STRUCTURAL LAB REPORT
By
SAMTA S. KUBDE
Roll No: 13CE65R09
Instructor
Dr. Sushanta Chakraborty
Structural Lab II ( CECECECE 69012690126901269012) report
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the second Semester Curriculum for the Degree of
MasterMasterMasterMaster inininin TechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnology inininin StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural EngineeringEngineeringEngineeringEngineering
Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Kharagpur721 302, INDIA Year: 2014
0
CONTENTS
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/m ^{3} Maximum water – cement ratio = 0.5 Workability (slump) = 5060 mm Exposure condition = moderate Quality control = Good Maximum cement content = 450 kg/m ^{3} 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 :
f’ _{c}_{k} = f _{c}_{k} + s*t
= 25+4*1.65
= 31.6 N/mm ^{2}
SELECTION OF WATER CEMENT RATIO :
28 days cube strength for concrete = 41.746.6 N/mm ^{2} (curve C in fig 2: IS 102621982)
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 5060 mm slump =186+ ^{}^{}
=188 liters
CALCULATION OF CEMENT CONTENT:
Water cement ratio= 0.45
Cement content =
_{}_{} = 418 kg/m ^{3}
.
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
X
_{}_{}_{} X186
(Zone II) for watercement ratio of 0.50 =0.62 In this case w/c ratio = 0.45 Therefore, as watercement 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 watercement ratio)
Therefore, corrected proportion of volume of coarse aggregate = 0.63
So, volume of fine aggregate = 10.63 = 0.37
MIX CALCULATIONS:
The mix calculations per unit volume of concrete shall be as follows:
a) Volume of concrete = 1 m ^{3}
b) Volume of cement =
c) Volume of water =


^{X}


= ^{X}


.


= 0.136 m ^{3} 




^{X} 

=
X
^{}
= 0.188 m ^{3}
d) Volume of all in aggregate = 1 (0.136+0.188) = 0.676 m ^{3}
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=1887=181 kg
MIX PROPORTIONS FOR TRIAL :
a) Cement 
= 418 kg/m ^{3} 
b) Water 
= 181 kg/m ^{3} 
c) Fine aggregate
= 657 kg
3
d) Coarse aggregate
e) Watercement ratio
=
= 0.45
1192 kg
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 
= 5060 mm Slump 
Quality control 
= good 
Exposure 
= moderate 
Minimum cement Content 
=320 kg/m ^{3} 
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/m ^{3} 

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
4. Water Cement Ratio
28 days cube strength for concrete
=(30+5*1.65) N/mm ^{2} (Table 1 of IS
10262:2009)
=38.25 N/mm ^{2}
= 41.746.6 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 m ^{3} ) of concrete 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
= 186 kg/m3
Coarse aggregate as % of total aggregate by absolute volume
Sand as % of total aggregate by absolute volume
Increment in water content Clause 4.2 of IS 10262:2009
6. Determination of Cement Content:
= 0.62 + 0.01*(0.50.38)/0.05
= 64.4 %
=(10.644) *100
=35.6%
+
=186
(10%/25%)
=188.23 kg/m3
*(3/100)*186
;
W/C 
= 0.38 
Water 
= 188.23 lt. per Kg 
Cement 
= 188.23/0.38 
7. Mix Calculations
Volume of Concrete
Volume of Cement
Volume of Water
= 495.342 Kg/m3
=1 m ^{3} = Mass of Cement /Sp. gravity of Cement * 1/1000 =495.342/3.08 * 1/1000 =0.161 m ^{3} = Mass of water /Sp. gravity of water *
1/1000
5
=188.23/1 * 1/1000
=0.188 m ^{3} 

Volume of All in aggregates 
=10.1610.188 
=0. 651 m ^{3} 

Mass of Coarse Aggregates 
=0.644*0.651*2.8*1000 
Mass of Fine Aggregates
Corrected Mix Proportion
Corrected for moist fine aggregate
=1174 kg
=0.356*0.651*2.6*1000
=602.50
=1% of weight of fine aggregate
a) Fine Aggregate 
=603 *1.01 
=609 kg/m ^{3} 

b) Coarse Aggregate 
=1174 kg/m ^{3} 
c) Water Cement ratio 
=0.38 
d) Water 
= 188  6 
=182 kg/m ^{3} 

e) Cement 
= 495 kg/m ^{3} 
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 
Mean 
Comp. 
Crushing 
Mean 
Comp. 

Cube No 
Load 
Strength 
Cylinder 
Load 
Strength 

(ton) 
(ton) 
(MPa) 
(ton) 
(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 
Mean 
Comp. 
Crushing 
Mean 
Comp. 

Cube No 
Load 
Strength 
Cylinder 
Load 
Strength 

(ton) 
(ton) 
(MPa) 
(ton) 
(ton) 
(MPa) 

1 
109 
1 
59.5 

2 
106 
106.6 
46.48 
59.5 
33.03 

3 
105 
OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:
1. direct compression test results for both the specimens are higher results when compared to the 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 Prism100 x 100 x 500 mm
7
Section Modulus Z = 100*100 ^{2} /6 =1.67 x 10 ^{5} mm ^{3} Flexural Strength = P*9.81*L/(3*Z)
Test Result: M25 Concrete
Specimen 
Total Ultimate Load(2P) Kg 
Flexural Tensile Strength N/mm ^{2} 
1 
1245 
5.49 
2 
1285 
5.66 
3 
1275 
5.62 
Test Result: M30 Concrete
Specimen 
Total Ultimate Load(2P) Kg 
Flexural Tensile Strength N/mm ^{2} 
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/mm ^{2} and 3.83 N/mm ^{2} 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, σ 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 Setup:
9
Test Result:
Ultimate Load 
Split Tensile Strength N/mm ^{2} 

Grade of Concrete 
Ton 

M 
25 
13.5 
2 
∗ 13.5 ∗ 10 ^{} /( ∗ 300 ∗ 150) = 1.91 
M 
30 
15.5 
2 
∗ 15.5 ∗ 10 ^{} /( ∗ 300 ∗ 150) = 2.19 
Crack Pattern:
OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:
1. The direct tensile strength is about one tenth of the uniaxial 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 lowstrength materialsl because such specimens suffer considerable deformation during the test, which alters the distribution of stresses.
STRESSSTRAIN 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 Hooke’s 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 
2.5E06 
80 
2.5E05 
10 
5.55 
137 
1.25E05 
165 
0.00024 
15 
8.32 
137.5 
1.38E05 
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 
1.25E05 
460 
0.00098 
35 
19.42 
137 
1.25E05 
485 
0.00104 
45 
24.97 
137 
1.25E05 
520 
0.00113 
45 
24.97 
137 
1.25E05 
555 
0.00121 
50 
27.75 
140 
0.00002 
610 
0.00135 
12
Stress Strain Plot
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 microcracks,
the initial portion of the curve is highly nonlinear .
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 highamplitude, transient electrical pulse from a highvoltage, highcurrent 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, waterfilled voids, reinforcing bars, cracks, delaminations 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)
_{K}_{=} (1 − ) (1 + )(1 − 2 )
Ed=dynamic modulus of elasticity (kN/mm ^{2} )
14
ρ=density (kg/m ^{3} ) and v =dynamic Poisson’s ratio.
Velocity Criterion of concrete quality grading (as per IS: 13311part I)
Ultra Sonic Pulse Velocity Test Equipment
15
Test Results for M25 grade of Concrete
_{C}_{u}_{b}_{e} _{N}_{o} 
Length of 
Time (μs) 
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 (μs) 
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 
Velocity (km/s) 
Mode of 
measurement 
(μs) 
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.
Load 
UPV Reading 
Velocity (km/s) 
Ton 
(μs) 

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
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
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
OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS:
1. The Rebound hammer is an easy to use instrument for nondestructive 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 insitu strength by conventional crushing.
21
4. DESIGN AND TESTING OF R.C.C T BEAM
OBJECTIVE:
• To determine the flexural behavior of RCC TBeam 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 Loading Arrangements 
M25 
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/mm² 
Yield strength of secondary steel, fy2 
= 
250 
N/mm² 
Characteristic Strenght of Concrete, fck 
= 
25 
N/mm² 
Density of Concrete, Dc 
= 
24 
kN/mᶟ 
Nominal Diameter of Main Steel bars for Web, Φr 
= 
12 
Mm 
Nominal Diameter of Main Steel bars for Flange, Φf 
= 
6 
Mm 
Nominal Diameter of Stirrups, Φs 
= 
6 
Mm 
Effective Depth, d 
= 
225 
Mm 
Steel In Web 

Minimum reinforcement on web (Clause 26.5.1.1), Ast_min1 
= 
70.00 
mm² 
Provide 3T12 at the bottom of Web 

Total Area of Steel to be Provided, Ast1 
= 
339.43 
mm² 
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 *(d0.42 Xu) M.R 
= 
25.57 
kNm 
Dead Load, DL 
= 
1.28 
kN/m 
Dead Load Moment at mid span, Md 
= 
1.44 
kNm 
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 
τ_v = Vu/ (bw * d) 
= 
0.77 
N/mm² 
% Steel Provided, 100* Ast1 / (bw * d) 
= 
1.01 
% 
τ_c, from Table 19 IS 4562000 
= 
0.64 
N/mm² 
τ_v > τ_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 
mm²/m 
Provide 6 T @150mm c/c in Longitudinal direction for flange Reinforcement Detailing of T beam:
24
BAR BENDING SCHEDULE
Sl No 
Bar dia 
Bar Name 
Spacing 
No. 
of 
Shape 
Cutting Length 
Total Length 

mm 
Mm 
Bars 

Mm 
M 

1 
12 
Longitudinal 
 
3 

3442 
10.326 

2 
6 
Transverse 
150 
23 
396 
9.108 

Closed 


3 
6 
Stirrups 
150 
23 
744 
17.112 

4 
6 
Hanger 
 
4 

3346 
13.384 

Experimental Setup 

DIALGAUGE 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(DF1)
Load Vs Deflection curve at one third point(DF2)
27
Load Vs Deflection curve at one third point(DF3)
Calculation of Theoretical Deflection:
L=3000mm
E= 22360N/mm2 I= 108310000mm4(Moment of Inertia of the effective section) Deflection at onethird Span:
28
Demech Readings 

Load(kg) 
0 
600 
1200 
1800 
2400 
3000 
Position1 
2140 
2136 
2130 
2117.5 
2130 
2170 
Position2 
2140 
2135.6 
2120 
2137.5 
2149 
2150 
Position3 
2150 
2157 
2155 
2120 
2195 
2197 
Position4 
2166 
2167.5 
2220.5 
2154 
2185 
2215 
Load(kg) 
3600 
4200 
4800 
5400 
6000 
6600 
Position1 
2121 
2113 
2112 
2120 
2117.5 
2216 
Position2 
2169 
2186 
2152 
2152.5 
2178 
2222.5 
29
Position3 
2170 
2206 
2230 
2200 
2217.5 
2287 

Position4 
2242.5 
2245 
2255 
2286 
2273 
2617.5 

Calculated Strain from Demech Gauge Reading 

Load (kg) 
Position1 
Position2 
Position3 
Position4 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 

600 
0.00004 
4.4E05 
7E05 
1.5E05 

1200 
0.0001 
0.0002 
5E05 
0.000545 

1800 
0.000225 
2.5E05 
0.0003 
0.00012 

2400 
0.0001 
9E05 
0.00045 
0.00019 

3000 
0.0003 
1E04 
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 
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 mm ^{2} . The reinforcing steel in the tension region used is 312Φ . 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 onethird 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 cubes7 Days Strength 

Mean 
Mean 

Crushing 
Comp. 
Crushing 
Comp. 

Cube No 
Load 
Strength 
Comp. Strength 
Cylinder 
Load 
Strength 
Comp. 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 cubes28 Days Strength 

Cube No 
Dimension 
Area 
Failure 
Failure 
Average 

(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 
Dimension 
Area 
Failure 
Failure 
Average 

No 
(mm2) 
Load(ton) 
Stress(N/mm2) 
Stress(N/mm2) 

R=150, 

1 
h=300 
17671.459 
56 
31.09 
29.70 

R=150, 

2 
h=300 
17671.459 
49.5 
27.48 

33 
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 *(d0.42 Xu) 

M.R 
= 
16.90 
kNm 

Dead Load, DL 
= 
0.90 
kN/m 

Dead Load Moment at mid span, Md 
= 
1.01 
kNm 

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 
= 
_{3}_{1}_{.}_{7}_{7} 
_{k}_{N} 

Design of Shear Reinforcement 

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

τ_v = Vu/ (bw * d) 
= 
0.51 
N/mm² 

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

τ_c, from Table 19 IS 4562000 
= 
0.554 
N/mm² 
τ_v < τ_c and τ_v > τ_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 uncracked 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 

Load (kg) 
Deflection @ 1/3 Point 
@ Mid 
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 
37
Strain Gauges Readings: Strain gauge orientations:
Strain Gauge 1(Bottom) 
Strain Gauge 2 (Center) 
Strain Gauge 3 (Top) 

Load (kg) 
Gauge1 
Strain 
Gauge2 
Strain 
Gauge3 
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 

Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.
Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.
Отменить можно в любой момент.