressive Strength (MPa)

43.5
43
42.5
42
41.5
41
40.5
26.2 26.4 26.6 26.8 27 27.2 27.4 27.6
Mean Rebound Number

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. The Rebound hammer is an easy to use instrument for non-destructive test for obtaining an
immediate indication of concrete strength in various parts of a structure. But it can be only used
as a rough indication of concrete strength .
2. It is observed that the characteristic strength of the concrete can approximately be known as it is
slightly lower than the Rebound Number obtained.
3. The angle of application needs to be taken into account to give the correct reading.
4. As the test greatly depends on the surface condition, type and size of aggregate, it is best used for
comparison to identify areas of lower strength concrete which may then be sampled by coring and
tested to determine in-situ strength by conventional crushing.

21
 4. DESIGN AND TESTING OF R.C.C T BEAM

OBJECTIVE:
To determine the flexural behavior of RCC T-Beam under two point load.
To determine the elastic and plastic moment carrying capacity of T beam.
Given data:
Overall depth of beam (D) =250mm
Depth of flange (Df) =80 mm,
Web thickness (bw) =150 mm
Flange width (bf) =350 mm,
Grade of concrete M25
Loading Arrangements

Design calculations:
Effective Span , L_eff = 3.0 m

Width of Web , bw = 150 Mm

Total Width of Flange, bf = 350 Mm

Depth of Flange, Df = 80 Mm

Overall Depth, D = 250 Mm

Depth of Web , dw = 170 Mm

Effective Cover = 25 mm

22
Yield strength of main steel, fy1 = 415 N/mm

Yield strength of secondary steel, fy2 = 250 N/mm

Characteristic Strenght of Concrete, fck = 25 N/mm

Density of Concrete, Dc = 24 kN/m

Nominal Diameter of Main Steel bars for Web, r = 12 Mm

Nominal Diameter of Main Steel bars for Flange, f = 6 Mm

Nominal Diameter of Stirrups, s = 6 Mm

Effective Depth, d = 225 Mm

Steel In Web

Minimum reinforcement on web (Clause 26.5.1.1), Ast_min1 = 70.00 mm

Provide 3-T-12 at the bottom of Web

Total Area of Steel to be Provided, Ast1 = 339.43 mm

Let us assume Xu<Df,

0.36 fck bf Xu = 0.87 fy Ast

Depth of N.A, Xu = 38.90 Mm

Xu < Df , Assumption is right

Limiting Depth of N.A, Xu_max = 108 Mm

Xu < Xu_lim, Section is Under reinforced

23
 Moment of Resistance of Section , Mu = 0.87 fy Ast *(d-0.42
Xu)
M.R = 25.57 kN-m

Dead Load, DL = 1.28 kN/m

Dead Load Moment at mid span, Md = 1.44 kN-m

Considering Two Point loading, Moment at mid span M=w*l/3

P- Estimated Point load at l/3 and 2l/3 from the support

P = 24.13 kN

Design of Shear Reinforcement

Ultimate Shear, Vu = P+ total DL /2 = 26.05 kN

_v = Vu/ (bw * d) = 0.77 N/mm

% Steel Provided, 100* Ast1 / (bw * d) = 1.01 %

_c, from Table 19 IS 456-2000 = 0.64 N/mm

_v > _c

Calculated Transverse reinforcement Spacing in the web sv, = 620.00 mm

Spacing of Two legged - 6mm Shear reinforcement in Web

(Clause 26.5.1.6) = 150 mm
.
Minimum reinforcement on flange (Clause 26.5.2.1), Ast_min2 = 120 mm/m

Provide 6 T @150mm c/c in Longitudinal direction for flange

Reinforcement Detailing of T- beam:

24
BAR BENDING SCHEDULE

Cutting Total
Bar dia Spacing No. of
Sl No Bar Name Shape Length Length
mm Mm Bars
Mm M
1 12 Longitudinal - 3 3442 10.326
2 6 Transverse 150 23 396 9.108
Closed
3 6 150 23 744 17.112
Stirrups
4 6 Hanger - 4 3346 13.384

Experimental Setup
DIAL-GAUGE POSITION FOR BENDING TEST

Experimental Results
Cube & Cylinder Compression test of concrete
Testing after 28 days
Crushing Comp. Mean Crushing Comp. Mean
Cube No Load Strength Comp. Cylinder Load Strength Comp.
(T) (MPa) Strength (T) (MPa) Strength

25
 (MPa) (MPa)
1 97 42 1 37 20.53
2 87.5 37.89 41.09 2 51 28.31 26.83
3 100.5 43.38 3 57 31.64

Bending Test results on Beam

Experimental Dial Gauge Readings
Dial Gauge 1 Dial Gauge 2 Dial Gauge 3
Load Dial Deflection Dial Deflection Dial Deflection
Reading (mm) Reading (mm) Reading (mm)
0 370 0 188 0 420 0
600 408 0.38 228 0.4 458 0.38
1200 450 0.8 280 0.92 500 0.8
1800 552 1.82 395 2.07 696 2.76
2400 665 2.95 535 3.47 715 2.95
3000 806 4.36 690 5.02 845 4.25
3600 965 5.95 870 6.82 1000 5.8
4200 1100 7.3 1038 8.5 1140 7.2
4800 1260 8.9 1105 9.17 1295 8.75
5400 1424 10.54 1385 11.97 1405 9.85
6000 1568 11.98 1504 13.16 1595 11.75
6600 1990 16.2 1925 17.37 1901 14.81

26
Load Vs Deflection curve at one third point(DF-1)

Load vs Displacement Plot DG-1

7000
Load (kg) 6000
Load vs
5000 Displacement
Plot
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 5 10 15 20
Displacement (mm)

Load Vs Deflection curve at one third point(DF-2)

Load vs Displacement Plot DG-2

7000
Load (kg)

6000
Load vs
5000 Displacemen
t Plot
4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0 5 10 15 20
Displacement (mm)

27
Load Vs Deflection curve at one third point(DF-3)

Load vs Displacement Plot DG-3

7000
Load (kg)
6000
Load vs
5000 Displacement
Plot
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 5 10 15 20
Displacement (mm)

Calculation of Theoretical Deflection:

L=3000mm
E= 22360N/mm2
I= 108310000mm4(Moment of Inertia of the effective section)
Deflection at one-third Span:
Deflection @ 1/3
point
Load Deflection
(Kg) (mm) Load vs Theoretical Deflection At 1/3 Point
0 0 7000
Load (kg)

600 0.5274 6000

Load vs
1200 1.0548 5000 Theoretical
1800 1.5822 Deflection
4000
2400 2.1096
3000
3000 2.637
2000
3600 3.1644
1000
4200 3.6918
0
4800 4.2192
0 2 4 6 8
5400 4.7466 Theoretical Displacement (mm)

28
6000 5.274
6600 5.8012

Deflection @
Mid Point
Load Deflection Load vs Theoretical Deflection
At Mid Point
(Kg) (mm)
7000
0 0
Load (kg)

6000
600 0.606
Load vs
1200 1.212 5000 Theoretical
Deflection
1800 1.818 4000
2400 2.424
3000
3000 3.03
2000
3600 3.636
4200 4.242 1000

4800 4.848 0
0 2 4 6 8
5400 5.454 Theoretical Displacement (mm)
6000 6.06
6600 6.666

Demech Readings
Load(kg) 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000
Position-1 2140 2136 2130 2117.5 2130 2170
Position-2 2140 2135.6 2120 2137.5 2149 2150
Position-3 2150 2157 2155 2120 2195 2197
Position-4 2166 2167.5 2220.5 2154 2185 2215

Load(kg) 3600 4200 4800 5400 6000 6600

Position-1 2121 2113 2112 2120 2117.5 2216
Position-2 2169 2186 2152 2152.5 2178 2222.5

29
Position-3 2170 2206 2230 2200 2217.5 2287
Position-4 2242.5 2245 2255 2286 2273 2617.5
Calculated Strain from Demech Gauge Reading
Load (kg) Position-1 Position-2 Position-3 Position-4
0 0 0 0 0
600 -0.00004 -4.4E-05 7E-05 1.5E-05
1200 -0.0001 -0.0002 5E-05 0.000545
1800 -0.000225 -2.5E-05 -0.0003 -0.00012
2400 -0.0001 9E-05 0.00045 0.00019
3000 0.0003 1E-04 0.00047 0.00049
3600 -0.00019 0.00029 0.0002 0.000765
4200 -0.00027 0.00046 0.00056 0.00079
4800 -0.00028 0.00012 0.0008 0.00089
5400 -0.0002 0.000125 0.0005 0.0012
6000 -0.000225 0.00038 0.000675 0.00107
6600 0.00076 0.000825 0.00137 0.004515

Strain Distribution Along the Depth

0
-0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 600
-50 1200
2400
Depth

-100 3600
4200
-150 4800
5400
-200
6000

-250
Strain

30
OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:
1. The experimental deflection is found to be significantly varying from theoretical
deflection due to heterogeneity of concrete.
2. The load at which the crack is visible is found to be 1800 kg. Thus it can be said that
beam behaves elastically upto this loading. The maximum theoretical deflection is found
to be less than the experimental deflections. This can be due to the fact that theoretical
deflections are calculated considering homogenous section but concrete is heterogeneous.
3. At the beginning, the applied moment is less than the cracking moment hence the entire
section contributes in resisting the moment. The tension in steel suddenly increases when
the applied moment exceeds the cracking moment and the tensile stress in concrete
becomes more than its permissible flexural strength. The stiffness of beam reduces
causing faster propagation of crack and collapse of beam. Since the section is under
reinforced, there is no catastrophic failure.
4. The upward shift of neutral axis is observed and can be interpreted from the strain
variation curve along the depth.
5. It is observed that the cracks initiate in the middle third part of beam which is subjected
to flexure stress only. Hence the cracks are vertical and they propagate towards the top of
the beam. Beyond this part some cracks are developed due combination of shear and
flexure.
6. The compressive strength of concrete is found to be higher than the expected strength.
This is because the factor of safety and the confidence level are considered while
calculating the strength of concrete. Also the experimental failure load 7000kg is higher
than the theoretical failure load 4800kg for the same reason.

31
 5. RECTANGULAR REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM
Experimental setup
The beam used for the study has an effective length of 3m and a cross section of 150*250 mm2.
The reinforcing steel in the tension region used is 3-12 . The beam is assumed to be singly
reinforced and hence the support reinforcement provided for hanging the stirrups will be
neglected from the moment of resistance calculations. To ensure that the top reinforcement does
not contribute to the moment of resistance they were cut at equal intervals. This however does
not ensure that the top reinforcements will not take any load. Hence a small amount of load will
be carried by the top reinforcements but for the sake of simplicity it is neglected. Minimum shear
reinforcement is provided throughout except near the supports. A two point loading scheme is
used. Equal concentrated vertical loads are applied at one-third span from both the supports. This
gives rise to a pure flexure state in the middle third region. Figure below shows the experimental
setup.

Experimental Setup

In the figure L =3000 mm. The load P is slowly increased to study the appearance of first cracks
and the ultimate failure. Figure 2 shows a cross section of the beam.

Cross section of the beam

32
The clear cover used in the beam is 25mm.

Experimental Results:-
For the determination of the compressive strength of the concrete three cubes of
length 150mm and three cylinders of 150mm diameter and 300 mm length were tested. The test
results are given in Table.
For cubes-7 Days Strength

Mean Mean
Crushing Comp. Crushing Comp.
Comp. Comp.
Cube No Load Strength Cylinder Load Strength
Strength Strength
(T) (MPa) (T) (MPa)
(MPa) (MPa)
1 58.5 24.5 1 29 16.1
2 60 26.16 25.62 2 27 15.0 16.94
3 60.5 26.2 3 35.5 19.71

For cubes-28 Days Strength

Area Failure Failure Average

Cube No Dimension
(mm2) Load(ton) Stress(N/mm2) Stress(N/mm2)
1 151x150x150 22650 108 46.78
2 150x152x150 22800 102 43.89 45.19
3 150x150x150 22500 103 44.91

For Cylinders

Cylinder Area Failure Failure Average

Dimension
No (mm2) Load(ton) Stress(N/mm2) Stress(N/mm2)
R=150,
1 17671.459 56 31.09
h=300
29.70
R=150,
2 17671.459 49.5 27.48
h=300

33
 R=150,
3 17671.459 55 30.53
h=300

As expected the average compressive strength of concrete is higher for cubes. According to
existing research the value of cylinder should be around 70 % the compressive strength of
compressive cube strength. In this case it is 65.72%. According to IS:456 the characteristic
strength of concrete is defined in terms of compressive cube strength. So the cube compressive
strength is considered as the compressive strength of the concrete. The average compressive
strength of concrete from the 28 day compressive strength is 45 MPa. The grade of steel used in
the beam was Fe415.
DESIGN OF RC RECTANGULAR BEAM- BEAM
Effective Span , L_eff = 3.0 m

Width , b = 150 mm

Overall Depth , D = 250 mm

Effective Cover = 25 mm

Yield strength of main steel, fy1 = 415 N/m m

Yield strength of secondary steel, fy2 = 250 N/mm

Characteristic Strength of Concrete, fck = 25 N/mm

Density of Concrete, Dc = 24 kN/m

Nominal Diameter of Main Steel bars, r = 10 mm

Number of Bottom reinforcement = 3

Nominal Diameter of Stirrups, s = 6 mm

C/C Spacing of Stirrups = 150 mm

Effective Depth, d = 225 mm

34
Moment of Resistance Calculations

0.36 fck b Xu = 0.87 fy Ast

Depth of N.A, Xu = 63.04 mm

Limiting Depth of N.A, Xu_max = 108 mm

Xu < Xu_lim , Section is under reinforced

Moment of Resistance of Section , Mu = 0.87 fy Ast *(d-0.42

Xu)
M.R = 16.90 kN-m

Dead Load, DL = 0.90 kN/m

Dead Load Moment at mid span, Md = 1.01 kN-m

Considering Two Point loading, Moment at mid span M=w*l/3

w- Estimated Point load at l/3 and 2l/3 from the support

w = 15.88 kN

Total Estimated Load that can be applied over the beam = 31.77 kN

Design of Shear Reinforcement

Ultimate Shear, Vu = w+ total DL /2 = 17.23 kN

_v = Vu/ (bw * d) = 0.51 N/mm

% Steel Provided, 100* Ast1 / (bw * d) = 0.70 %

_c, from Table 19 IS 456-2000 = 0.554 N/mm

_v < _c and _v > _c / 2

35
 Minimu Shear Reinforcement is required

Spacing of Two legged - 6mm Shear reinforcement in Web

(Clause 26.5.1.6) = 150 Mm
.
All the above calculations are for un-cracked sections. So it can be expected that the theoretical
results will deviate from the experimental results once cracking of the section starts. The ultimate
failure load of the beam was found to be 7.6 ton.

Results of the dial gauges:-

Dial Gauge 1 Dial Gauge 2 Dial Gauge 3

Load Dial Deflection Dial Deflection Dial Deflection

Reading (mm) Reading (mm) Reading (mm)

0 117 0 347 0 190 0
600 158 0.41 390 0.43 230 0.4
1200 226 1.09 470 1.23 292 1.02
1800 329 2.12 600 2.53 380 1.9
2400 512 3.95 888 5.41 550 3.6
3000 792 6.75 980 6.33 725 5.35
3600 834 7.17 1140 7.93 857 6.67
4200 1000 8.83 1320 9.73 1013 8.23
4800 1135 10.18 1470 11.23 1143 9.53
5400 1300 11.83 1640 12.93 1290 11
6000 1517 14 1868 15.21 1582 13.92
6600 1640 15.23 2020 16.73 1613 14.23
7200 1860 17.43 2560 22.13 1915 17.25

36
 Theoretical Displacement
Calculations
Deflection
Deflection
Load (kg) @ Mid
@ 1/3 Point
Point
0 0 0
600 0.073563218 0.0845977
1200 0.147126437 0.1691954
1800 0.220689655 0.2537931
2400 0.294252874 0.33839081
3000 0.367816092 0.42298851
3600 0.44137931 0.50758621
4200 0.514942529 0.59218391
4800 0.588505747 0.67678161
5400 0.662068966 0.76137931
6000 0.735632184 0.84597701
6600 0.809195402 0.93057471
7200 0.882758621 1.01517241

Load vs Displacement Plot

8000 DG-1
7000 DG-1
Load (kg)

6000
DG-2
5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25

Displacement (mm)

37
Strain Gauges Readings:-
Strain gauge orientations:-
Strain Gauge 1(Bottom) Strain Gauge 2 (Center) Strain Gauge 3 (Top)
Load (kg) Gauge-1 Strain Gauge-2 Strain Gauge-3 Strain
0 16001 0 248 0 607 0
600 15933 -0.000068 244 -0.000004 622 0.000015
1200 15922 -0.000079 243 -0.000005 670 0.000063
1800 15907 -0.000094 242 -0.000006 731 0.000124
2400 15900 -0.000101 239 -0.000009 781 0.000174
3000 15905 -0.000096 237 -0.000011 836 0.000229
3600 15903 -0.000098 230 -0.000018 889 0.000282
4200 15889 -0.000112 227 -0.000021 952 0.000345
4800 15883 -0.000118 219 -0.000029 1001 0.000394
5400 15874 -0.000127 216 -0.000032 1055 0.000448
6000 15870 -0.000131 215 -0.000033 1123 0.000516
6600 15861 -0.00014 213 -0.000035 1178 0.000571
7200 15855 -0.000146 209 -0.000039 1226 0.000619

100
For 0 kg
80
For 600 kg
60
For 1200 kg
40
For 1800 kg
20 For 2400 kg
0 For 3000 kg
-0.0002 0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 For 3600 kg
-20
For 4200 kg
-40
For 4800 kg
-60
For 5400 kg
-80
For 6000 kg
-100

38
Demech Gauge readings:-
At 1/3rd Span
Demech Reading
Load Position - Position - Position - Position - Position - Position - Position -
(kg) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0 830 847 840 842 857 854 853
600 885 839 838 822 847 848 854
1200 875 837 832 870 855 869 862
1800 812 825 830 844 858 853 874
2400 844 818 826 843 885 889 898
3000 846 825 847 852 912 942 940
3600 825 844 848 874 924 975 994
4200 836 821 858 895 958 995 999
4800 840 837 878 925 975 998 1015
5400 837 820 866 910 965 1012 1038
6000 828 825 866 925 990 1042 1068
6600 798 815 882 930 1014 1055 1089
7200 776 784 886 971 1040 1091 1121

Calculated Strain Values from Demech Reading

Load Strain-1 Strain-2 Strain-3 Strain-4 Strain-5 Strain-6 Strain-7
0kg 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
600kg 0.00055 -0.00008 -0.00002 -0.0002 -0.0001 -0.00006 0.00001
1200kg 0.00045 -0.0001 -0.00008 0.00028 -0.00002 0.00015 0.00009
1800kg -0.00018 -0.00022 -0.0001 0.00002 0.00001 -0.00001 0.00021
2400kg 0.00014 -0.00029 -0.00014 0.00001 0.00028 0.00035 0.00045
3000kg 0.00016 -0.00022 0.00007 0.0001 0.00055 0.00088 0.00087
3600kg -0.00005 -0.00003 0.00008 0.00032 0.00067 0.00121 0.00141
4200kg 0.00006 -0.00026 0.00018 0.00053 0.00101 0.00141 0.00146
4800kg 0.0001 -0.0001 0.00038 0.00083 0.00118 0.00144 0.00162

39
5400kg 0.00007 -0.00027 0.00026 0.00068 0.00108 0.00158 0.00185
6000kg -0.00002 -0.00022 0.00026 0.00083 0.00133 0.00188 0.00215
6600kg -0.00032 -0.00032 0.00042 0.00088 0.00157 0.00201 0.00236
7200kg -0.00054 -0.00063 0.00046 0.00129 0.00183 0.00237 0.00268

Depth vs Strain Plot from Demech Reading

0
Depth (mm)

-0.001 0 0.001 0.002 0.003

-50
1800
-100 kg
3600
-150 kg

-200

-250
Strain

At Mid Span

Demech Readings
Load (kg) 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000 3600
Position-1 2040 2035 2035 2009 1997 1980 2084
Position-2 2109 2025 2097.5 2092 2081 1986 2075
Position-3 2037 2028 2020 2027.5 2017.5 1940 2044.5
Position-4 2078 2080 2087.5 2097 2097.5 2121.5 2026
Position-5 2053 2041 2072.5 2077.5 2086 2115 2019
Position-6 2067 2067.5 2075 2095 2181 2157.5 2079
Position-7 2022 2046 2070 2104 2152 2187.5 2020

Load (kg) 4200 4800 5400 6000 6600 7200

Position-1 1967 2067.5 2055 2045 2040 2025
Position-2 2091 2074 2075 2061.5 2060 2067.5

40
Position-3 2035 2049 2049 2047.5 2060.5 2066
Position-4 2142 2056 2059 2072.5 2087 2025
Position-5 2143 2058 2077.5 2002 2025 2090
Position-6 2150 2021 2043 2073 2093.5 2085
Position-7 2245 2087 2300 2051 2060 2095

Calculated Strain from Demech Gauge Reading

Load Position- Position- Position- Position- Position- Position- Position-
(kg) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
600 -0.00084 -0.00012 -9E-05 -5E-05 -2E-05 5E-06 0.00024
1200 -0.00017 -0.00011 -5E-05 8E-05 9.5E-05 0.000195 0.00048
1800 -0.00031 -0.00017 -9.5E-05 0.00019 0.000245 0.00028 0.00082
2400 -0.00043 -0.00028 -0.00019 0.000195 0.00033 0.00114 0.0013
3000 -0.00123 -0.00097 -0.0006 0.000435 0.00062 0.000905 0.001655
3600 -0.00052 -0.00034 -0.00034 -2E-05 7.5E-05 0.00012 0.00044
4200 -0.00073 -0.00018 -2E-05 0.00064 0.00083 0.0009 0.00223
4800 -0.00046 -0.00035 -0.00022 5E-05 0.00012 0.000275 0.00065
5400 -0.00034 -0.00024 -0.00019 0.00012 0.00015 0.000245 0.00278
6000 -0.00051 -0.00047 -5.5E-05 6E-05 5E-05 0.000105 0.00029
6600 -0.00049 -0.00028 0 9E-05 0.000235 0.000265 0.00038
7200 -0.00053 -0.00042 -0.00015 0.00018 0.00029 0.00037 0.00073

41
 Strain Distribution Along the Depth
600
0
-0.002 -0.001 1200
-20 0 0.001 0.002 0.003
1800
-40
2400
-60
3000
-80
3600
-100
4200
-120 4800
-140 5400
-160 6000
-180 6600
Strain

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. The ultimate load for rectangular RCC beam was observed to be 7.6 ton which is much higher
than the calculated ultimate value load of 3.2 ton. This may be due to the factor of safety
considered while calculating the ultimate load.
2. When the section gets cracked, the steel experiences high tension leading to the shift of neutral
axis upwards and top reinforcement are also subjected to tensile stress. This may add up to
resistance provided to loading.
3. The experimental deflections are higher than the theoretical values because for theoretical
calculations entire cross section is considered while in reality cross section below neutral axis is
less effective in case of concrete.
4. The gradual shift of neutral axis is well shown by the demech gauge readings.

NUMERICAL SIMULATION

Since the representative sample has not been subjected to stress-strain behavior study both in compression
and tension, the stress-strain/crack opening curves for the uni-axial compression and uni-axial tension
tests is generated using available empirical relations. To generate the stress-strain curve in uni-axial
compression, the empirical equations given in Popovics (1973), specifically Eqns. (2) and (3) is used. To
define the stress-crack opening behavior in tension, equations 1, 2 and 3 in "Determining the Tensile
Stress-Crack Opening Curve of Concrete by Inverse Analysis", by Jos Luiz Antunes de Oliveira e
Sousaet al Ref: 10.1061/ASCE 0733-9399(2006) 132:2(141) are used.

42
CALCULATIONS

28 Days Compressive Strength, fck = 41.0 Mpa

Young's Modulus of Concrete, Ec (As per IS 456:2007) = 36.0 Gpa

Ultimate Strain in compression, _u = 0.003

Poisson's Ratio = 0.20

Density of Concrete = 24,000.0 kg/m

As per table 2.3 of "Design of Concrete Structures"Nilson, Edition-14
Direct Tensile strength 4 fck

Limiting Value of Crack opening ( as per IS 456:2007) = 0.30000 mm

= 2.13 Mpa
Post Peak Tensile Behaviour

Estmated Ultimate Elastic Strain , _cr = fcr/Ec

= 0.0000591

1 = fcr ( _cr /
Estmation of Post peak stress , 1)^0.4

Post Peak Compressive Behaviour

N = 3.37862

Flow field eccentricity, = 0.10000

Ratio of biaxial compressive yield stress to uni-axial compressive
yield stress = 1.16000

Kc, ratio of stress invariants on tensile and compressive meridian = 0.67000

Dilatation angle = 36 degree.

43
 Failure Pattern

Load vs Displacement

44
OBSERVATION AND COMMENTS:

1. Numerical Simulation shows ultimate load as 5.6 Ton which is in between the experimental and
theoretical values (74% of actual ultimate load and 1.75 times the theoretical value)
2. The cracking pattern in the numerical and experimental model was found to be similar.
3. Since the model is a continuum, numerical simulation may not be reliable until all the
nonlinearities in concrete behavior are not incorporated in simulation.

6. DESIGN AND TESTING OF POST TENSIONED PRE-

STRESSED BEAM

Objective:
One concrete beam of cross section 180 mm x 200 mm is designed for post-tensioning and its is
tested under two point loads. Experimental results and theoretical results are compared.
Details of Beam:
Cross sectional dimensions: 150 mm x 200 mm.
Beam span = 3000 mm.
Grade of Concrete: M25.
Cube & Cylinder Compression test of concrete
Testing after 7 days
Mean Mean
Crushing Comp. Crushing Comp.
Comp. Comp.
Cube No Load Strength Cylinder Load Strength
Strength Strength
(T) (MPa) (T) (MPa)
(MPa) (MPa)
1 60 26.16 1 33 18.32
2 66.5 29 26.72 2 35 19.43 19.06
3 57.5 25 3 35 19.43

45
Testing after 28+7 days
Mean Mean
Crushing Comp. Crushing Comp.
Comp. Comp.
Cube No Load Strength Cylinder Load Strength
Strength Strength
(T) (MPa) (T) (MPa)
(MPa) (MPa)
1 106 46.22 1 65 36
2 124 54.06 49.85 2 49.5 27.48 27.64
3 113 49.27 3 35 19.43

DESIGN OF P.S.C RECTANGULAR BEAM

Effective Span , L_eff = 3.0 m

Width of the Section, b = 150 mm

Over all Depth of the Section, D = 250 mm

Yield strength of tendon, fp = 1470 N/mm

Diameter of tendons = 5 mm

Number of tendons = 3

Effective Cover, = 75 mm

effective depth, d = 175 mm

Characteristic Strenght of Concrete, fck = 25 N/mm

Elastic Modulus of Concrete, E = 5000 fck = 25000 N/mm

Density of Concrete, Dc = 24 kN/m

Cross-sectional Area, A = 37500 mm

46
Moment of Inertia, I = 195.31x 10^6 mm

Section Modulus, Z = 1562500 mm

Dead Load Moment, Md = 1.225 kN-m

Calculation of pre-stressing force:

Stress at Transfer

To have the zero stress at the top fibre when only pre-stress is
applied:

Maximum Eccentricity, e = 50 Mm

Applied Prestressing force in each tendon = 2 Ton

Effective Prestressig force in each tendon ( assuming 15% over all

loss) = 1.7 Ton

= 16677 N

Total Prestressing force, P = 50031 N

Top Stress at Transfer

P/A - Pe/Z +Md/Z = 0.5172 N/mm

Effective Stress in each tendon = 849.01 N/mm

Soffit stress at Transfer

P/A + Pe/Z - Md/Z = 2.1511 N/mm

Condition for Zero Soffit stress

47
Maximum Imposed Load Stress, at bottom = -2.1511 N/mm

Ultimate Imposed Load Moment for zero soffit stress, Ml = -3361050.00 N-mm

= -3.36 kN-m
Considering Two Point loading, Moment at mid span M=w*l/3

w- Estimated Point load at l/3 and 2l/3 from the support

w = 3.36 Kn

Total Estimated Load that can be applied over the beam = 6.72 kN

Condition where Micro Cracks are allowed to develop at the

soffit

Allowable tensile stress in concrete, _a = 3 N/mm

Bottom Stress P/A + Pe/Z - Md/Z - Ml/Z = _a

=> Ml = 8.049 kN-m

Considering Two Point loading, Moment at mid span M=w*l/3

w- Estimated Point load at l/3 and 2l/3 from the support

w = 8.049 kN

Total Estimated Load that can be applied over the beam = 16.10 kN

Check for flexure (as per IS:1343-1980):

Total Area of Prestressing steel, Ap = 58.93 mm

effective prestress < fp > 849.01 N/mm

48
Ap fp / bd fck = 0.1320

From Table 12 of IS-1343:1980, fpu / (0.87 fp ) = 1

fpu = 1278.90 N/mm

xu/d = 0.2804

xu = 49.063 Mm
Moment of Resistance of the section M,
Ap fpu * (d - 0.42 xu ) = 11.64 kN-m

w- Estimated Point load at l/3 and 2l/3 from the support

w = 11.64 kN

Total Estimated Load that can be applied over the beam = 23.27 kN

Check for Deflection

Deflection due to Load at Ultimate uncracked Moment of

Resistance

Deflection at middle Span = ( 23/648 )PL / EI

= 2.28 Mm

Deflection at one third point = ( 5/162 )PL / EI

= 1.99 Mm

Deflection Due to Prestress Only

Deflection at Mid span = ( 5/48 )PeL /

49
 EI
= 0.48 Mm

( 7/81 )PeL /
Deflection at one third point = EI
= 0.40 Mm

Deflection of Uncracked Member

Short Term deflection = L [ ( Mcr / Ec Ic ) + (M-Mcr)/(0.85 Ec

Icr) ]

= constant = 1/12 for middle & 7/108 for the one third point.

Mcr = cracking moment = 8.05 kN-m

M- Bending Moment at the section

Ic = moment of inertia of the un-cracked section = 195.31x 10^6 mm

Icr = moment of inertia of cracked section

Icr = 1/3 b x + e As r

Modular Ratio ,e = Es/ Ec = 8

b x/2 = e As (d-x)

=> x = 30.2 Mm

Icr = 1/3 b x + e As r = 11.262x 10^6 mm

Ec = 25000 N/mm

50
Estimated Values Deflections
Mom Deflection at one third point
Deflection at mid point (mm)
ent (mm)
Total Load at Prestr Uncrac Crack Pre- Uncrac Crack
(KG) middl ess ked ed Total stress ked ed
Total
e (K (Upwa Sectio mm (Upwa Sectio
N-m) rd) Section n rd) Section n
Cracking
8.05 kN-m
Moment =
- -
0.0000
0 0.00 0.40 0.398 0.48 0.0000 0.480
0
47 30
- -
0.1706
200 1.00 0.40 0.227 0.48 0.1963 0.284
7
80 03
- -
0.3413
400 2.00 0.40 0.057 0.48 0.3925 0.087
3
14 76
0.5120 0.113 0.108
600 3.00 0.40 0.48 0.5888
0 53 50
0.6826 0.284 0.304
800 4.00 0.40 0.48 0.7851
7 20 77
1000 5.00 0.40 0.8533 0.454 0.48 0.9813 0.501

51
 3 86 04
1.0240 0.625 0.697
1200 6.00 0.40 0.48 1.1776
0 53 30
1.1946 0.796 0.893
1400 7.00 0.40 0.48 1.3739
7 20 57
1.3653 0.966 1.089
1600 8.00 0.40 0.48 1.5701
3 86 84
3.280 2.882 4.218 3.737
1800 9.00 0.40 0.48
76 29 11 82
5.718 5.319 7.352 6.871
2000 10.00 0.40 0.48
32 85 13 83
8.155 7.757 10.48 10.00
2200 11.00 0.40 0.48
89 42 614 584
10.59 10.19 13.62 13.13
2400 12.00 0.40 0.48
345 498 015 985

Experimental Results:-
Theoretical Theoretical
Load Values @ Values @
(kg) 1/3rd Point Mid Point
(mm) (mm)
0 -0.39847 -0.4803
200 -0.2278 -0.28403
400 -0.05714 -0.08776
600 0.113531 0.108502
800 0.284198 0.304769
1000 0.454864 0.501036
1200 0.625531 0.697302
1400 0.796198 0.893569
1600 0.966864 1.089836

52
 1800 2.882286 3.737816
2000 5.319851 6.871829
2200 7.757417 10.00584
2400 10.19498 13.13985
2600 12.63255 16.27387
2800 15.07011 19.40788
3000 17.50768 22.54189

Load vs Deflection Plot

3500 Deflection-1
Load (kg)

3000

2500 Deflection-2

2000
Deflection-3
1500

1000

500

0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Displacement (mm)

Demech gauge reading

Demech Readings
Load (kg) 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000
Position-1 2085 2025 2112 2085 2010 2080
Position-2 2079 2075 2166 2099 2083 2105
Position-3 2076 2074 2166 2099 2090 2165
Position-4 2010 2014 2176 2180 2190 2187

53
 Calculated Strains from Demech Gauge Reading
Load (kg) Position-1 Position-2 Position-3 Position-4 Position-5 Position-6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
600 -0.0006 -0.00004 -2E-05 0.00004 0.00089 0.00211
1200 0.00027 0.00087 0.0009 0.00166 0.00206 0.00519
1800 0 0.0002 0.00023 0.0017 0.00318 0.00676
2400 -0.00075 0.00004 0.00014 0.0018 0.00488 0.00963
3000 -5E-05 0.00026 0.00089 0.00177 0.00544 0.01831

Strain Distribution Along the Depth

0
-0.005 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
-50
600
1200
-100
Depth

1800

-150 2400
3000
-200

-250
Strain

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. It was observed that the first visible crack appeared at 1.0 ton load. This is found to be conversant
with the theoretical uncracked capacity.
2. The demech gauge readings were slightly erroneous but they were successful to show the position
of neutral axis. The depth of neutral axis is found to be between 60-100 mm but calculated depth
was 49 mm. This may be due to the effect of loss of symmetry in theassembly of prestressing
cables, different existing prestressing force than that was applied and effect of bottom mild steel
bars.

54
 3. The pattern of load-displacement curve for theoretical and experimental values is almost similar.
But the theoretical values differ from experimental values due to conservative effect of bilinear
formula used for theoretical deflections , heterogeneity of concrete and unsymmetry of tendons.
4. The net deflection is calculated by subtracting the upward deflection due to the
prestressing force from the downward deflection due to the applied load.
5. Initially the deflection is small and almost linear but after the section is cracked the deflection
increases rapidly as shown by load- deflection curve. Before cracking entire section was
considered while calculating the deflection but after cracking bilinear formula was used to
calculate the cracked section deflection.

7. TESTING OF STEEL BEAM

Objective
One rolled ISMB-200 section is tested under two point loads. Testing is carried out and
results are compared with the theory.
Section Characteristics
Yield strength of section = 250 Mpa
Young's Modulus of the section = 2.00E+05 Mpa
Length of = 2850 mm

Properties of the ISMB 200 section

Mass = 242 N/m

Area = 3080 mm2
H = 200 mm
R = 11 mm
Bf = 100 mm
Tw = 5.7 mm
Tf = 10 mm
Iz = 2120 cm4
Iy = 137 cm4
Rz = 82.9 mm

55
Ry = 21.1 mm
Zz = 212 cm3
Zy = 27.4 cm3

Plastic modulus:-

Zpz = 253.86 cm3

Shape factor = 1.1358

Where the symbols carry their usual meanings.

Calculations

Ixx = 2.12E+07 mm4

Zt = 2.12E+05 mm3
Zb = 2.12E+05 mm3
Ultimate elastic moment capacity before yielding (M) = Zt *
fy =
212 x 103 x
= 250
kN-
= 5.30E+01 m
Yield Load = 5.30E+01 kN
Maximum Load the assembly from top before yielding = 2P =
= 1.06E+02 kN
= 1.08E+01 T
Shape factor = 1.1358
where M = elastic moment and Mp = Plastic Moment
Pu = 1.23E+01 T

Deflection:

56
Deflection at middle (23/648)xPl3/EI
Deflection at one third point (5/162)xPl3/EI
Length of the beam, L 2850 mm

Loading arrangement:

Experimental Procedure:
Steel Beam was full of rust. To attach strain gauge it is cleaned with acetone. Then BKCT 3
strain gauges were attached with adhesive. It is tested under the two point loading condition
in UT machine.

Load vs Deflection

Theoretical Theoretical
Experimental Results
Deflection Deflection
Load(kg)
@ Mid @ 1/3 Dial 1 @ one Dial 2 @ Mid Dial 3 @ 2/3rd
Span Span third point point point
Dial Deflection Dial Deflection Dial Deflection
-1 (mm) -2 (mm) -3 (mm)
0 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 250 0 310 0 595 0
600 1.14E+00 9.92E-01 298 0.48 365 0.55 645 0.5
1200 2.28E+00 1.98E+00 345 0.95 415 1.05 685 0.9
1800 3.42E+00 2.98E+00 390 1.4 465 1.55 731 1.36

57
 2400 4.56E+00 3.97E+00 430 1.8 515 2.05 785 1.9
3000 5.70E+00 4.96E+00 480 2.3 670 3.6 820 2.25
3600 6.84E+00 5.95E+00 520 2.7 715 4.05 859 2.64

Load vs Displacement Plot

4000 Theoretical
Load (kg)

3500 Deflection @
Mid Span
3000 Theoretical
Deflection @
2500
1/3 Span
2000 Observed
Deflection@1
1500 /3rd Point
1000 Observed
Deflection@
500 Mid Point
0
0.00E+00 2.00E+00 4.00E+00 6.00E+00 8.00E+00
Displacement (mm)

Here in the above figure, the deflection (experimental data) at one third & two third point
coincides because of the symmetry in loading and geometry and material is observed to be
having homogeneity . So, the blue & green line overlaps each other.
Strain Gauge Data
Strain gauge orientation is as follows:-
Sl. No. of strain gauge Position
Strain gauge No. - 1 At the web in the middle of the beam and 50 mm towards bottom flange
from centroidal axis of beam
Strain gauge No. 2 At the web in the middle of the beam and at the centroidal axis of beam
Strain gauge No. 3 At the web in the middle of the beam and 50 mm towards top flange from
centroidal axis of beam
Strain gauge No. 4 At the middle of the beam in longitudinal direction of beam at the top of the
flange
Strain gauge No. 5 At the middle of the beam in transverse direction of beam at the top of the
flange

58
 Strain gauge in Web
SG SG SG
Load
Reading Strain (1) Reading Strain (2) Reading Strain(3)
bottom (1) middle (2) top (3)
0 25176 0 21005 0 6549 0
600 25201 0.000025 21006 0.000001 6531 -0.000018
1200 25220 0.000044 21007 0.000002 6520 -0.000029
1800 25238 0.000062 21004 -0.000001 6504 -0.000045
2400 25264 0.000088 21008 0.000003 6563 0.000014
3000 25282 0.000106 21008 0.000003 6586 0.000037
3600 25297 0.000121 21005 0 6645 0.000096

Load vs Strain Plot

4000
Load (kg)

SG Reading
3500 bottom (1)
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
-0.0001 -0.00005 0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
Strain

Strain gauge in Flange

Load
SG Reading 4 Strain(4) SG Reading 5 Strain(5)
0 16896 0 18259 0
600 16896 0 18385 0.000126
1200 16899 0.000003 20424 0.002165
1800 16934 0.000038 20418 0.002159
2400 16935 0.000039 20359 0.0021

59
3000 16937 0.000041 20357 0.002098
3600 16940 0.000044 20364 0.002105

Load vs Strain Plot

4000
Load (kg)

3500 SG Reading 5

3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
-0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025
Strain

Load vs Strain Plot

2000
Load (kg)

1800 SG Reading 4
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.000036 0.000038 0.00004 0.000042 0.000044 0.000046
Strain

60
 Strain
60
Distribution Plot In Depth Direction
Depth Direction

40

for 0kg Load

20
for 600kg Load
for 1200kg Load
0
for 1800kg Load
-0.0001 -0.00005 0 0.00005 0.0001
for 2400kg Load
-20

-40

-60 Strain

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. The steel beam was loaded upto 3.6 ton of load well within the elastic limit even though its
theoretical failure load is 12 ton. This is due to the reason that the beam can be reused for other
experiments. Also due to the absence of lateral confinement the beam may bend laterally instead
of vertically on the onset of permanent deformation which fails to achieve our aim of test.
2. The load vs displacement curve is fairly linear assuring that permanent deformation has not taken
place and the beam is well within the elastic limit. Again this was proved by the readings of dial
gauges after unloading completely. The readings were found to be exactly same as the initial
readings.
3. The strain variation along the depth is shown in the figure. The results were slightly erroneous.
this may be due to improper contact between beam and strain gauges due to rust.

61
 4. The theoretical deflections are higher than the experimental deflections because the exact
material parameters of beam are unknown and also improper fixity of strain gauges due to rust.

8. DESIGN AND TESTING OF RC COLUMN

OBJECTIVE:
To test the concrete column section for bending and failure.
PROCEDURE:

Column was tested with concentric loading over the column head without any cap. Necessary
arrangements were done to avoid stress concentration at the top. Strain gauge and dial gauge
readings are recorded for each load increment.

DESIGN OF COLUMN

Length of column ,L = 1500 mm

Effective length , Leff = 0.65L = 975 mm
Lex = 975 mm
Ley = 975 mm
width , b = 200 mm
Depth , D = 200 mm
Number of bars in column = 4
Diameter of bars = 12 mm
Area of steel , Asc = 452.57 mm^2
Area of cross-section = 40000 mm^2
Area of Concrete , Ac = 39547.43 mm^2
Lateral ties = 6 @ 175 mm c/c
Fck = 42.7 N/mm^2
Fy = 415 N/mm^2

To check if column is short or slender

Lex/D = 4.875 < 12
Ley/b = 4.875 < 12
Hence, the column is short

Minimum eccentricity
ex min = Greater of (Lex/500 + D/30) and 20 mm = 20.00 mm
ey min = Greater of (Ley/500 + b/30) and 20 mm = 20.00 mm
0.05D = 10 < 20 mm (=ex min)

62
0.05b = 10 < 20 mm (=ey min)
Hence, the equation given in cl.39.3 of IS 456 is applicable for the design here

Ultimate Load
Pu = 0.4 fck Ac + 0.67 fy Asc
Therefore, Pu = 801.31 kN
Pu = 80.1 ton

Reinforcement Details Failure Pattern

Experimental Results
Testing after 28 days
Crushing Comp.
Mean
Cube No Load Strength
(T)
(T) (MPa)
1 97
2 100.5 98 42.7
3 96.5

DIAL GAUGE READING

Load (ton) DG Reading 1 DG Reading 2 Deflection -1 Deflection -2

0 55 30 0 0
10 74 31 19 1
20 78 44 23 14

63
 30 79 45 24 15
40 92 45 37 15
50 102 45 47 15
60 124 45 69 15
70 140 45 85 15

Load - Deflection Plot

80
70
Deflection in
60 Direction -1
50
Load (ton)

40
30
Deflection in
20
Direction -2
10
0
-10 0 50 100

Deflection (mm)

STRAIN GAUGE READING

Strain- Strain- Strain- Strain-
SG SG SG SG Average
Load 1 2 3 4
Reading Reading Reading Reading Stress
(ton) (x10^- (x10^- (x10^- ((x10^-
1 2 3 4 (N/mm2)
6) 6) 6) 6)
0 -18176 -8441 -12418 -14505 0 0 0 0 0
10 -18993 -8427 -12478 -14493 2.45 817 14 60 12
20 -19032 -8411 -12588 -14478 4.91 856 30 170 27
30 -19087 -8396 -12647 -14464 7.36 911 45 229 41
40 -19141 -8375 -12720 -14444 9.81 965 66 302 61
50 -19225 -8362 -12766 -14431 12.26 1049 79 348 74
60 -19271 -8340 -12846 -14416 14.72 1095 101 428 89
70 -19460 -8314 -12928 -14392 17.17 1284 127 510 113

64
 Stress vs Strain Plot
1400 Longitudinal Strain-
1200 1 (x10e-6)

1000
Longitudinal Strain-
800 2 (x10e-6)
Stress (N/mm2)

600
Lateral Strain -1
400 (x10e-6)

200
Lateral Strain -2
0 (x10e-6)
0 5 10 15 20

Strain

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. The ultimate load of concentrically loaded column was found to be 755.4 kN.
2. Slight non-linearity in stress-strain curve is observed from beginning itself. Reason for
this can be the inherent heterogeneity of concrete and the inadequate quality control.
3. The theoretical ultimate load is 800 kN. The variation in theoretical and experimental
results might be due to the difference in actual end conditions and theoretical end
conditions. As per elastic theory, column ends are considered fixed for calculation
purpose.
4. The stress-strain relation as well as the load deflection curve show different behaviors of
column in the direction-2 and direction-1, even though the cross-section is square and
reinforcement bars are placed symmetrically. The reasons can be unavoidable asymmetry
in the reinforcement or non-uniform distribution of constituents of concrete in the cross-
section resulting in weaker planes and hence leading to different sectional modulus.
There can be eccentricity created in loading due to slippage at the contact with platten.

65
 9. CORE SAMPLING AND TESTING OF CONCRETE
OBJECTIVE:
Assessment of strength , Study of aggregates used in the mix design, assessing probable
causes of failures in the structure with the study of the representative sample.

CONCEPT:
Cores are usually cut by means of a rotary core sampler with diamond studded bits. In this way, a
cylindrical specimen is obtained usually with its ends being uneven, parallel and sometimes with
embedded pieces of reinforcement according to the locations from where the sampling is done. Rebar
locater can be used to locate the reinforcement steel before core cutting. This prevents structural damage
to the RCC member by avoiding the reinforcement in cutting. The cores are smoothened and tested using
standard compression testing methods to determine the compressive strength and to arrive at equivalent
cube strength of concrete.
Experimental setup:

Core Sampler
Grade Of concrete: M30
Core Sampling - Experimental Results
Estimate of
Avg Height Of Ultimate Correct Avg
Cube
Sample Diamete Sample( H/D Stress ion Strengt
strength(N/
r(mm) mm) (N/mm2) Factor h
mm2)

Specimen-1 65.4 152.0 2.3 13.2 1.0

18.5 23.1
Specimen-2 65.2 151.0 2.3 24.5 1.0

66
Specimen-3 65.2 152.0 2.3 17.7 1.0

67
 Fig: Force vs. Displacement of the core cutter.

Compression Test Results

Cube Ultimate Ultimate Avg Strength

Size(mm)
No. Load(ton) Strength(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
1 150x150x150 86.5 37.71
2 150x150x150 83 36.18 37.64
3 150x150x150 89.5 39.02

Cylinde Ultimate Ultimate Avg Strength

Size(mm)
r No Load(ton) Strength(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
150 300
1 48 26.64
Long
150 300
2 50.5 28.03 27.47
Long
150 300
3 50 27.75
Long

68
OBSERVATION AND COMMENTS:
1. In this test, the ultimate strength of the cylindrical sample was found to be 18.5 MPa. So, the
approximate cube strength = 1.25*18.5=23.1 MPa which is much less than the actual values
which was 30 MPa theoretically and 37.64 experimentally.
2. This variation in results may be due to the internal damage that must have been caused while
cutting the core or might be samples were taken from weaker section.
3. This test is done generally for the health monitoring as well as quality checking of the existing
structures or partially failed structures which is still under service condition.
4. In this test, initially the rebar locator is used to identify the locations of the reinforcements in the
structural systems & then the core cutter is used there to collect the sample by avoiding the
reinforcement. Generally in the core cutter sample the reinforcements are avoided so that the
strength of the structural systems does not decrease drastically.

10. MODAL ANALYSIS OF FRAME USING ROVING HAMMER FFT

ANALYSER AND SHAKE TABLE

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the Natural frequency of the shear frame model using Roving Hammer and FFT Analyser
(PULSE Labshop software).

ROVING HAMMER TESTING

Impact hammer testing is a method of testing that allows us to calculate the natural frequencies (modes),
modal masses, modal damping ratios and mode shapes of a test structure. This is commonly done using
either roving impact hammer testing or roving accelerometer testing.

In theory, impact given to structure is a perfect impulse lasting for very short time. This would result in
constant amplitude in the frequency domain. But practically such an impulse is not possible. Instead, a
known contact time is directly linked to the frequency content of the force applied. Hence some suitable
number of impacts were applied at each of the several points using roving hammer to get the response of
structure through accelerometer fixed at location where response is desired.

69
NUMERICAL MODEL

A numerical simulation is done for modal analysis. Shell element is used to model the structure. Abaqus
6.3 is used for numerical modeling.

Mode-1 and Mode 2

Mode-3 and Mode -4

Mode Frequency (cycles/sec)

Mode -1 0.29
Mode -2 0.45
Mode-3 0.62
Mode-4 0.904

70
 OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:
1. Due to very high computational time and efforts convergence analysis is not done. Hence the
results obtained for frequency is not accurate and experimental results and numerical
simulation results differ from each other. The difference in results may also be due to
difference in simulation of real connections and numerical connections.
2. The experimental results obtained from PULSE Labshop were fed in the Emiscope software
to obtain the natural frequency.

SHAKE TABLE TEST

OBJECTIVE:
To study the seismic response of frame system model by shake table excitations.
CONCEPT:

This is a device for shaking structural models or building components with a wide range of simulated
ground motions, including reproductions of recorded earthquakes time-histories.

The setup is typically consist of a rectangular platform that is driven in up to six degrees of freedom
(DOF) by servo-hydraulic actuators. Test specimens are fixed to the platform and shaken. Using data
from transducers connected to the model, it is possible to interpret the dynamic behavior of the model.

71
 INPUT ACCELERATION ( BASE EXCITATION)

0.0018
0.0016
Acc-
0.0014 YY(g)
Acceleration (g)

Acc-
0.0012
ZZ(g)
0.001 Acc-
XX(g)
0.0008
0.0006
0.0004
0.0002
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Time (s)

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:

1. The model was subjected to different base excitations: i) X-direction (single DOF) , ii) Y-Z
directions (Combination of DOFs) , iii) X-Y-Z directions .
2. The time history data for ground acceleration are given as input. The fig. above shows the input
ground acceleration.
3. To obtain the displacements of the model, feedback mechanism, that is, accelerometers must be
fixed at different locations on the model.
4. Thus, shake table can be used to study the dynamic response of the structure.

72
 REFERENCES

1. IS- 456:2007: PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE - CODE OF PRACTICE

2. IS- 516:1959: METHODS OF TEST FOR STRENGTH OF CONCRETE
3. IS- 1199:1959:METHODS OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF CONCRETE
4. IS- 800:2007: GENERAL CONSTRUCTION IN STEEL - CODE OF PRACTICE
5. IS- 10262:2009: CONCRETE MIX PROPORTIONING- GUIDELINES
6. IS: 13311 (PART 2) :1992: NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF CONCRETE-METHODS OF
TEST
7. IS 8112:1989 ORDINARY PORTLAND CEMENT, 43 GRADE SPECIFICATION
8. IS 383:1970 SPECIFICATION FOR COARSE AND FINE AGGREGATES FROM NATURAL
SOURCES FOR CONCRETE
9. Pulse-Labshop/Labshop-Modules - Brel & Kjr
10. Design Of Concrete Structures - Nilson, Edition-14
11. Understanding Concrete Core Testing, National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA)
Publication No. 185
12. Determining The Tensile Stress-Crack Opening Curve Of Concrete By Inverse Analysis", By
Jos Luiz Antunes De Oliveira E Sousaet Al Ref: 10.1061/ASCE 0733-9399(2006) 132:2(141)

73